Why were the fascists so good at fighting in the Spanish civil war?

leftists are weak.

german/italian support

they had a professional army on their side duh

>Why were the fascists so good at fighting in the Spanish civil war?
The fascists lost the war, OP.

the Nationalists got actual help from foreign nations, while the republicans, at best, got supplies from i think Mexico and the S.U.

Western democracies, led by Britain, the US, and France, actually signed a treaty promising not to intervene. Of course, everyone knew that Italy, Germany, and the USSR weren't going to abide by it, and all three had imperialist designs that ultimately involved ending democracy in Spain. So tiny little Mexico, with some weird, obsessive commitment to the idea of democracy, defies several blockades to send aid to the Republicans, with basically no strings attached. They also took in over 20,000 refugees.

Because they actually feed their soldiers

Manuel Azaña was also buried with a Mexican flag because Vichy France would only allow him to be buried with a Nationalist Spain flag and without head of state honors.

What did he mean by this?

Maybe that modern Spain is more similar to the Republic because of Franco choosing Juan Carlos to succeed him?

wtf I love Mexico now

any good movies on the spanish civil war?

>with some weird, obsessive commitment to the idea of democracy
At the time mexico was socialist as fuck. They could have cared less about democracy, especially the PRI.

Turns out, having a big chunk of your army start fighting and purging the other part of the army, while still also trying to fight the enemy, isn't the best way to win wars.

Italian intervention and support.

> The financial cost of the war was more debilitating. The cost of the CTV to Italy amounted to between 6 and 8.5 billion lire. At 14 to 20 percent of annual expenditure, this represented an immense drain on the Italian economy.
> Of the approximate 78,500 men sent to Spain, 2,989-3,819 were killed and 10,629 were wounded
> The Italian military gave the Spanish roughly 3,400 machine guns, 1,400 mortars, 1,800 artillery pieces, 6,800 trucks, 160 tanks, and 760 aircraft

Italy spent quite a lot of resources on this war, they sent only their best. It kinda screwed them over, as they hadn't recovered from the losses here or in Ethiopia when WW2 broke out.

Pan's Labyrinth is set during it.

According to Krivosheev:
>The Soviet Union, having responded to the request of the Spanish government, gave concurrence to ship weapons and military hardware to the Spanish Republic. ln total from
October,1936 through January 1939, it was supplied with 648 planes, 347 tanks, 60 arrnored cars, 1186 artillery guns, 20,486 machine guns, and 497,813 rifles.
>Also, in accordance with the request of the republic government the Soviet Union sent
to Spain about 3000 highly trained volunteers - military advisers, pilots, tank soldiers, sailors, various specialists who fought and worked on the side of the republic. One hundred fifty-eight volunteers were killed during this.

They actually supplied as much or more materiel to the Republicans as the Italians contributed to the Nationalists, though Italy sent more money and actually sent a full expeditionary force to intervene militarily. Instead of just a few thousand specialists.

"My HoI4 game usually shows the republic winning."

Because the nationalist troops were better trained, and because the republicans were divided among themselves.

Yugoslav communists revere, no they venerate Yugoslavian volunteers that fought for the republicans.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yugoslav_volunteers_in_the_Spanish_Civil_War

>why was the faction that consisted largely of the military returning from deployment good at fighting in a civil war against a bunch of militia chuckle fucks who spend half the time infighting?

What a totally sensible and not at all stupid question.

I didn't know they were still using spears.

they might have sent as much supplies as the italians, but they requested repayment that usually took the form of spanish gold to cover the expenses of this equipment. by the end of the war this had practically depleted most of the spanish gold reserves
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_gold

Being bankrolled by fascists from around the world and landlords internally.

No way.

La Lengua de las Mariposas is pretty good.

You know socialism and democracy are not incompatible, right?

But why did it take them 3-4 years to win tho?

Republicans were stronk, leftists fight hard when push comes to shove, ect.

Only fascist's being the Italians, who - of course- were a one third party in the war.

They were supported by the Nazis, Italian fascists, UK, USA, etc. Only the Soviets supported the Republicans

>But why did it take them 3-4 years to win tho?
Siesta erryday.

God was with them.

but only republicans got the massive number of volunteers

Don't forget Mexico, some American companies, and volunteers.
I think their defeat greatly involves the backstabbing of Republican politicians and the hordes of Africans summoned by Franco's warlocks.

Franco was a really bad general. He progressed very slow and Mussolini even criticized him. Also the Republic was able to defend successfully some strategic points (Madrid etc.).

...

It's funny, because Orwell actually says that he found both sides in the Civil War incredibly inefficient and not particularly effective. He describes the two sides setting up artillery in the mountains and not being able to reach each other but still shooting anyway. Spain hasn't been able to fight since the tercios, I guess.

The fascist were being armed by German, Italian and Portuguese weapons and technology. I believe some of those countries even sent soldiers and generals. They were better at fighting because they had better means to fighting. I am somewhat glad the republican side never won though I don't agree with Franco's ideology.

>You know socialism and democracy are not incompatible, right?
Theyre not you know nothing smartass. That said anyone claiming mexico in the 30's was a bastion of freedom and democracy and supported it around the world is a fucking retard, kinda like you.

See this is how your thought process was supposed to go, mexico didn't care about democracy>they were super socialist practically communist>the republicans were socialists>mexico supported them becausr they were also practically communist. Instead you just went "well democracy and socialism aren't mutually exclusive HUUURRRRRRRRR", like a fucking retard becausr you are one. Mexico didn't give a flying fuck about democracy, they cared that daddy Spain might join the super special commie club with them and be with the cool kids. Democracy was just an easy excuse to gain the moral highground, you dumbass.

Deus Vult

Ffs this is the same government that 7 years before was engaging in the same shenanigans as the republican anti-religion fanatics.

Mexico had a "obsessive commitment to the idea of democracy", fucking stupid.

Because anti-militarism is not a good idea when you are trying to win a war. This applies to modern leftists as well.

>Cárdenas had pushed for women's suffrage in Mexico, responding to the pressure from women activists and from the political climate that emphasized equality of citizens.

>Cárdenas did not use armored cars or bodyguards to protect himself.

>In a move that struck at the financial interests of his patron Calles's cronies, Cárdenas closed down their gambling casinos and brothels, where "prominent Callistas had invested their profits from bribery and industrial activities."

>Cárdenas became known for his progressive program of building roads and schools and promoting education, gaining Congressional approval to allocate twice as much federal money to rural education as all his predecessors combined.

>Cárdenas ended capital punishment (in Mexico, usually in the form of a firing squad). Capital punishment has been banned in Mexico since that time.

>Cárdenas was not as left-wing as Leon Trotsky and other socialists would wish, but Trotsky described his government as the only honest one in the world.

>After establishing himself in the presidency, Cárdenas led the Congress in condemning Calles's persecution of the Catholic Church in Mexico.

The Cardenas was committed to the idea of democracy. You can argue that it failed to be effective in its methods, but you can't deny a commitment to the idea.

*Cardenas government

>the trouble with fighting a war in Spain is that the Spanish are always late for everything, including battle