St. Fransisco Franco?

  • Thread starter Thread starter HabemusFrancis
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
devoutchristian said:
That would be a mortal sin.
Click to expand...
leave him in the ground and put him on trial anyway.
devoutchristian said:
He didn’t kill Catholic priests or commit rape.
Click to expand...
yeah, he did. if you give him credit for murdering POWs and running slave labor camps and overthrowing the government, you have to give him credit for the other crimes his regime committed in his name and under his authority and for his benefit including rapes and the murder of those Basque priests the bishops recently apologized for. the Allies executed many nazis and Japanese for similar reasons.

and, of course,** the Spanish government has formally condemned the franco regime in the Historical Memory Law.**

F/
 
devoutchristian said:
I don’t believe that a man should be held personally responsible for every little thing that happens in his country.
Click to expand...
what you believe isn’t important, command responsibility for the actions of subordinates has been recognized since the 6th century BC (Sun Tzu) and was used by the Holy Roman Empire when it tried and executed a military commander and appears in the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907.

since I’m not a brutal dictator like franco, I think he should be given a fair opportunity to explain the murders, rapes, executions, slave labor camps.

F/
 
devoutchristian said:
Should we also try Truman and Churchill?
Click to expand...
start another thread for that. the tu quoque defense is a lame defense but it is interesting because you’re indirectly admitting franco’s guilt. I accept that concession.
devoutchristian said:
I don’t care what a bunch of baby-killers think about him.
Click to expand...
the Republic government is gone. but, let’s ask the POWs and other murdered victims he killed what they think.

we don’t have to ask the present Spanish government what it thinks because it has already condemned franco…
 
Fairwinds said:
start another thread for that. the tu quoque defense is a lame defense but it is interesting because you’re indirectly admitting franco’s guilt.
Click to expand...
I never claimed that Franco was perfect, I was merely pointing out that since we wouldn’t try Truman and Churchill, it would be absurd to put Franco on trial.
 
devoutchristian said:
I never claimed that Franco was perfect, I was merely pointing out that since we wouldn’t try Truman and Churchill, it would be absurd to put Franco on trial.
Click to expand...
forget your *tu quoque *fallacy. we’ll just go with the Spanish government’s verdict on the man.
Landmark Law Condemns Dictatorship: Spain Confronts Past under Franco
…
The Spanish parliament Wednesday [October 31, 2007] passed a historic bill that condemns the almost 40-year dictatorship of General Francisco Franco and makes symbolic amends to victims of the 1936-1939 Spanish Civil War.
Click to expand...
The new “Law of Historical Memory” declares that sentences handed down by kangaroo courts during the regime, which led to the imprisonment or execution of thousands of Franco’s opponents, were “illegitimate.” It also decrees that local governments must help locate, exhume from mass graves and identify the bodies of victims of the dictatorship. The remains of tens of thousands of Franco opponents are believed to be buried throughout the country…
Click to expand...
spiegel.de/international/europe/landmark-law-condemns-dictatorship-spain-confronts-past-under-franco-a-514796.html

text in Spanish:
boe.es/buscar/doc.php?id=BOE-A-2007-22296

chances of franco’s sainthood: zero.
 
devoutchristian said:
I never claimed that Franco was perfect, I was merely pointing out that since we wouldn’t try Truman and Churchill, it would be absurd to put Franco on trial.
Click to expand...
the difference between them is this:

Truman and Churchill saved the world.

Franco was a t(name removed by moderator)ot dictator.
 
triumphguy said:
the difference between them is this:

Truman and Churchill saved the world.

Franco was a t(name removed by moderator)ot dictator.
Click to expand...
I’d be careful about how you answer responses that are intended to divert attention from the claim that franco should be made a saint.

what the OP is doing is making a fallacious argument called* tu quoque*, or, “you’re just as bad”. either that or the OP admits that they’re all war criminals. its hard to say exactly what, since the argument is so twisted.

while the attempt to smear the Allies to vindicate the thug franco is factually wrong, the argument itself is misleading, not only because neither Truman or Churchill is criticizing franco, but also because no one is advocating sainthood for either.

F/
 
Fairwinds said:
I’d be careful about how you answer responses that are intended to divert attention from the claim that franco should be made a saint.

what the OP is doing is making a fallacious argument called* tu quoque*, or, “you’re just as bad”. either that or the OP admits that they’re all war criminals. its hard to say exactly what, since the argument is so twisted.

while the attempt to smear the Allies to vindicate the thug franco is factually wrong, the argument itself is misleading, not only because neither Truman or Churchill is criticizing franco, but also because no one is advocating sainthood for either.

F/
Click to expand...
Yep, you’re right.

It’s amazing how much I’ve learned from these threads. When I first saw one I kinda sorta knew that Franco wasn’t a “nice guy” but in getting involved with the “discussions” I found concrete evidence and 1st person sources, as well as lots of articles and books documenting the atrocities that were committed during the “White Terror.”

Originally I thought he was just as bad as the Republicans, but won, and that he was only brutal in response to the “other side” (who were horrendous in their own right - but there’s no threads calling them to be beatified). Then I discovered that while working for the Republican government he engages in brutal military actions against populations in North Africa and in the Basque Region. And that once he had won the civil war he continued his acts of brutal repression.

For instance I didn’t know until recently that so many women were raped by Franco’s soldiers, or that the government had stolen so many thousands of babies, or that there were thousands mass graves hidden around Spain, or that priests were killed on his watch (if not by his direct orders), or that the modern population is so ashamed of Franco that they are obliterating any mention of him in the public square.

So I have to thank people like Francoist and Devoutchristian for giving me a reason to do some independent research and finding out more of the truth. If their arguments or links were more persuasive (less polemical, more factual, and less like propaganda) I might have learned to agree with them:shrug: ce la vie

Maybe that was their aim:confused:😛

Now if someone argued that the Red Terror was a “good thing” I’d have to argue with that too. But no-one does. I suppose that’s a good thing.👍
 
devoutchristian said:
That would be a mortal sin.

He didn’t kill Catholic priests or commit rape.
Click to expand...
Well yes Franco himself didn’t kill or rape anybody, the same way as Pinochet, Trujillo, Duvalier or fidel Castro didn’t kill anybody. They gave the orders and their soldiers were the ones who committed the crimes. Franco was a brutal dictator and while is true he did do some really good things for Spain, just like Pinochet, his means were not good. Also, with regard to sainthood you have to look at the fruits that the saint in question produced. One of the biggest fruits of Franco’s regime was turning a country that was 99% catholic into a country where 80% of people hate the catholic church. I don’t think the church is going to agree that those are the fruits of a saint.
 
marymary1975 said:
One of the biggest fruits of Franco’s regime was turning a country that was 99% catholic into a country where 80% of people hate the catholic church. I don’t think the church is going to agree that those are the fruits of a saint.
Click to expand...
The fault for that cannot be laid upon General Franco. If it proves anything, it proves that he did not go far enough in rooting out Communism. As a genuinely good man, perhaps he was too ready to see the good in others. Especially that abortionist king who now pollutes the Spanish throne.
 
Francoist said:
The fault for that cannot be laid upon General Franco. If it proves anything, it proves that he did not go far enough in rooting out Communism. As a genuinely good man, perhaps he was too ready to see the good in others. Especially that abortionist king who now pollutes the Spanish throne.
Click to expand...
the Spanish legislature passed a law condemning franco for his murderous ways. they’re still finding mass graves he had dug to hide evidence of his crimes. how many Catholic priests did the man have to shoot before he no longer gets a pass?
 
Francoist said:
The fault for that cannot be laid upon General Franco. If it proves anything, it proves that he did not go far enough in rooting out Communism. As a genuinely good man, perhaps he was too ready to see the good in others. Especially that abortionist king who now pollutes the Spanish throne.
Click to expand...
Being quite familiar with Spain and with Spaniards I disagree. I can assure you the reason why the catholic church lost most of its followers was because with one hand Franco was claiming himself.as a.practicing catholic who is working in the name of the church and on the other hand he is ordering murder, rapes, being a tyrant and breaking every rule of the church. Saints preach with their own actions and behavior. Saints follow the teachings of the church, they don’t tell others to follow it while they do exactly the opposite and that is what Franco did, he told everybody to follow the church but he could do exactly the opposite. In the beginning most people were happy with Franco but it took.a short time for Spaniards to be unhappy. Again he certainly did good things but Franco’s followed the “end justify the means” rule and that is not in accordance with the church. Obviously this ended up in a country who now views the church as Franco’s puppets and thinks they are hypocrits. Finally, remember that the person who brought the King back to Spain was Franco himself
 
I stand by my statements, by my approval of the official acts of General Franco, by the ideas of the FET y de las JONS, and by my utter rejection of Communist propaganda.

I know and regret that the Spaniards, like the French and the Irish and many others, have largely rejected Jesus Christ and given themselves over to the devil instead. That is very regrettable. The whole Church bears the burden for not praying, fasting, working and fighting hard enough for Jesus Christ.
 
Francoist said:
I stand by my statements, by my approval of the official acts of General Franco, by the ideas of the FET y de las JONS, and by my utter rejection of Communist propaganda.

I know and regret that the Spaniards, like the French and the Irish and many others, have largely rejected Jesus Christ and given themselves over to the devil instead. That is very regrettable. The whole Church bears the burden for not praying, fasting, working and fighting hard enough for Jesus Christ.
Click to expand...
yeah, the Spanish people have spoken and condemned the caudillo. do you really approve the execution of those Basque priests? the execution of POWs? the rapes? that’s hardcore.
 
Francoist said:
… FET y de las JONS,…
Click to expand...
that rings so much more ominously in spanish, whatever it means (and it could mean nothing and it would be menacing). that’s why errol flynn as protagonist was so cool in The Sea Hawk and Captain Blood against all those spanish heavies. don’t you agree?

F/
 
Francoist said:
I stand by my statements, by my approval of the official acts of General Franco, by the ideas of the FET y de las JONS, and by my utter rejection of Communist propaganda.

I know and regret that the Spaniards, like the French and the Irish and many others, have largely rejected Jesus Christ and given themselves over to the devil instead. That is very regrettable. The whole Church bears the burden for not praying, fasting, working and fighting hard enough for Jesus Christ.
Click to expand...
You’re 70 years too late.

And yes, if Franco had prayed and fasted more he might have avoided some of the terrible decisions he made. If he had avoided all of them and retired to a monastery at an early age that might have been more cause for his beatification 👍.

And the Irish, BTW, have not largely rejected Jesus Christ.
 
triumphguy said:
And yes, if Franco had prayed and fasted more he might have avoided some of the terrible decisions he made. If he had avoided all of them and retired to a monastery at an early age that might have been more cause for his beatification 👍.
Click to expand...
Then your pals the Communists could have murdered every priest, bishop and religious in Spain? After raping and murdering all the sisters? Much like the vaunted Red Army did in Eastern Europe (though they got every girl age 9 and above… I don’t think the Spanish Communists were quite as dedicated to Satan as the Russian ones).

And in Ireland weekly Mass attendance is only 30%. That’s abysmal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top