4 ms·

If you don't tell me such a thing during the months of planning before the war starts, you aren't orchestrating anything. It's not semantics, sometimes people

• candiodari 9y ago
  I think most people would strongly disagree if these things make the difference between success and failure of a rebellion. I would strongly disagree regardless of that factor. If there's a realistic chance it'll make a difference, I would say you're orchestrating things. Even if not, it still is. There are always people looking to rebel. For all sorts of reasons. Injustice. Ethnic alliances (esp. popular in Africa). Regional alliances (e.g. Catalonia, and the Balkans in general: the cities want to secede from their countries). Religious differences (esp. one particular religion, but not exclusively). And some want to purely for personal gain (famously in South America). Even when there is no chance of making a difference. You could say yesterday's attack in Manchester was carried out as a rebel act, to get the UK to govern itself according to the islamic religion. That is certainly a true statement, even if very unpopular. Providing material support for such things is definitely orchestrating, even though it has essentially zero chance for success.
  • euyyn 9y ago
    The Spanish Civil War wasn't, to quote OP, a "grass-root movement engineered" by Hitler; it was a failed coup. Both Hitler and the British intelligence offered logistical help to the rebels. The coup was already planned for months by the generals, and they were just waiting for the appropriate time to strike. The moment came when the police murdered Calvo Sotelo, not when the Nazis and British encouraged them.