Published: 13 May 09 14:34 CET | Print version
Online: http://www.thelocal.se/19406/20090513/
The Swedish Liberal Party has demanded that Sweden become a full member of NATO and argues that an open debate over the issue is needed.
What do you think? Leave your comment below.
Three people were wounded during an armed robbery on a jewellery store in Ängelholm, southern Sweden on Saturday, with the robbers escaping on a yellow moped. READ () »
The Sörmland County Council in central Sweden 'accidentally' hired a convicted criminal who had served a long prison sentence for threatening to blow up oil storage tanks and had to pay 1million kronor in severance pay to get rid of him. READ () »
Panic broke out at a Gothenburg school on Friday evening as one man was wounded in a shooting which could be linked to a violent robbery that took place in the area on the same day. READ () »
A 15-year-old girl has admitted to setting up the Instagram account that caused hundreds of teenagers to riot in Gothenburg last year, but her 16-year-old friend has denied involvement. READ () »
Ice hockey World Championships co-hosts Sweden and Finland continue their long-standing rivalry on Saturday with a place in the gold medal match at stake. READ () »
The president of the Stockholm School of Economics, one of Sweden's most prestigious universities, has been forced out in response to a scandal over his hiring of a high-ranking official who'd been convicted of insider trading. READ () »
Sweden tops a list of countries that risk suffering a housing market crash, Germany's Commerzbank has warned, citing the slackening off of Swedish property prices as a harbinger of a potential downswing. READ () »
Sweden's once flourishing pharmaceutical testing industry has been decimated in recent years, suffering an 85-percent drop according to new figures that industry experts describe as "deeply troubling". READ () »
| 18/05 | LCI CoordinatorAker Advantage | Bærum/Tranby |
| 18/05 | Tender Lead Subsea 7656Aker Advantage | Ågotnes |
| 17/05 | Account Executive - Sweden- Sofware Sales | Stockholm |
| 17/05 | Authorization Engineer | Västerås |
| 17/05 | Backend infrastructure Team Lead | Stockholm |
| 17/05 | Baxter Home Hemodialysis ? HHD Field Service EngineerBaxter Medical AB | Östergötland |
More news from Germany at thelocal.de
More news from France at thelocal.fr
More news from Norway at thelocal.no
More news from Switzerland at thelocal.ch
Register now for:
> Free use of noticeboard
> Special discounts
> Weekly news roundup
> Unlimited use of discuss
Be British, be sincere and be bold »
"Sweden is a veritable smorgåsbord for UK business. I see our work as a bit like a kind of dragon’s den for both for larger and smaller British companies. It is about matching the UK companies, not with cash, but with Swedish market opportunities." READ »
Your comments about this article:
The comments below have not been moderated in advance and are not produced by The Local unless clearly stated. Readers are responsible for the content of their own comments. Comments that breach our terms and conditions will be removed.
Does NATO need Sweet Eden ? If so for what ?
"We managed quite well staying out of the two World Wars..." he says. The seventy million souls, most of them civilian, who perished in that dark period of history might well take issue with the idea that pandering to the Nazi's was an achievement to be proud of.
The issue should not be about asking how many Swedes want to join NATO, rather it should be about how many members of the alliance want the gutless Swedes around to simply run up the white flag at the first sign of trouble.
Sweden was a kind of superpower in Europe 300 years ago - in your dreams sunshine!
how can u let someone walk right thru your backyard and don't say anything! that's why sweden doesn't get the respect that it desevers . yes nato is run by the usa,uk,france(the power players)but for good reason! today if a country wanted to invade like the germans did in world war 2,they would have to have atleast 10 million strong! sweden is down sizing it's military,so joining nato isn't such a bad idea. it thing it's about time sweden gets it's feet wet first before it joins nato!
PS. i know that i will get into the fire with this comment!! :)
UK and USA want to sell their soul for a dozen terrorists. That is quite weak.
Those 2 events got the concept of the Britishs and Americans to transform their society into an Orwellian one. I just hope that Sweden won't ever get into this trap. Olhsson says that only 25% are for NATO in Sweden, but that this is mainly because of the lefties who are against. I think that the 25% are just the apolitics people who don't get anything about anything. They are just followers and pushovers. Lets UK and the US live in their illusion and desillusion. That's their mess. People in Sweden fight for the real liberty and Freedom.
You got that right... its always cheaper to let somebody else do it...
As for NATO, it is an organisation that exists not to fight. If push comes to shove, I think all NATO members would honor their pact but they would never let it come to that. So joining is a good idea strategically, but never at the expense of individual warfare capability.
hey right!!! how can u fight for freedon and liberty,if u DON'T stand for nothing!!
Lets UK and the US live in their illusion and desillusion. That's their mess. SEBSEB! if it wasn't for our MESS as u call it! your ass would be speaking german! let me ask u this! if there was another world war and the usa,uk,and france said f#%ck it! let the fight it out! then what? we would get harsh remarks about doing nothing,you can have it both ways
I am proud Sweden is not a member of NATO. I am extremely happy that during the last elections the Liberal Party had a HUGE drop in votes.
NATO is made up of a bunch of paranoid embittered people who see everyone different as a threat. But hey, I'd be worried to since we're seeing a backlash due to years of forceful spreading of agendas. NATO use fear tactics to get their way. You'll be attacked by Arab countries or Russia if you don't join us. Etc. How about we disagree.
Go Sweden and Finland for keeping out of NATO! Don't forget Finland used to be occupied by Russia... they're apparently seeing something NATO countries are not.
Well - after reading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO - it should be obvious why it would be better for Sweden to stay out of NATO.
Don't get me wrong, co-operation in one thing, independence is another.
By all means - Sweden's Defence Force should be engaged in active co-operation with NATO simply because Sweden is an extension of NATO's purpose in defending Europe. However, it should be a right for Sweden to refuse and deny NATO's agenda if Sweden sees differently from NATO. This is the sole reason for supporting the status-quo.
Additionally, I find the language for "the right of first refusal" pretty scary. I mean, if Europe is being invaded - and NATO acts, but its response is not completely effective (for Sweden) ... NATO could in practice decide to consolidate its defences to cover a smaller area using foreign armies. So if Sweden joined NATO, and an invasion force starts to make its way from the North Pole towards Brussels - NATO reserves full rights in using Sweden's Airforce to abandon the defence over Lappland and consolidate Sweden's Airforce with the Airforce of other NATO members over Brussels. Granted that the probability of such an invasion force from the North Pole is very remote, the fact that a possibility exists for NATO to behave in what I have just described above is very disturbing.
Hence why I say, co-operation is better than joining - simply because when disagreements arise ... being un-cooperative is much more easier and quicker to execute than un-joining.
A sure thing, is if we have a huge war, Europe will have to choose between being friend with Russia and China or with the USA.
Since I live in Europe, that I actually have a lot of respect for Putin since he is not an hypocrit, he speaks out (contrary to what we have seen in the US), I back China and Russia. Europe depend on Russia for natural gas. China is going to be the new power.
We don't need the USA. I live in Sweden, so I don't want to mess with Russia and China.
The USA are finished. They should have tried to be friend with the Latin American countries. At least, they have Canada as a puppet....
Eventually everyone will compromise, that's just the way the infection spreads.
"And our freedom's consuming itself,
What we've become is contrary to what we want
Take a bow."
1: You respect Putin and you want to gob his knob because Europe depends on Russia for natural gas?
2: You back China because they are going to be a new power?
Translation: You are scared Russia and China will squash, so you support them in hopes they wont squash you.
Typisk.
Not really bothered if Sweden joins NATO. Certainly Swedes can bet on the lack of respect (though not openly or officially) due to the country,s history as being gutless opportunists in wartime......it,s what most think.
Still, Sweden could be a nice location for a few American bases or some missle silos. Military personel can expect to be bored shitless though!
The UN has not succeeded in preventing wars, and it has been caught up in more scams than success stories. None of the 'Soverign' countries have succeded in preventing the Iraq war. Save for few small and insignificant entities the Iraq war seemed to have every ones approval.
But let us take into consideration the Iraq war and what Sweden (or any pro-NATO) country could get out of it. Iraq war to me seems to be a last attempt to twart the recession, we should be sure they knew it all along.
Reconstruction money, Vehicles (Volvo, scania), construction contracts, ever thing from cellular networks (Ericsson) to radio stations. These will be from loans given by USA and close allies in imaginary money with imagimery value and will instead hold 'proportionate' interest in the Iraqi assets (oil?). This will probably keep Dollars and Euros high inspite of making the biggest losses every where. Good reasons to join EU or NATO ?
But like it or not the whole of europe (all of western + most eastern) +USA+Canada+Australia is already a single country and have always been since WW2.
I suppose he was just giving yet another example of the Swedish humility thing they harp on about.
It always reminds me of the old Mac Davis "O Lord, it's hard to be humble, when you're perfect in every way...."
Sing along everyone...
First, you need to accept this is a site dealing with Swedish news in the English language. That means lots of visitors, like myself, will have parents and grandparents who made unimaginable sacrifices to rid the world of Hitler and the Nazis.
I dunno what they teach Swedish kids in schools, but every Swede should be made to study a map of Europe in 1942 to decide for themselves whether their parents and grandparents did the right thing by looking the other way while Europe burned.
Perhaps then we might start to see a bit of genuine humility from Swedes and, gulp, possibly even an acknowledgement.
And as for Sweden-bashing, get over yourself Kaethar. Brits and Americans are constantly being vilified for standing up for what we believe in, but you won't hear us cry foul about it.
Sweden was by far Germanys biggest wartime trading partner providing all manner of vital miltary supplies (often using technology and machinery directly from Germany) from a 'you can't bomb us we're "neutral" ' manufacturing base ... but I had always assumed that the exports were in exchange for cash/gold etc ...
If they offered export credits then Swedens true wartime history is even more damning than I had imagined ... Swedish exports were certainly responsible for prolonging that awful conflict ... around a million died per month, many more towards the end of the war ... so it is anyones guess how many were deliberately sacrificed to 'enrich' the Swedish people and launch her multinational companies (hauntingly ... the true figure could exceed the population of Sweden of course)
In one of the most important books to date on Swedens WW2 role 'the art of cloaking' it was shown conclusively from archive material that the Wallenberg family (behind Ericsson, Electrolux and a host of household name Swedish multinationals) secured the looted wealth of Holland for themselves and the people of Sweden through provision of vital Swedish supplies to Hitlers Reich during the war ... the book shows to what extraordinary lengths the Wallenberg family (with the tacit support of the Swedish authorities) went to 'launder' their ill-gotten gains. Would bet that similar activities went on to secure for Sweden the looted wealth of many other occupied nations and indeed of holocaust victims, though the Dutch authors only focussed on Hollands lost wealth.
There was a recent thread asking what is Sweden best at in the world ... my candidates would be 'cloaking', 'spin' and 'denial' ;o)
During WW2 Sweden actively helped the nazis and was surrounded by them, to the point of loan guarentees and allowing through troop shipments even though that was a breach of Swedish neutrality.
Hitler planned to nazify Sweden. Goering talked him into suspending it until Russia was dealt with, otherwise Sweden was next. I wonder how Sweden's insane rules and political fantasies, would have stood up to a panzer tank.
Ordinary Swedes helped Finland, Denmark and Norway as much as possible, but a lot joined up with the nazi's,
Sweden needs to wake up. It needs to join NATO as that is by default who has really been giving it protection sine 1945. Also Sweden needs to join the Euro, regulate its banks properly, drop the hypocrisy and act like an adult.
Get the Finns on board and they can protect you all! A small nation but they sure know how to put up a fight........The Red Army got a taste of their fighting spirit!
As for the Nazification comment earlier on by Nemesis.......I dont think it would be too difficult to achieve even now. Despite all this political correctness and liberal ideas.....just under the surface, Sweden is one of the most racist states I,ve come across in Europe. Superior, Master Race mentality. Give them a drink though and they turn into 3 yr olds!!!
The only one of Sweden's neighbours who could even remotely possibly decide to attack them is Russia and if that happens NATO is going to help anyway.
Sweden in WW2: Come on, what other choice did they have? Once Norway had fallen they had to stay neutral or they were screwed. And neutral they did stay- it just so happens that by virtue of geography they were in a far better position for trading with the 'bad guy' Germany (they looked bad but the worst was not to be revealed for a long time) than with the UK.
Another reason I think Sweden should stay out of NATO is that they would have more influence on NATO, which I think is the wrong way to go. It took the US to initiate action in Yugoslavia in the 1990s before anything happened and that was in Europe and very recent.
Sweden is with us in spirit, but other western countries already know that Sweden doesn't step up, but prefers to stand back.
And that's not Sweden's fault. It's the fault of the people in charge of your government at the time. And it's up to you to decide if it was worth it. You can fight any battles you please, but don't expect the rest of the world to agree with it and/or join in.
I think they did the right thing. A non-alignment policy meant protection for Sweden's own inhabitants. That is the point of a country, after all. And it's not like a country of 8 million people would have been able to defeat the nazis. The point of a country is not to act as the world police and begin a war with whoever you disagree with and assassinate leaders who disagree with your views, etc.
An acknowledgement of what? I'd say most Swedes are totally aware of what went on during the second world war. Do you expect an apology? Will never happen. All Swedes I know are very happy we stayed out of the war so all our relatives are still alive. Herd mentality? Perhaps. But hey, we're only animals.
That's what you call it? A euphemism if I ever saw one.
What you forget in the equation is the USSR and the winterwar against Finland. Besides, none of the small nations in ww2 joined the war volontarily. Only Britain and France did and they were major powers at the time. Not even the USA joined the war until attacked.
Put yourself in the swedish position. Yes, Swedens iron-ore was vital to the german warindustry which is why germany would have invaded Sweden as soon as Sweden stopped exporting iron. And German troops were in both Denmark and Norway. And at the same time Sweden had the threat of USSR right next door.
If your nations were so bloody moral, why didnt you come to Finlands aid when it was attacked by the USSR in 1939? All other nations together didnt give half as much aid as Sweden and Sweden was the only nation that declared itself nonbeligerent rather than neutral. And tens of thousands of swedish volonteers were ready to go to Finland(even thou the war ended before most of them were deployed).
That said, the way our army is being reorganised, it makes sense to join Nato today.
Allowing the free movement of Nazi troops through your territory to invade your neighbour Norway.......Again not immoral?
Adolf Hitler was even nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1939....google it!
Norwegians gave reistance, Finns demand respect for their fight against the Red Army. Sweden made money. All facts! If Sweden joins NATO it is very probable that it will have to get involved in conflicts....quite a shift from norm!
A lot of what you say is right. Sweden did not have a lot of choice about remaining non-beligerant during the war. They would have been invaded had they not been.
However there remains two uncomfortable truths here. The first is that Sweden did very well out of the war. As Britain and France where literally bankrupted, Sweden did a raring trade dealing with whoever payed the most. Whilst Sweden did not participate directly in the war, the actions of the government no doubt extended it. Sweden is undoubtably the rich country it is today as a direct consiquence of the war and as mentioed earlier many swedish companys owe a great deal of their success to nazi sympathisers and immoral dealings.
The other one is the one that bugs me the most and it is when the Swedes hold themselves up as a beacon of pacifism by endlessly repeating that they havent been at war for 200 years or whatever it is. The reason they have not been involved in any conflict is because, at least from a military point of view, they have been an irrelavance and not from any saintly predisposition. A country unable to wage war is not automatically a pacifist country. For me at least, a country with a strong military who chooses not to use it... now thats pacifism
Yes and no. I think it gave Sweden a golden 15-20 years, sure, but you take it way to far, imho. Swedens economy is based on processed indigenous rawmeterials and engineering and hightech industries. Before ww2, after ww2 and now. More hightech now obviously, and services. However, not being an expert in economic history, ill bend to more qualified people on this.
Couldnt agree more. Even thou alot of the windfall sweden made out of ww2 went into our military. And, believe it or not, swedish armed forces served an important role in the containment of the USSR.
Britain and France both chose to go to war after Germany invaded Poland when we specifically told him not to... Bad Mr Hitler. Initailly Adolf didnt even want to go to war with Britain as he felt us Brits would most likely side with him.
Interestingly, we wernt prepared to go to war over Austria and Czechoslovakia....
Whether or not war was inevitable, the declaration of war at that time was unargueably a choice...
Rather wisely I must say, Sweden invested in new housing and infrastructure with the so called ¨"Million Programme". This effectivley dragged Sweden into the twentieth century and allowed swedish society and business to funtion in a competative way, sowing the seeds for Swedens modern day success.
In this way, the Swedish people would have maintained Scandinavian unity, tied down large numbers of occupying troops, been able to disrupt essential supplies to the axis and basically tip the balance of WW2, bringing a much earlier end to the conflict, all without shedding Swedish blood while keeping the moral high ground ...
That route would have likely saved countless millions ...
60 years on most of the blood money's gone (the golden age of relative material affluence, full employment and high wages a receding memory), but the shame lingers ... and the Norwegians now lord it over their impoverished neighbours whilst enjoying the respect of the historically literate ...
It's like a morality tale ;o) ...
And again, you forget the winter war and USSR.
I think that remaining non beligerant was propably the only real choise they had. Do get fat on Nazi and Allied money, somewhat shameful...
And if they were not to declare war, why talk about sending troops to help? And why not send military hardware that was extremely hard to come by especially for Finland but also for Sweden (working as finlands proxy in the armsdeals just before and during the war)
The occupation of the nordic nations was far less brutal than elsewhere in Europe, though of course a long way from 'benevolent' ...
Agreed, Sweden had no good choices available when it's Scandi neighbours were invaded by Germany ... but they did not even choose the less noble path of true neutrality ... they chose active industrial partnership/integration with Germany behind a sham veil of neutrality ... hence the continuing controversy, cloaking, spin and denial
Swedens wartime exports to the allies were very limited and more or less irrelevant to the allied war effort ... whereas Swedish exports were absolutely vital to the axis war machine ...
one small example was that Sweden refused point blank to deal with the US when they offered the present day equivalent of several billion dollars (way over market rates) for a years supply of military grade ball bearings from Gothenburg based SKF. These vital supplies went to Germany instead, negating a hugely expensive (in blood and treasure) allied bombing campaign against the Schweinfurt ball bearing factories in Germany designed to cause the wehrmacht to literally grind to a halt!
Sweden may have been a non-combatant in WW2 ... but that is not the same as being non-aligned
At the very minimum, one could have reasonably expected true non-aligned neutrality, which would have shortened WW2 considerably
However, it is rather obvious that Swedens only aim in ww2 was to remain free. If any other aims can be identified it would be to keep the USSR out of Finland. Its that simple. By your statements you try to make it seem like Sweden was allied or sympathetic to Germany. But Swedens trade with germany merely reflected the threat Germany posed. The less of a threat Germany posed to Sweden, the less Sweden traded with Germany.
The official US government report on wartime complicity released in May 1997 concluded that Sweden (by far Germanys biggest wartime trade partner) “…. chose collaboration - including allowing Nazi troops to cross its territory - because it feared invasion, its government was pro-Nazi, and Swedes saw an opportunity for profit”
Sweden, Switzerland and other neutrals, the report charged, ``all helped support and prolong Nazi Germany's capacity to wage war at a time of grievous Allied and civilian casualties.'' And the report said - and respected historians like Paul A. Levine (a US holocaust scholar based in Sweden) agree - that after the German defeat at Stalingrad in January 1943, Sweden's sole reason for continuing trade was to retain the economic benefits.
Swedens position in ww2 was no worse than the US. The US stayed out of the war until it was attacked and declared war on. Before that it helped its allies with military supplies. Same as sweden. Yes, sweden did trade with Germany but that was necessary for avoiding being invaded. And sweden was a small nation surrounded by nazi-germany and the USSR.
Seriously, you are making a fool out of yourself in this thread, for reasons unknown. Like your ludicrous interpetation about the british bid to send troops to finland, no wonder you dropped that argument doublequick.
Swedens main contribution to finland was warmaterials, few volonteers were deployed since the war ended quickly.
Well, as many people have pointed out, swedish rawmaterials were vital to germany. And germany invaded denmark and norway and holland without thinking twice about it. So, obviously, refusing to trade with germany would invite a vastly superior power to attack. Much as the US oil-embargo on Japan prompted the Japanese attack on the US(well, japan was obviously not superior to the us).
So, in practice, sweden did back nazi germany to 1943. But out of necessity rather than a particular love of nazism.
Maybe if Swedes had been affected by WWII it would be a very different society with a different soul and outlook on life.No Remembrance Day to honour the dead here........we wer,nt involved in that so to speak....not important. Take a side...join NATO and be a part of the real world.
Whatever. Dont like it? off home to britain, we shant miss your bony ass you limie git.
On a lighter note- I think I know why when you put a gun in a German's hands they head to France. All the Germans want is a decent meal, and to enjoy the company of a lovely woman. What German would want to come home to someone named Ulga -probably weighing a ton - who cooks a dinner called a weinersnitzle...lol
What German would want to come home to someone named Ulga -probably weighing a ton - with a butterknife haircut, who cooks a dinner called a weinersnitzle...lol
But Sweden was completely encircled in a huge country with a tiny population, huge difficult to defend coastline and bordering countries occupied - I don't see this as similar to the USAs sitation at all.
[attachment=206:350px_Se...2_map_en.png]
Then Sweden's situations occupying an area of strategic importance between East and West during the cold war made neutrality the only sensible way to go
In the 80,s there were US/UK Submarine incursions into swedish waters putting Swedens military on alert.......the US/UK claimed they had no subs in that area.....so obviously the swedes thought they must be Russian. Perception of threat prevailed........and public opinion in sweden changed from 30% to 80% as viewing Russia as a threat.......thus raising the question that the country needed to join NATO!
I spoke with some old american soldiers who sortof was an eyeopener for me about NATO defenceplanning and swedens role in it. Assuming they had good information.
If what you say is true the anglos were rocking the boat, possibly as a part of the Reagan strategy of putting pressure on the USSR economically by the armsrace (starwars and all that). Opening up a northern front by making Sweden join Nato?
Problem is that the propaganda was very efficient and the SAP still have an interest in keeping it in place to preserve its selfimage. And, well, all sides were served by keeping the image of swedish neutrality in place. NATO was happy since they knew they could depend on swedish army denying swedish territory (and thus norway and thus domination of the north atlantic) to the WP, the USSR was happy about it since the alternative was NATO membership and the Swedes were happy about it for reasons I dont quite understand. But they were.
I wouldn't be so quick to denounce Skane_Refugee. A great deal of what he writes appears measured and accurate.
If you look at some of the Swedish Council Research funding (particularly going to Lund) in the last ten years, you'll see he is in fact correct. There is an acceptance that perhaps the narrative of 'small country protects citizens etc etc', is misleading, and follows typical European explanations for their involvement or lack thereof in the war. Normally, with a patriotic twist.
There are sound arguments suggesting that National Socialism was far more widespread in Sweden in 30's and 40's than typically acknowledged. If true, this would put the burden of proof on you rather than Skane.
I also remember once being asked the question ‘How would you convince someone to do something against their religion and/or country?’ I spouted some answer about appealing to their moral ideals or some such rubbish. The answer I was given - money. The only variable is how much. I suspect this is also true of nations, which are run by people. Economic benefit is probably a far stronger (not nicer) incentive than protection of the people; especially if you don’t believe it feasible to protect said people.
Gone off topic, sorry.
Essentially, the operations were a success as Sweden started to believe in a threat......prompting debate on joining NATO and militay alliance to the West.
If you have a point to make, make it? And if not, well, then your post was kindof pointless, wasnt it?
The Russo-Finnish war you refer to was fought between November 30 1939 and March 12 1940 ... the invasion of Denmark and Norway was not until 9 April 1940 (i.e. almost a month after the Russo-Finnish war had ended with an independent Finland retaining almost all of her pre-war territory and with the red army utterly humiliated)
Although the Russians 'won' some concessions at the end of that conflict (Finland ceded a part of western Keralia and permission for a Russian naval base on the Hanko peninsula) ... tiny Finland with a small part-time army, limited equipment and a long border had more than matched (indeed, according to many commentators, humiliated) the Red army (with an invasion force of over 1 million men supported by heavy artillery etc) for most of the winter of 1939/40 ... even destroying 2,000 soviet tanks (ironically with molotov cocktails!)
... military strategists outside Russia (especially in Germany) concluded that Stalins purges of the officer class had so weakened the red army (especially in terms of tactics and discipline) that it was no longer capable of defending Russia herself, let alone projecting power elsewhere in Europe
The Russo-Finnish war exposed the red army as impotent, and more or less invited the eventual tearing up of the German/Soviet non-aggression pact and the German invasion of Russia on 15 May 1941 in pursuit of what Germany had always lacked ... raw materials and oil
The idea that Sweden was threatened in any way by Russia at the time of the German invasions of Denmark and Norway in 1940 is so far off the mark as to be invisible ;o)
Just out of interest, during the war, aircraft ordered by Finland were as follows: 64 aircraft from Britain, 44 from the US, 30 from France and 10 from Italy ... though the Finns proved more than capable of defending themselves against the weakened Red Army without much help from outside (see previous post!)
Would be interested to learn more about Swedens tangible contribution to the Finnish war effort in the Russo-Finnish war 1939-1940 (not just making money through arms deals ;o) )
(I had a better link to a great CNN piece on a similar theme, but can't find it immediately :-( ... may post it later if anyone's vaguely interested
Cheers
What can I say except..........I does,nt suprise me in the least!........despite arguments in this thread on: trade adjustments to nazi threat level, no choice, neutral stance, war with USSR (for which I will still read up on), we wanted to remain free etc.
As previously understood, Sweden was pro Nazi and Anti-semitic up until 1943.....where they realised they backed the loser in the war....and pragmatically changed sides and policy on jews to enter the country.
Moral beacon my ass............
I guess that was a reference to the transfer of zulu warriors then? You are being dishonest.
You just show ignorance in this. Swedens aid to Finland was substantial and both for egocentric reasons and sentimental ones, Sweden desperately didnt want the USSR occupying Finland. An example is that in this very dangerous time a third of swedens minute airforce was sent to Finland. Still, in my personal opinion, it WAS shameful that Sweden did not declare war on the USSR and send substantial regular troops. Its understandable if you study the historical facts but its still shameful and it was the wrong descicion. Your ramblings about Swedens actions visavi the allies and nazigermany really just strike me as silly and historically ignorant but you have a point in that sweden failed Finland.
These are some numbers grabbed off some wiki article:
* 135,402 rifles, 347 machine guns, 450 light machine guns with 50,013,300 rounds of small arms ammunition;
* 144 field guns, 100 anti aircraft guns and 92 anti-armour guns with 301,846 shells;
* 300 sea mines and 500 depth-charges;
* 17 fighter aircraft, 5 light bombers and 3 reconnaissance aircraft.
But hardly the gist of it, Finland really would not have been able to resist the USSR without swedish material aid, even thou they are the bravest and best soldiers in all the world. Just them anti-armour guns were a godsent at the front. Much of the material they succeded in scrambling together just before the war was gotten with the help of swedish contacts. 1939 was not really a buyers market if you were looking for guns.
For those that find finnish brawn facinating (i do), here is a link to a wiki-article about the most lethal soldier in world-history:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simo_H%C3%A4yh%C3%A4
some interesting addition on the continuation of the tangent from the initial subject of Sweden joining NATO
http://www.thelocal.se/3464/20060404/
Of course it's a different world now with Muslim terrorism being the #1 world security concern.
I think this should be open for serious debate among the Swedes. It's not an easy decision for my Swedish friends.
Military expenditure as part of GDP is low but this is true of all european countries with the exception of UK maybe. And, including sweden would not increase the threatlevels to nato since sweden is not currently in any international dispute.
Compare the entry of the baltics? Incapable of defending themselves, nonexistent armies and a large increase of the risk of nato getting entangled in a conflict with Russia.
CIA factbook:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/th...k/print/sw.html
Armed forces homepage (i think?):
http://www.mil.se/en/
Tech examples:
http://www.gripen.com/en/index.htm
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/visby