Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

The Local _ Swedish news _ The Swedish dream was always too good to be true.

Posted by: cootje1976 15.May.2019, 04:15 AM

Pretty revealing article about Sweden and it's role in the second World War.
And the consequences of turning a blind eye to their own role during the war. Not that we did not know about that, but a good to read article nonetheless.



https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/14/sweden-far-right-wartime-past

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 15.May.2019, 07:17 AM

Thanks for article. It was a good little read with more expansive sub links.

Just goes to show the importance of introspection, be it on the individual, communal, or national level.

I love that many use the excuse “but we didn’t have slavery” to justify their use of the N word. They believe that problem is isolated in America.

Swedes are quick to point the finger outward at all the wrong in the world that they swoop in to make better or are a shining example of “how it should be”.

If they ever pointed the finger at themselves they would be devastated. And since their national identity rests in a lie, they would crumble... as they are.

They are in an identity crisis because if, as mentioned in the article, they let go of their “good guy history” starting 1943... they are left with a prejudice, white supremacist, intolerant, anti Semitic identity... that eats fish and potatoes.

A sub link also pointed out that Sweden has the second worst attitude towards immigration in Europe, just 1% behind Italy, that 49% believe immigration is a negative thing.

Sweden’s tolerance of intolerant neo nazis is worse than trump. Why allow any ideology whose end goal is to remove democracy?


I’m curious who will defend Sweden after reading this... or who will say “ Sweden was never prosecuted for war crimes in ww2 so they did nothing wrong”... I wonder who will say that????


Posted by: skogsbo 15.May.2019, 07:22 AM

Slavery still exists in just about every European country, be it living in a caravan picking fruit and veg, or on a zero hours contract in an Amazon warehouse. It might not the same on the surface but all the traits are there.

Posted by: skogsbo 15.May.2019, 07:29 AM

QUOTE (Saywhatwhat @ 15.May.2019, 06:17 AM) *
I’m curious who will defend Sweden after reading this... or who will say “ Sweden was never prosecuted for war crimes in ww2 so they did nothing wrong”... I wonder who will say that????

I think a line has been drawn under it, for all apart from those directly responsible. Exceedingly few of which are still alive. After most people would be happy to have a vw car etc. There might be a few old Nazis lurking in Argentina but the chances of getting them to the Hague are sadly next to zero.

That's war in a pre digital age, most people never know what was happening until after.

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 15.May.2019, 07:38 AM

QUOTE (skogsbo @ 15.May.2019, 08:29 AM) *
That's war in a pre digital age, most people never know what was happening until after.


Well, yeah... and being accountable for your actions is very important. What is that saying, if you forget history you are doomed to repeat it?

It isn’t about the past, completely, but the current generations who hold on to the good guy innocent image created circa1943. Or how this article exposes Sweden’s good actions during ww2 were not initiatives of their own. And that they had to be financially incentivized to help.

Did you read the article... it’s not about nazis of the past... it’s about accountability and introspection.


And with VW cars... what’s your point? Germany was and is accountable for their actions. That’s why they are a respected nation still, even after such atrocities. Although, all of Europe, including Germany, is having neo nazi, nationalist extemist problems.

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 15.May.2019, 07:42 AM

QUOTE (skogsbo @ 15.May.2019, 08:22 AM) *
Slavery still exists in just about every European country, be it living in a caravan picking fruit and veg, or on a zero hours contract in an Amazon warehouse. It might not the same on the surface but all the traits are there.



Oh, for sure. My point was more in reference to the enslavement of Africans and people from the Caribbean.

Did you even read the article... that part is about how Sweden believes those are problems other countries have, not theirs. They are innocent.

Posted by: skogsbo 15.May.2019, 07:57 AM

I know many Swedes the same age as me who are deeply ashamed of what their ancestors did, or stood by to allow others to do. One is half norwegian and his grand father was involved in the sabotage of the heavy water plants at rjukan. So you can't label a whole society.

I think of those who were conditioned into supporting Nazism in the 1940s... how many knew what was happening in the camps in Poland? That was then, now of course there is no excuse for sympathizing.

Then of course every country has it's holocaust deniers, those who latch onto Nazism because they see it matching their current anti migrant ideals. I expect the eu elections will see a heavy swing to the far right, often bizarrely in countries who suffered most when the Nazis invaded.

You could change Trumps wording about Mexicans to jews and it wouldn't be out of place at a 1930s Nazi rally.

Posted by: nativeswedishengineer 15.May.2019, 09:27 AM

QUOTE (Saywhatwhat @ 15.May.2019, 08:17 AM) *
Thanks for article. It was a good little read with more expansive sub links.

Just goes to show the importance of introspection, be it on the individual, communal, or national level.

I love that many use the excuse “but we didn’t have slavery” to justify their use of the N word. They believe that problem is isolated in America.

Swedes are quick to point the finger outward at all the wrong in the world that they swoop in to make better or are a shining example of “how it should be”.

If they ever pointed the finger at themselves they would be devastated. And since their national identity rests in a lie, they would crumble... as they are.

They are in an identity crisis because if, as mentioned in the article, they let go of their “good guy history” starting 1943... they are left with a prejudice, white supremacist, intolerant, anti Semitic identity... that eats fish and potatoes.

A sub link also pointed out that Sweden has the second worst attitude towards immigration in Europe, just 1% behind Italy, that 49% believe immigration is a negative thing.

Sweden’s tolerance of intolerant neo nazis is worse than trump. Why allow any ideology whose end goal is to remove democracy?


I’m curious who will defend Sweden after reading this... or who will say “ Sweden was never prosecuted for war crimes in ww2 so they did nothing wrong”... I wonder who will say that????



QUOTE (skogsbo @ 15.May.2019, 08:57 AM) *
I know many Swedes the same age as me who are deeply ashamed of what their ancestors did, or stood by to allow others to do. One is half norwegian and his grand father was involved in the sabotage of the heavy water plants at rjukan. So you can't label a whole society.

I think of those who were conditioned into supporting Nazism in the 1940s... how many knew what was happening in the camps in Poland? That was then, now of course there is no excuse for sympathizing.

Then of course every country has it's holocaust deniers, those who latch onto Nazism because they see it matching their current anti migrant ideals. I expect the eu elections will see a heavy swing to the far right, often bizarrely in countries who suffered most when the Nazis invaded.

You could change Trumps wording about Mexicans to jews and it wouldn't be out of place at a 1930s Nazi rally.


I don't understand why people are so surprised that the electorate is turning right. Maybe they are fed up with the neo-liberal project that has resulted in, cheaper junk available from China and clothes of very questionable quality from Bangladesh available for cheap but the jobs that used to provide an income have all been outsourced or insourced to cheaper indentured servants migrating here, while not a single party rasies any questions whatsoever to the corporations always screaming and shouting about their "critical shortage of workers" regarding why the barriers to entry for a junior job just keep getting higher and higher or why all this "job growth" consists of 0 hour contracts.

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 15.May.2019, 10:15 AM

QUOTE (nativeswedishengineer @ 15.May.2019, 10:27 AM) *
I don't understand why people are so surprised that the electorate is turning right. Maybe they are fed up with the neo-liberal project that has resulted in, cheaper junk available from China and clothes of very questionable quality from Bangladesh available for cheap but the jobs that used to provide an income have all been outsourced or insourced to cheaper indentured servants migrating here, while not a single party rasies any questions whatsoever to the corporations always screaming and shouting about their "critical shortage of workers" regarding why the barriers to entry for a junior job just keep getting higher and higher or why all this "job growth" consists of 0 hour contracts.



That’s the point of the article... that since World War Two Sweden has created a false identity for themselves and since then they try to keep the lie afloat with their virtue signaling moral compass of the world bullshit.

And dude, if all that “cheap junk” that we get from China was manufactured elsewhere.... it would be insanely expensive... so enjoy.

And clothing... funny how it’s H and M that uses Bangladesh as their production hub.... funny how h and m is a Swedish company... funny how, like this article, you are incapable of understanding that it is the Swedish h and m clothes that are shit because they, the Swedish company, allows it. Quality control? But of course, Sweden is never to blame, they are perfect in every way, if only everyone else could be like them. It’s the Chinese and Bangladeshis fault.

Point the finger at yourself for once, native Swede, not everywhere else.

But thanks for being a shining example of what the article is getting at to an extent.

Posted by: skogsbo 15.May.2019, 10:26 AM

QUOTE (Saywhatwhat @ 15.May.2019, 09:15 AM) *
That’s the point of the article... that since World War Two Sweden has created a false identity for themselves and since then they try to keep the lie afloat with their virtue signaling moral compass of the world bullshit.

Or USA as the policeman of the world. They've started as many fights themselves as they have resolved.

Posted by: nativeswedishengineer 15.May.2019, 10:35 AM

QUOTE (Saywhatwhat @ 15.May.2019, 11:15 AM) *
That’s the point of the article... that since World War Two Sweden has created a false identity for themselves and since then they try to keep the lie afloat with their virtue signaling moral compass of the world bullshit.

And dude, if all that “cheap junk” that we get from China was manufactured elsewhere... it would be insanely expensive... so enjoy.

And clothing... funny how it’s H and M that uses Bangladesh as their production hub... funny how h and m is a Swedish company... funny how, like this article, you are incapable of understanding that it is the Swedish h and m clothes that are shit because they, the Swedish company, allows it. Quality control? But of course, Sweden is never to blame, they are perfect in every way, if only everyone else could be like them. It’s the Chinese and Bangladeshis fault.

Point the finger at yourself for once, native Swede, not everywhere else.

But thanks for being a shining example of what the article is getting at to an extent.


So instead of answering the post you qouted, you post some more soapboxing. Are you an alt account for gjeebes?

Posted by: cootje1976 15.May.2019, 11:05 AM

QUOTE (skogsbo @ 15.May.2019, 09:26 AM) *
Or USA as the policeman of the world. They've started as many fights themselves as they have resolved.


That is correct but yet all our political leaders that are voted in follow the USA where ever they decide to play police;
and if you read the following, and I'd start from the 1960's they have been doing it always with (silent) support from other countries:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_military_operations

Here is the thing; no country is 100% awesome and perhaps correct. But I have seen in my short time here more evidence of people not talking about the not so good side of their history; In Germany they have owned up to the fact that those things happened, and teach them in schools to understand why, and to prevent it from happening in that scale. Not everyone will listen, but then it is out there, and you make your own decision.

They have made sure to highlight what happened with the jews; some streets in Berlin, in front houses where Jews and other undesirables were deported, they created signs for the young generation to see and ask questions about what happened. People there are allowed to openly vent and discuss these points and not to see it just as a stigma.

Here it seems that it is avoided as cancer. If you bring it up, people shrug and continue with their live. People sometimes seem disconnected from their past and do not seem to want to 'own' it; just to sweep it under the rug and continue like as if it never existed is the way it is being done here, and therefore actual lessons of 'why, how, and where' are never discussed.

Sticking ones head in the sand does not make the problem 'disappear'.

It even public secret that the majority of the Swedish riches come from that period of dealing with the Nazis. And that to the very high top, even royals were, in that time, avid supporters of some, if not all of the Nazi ideology.

It is now just boxed somewhere for safekeeping and starts to leak out I guess...

At least the Norwegians owned it, as have many other countries:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_purge_in_Norway_after_World_War_II

And just searching on the following in google (add any country): nazi collaborators france

Shows that the rest of the countries did not stick their heads in the sand...

And This is actually even scarier:
Sweden's Refusal to Prosecute Nazi War Criminals
http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-zuroff-f02.htm

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 15.May.2019, 11:30 AM

QUOTE (skogsbo @ 15.May.2019, 11:26 AM) *
Or USA as the policeman of the world. They've started as many fights themselves as they have resolved.


Well, look at it this way... would you rather USA do it or Russia and China?
Europe benefits greatly from USA world police... they are able to not pay into a strong military for themselves which allows them to provide a greater social net. If the USA wasn’t there, the Soviet Union would still exist, and who knows... maybe they would expand and expand.

America has plenty of blood on their hands, no doubt. But let’s not forget USA is less than 300 years old. You think Europe was behaving until big bad usa came along?

And yes trump isn’t a good guy and spouts ridiculous nonsense about Mexicans. But fact is, Mexicans are very accepted and well integrated into America. Mexican culture, like many cultures, makes up America. And there are also many Mexican people in positions of power... business and politics. Try saying that about foreigners in Sweden.

But golly. An article about Sweden taking a look at itself and people continue to point the finger elsewhere.




QUOTE (nativeswedishengineer @ 15.May.2019, 11:35 AM) *
So instead of answering the post you qouted, you post some more soapboxing. Are you an alt account for gjeebes?


There wasn’t a single question in your post. Lol! What is wrong with you... you just took another opportunity to soapbox your hatred of immigrant labor.

Puhleaaase







To both... this isn’t an attack on Sweden... this is the truth swedes hide from constantly. And this article is about the consequences of hiding from the truth just to keep a good Swede image. Damn

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 15.May.2019, 11:42 AM

QUOTE (cootje1976 @ 15.May.2019, 12:05 PM) *
That is correct but yet all our political leaders that are voted in follow the USA where ever they decide to play police;
and if you read the following, and I'd start from the 1960's they have been doing it always with (silent) support from other countries:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_military_operations

Here is the thing; no country is 100% awesome and perhaps correct. But I have seen in my short time here more evidence of people not talking about the not so good side of their history; In Germany they have owned up to the fact that those things happened, and teach them in schools to understand why, and to prevent it from happening in that scale. Not everyone will listen, but then it is out there, and you make your own decision.

They have made sure to highlight what happened with the jews; some streets in Berlin, in front houses where Jews and other undesirables were deported, they created signs for the young generation to see and ask questions about what happened. People there are allowed to openly vent and discuss these points and not to see it just as a stigma.

Here it seems that it is avoided as cancer. If you bring it up, people shrug and continue with their live. People sometimes seem disconnected from their past and do not seem to want to 'own' it; just to sweep it under the rug and continue like as if it never existed is the way it is being done here, and therefore actual lessons of 'why, how, and where' are never discussed.

Sticking ones head in the sand does not make the problem 'disappear'.

It even public secret that the majority of the Swedish riches come from that period of dealing with the Nazis. And that to the very high top, even royals were, in that time, avid supporters of some, if not all of the Nazi ideology.

It is now just boxed somewhere for safekeeping and starts to leak out I guess...

At least the Norwegians owned it, as have many other countries:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_purge_in_Norway_after_World_War_II

And just searching on the following in google (add any country): nazi collaborators france

Shows that the rest of the countries did not stick their heads in the sand...

And This is actually even scarier:
Sweden's Refusal to Prosecute Nazi War Criminals
http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-zuroff-f02.htm



Thank you for stressing the point and importance.

And since everyone likes to shit on USA, including US citizens, I would say the American people are good at owning up to the all the problems we have caused or been a part of. Most will gladly talk about anything. I would say the biggest fuck up is the treatment of the natives before the Spanish French and British colonists took over. It’s talked about in history classes, the wretch Andrew Jackson, trail of tears, reservations and forcing them into Christianity. It’s talked about but sadly it doesn’t ring as loud as slavery and the constant mistreatment of people of color. Although they too have gained many positions of power in businesses and politics. The indigenous.... sadly, not nearly as much, not much at all.

Unless you consider Elizabeth warren hahahahahahaha

Posted by: nativeswedishengineer 15.May.2019, 12:08 PM

QUOTE (Saywhatwhat @ 15.May.2019, 12:30 PM) *
There wasn’t a single question in your post. Lol! What is wrong with you... you just took another opportunity to soapbox your hatred of immigrant labor.

Puhleaaase


So you totally missed the point about the fact that people might be turning right, because the neo-liberal globalist project has failed to provide any value? Yes, we get cheap crap from asia, but what is the value of that when we also get turned into day labourers?

Posted by: Gamla Hälsingebock 15.May.2019, 02:11 PM

Liberal bullshit!!!

Posted by: Bsmith 15.May.2019, 05:02 PM

QUOTE (nativeswedishengineer @ 15.May.2019, 11:08 AM) *
So you totally missed the point about the fact that people might be turning right, because the neo-liberal globalist project has failed to provide any value? Yes, we get cheap crap from asia, but what is the value of that when we also get turned into day labourers?



We are all assigning our futures to China in exchange for cheap shit.

Posted by: cootje1976 15.May.2019, 07:18 PM

QUOTE (Bsmith @ 15.May.2019, 05:02 PM) *
We are all assigning our futures to China in exchange for cheap shit.


Yep, and then we wonder why China now has all our ip and is able to allegedly spy on us via Huawei etc.
Outsourcing! Cheaper shit brought this, that is the new reality. Heck now they make even better phones then Apple...

Posted by: simontnms115 16.May.2019, 07:41 AM

Thanks for great article.

Swedes are quick to point the finger outward at all the wrong in the world that they swoop in to make better or are a shining example of “how it should be”.

If they ever pointed the finger at themselves they would be devastated. And since their national identity rests in a lie, they would crumble... as they are.

Posted by: skogsbo 16.May.2019, 08:50 AM

QUOTE (simontnms115 @ 16.May.2019, 06:41 AM) *
Americans are quick to point the finger outward at all the wrong in the world that they swoop in to make better or are a shining example of “how it should be”.

If they ever pointed the finger at themselves they would be devastated. And since their national identity rests in a lie, they would crumble... as they are.

FTFY

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 16.May.2019, 09:21 AM

QUOTE (skogsbo @ 16.May.2019, 09:50 AM) *
FTFY



Hahaha. Are you incapable of being critical towards Sweden?

It’s hilarious how many are proving the point of the article.

American people care more about what’s going on in their own country and try to solve their own social issues.

Sweden cares more about what’s wrong in other countries rather than addressing their own issues... because they are good swedes, incapable of wrongdoing.

Do some research and learn why America became the superpower it is today... it has a little something to do with saving Europe from being destroyed. Just a little.


Posted by: nativeswedishengineer 16.May.2019, 10:27 AM

QUOTE (Saywhatwhat @ 16.May.2019, 10:21 AM) *
Hahaha. Are you incapable of being critical towards Sweden?

It’s hilarious how many are proving the point of the article.

American people care more about what’s going on in their own country and try to solve their own social issues.

Sweden cares more about what’s wrong in other countries rather than addressing their own issues... because they are good swedes, incapable of wrongdoing.

Do some research and learn why America became the superpower it is today... it has a little something to do with saving Europe from being destroyed. Just a little.


Sorry, what did you just say? Saving Europe? So americans were the ones beeing slaughtered at Rostov, Brody, Stalingrad, Moscow, Prokhorovka and Kursk?

Posted by: skogsbo 16.May.2019, 10:47 AM

QUOTE (Saywhatwhat @ 16.May.2019, 08:21 AM) *
Hahaha. Are you incapable of being critical towards Sweden?

It’s hilarious how many are proving the point of the article.

American people care more about what’s going on in their own country and try to solve their own social issues.

Sweden cares more about what’s wrong in other countries rather than addressing their own issues... because they are good swedes, incapable of wrongdoing.

Do some research and learn why America became the superpower it is today... it has a little something to do with saving Europe from being destroyed. Just a little.

You are American aren't you?

Don't get so wound up. All nationalities will defend their home nation, but happily criticise it amongst each other.

Be it ww2, Vietnam, Iraq or Iran again the USA does nothing for the benefit of others, there is always a selfish end goal. Which is fine, why not, but also lets not pretend otherwise.

It's was pretty clear in the late 30s and certainly 40s that there was a massive global rise in communism and facism. Had the USA stayed out of Europe, north America would have eventually become the only continent that was essentially free and democratic. Japan, ussr, Germany were all prepared to sacrifice millions of their population in battle to rule the world. Also Germany's rocketry was advancing rapidly, if they developed a functioning nuclear bomb it would be game over. So again, the USA didn't care about freeing Paris etc.. it was pure self interest. It worked out well for Europe as well of course. Even the post war loans to Europe the usa gave after ww2 were with interest, they weren't losing out through their charity and also got to use Europe as buffer between them and ussr.

Posted by: Bsmith 16.May.2019, 11:47 AM

There is no country with a clean laundry list. No country.

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 16.May.2019, 04:36 PM

QUOTE (nativeswedishengineer @ 16.May.2019, 11:27 AM) *
Sorry, what did you just say? Saving Europe? So americans were the ones beeing slaughtered at Rostov, Brody, Stalingrad, Moscow, Prokhorovka and Kursk?


Yes... and they did. No, they weren’t necessarily slaughtered there. However, 400,000 died... while saving Europe.

QUOTE (skogsbo @ 16.May.2019, 11:47 AM) *
You are American aren't you?

Don't get so wound up. All nationalities will defend their home nation, but happily criticise it amongst each other.

Be it ww2, Vietnam, Iraq or Iran again the USA does nothing for the benefit of others, there is always a selfish end goal. Which is fine, why not, but also lets not pretend otherwise.

It's was pretty clear in the late 30s and certainly 40s that there was a massive global rise in communism and facism. Had the USA stayed out of Europe, north America would have eventually become the only continent that was essentially free and democratic. Japan, ussr, Germany were all prepared to sacrifice millions of their population in battle to rule the world. Also Germany's rocketry was advancing rapidly, if they developed a functioning nuclear bomb it would be game over. So again, the USA didn't care about freeing Paris etc.. it was pure self interest. It worked out well for Europe as well of course. Even the post war loans to Europe the usa gave after ww2 were with interest, they weren't losing out through their charity and also got to use Europe as buffer between them and ussr.


Not wound up at all skogs. I have enjoyed our exchanges as they haven’t devolved into nonsense despite our different opinions.

I agree with all that you say here. My problem was that you made that joke, and then the following, assuming people think America is doing what it does to help people.... and no one thinks that, especially not Americans... well... a majority knows America only operates out of self interests.

And then you said it perfectly... “Had the USA stayed out of Europe, north America would have eventually become the only continent that was essentially free and democratic. Japan, ussr, Germany were all prepared to sacrifice millions of their population in battle to rule the world. Also Germany's rocketry was advancing rapidly, if they developed a functioning nuclear bomb it would be game over. So again, the USA didn't care about freeing Paris etc.. it was pure self interest. It worked out well for Europe as well of course. Even the post war loans to Europe the usa gave after ww2 were with interest, they weren't losing out through their charity and also got to use Europe as buffer between them and ussr”

I never said nor implied America does what it does, during ww1-ww2 or ever, out of the goodness of their heart.


And as I said before... I wish America would spend more on its own problems rather than their military... and if left to defend themselves... European countries would have a hard time providing the social benefits like they do.









Posted by: nativeswedishengineer 16.May.2019, 04:59 PM

QUOTE (Saywhatwhat @ 16.May.2019, 05:36 PM) *
Yes... and they did. No, they weren’t necessarily slaughtered there. However, 400,000 died... while saving Europe.


So you want to count all US war casualites as belonging to the europea theater of operations? Nothing going on in asia or in the pacific, right?

Posted by: Bsmith 16.May.2019, 05:38 PM

What if games are always meaningless. What if USA had not intervened in WW2? Who knows for sure? Historians are pretty much in agreement that it was a turning point in the war but myself, as an American, don't expect to get my ass kissed everytime I meet a European. It was something that happened several generations ago and that is that.

I know that a lot of Europeans have bad feelings towards Americans. Not entirely sure why but certainly America nor all Americans are perfect. On the other side of the coin, most Americans have a total disregard for Europe other than a fascination with the countries of their origin. On Saint Paddy's Day, "Oh I'm half Irish" and all that type of hoorah. The reason for this is probably because most Americans have not been to Europe. It is a bit pricey to fly over the pond unless Uncle Sam is sponsoring a free trip. That is why I thought it was so important to introduce my kids to Sweden when they were little. Instead of a trip to *gag* Disneyworld, we moved to Sweden for a year. One of the best things I have ever done for my daughters, I'm sure. For the most part, I find that we are all more alike than we are different and I believe that if we focus on our commonalities instead of our differences, the world would be much better off.

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 16.May.2019, 05:53 PM

QUOTE (nativeswedishengineer @ 16.May.2019, 05:59 PM) *
So you want to count all US war casualites as belonging to the europea theater of operations? Nothing going on in asia or in the pacific, right?


There was plenty going on there... including the slaughter of millions of Chinese. What is your point?

Would you rather the iron curtain was still up and advancing west?


QUOTE (Bsmith @ 16.May.2019, 06:38 PM) *
What if games are always meaningless. What if USA had not intervened in WW2? Who knows for sure? Historians are pretty much in agreement that it was a turning point in the war but myself, as an American, don't expect to get my ass kissed everytime I meet a European. It was something that happened several generations ago and that is that.

I know that a lot of Europeans have bad feelings towards Americans. Not entirely sure why but certainly America nor all Americans are perfect. On the other side of the coin, most Americans have a total disregard for Europe other than a fascination with the countries of their origin. On Saint Paddy's Day, "Oh I'm half Irish" and all that type of hoorah. The reason for this is probably because most Americans have not been to Europe. It is a bit pricey to fly over the pond unless Uncle Sam is sponsoring a free trip. That is why I thought it was so important to introduce my kids to Sweden when they were little. Instead of a trip to *gag* Disneyworld, we moved to Sweden for a year. One of the best things I have ever done for my daughters, I'm sure. For the most part, I find that we are all more alike than we are different and I believe that if we focus on our commonalities instead of our differences, the world would be much better off.


So someone who is born in America to 1 irish parent is not half Irish? I know what you mean, but at the same time I don’t think that is why Europeans dislike Americans as you say.

There are plenty of misconceptions flying both ways.

I don’t think Europeans dislike Americans, nor Americans dislike Europeans. I think everyone dislikes American foreign policy. Most of it at least.





My goodness, has anyone read the article at the beginning of this thread and care to comment on that?



Posted by: skogsbo 16.May.2019, 09:45 PM

QUOTE (Saywhatwhat @ 16.May.2019, 04:53 PM) *
...

Like it or not, the USA needs Europe as military launch pad and surveillance base(menwith hill and flyingdales). Be it radar and listening stations or air forces. The same with common wealth islands or French territory in the Indian ocean and other places. Or Cyprus. It needs these safe havens closer to Russia and China as part of its defence programme. The USA base on Diego Garcia is UK territory on long lease to the USA etc.. some times defence is mutually beneficial.

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 17.May.2019, 06:04 AM

QUOTE (skogsbo @ 16.May.2019, 10:45 PM) *
Like it or not, the USA needs Europe as military launch pad and surveillance base(menwith hill and flyingdales). Be it radar and listening stations or air forces. The same with common wealth islands or French territory in the Indian ocean and other places. Or Cyprus. It needs these safe havens closer to Russia and China as part of its defence programme. The USA base on Diego Garcia is UK territory on long lease to the USA etc.. some times defence is mutually beneficial.


Yea, cool. What is your point? Why do you always speak from a point of inferiority? No one here is saying or implying America is superior.

Now how about Sweden’s actions during ww2 and the repercussions of telling and teaching in school to successive generations of swedes that they were always the good guy?

Posted by: skogsbo 17.May.2019, 07:05 AM

QUOTE (Saywhatwhat @ 17.May.2019, 05:04 AM) *
Yea, cool. What is your point? Why do you always speak from a point of inferiority? No one here is saying or implying America is superior.

Now how about Sweden’s actions during ww2 and the repercussions of telling and teaching in school to successive generations of swedes that they were always the good guy?

I think all Swedes are well aware of what their history is.

Perhaps the argument is they are less bad than other nations?

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 17.May.2019, 09:01 AM

QUOTE (skogsbo @ 17.May.2019, 08:05 AM) *
I think all Swedes are well aware of what their history is.

Perhaps the argument is they are less bad than other nations?


No, they aren’t.

I’d prefer an honest criminal to a dishonest one.

Posted by: Gamla Hälsingebock 17.May.2019, 02:46 PM

"I think all Swedes are well aware of what their history is."

Sweden's role in WWII was a classic exercise in diplomacy brought about by the need to protect its lands and peoples...

Surrounded for the second time by crazed war mongers it walked a virtual tightrope and survived that madness unscathed, a most brilliant accomplishment considering that the war lunacy gobbled up most of the world...

And for this great accomplishment there are those that condemn their efforts and denounce them as acts of cowardice...

An outstanding act of cowardice was perpetrated by none other than Neville Chamberlain a man whose bravery was illustrated by him kissing Hitler's boots and giving him somebody else's country to save his own "bum"!!!

And so began the horror known as WWII...It seems the first one did not satisfy the blood lust of the people who deem Sweden as cowardly...

Posted by: Bsmith 17.May.2019, 03:55 PM

A lot of left leaning liberal types second guess Harry S. Truman's decision to drop the H bomb on Japan. However, they weren't there and the decision was not theirs to make. Most historians agree that, however horrible, dropping the bomb(s) ultimately saved more lives than it took.

Sweden's decision to side with the Nazis seems distasteful and disgraceful now, but in light of what Sweden was facing at the time, may just well have been the best option for the Swedish people overall.

Posted by: Gamla Hälsingebock 17.May.2019, 04:15 PM

What is conveniently forgotten is the plain fact that Sweden sided with nobody!!!

Had she sided with the Axis powers she would have been sanctioned and punished by the winners...and we all know that NEVER happened!!!

Posted by: Gjeebes 17.May.2019, 06:48 PM

Simply wow for the complete BS on this particular thread-page.

We have heard from the Skoogsies, Meatballia's ugliest self-righteous Man-Cheerleader.

We've heard from the Gamla who just makes it up as he goes along. A proud decedent of, but whom has never lived in, Meatballia. (maybe finally your time to conduct the old duct tape/plastic bag routine, on yourself, in just the very same way you described it to that one OP a couple years back)

And BSmith...for shame. I mean Gamla's an utter moron, but you...there was such hope lol!

There are yet others who feel that Truman dropped the bomb on Japan simply as a warning to the Soviets of what would happen if they didn't comply with the NWO, single-handedly forcing the Iron Curtain to be established.

Posted by: Bsmith 17.May.2019, 10:11 PM

And there are some who feel that the 9-11 attack on the World Trade Center was planned by the US. And there are some who feel that the 1969 moon landing was a hoax. And there are some who deny the Holocaust ever happened. And so on...

Posted by: Gamla Hälsingebock 18.May.2019, 12:12 AM

And there are some that believe Sweden supported Nazi Germany too... rolleyes.gif laugh.gif

Posted by: Gjeebes 18.May.2019, 04:49 AM

"And there are some that believe Sweden supported Nazi Germany too... rolleyes.gif laugh.gif"

Yes, the native Swede who wrote the piece that is the focus of this thread certainly does, and has apparently written a book about it.

But your confusion is understandable as many mix-up Switzerland with Meatballia (and in this case, even fellow Meatballs, as you claim to be, can't get it straight).

And what's next Gamla, you will tell us the Holocaust didn't happen either?

"My readers seemed unaware of the full extent of Swedish complicity with Nazi Germany during the war. This is one reason that I have returned to the subject in my latest book – revealing how, from July 1940 to November 1941, a total of 686,000 German soldiers travelled by train through Sweden to occupied Norway, and how, in spite of the best efforts of the Allies, Sweden had covertly continued to export ball-bearings to Nazi Germany, making an important contribution to rearmament."

And thanks for the straw-man BSmith. I had never connected the dots that nuking Japan unnecessarily might be a hoax, which I suppose is what you are implying with your moon landing comments. Or was that offered more as a desperate attempt to make yourself feel better, knowing that there is no real way to motivate that dropping the nukes can be in any way rationalised as a positive thing?

Fact is, the Meatballs did nothing to stop Hitler. That is what they will be most remembered for with respect to WWII. Well that, and allowing high ranking Nazi's to own flats, which they then used for vacationing with Meatballian crack whores of the time, during breaks from front-line fighting. Oh, and knowingly having had confiscated Jewish marked gold bars melted down to conceal the origins, etc, etc ,etc.

Posted by: skogsbo 18.May.2019, 06:33 AM

Gjeebes I don't think there was anything covert about ball bearing transport... it was known.. just like the iron ore. But, just because the political class made a decision 70-80 years ago mean that a person born decades after agrees with it.

If you wrote a list of nations who ignored all the warning signs and even sat on their hands for a year or two, it wouldn't just include sweden!

I'm no defender of Sweden's track record on ww2 but they were vastly different times globally. US and UK political and business elite were still having dinner parties in Berlin when Germany marched across Poland.

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 18.May.2019, 07:13 AM

This is what successive generations of swedes are taught...

http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-zuroff-f02.htm

In the in the 40’s and 50’s do nothing, in the 60’s do nothing, in the 80’s do nothing, in the 2000’s do nothing.

Bury your heads in the sand and keep telling yourself you are a good Swede.


And funny because if anyone reads it, a lot rings true today about Sweden’s handling of isis members/ supporters/ other criminals.

Sweden’s dumbass told the world they are a leader in holocaust education but they can’t even educate themselves... or MOST IMPORTANTLY, especially in relation to the main article of this thread that none of you can read or comment on, they can’t examine themselves to realize the errors/ faults in their ways...


Posted by: Bsmith 18.May.2019, 12:30 PM

QUOTE (Gjeebes @ 18.May.2019, 04:49 AM) *
Or was that offered more as a desperate attempt to make yourself feel better, knowing that there is no real way to motivate that dropping the nukes can be in any way rationalised as a positive thing?



Desperate attempt to make myself feel better...from what? I wasn't yet born when the bomb was dropped. And rationalizing that nukes are good? I know of no such thing. If dropping the bomb brought a quicker end to the war and ultimately saved more lives than it took, how cannot that be considered positive? Would it be better if such terrible measures were not necessary? Sure, and while were at it let's eliminate all war, famine, disease, rap music and mosquitoes. Hate those friggin' things.

Posted by: Gamla Hälsingebock 18.May.2019, 12:54 PM

I think it was an incredible stroke of luck that Sweden found a monetary reward by selling goods to those that used them to kill each other...

Why not take advantage of the murderous hearts and souls of European war mongers by helping them to destroy themselves...

Aahh the joys of neutrality...and a great way to make a buck!!!

Need help killing your neighbor??? laugh.gif


Posted by: Saywhatwhat 18.May.2019, 03:31 PM

QUOTE (Gamla Hälsingebock @ 18.May.2019, 01:12 AM) *
And there are some that believe Sweden supported Nazi Germany too... rolleyes.gif laugh.gif


Do yourself a favor and read this... https://1997-2001.state.gov/regions/eur/rpt_9806_ng_sweden.pdf

Anyone interested in history should.

Sweden was punished... businesses sanctioned, blockades made, public embarrassment on the world stage. During the war, the allies considered letting Sweden fall into economic plight with lengthier blockades of imports because they kept helping Germany. That is not neutrality. Lengthy investigations. It’s all there. It all happened. The allies pressured Sweden and “squeezed” them to get something out of them BECAUSE they were too buddy buddy with Germany.

It’s all ignored and forgotten.

Perhaps the a bomb wouldn’t have been dropped if Sweden stopped supplying the Nazis with vital resources... prior to 1944...

Posted by: skogsbo 18.May.2019, 06:44 PM

QUOTE (Saywhatwhat @ 18.May.2019, 02:31 PM) *
Perhaps the a bomb wouldn’t have been dropped if Sweden stopped supplying the Nazis with vital resources... prior to 1944...

Flaw... the bombs were dropped Japan.

Posted by: Gamla Hälsingebock 18.May.2019, 07:59 PM

This discussion is basically flawed...The "Swede bashers" have no idea what neutrality really is and do not want to recognize the truth...

Their truth is revisionist history and totally fake news written by rabid liberals who worship the society depicted by Eric Blair; who's main character has a job changing past history to fit today's politics...

Again Liberal bullshit!!!

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 18.May.2019, 08:31 PM

QUOTE (Gamla Hälsingebock @ 18.May.2019, 08:59 PM) *
This discussion is basically flawed...The "Swede bashers" have no idea what neutrality really is and do not want to recognize the truth...

Their truth is revisionist history and totally fake news written by rabid liberals who worship the society depicted by Eric Blair; who's main character has a job changing past history to fit today's politics...

Again Liberal bullshit!!!


You obviously didn’t read the link I attached in my previous post. A thorough account filled with facts.

It seems your history includes a lot of sharpie markings...


Posted by: cootje1976 19.May.2019, 07:22 AM

QUOTE (Gamla Hälsingebock @ 18.May.2019, 07:59 PM) *
This discussion is basically flawed...The "Swede bashers" have no idea what neutrality really is and do not want to recognize the truth...

Their truth is revisionist history and totally fake news written by rabid liberals who worship the society depicted by Eric Blair; who's main character has a job changing past history to fit today's politics...

Again Liberal bullshit!!!


Your definition of neutrality is flawed;

"neutrality
/njuːˈtralɪti/
Learn to pronounce
noun
noun: neutrality
1.
the state of not supporting or helping either side in a conflict, disagreement, etc.; impartiality.
"during the war, Switzerland maintained its neutrality"
synonyms: impartiality, lack of bias, lack of prejudice, objectivity, open-mindedness, disinterestedness, even-handedness, fairness, fair-mindedness, detachment More
"the tradition of civil service neutrality"
non-alignment, non-participation, non-involvement, non-intervention, non-interventionism, non-combativeness
"our long-term interests will be served best by maintaining our neutrality in the war"
antonyms: partiality, bias, participation, taking sides
2.
absence of decided views, expression, or strong feeling.
"the clinical neutrality of the description"
3.
the condition of being chemically or electrically neutral.
"the structure has overall electrical neutrality""

And that is just when looking it up.

And is trading with both groups seen as being neutral?
Not so sure: http://www.historyisnowmagazine.com/blog/2017/12/18/was-sweden-really-neutral-in-world-war-two#.XOD1A1OxWNw=

This is not bashing I think, but a valid point that should be open for discussion; it should not be seen as an attack, but merely something to reflect upon.

Posted by: skogsbo 19.May.2019, 08:03 AM

Cootje... there are no excuses for Nazis or the racist events of ww2, but the phrase the winners write the history books makes finding out all the detail much harder.

Curiously Germany has just paid out compensation to Chileans who suffered in former Nazis cult camps there after ww2. I'm sure there are or were more lurking in south America. There must have been plenty Nazi supporters dotted around the world to enable their escape there.

Posted by: john.boy 19.May.2019, 12:08 PM

QUOTE (cootje1976 @ 19.May.2019, 07:22 AM) *
And is trading with both groups seen as being neutral?
Not so sure
This is not bashing I think, but a valid point that should be open for discussion; it should not be seen as an attack, but merely something to reflect upon.

According to the Hague Convention of 1899, 1907 and the London Declaration of 1909, iron ore, ball bearings, were not listed as contraband. This meant that a nation that has claimed neutrality in a conflict can sell those items to any belligrent country without violating neutrality.

It is incorrect to state that Sweden was neutral during WW2, because there were multiple conflicts taking place around the same time. Sweden declared neutrality with regards the conflict between Germany, France & Britain. However, it did not declare neutrality with regards Finland vs Soviet Union. For that conflict it declared itself non-belligrent, not neutral.

Sweden did on numerous occasions violate neutrality in the conflict between Germany, France & Britain. For example, allowing German troop transports to use the train network, allowing British Airforce to cross it's airspace when performing bombing runs against Germany, the agreement to return British Aircrews to Britain who ditched damaged planes in Sweden after raids on Germany.

Posted by: Gamla Hälsingebock 19.May.2019, 01:11 PM

For the record I never defined neutrality, however I am glad there are those who have provided some examples that indicate what a "slippery slope" Sweden had to navigate to safe guard its country and people...Which I had previously stated...

Had the Axis powers prevailed I am sure there would Germans who would condemn Sweden for aiding the Allies...

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 19.May.2019, 05:24 PM

QUOTE (Gamla Hälsingebock @ 19.May.2019, 02:11 PM) *
For the record I never defined neutrality, however I am glad there are those who have provided some examples that indicate what a "slippery slope" Sweden had to navigate to safe guard its country and people...Which I had previously stated...

Had the Axis powers prevailed I am sure there would Germans who would condemn Sweden for aiding the Allies...


Good for you, then you can apply at your own convenience.

If the axis won then Sweden would have fully embraced their nazi side.

Even without a threat, they still helped out nazi Germany, after the war as well.

“Secretary Hull considered threatening to take over Swedish companies in the United States and to deny Sweden critical supplies after the end of the War unless Sweden cut its ties with Germany In a September 13, 1944, telegram to U.S. representatives in Stockholm, Secretary Hull made clear his feeling that the danger to Sweden of a German retaliatory attack had passed:
"We fail to appreciate the validity of the arguments used by the [Swedish] Foreign Minister in defense of Sweden’s so-called ’neutrality policy’. In our opinion Sweden’s policy has been based upon a determination to keep out of the war at all costs rather than one of strict neutrality. Hence, she has granted concessions to one belligerent group and then the other in accordance with fluctuations of the war. Now that the people of Sweden, as well as those of the United Nations, realize the defeat of Germany is a forgone conclusion, we cannot comprehend why the Swedish government still hesitated to sever all trade with Germany.”

Posted by: Gamla Hälsingebock 19.May.2019, 06:34 PM

"In our opinion Sweden’s policy has been based upon a determination to keep out of the war at all costs rather than one of strict neutrality. Hence, she has granted concessions to one belligerent group and then the other in accordance with fluctuations of the war."

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 19.May.2019, 07:54 PM

QUOTE (Gamla Hälsingebock @ 19.May.2019, 07:34 PM) *
"In our opinion Sweden’s policy has been based upon a determination to keep out of the war at all costs rather than one of strict neutrality. Hence, she has granted concessions to one belligerent group and then the other in accordance with fluctuations of the war."


Yep, she bent over for whoever was about to storm their border.

I guess they never learned...

Posted by: Gamla Hälsingebock 19.May.2019, 08:02 PM

"Sweden's role in WWII was a classic exercise in diplomacy brought about by the need to protect its lands and peoples..."

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 19.May.2019, 08:15 PM

Seems like they bend over for whoever they are scared of...

Kind of like today....

Funny what happens when Sweden, as a nation, sticks their head in the sand and borks on about being good guys, not allowing themselves to have an honest dialogue in their country...

Posted by: Gamla Hälsingebock 19.May.2019, 08:46 PM

"Surrounded for the second time by crazed war mongers it walked a virtual tightrope and survived that madness unscathed, a most brilliant accomplishment considering that the war lunacy gobbled up most of the world..."


Posted by: Saywhatwhat 19.May.2019, 08:56 PM

Seems like they bend over for whoever they are scared of...

Kind of like today...

Funny what happens when Sweden, as a nation, sticks their head in the sand and borks on about being good guys, not allowing themselves to have an honest dialogue in their country.

Posted by: Gamla Hälsingebock 19.May.2019, 09:19 PM

"And for this great accomplishment there are those that condemn their efforts and denounce them as acts of cowardice..."

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 19.May.2019, 09:38 PM

But how about their actions concerning the war, after the war?

You still don’t get it.

Being honest with oneself is necessary to be honest to others.

Posted by: Gamla Hälsingebock 19.May.2019, 11:29 PM

"In our opinion Sweden’s policy has been based upon a determination to keep out of the war at all costs rather than one of strict neutrality. Hence, she has granted concessions to one belligerent group and then the other in accordance with fluctuations of the war."

Posted by: skogsbo 20.May.2019, 06:59 AM

QUOTE (Saywhatwhat @ 19.May.2019, 08:38 PM) *
But how about their actions concerning the war, after the war?

You still don’t get it.

Being honest with oneself is necessary to be honest to others.

You mean countries change their own rules to suit themselves?

The same country that lobbied for sanctions on sweden in 1944, had no issue using brutal middle East or north african dictators in the 60, 70, 80s but then invaded most of them 20 years later!

Posted by: Bsmith 20.May.2019, 11:51 AM

If the general population knew what our governments are really doing in the name of national security or best interests, we would be appalled. Supposedly our democratic governments are representing the wishes of the public that they serve but, I fear that in many cases, this is not so. Governments as a whole and individual politicians whom are drunk with power and/or have an social agenda do their own thing.

When you say you are upset with a country and do not like its policies, it is important to separate the people of that nation from the politics. Most of us are not happy with the policies either.

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 20.May.2019, 11:58 AM

QUOTE (skogsbo @ 20.May.2019, 07:59 AM) *
You mean countries change their own rules to suit themselves?

The same country that lobbied for sanctions on sweden in 1944, had no issue using brutal middle East or north african dictators in the 60, 70, 80s but then invaded most of them 20 years later!


In the case of Sweden, they didn’t change their rules when the time came to investigate and prosecute all the nazi war criminals that were living free and wealthy in Sweden. A simple ask, complied by many countries, considering they helped save Jewish refugees during the war. But nope, for decades until now they were unwilling to do so. Even now, as a symbolic act. How weird because that could have sealed the deal of the “good Swede” image.

But maybe that already suited them, nazis living amongst them.

You keep bringing up America as if I think they are innocent or that it’s people turn a blind eye to the governments wrong doings. You are challenging me based on a sentiment YOU believe I have, an assumption.

You are arguing with yourself.

But still, I’d rather the US do it rather than the USSR. Oh wait...

Posted by: Gjeebes 20.May.2019, 05:34 PM

"...Sweden’s policy has been based upon a determination to keep out of the war at all costs..."

Swap "costs" for "profits", and you're starting to make sense.

But then there's no point arguing with an idiot, right (right).

"Desperate attempt to make myself feel better...from what?"

The guilt of living in the country that nuked another country. Same as the Germans today, who have the national guilt to carry courtesy of their grandfathers...not the same, but similar.

"I wasn't yet born when the bomb was dropped."

So what. Neither was I.

"And rationalising that nukes are good?"

Um, yup...let's have a look at what you write immediately after this comment: "If dropping the bomb brought a quicker end to the war and ultimately saved more lives than it took, how cannot that be considered positive?"

You pose it as a question, but actually, you use it to absolve. Claiming nukes were necessary (i.e. killing shit loads of people) to "save lives", avoid killing shit loads of other people, makes little sense to me.

And it's pure speculation. You don't really know if that was in fact true, that's why you pose it as a question, a possibility, Granted, my statement, was also a speculation and according to you, a lefty liberal "idealistic" argument. But it makes inherently more sense to me, that it wasn't at all about ending the war in Japan, since it was essentially already over. Estimates were that it would have caved in within 3 months of the "nuking of Japan", regardless.

It was all about what would be coming next, as Britain handed the keys to the universe over to the US.

Now, as I admit it is speculation, what I wrote, and that it makes much sense to me, I can add, much to your chagrin, that this was researched and presented by a 2-tours in Vietnam American patriot, who knows how to make excellent movies. There is quite a lot of "verified" information there, even if there was a lefty liberal spin. Doesn't take a genius to read between the lines, to filter, and see what's left at the end.

Now, you can politicise that as you like, doesn't matter to me. But that series of documentaries can at least back up what it claims; what small part of it I have relayed here (as opposed to your conjecture, chosen due to you politics and whatever else you see as the narrative that suits you).

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 20.May.2019, 06:13 PM

QUOTE (Gjeebes @ 20.May.2019, 06:34 PM) *
"...Sweden’s policy has been based upon a determination to keep out of the war at all costs..."

Swap "costs" for "profits", and you're starting to make sense.

But then there's no point arguing with an idiot, right (right).

"Desperate attempt to make myself feel better...from what?"

The guilt of living in the country that nuked another country. Same as the Germans today, who have the national guilt to carry courtesy of their grandfathers...not the same, but similar.

"I wasn't yet born when the bomb was dropped."

So what. Neither was I.

"And rationalising that nukes are good?"

Um, yup...let's have a look at what you write immediately after this comment: "If dropping the bomb brought a quicker end to the war and ultimately saved more lives than it took, how cannot that be considered positive?"

You pose it as a question, but actually, you use it to absolve. Claiming nukes were necessary (i.e. killing shit loads of people) to "save lives", avoid killing shit loads of other people, makes little sense to me.

And it's pure speculation. You don't really know if that was in fact true, that's why you pose it as a question, a possibility, Granted, my statement, was also a speculation and according to you, a lefty liberal "idealistic" argument. But it makes inherently more sense to me, that it wasn't at all about ending the war in Japan, since it was essentially already over. Estimates were that it would have caved in within 3 months of the "nuking of Japan", regardless.

It was all about what would be coming next, as Britain handed the keys to the universe over to the US.

Now, as I admit it is speculation, what I wrote, and that it makes much sense to me, I can add, much to your chagrin, that this was researched and presented by a 2-tours in Vietnam American patriot, who knows how to make excellent movies. There is quite a lot of "verified" information there, even if there was a lefty liberal spin. Doesn't take a genius to read between the lines, to filter, and see what's left at the end.

Now, you can politicise that as you like, doesn't matter to me. But that series of documentaries can at least back up what it claims; what small part of it I have relayed here (as opposed to your conjecture, chosen due to you politics and whatever else you see as the narrative that suits you).


What documentarian, Ken Burns?

My speculation is that America wanted a revenge attack on Japan, wanted to show the world what destructive power it held, and, as you put forth, that it was a warning to USSR. The USSR was essentially doing the same thing as nazi Germany, trying to take over Europe, the Gulag camps, authoritarian dictatorship. It makes perfect sense.

America even got the soviets to join in the fight against japan right at the end so they could have front row seat to the destructive powers the US now held.

My speculation is that if Sweden joined the allies the war would have been over much sooner and many more lives would have been saved with less lost than the atomic bomb produced.

Posted by: Bsmith 20.May.2019, 09:19 PM

QUOTE (Gjeebes @ 20.May.2019, 04:34 PM) *
The guilt of living in the country that nuked another country. Blah blah blah



You're speculating same as I am. No one knows for sure.

Posted by: Gamla Hälsingebock 20.May.2019, 09:55 PM

People should also realize that Japan was totally devastated by conventional incendiary bombs along with high explosive bombs and there really were no targets left of any real value other than the two that were a-bombed only because they were untouched...

The Tokyo conventional bombing killed more than 70,000 people!!!

Japan was devastated by conventional weaponry alone...

Curtis LeMay and his bombers were unparalleled in their ability to rain destruction on enemy targets...He made "Bomber" Harris look peaceful!!!

However the A bombs were an incentive for Japan to admit defeat and surrender...

The estimates of casualties suffered in an invasion were over 900,000 Americans alone...No military leader/President would allow those deaths if he had the weapons to achieve victory at hand...

Remember Pearl Harbor was something I heard all my young life...And we certainly did!!!

Posted by: Gjeebes 21.May.2019, 04:38 AM

"What documentarian, Ken Burns?"

Oliver Stone - Untold History of the United States

These are well worth watching. I think there are 10-12 parts.

Makes you think...for those capable...

Posted by: Bsmith 21.May.2019, 01:55 PM

Oliver "tinfoil hat" Stone?

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 21.May.2019, 04:10 PM

QUOTE (Bsmith @ 21.May.2019, 02:55 PM) *
Oliver "tinfoil hat" Stone?


A shame you are dismissive of people who have different opinions outside the orthodoxy.

Is it also Howard “tinfoil hat” Zinn to you? How dare someone examine a larger portion of history that is often stuffed down by “glory” and “triumph”

After just 10 min of watching the stone documentary, thanks gheebes by the way, will continue watching, it is clear that is what stone is trying to get across... that the shear atrocity of war, even those that “stay out” and are profiteers, are overlooked because stories and ideology of glory and “being a good guy” prevails.

Nobody did the right thing.

Posted by: Gjeebes 21.May.2019, 05:37 PM

"Oliver "tinfoil hat" Stone?"

Haha! Really got nuthin to say hey?

Posted by: Bsmith 21.May.2019, 05:45 PM

Okay, how about Oliver "get rich off crazy conspiracy theories" Stone?

Posted by: Gjeebes 21.May.2019, 05:56 PM

How about stop acting like a child?

At least he did his homework and can back up his view points with factual data.

Whereas all you have is teenager level sass.

Posted by: nativeswedishengineer 21.May.2019, 07:48 PM

QUOTE (Saywhatwhat @ 20.May.2019, 07:13 PM) *
What documentarian, Ken Burns?

My speculation is that America wanted a revenge attack on Japan, wanted to show the world what destructive power it held, and, as you put forth, that it was a warning to USSR. The USSR was essentially doing the same thing as nazi Germany, trying to take over Europe, the Gulag camps, authoritarian dictatorship. It makes perfect sense.

America even got the soviets to join in the fight against japan right at the end so they could have front row seat to the destructive powers the US now held.

My speculation is that if Sweden joined the allies the war would have been over much sooner and many more lives would have been saved with less lost than the atomic bomb produced.


Speculate all you want. Nazi Germany had plenty of iron ore available in occupied france.

Posted by: Bsmith 21.May.2019, 08:16 PM

And you act as if you are a pseudo-intellectual ass.

Posted by: john.boy 21.May.2019, 11:04 PM

QUOTE (Saywhatwhat @ 20.May.2019, 11:58 AM) *
In the case of Sweden, they didn’t change their rules when the time came to investigate and prosecute all the nazi war criminals that were living free and wealthy in Sweden.

Personal morality aside, Sweden did have a very valid reason, by which was that the statute of limitations was a maximum of 25 years and they said it would not be right to change that to prosecute retrospectively. Just think what abuse of power that door could open!

QUOTE (nativeswedishengineer @ 21.May.2019, 07:48 PM) *
Speculate all you want. Nazi Germany had plenty of iron ore available in occupied france.

The issue that is often forgotten is that Sweden relied on German coal far far more than Germany ever relied upon Swedish iron ore. It was about continued survival.

Posted by: Gamla Hälsingebock 21.May.2019, 11:55 PM

Yes French coal did make a big difference because the Swedes through agreement with the Allies reduced its ore delivery to Germany to 1939 levels... before the war...

None of the "bashers" will admit it but the Allies sympathized with Sweden because for one she was surrounded on all sides by countries occupied by Germany and was blockaded by the Germans and the Allies themselves...

Again I commend the Swedish government for keeping the country safe and its peoples unharmed...

It seems the "bashers" here want to see Swedes dead, then they will be happy...Bastards!!! angry.gif

Posted by: Gjeebes 22.May.2019, 03:16 AM

"And you act as if you are a pseudo-intellectual ass."

Meeeeooooowwwwwww!!

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 22.May.2019, 06:51 AM

QUOTE (john.boy @ 22.May.2019, 12:04 AM) *
Personal morality aside, Sweden did have a very valid reason, by which was that the statute of limitations was a maximum of 25 years and they said it would not be right to change that to prosecute retrospectively. Just think what abuse of power that door could open!


The issue that is often forgotten is that Sweden relied on German coal far far more than Germany ever relied upon Swedish iron ore. It was about continued survival.


Sweden relied on oil supplied by the allies. The allies considered letting Sweden fall into economic plight by cutting off their imported oil and rubber. They would do this unless Sweden slowed down its trade of iron ore to Germany, stop transporting their soldiers, stop escorting German ships through the Baltic and stop using Swedish ships to covertly supply Germany with resources.


What abuse of power would that open? Sweden had time within that 25 years to do something but they chose not to. Also, other countries had statutes of limitation which they got rid of when dealing with the investigation and prosecution of war criminals. That’s the great thing with amending or even writing laws... you can make them specific.

Sweden could have easily lifted that 25 yr limit when it came to war criminals. As stated before, it would have been a symbolic act to show the world where Sweden really stands... but instead they showed the world where they stand... a lack of willingness to prosecute war criminals.... even to this day with isis members.

So... valid... I think not.

QUOTE (Gamla Hälsingebock @ 22.May.2019, 12:55 AM) *
Yes French coal did make a big difference because the Swedes through agreement with the Allies reduced its ore delivery to Germany to 1939 levels... before the war...

None of the "bashers" will admit it but the Allies sympathized with Sweden because for one she was surrounded on all sides by countries occupied by Germany and was blockaded by the Germans and the Allies themselves...

Again I commend the Swedish government for keeping the country safe and its peoples unharmed...

It seems the "bashers" here want to see Swedes dead, then they will be happy...Bastards!!! angry.gif


First of all, you are way off in thinking “bashers” want swedes dead. I would more say “critics” want Sweden to own up to the other half of history that isn’t drowned out by the light of “Swedish goodness” which is of swedes own, unfounded, making.

Secondly, it is recognized that Sweden did what it did for survival. Just as it is recognized that even though there was no longer a threat, Sweden continued supplying the nazi war effort at the same rate it did at the beginning of the war. Just as it’s recognized that Sweden accepted, and tried to cover up, looted Jewish gold as payment from Germans.

Just wondering if you can recognize that all of Sweden’s concessions to Germany were not for survival but rather support and $$$.

Swedes are definitely no “good guy” and they should be ashamed like all other nations who participate in the atrocities of war, “neutral” or not.

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 22.May.2019, 07:04 AM

QUOTE (nativeswedishengineer @ 21.May.2019, 08:48 PM) *
Speculate all you want. Nazi Germany had plenty of iron ore available in occupied france.


That isn’t just my speculation but the speculation of many experts past and present that had Sweden slowed down the supply of iron ore that the nazi war effort would have ended sooner.

it is well known that Swedish iron ore and ball bearings greatly improved the nazis war effort.

Put it this way... your local grocery store closes. You now have to travel further to get your products and the products aren’t the same nor can you get everything you are used to. Your eating habits will begin to change.

Posted by: skogsbo 22.May.2019, 07:40 AM

If Sweden's actions were making a critical difference then the British forces and local resistance would have destroyed the factories and transport lines. Just as they did in Norway, with multiple raids on Rjukan, various factories and several ports(where ports or towns were temporarily captured) along the west coast, some civilian casualties were considered acceptable due to the critical need to stop production.

Posted by: Saywhatwhat 22.May.2019, 11:18 AM

QUOTE (skogsbo @ 22.May.2019, 08:40 AM) *
If Sweden's actions were making a critical difference then the British forces and local resistance would have destroyed the factories and transport lines. Just as they did in Norway, with multiple raids on Rjukan, various factories and several ports(where ports or towns were temporarily captured) along the west coast, some civilian casualties were considered acceptable due to the critical need to stop production.


????

You think the allies raiding and bombing Sweden would have been a good idea?

Uh, no.

There were diplomatic attempts, blockades, and threats of prolonged blockades all to get the Swedes to stop making so many concessions to the nazis and slow down their iron ore supply... eventually, EVENTUALLY, they slowed down... well past the threat of nazi invasion.

Posted by: skogsbo 22.May.2019, 12:34 PM

QUOTE (Saywhatwhat @ 22.May.2019, 10:18 AM) *
????

You think the allies raiding and bombing Sweden would have been a good idea?

Uh, no.

There were diplomatic attempts, blockades, and threats of prolonged blockades all to get the Swedes to stop making so many concessions to the nazis and slow down their iron ore supply... eventually, EVENTUALLY, they slowed down... well past the threat of nazi invasion.

If the allied forces needed to, they would and did. Lots of civilians died elsewhere, and as I said they struck in other Nordic nations when they had to. The human losses in south east Europe where they fought for access for oil shows this. Also if sweden was so critical there was nothing stopping Stalin marching right across Finland and into sweden. You making sweden out to be a lynch pin when it certainly wasn't.

Posted by: intrepidfox 22.May.2019, 12:39 PM

The Wallenberg family were the worst. Double dealing with both sides. Forget Raoul (the so called hero) he only helped friends families and company directors to get out Hungary.

Posted by: Gjeebes 22.May.2019, 04:07 PM

"then the British forces and local resistance would have destroyed the factories and transport lines"

The Yanks wanted to bomb Piteå and other locations but Churchill wouldn't permit it, presumably due to them also needing ore.

Bombing of Rjukan was to take out heavy water production at the electrical plant, to remove a key ingredient required by Heisenberg to build the bomb.

As the cowardly Swedes shook in their boots, whilst counting their profits, the rest of the world joined forces to do something against Hitler.

The Soviets paid the highest price of all, >20 million dead.

I am happy to be able to say Canada also did its part and I for one am grateful for the sacrifices made.

Posted by: skogsbo 22.May.2019, 04:46 PM

QUOTE (Gjeebes @ 22.May.2019, 03:07 PM) *
"then the British forces and local resistance would have destroyed the factories and transport lines"

The Yanks wanted to bomb Piteå and other locations but Churchill wouldn't permit it, presumably due to them also needing ore.

Bombing of Rjukan was to take out heavy water production at the electrical plant, to remove a key ingredient required by Heisenberg to build the bomb.

As the cowardly Swedes shook in their boots, whilst counting their profits, the rest of the world joined forces to do something against Hitler.

The Soviets paid the highest price of all, >20 million dead.

I am happy to be able to say Canada also did its part and I for one am grateful for the sacrifices made.

The British and norwegian resistance all took out norwegian ports and other factories not just heavy water plants. The grand father of a friend here was in the resistance around rjukan. The reality of what happened is a bit grim compared to the old movies. Norwegian tv did a good programme about it a couple of years ago.

Would agree with you, the Soviets paid in blood, there is no doubt there.

It's strange because just how ruthless and evil the Japanese were, doesn't seem to carry the same stigma today that Nazi Germany still does. Whilst the Japanese didn't have a cleansing programme, they had zero respect for another nations military or civilians as prisoners etc..

Off back to the UK next week and by coincidence we have time for a few hours at the imperial war museum in Manchester. Chance to give the kids a more round view of the world.

Posted by: Bsmith 22.May.2019, 10:54 PM

QUOTE (skogsbo @ 22.May.2019, 04:46 PM) *
It's strange because just how ruthless and evil the Japanese were, doesn't seem to carry the same stigma today that Nazi Germany still does. Whilst the Japanese didn't have a cleansing programme, they had zero respect for another nations military or civilians as prisoners etc..




True, I've often thought the same.

Posted by: Gamla Hälsingebock 23.May.2019, 12:16 PM

The population that bore a lot of Nazi cruelty did/does not have a lot of members in Asia and does not have the influence there as it does in the West...

And to my knowledge no single part of the Japanese population was a target/political enemy, although there will be people who disagree because of the atrocities in China...

Posted by: jannasanders 5.Jun.2019, 09:32 AM

QUOTE (skogsbo @ 15.May.2019, 08:22 AM) *
Slavery still exists in just about every European country, be it living in a caravan picking fruit and veg, or on a zero hours contract in an Amazon warehouse. It might not the same on the surface but all the traits are there.


Couldn't agree more. Sad to say, slavery is still rampant worldwide. sad.gif

Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)