what did european countries do in WW2? - Page 2

Buck Birdseed · May 12, 2002, 11:44

Sweden pursued a policy which by many is hailed as brilliant and immensely effective and by others as treacherous, cowardly and honourless. Basically, It consisted of pursuing an appeasement policy towars hitler (by allowing nazi troop transports through sweden, by supplying him with steel and iron ore, by extraditing dissenters, by interning communists) until he started to have preoccupations elsewhere than scandinavia in about '43 when we unashamedly switched sides and started supplying the Allies with iron ore instead. All while remaining formally neutral, of course.

While the moral disadavantages of this are obvious, the tactical advantages were huge. Sweden was peaceful, well-fed and stable during the entire war. No nazi threats, neither internal nor external, ever managed to touch the Swedish (all-party, though Social Democrat led) government. No reprecussions hit Sweden after the war, and more importantly, it was one of the few western european industrial economies not ruined and in need of no aid. This is where the basis of the post-war Swedish economic boom that lasted for decades lies. By many back in Sweden, the government's dogged determination not to relent while assaulted from all sides is seen as heroic, not treacherous. PM Per Albin Hansson is in many ways the political role model followed since, and is credited with creating the swedish "People's Home", the industry-government co-operative welfare model that made Sweden famous.

laurentius · May 12, 2002, 11:52

Or maybe your goverment just were a buch of cowards

Buck Birdseed · May 12, 2002, 11:58

I'm not a big fan of the policy, Hansson nor of the Swedish Model (pseudo-fascist nonsense), but I'm just trying to report the situation. Perhaps you should stop being sarcastic when the author isn't pursuing an agenda?

faded glory · May 12, 2002, 12:16

Britian rescued greece, from the italians.

Akka · May 12, 2002, 12:17

Quote:

Originally posted by BeBro

Well, now we all learn English instead

It's better. English is quite simple to learn and to use, and is more pleasant to the ear.
German is really a ugly language (no offense, just speaking the truth

).
It's always such a disappointment to see a beautiful girl and then BAM the ugly accent is coming

BeBro · May 12, 2002, 12:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Akka le Vil

It's better. English is quite simple to learn and to use, and is more pleasant to the ear.
German is really a ugly language (no offense, just speaking the truth

).
It's always such a disappointment to see a beautiful girl and then BAM the ugly accent is coming

Well, I agree to some extent. I also like English, but (for some reasons

) not more than German...

Ecthy · May 12, 2002, 12:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Saint Marcus
the bombing of Rotterdam was the worst in world history at that time)

Warsaw?

Zkribbler · May 12, 2002, 12:39

All of the occupied countries and even Germany itself had active undergrounds fighters.

Partisans from Norway were crucial in preventing Hitler from getting the A-bomb first.

Balkan guerillas were awesome.

The Poles provided military units to the Allies. Their most critical role, as I recall, was their heroic assault on the Monte Casino fotress in Italy. (Weren't they also in on the Dieppe raid?)

Garbo, the most effective British double-agent, was Spanish.

DarkCloud · May 12, 2002, 13:02

Greece kicked Italy's @ss

Then fought a guerilla war against Hitler.

Italy's defeat in Greece force Hitler to delay his invasion of Russia which then caused them to bog down in the winter

Gracious Greeks

-

faded glory · May 12, 2002, 13:05

no hitler was going to attack Yugo/greece anyway. Kesselring warned him about RAF intervention from Yugoslavia.

oh and about Italy, I was trolling

Italy never beat anyone in ww2

KrazyHorse · May 12, 2002, 13:50

Quote:

Originally posted by paiktis22

yes but did they fight?

They valiantly resisted. I think the Netherlands lasted 8 days.

KrazyHorse · May 12, 2002, 13:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Saint Marcus
Where did you get your information from? We were never crushed, but surrendered to avoid our civilian population being wiped out. The terror bombing of Rotterdam did take us by surprise though. It was a despicible act of terrorism.

You were also crushed, but the Germans encountered heavier than expected resistance in a few areas. The terror bombing shouldn't have caught you by surprise after Guernica.

KrazyHorse · May 12, 2002, 13:54

Quote:

Originally posted by Ecthelion

Warsaw?

Again: Guernica. 30 000 dead, IIRC.

Ecthy · May 12, 2002, 13:57

Yeah, but Guernica was a smaller place than Warsaw or Rotterdam.

Or Dresden, for that matter. Does anyone ever ask what the German population did during the war?

KrazyHorse · May 12, 2002, 14:01

Still more dead at Guernica, IIRC.

We know what the Germans did. It would be to your advantage not to bring it up...

Ecthy · May 12, 2002, 14:07

What a lame accusation, it's always the same bullshit... I'm talking about suffering from bombardments... I won't even try to deny they were all denying what was going on around them... I'm talking about suffering, my friend

KrazyHorse · May 12, 2002, 14:19

Suffering is listening to a German complain about the suffering they underwent in WWII.

BeBro · May 12, 2002, 14:26

Quote:

Originally posted by KrazyHorse

Again: Guernica. 30 000 dead, IIRC.

But I thought Guernica had not even 10000 inhabitants? Don´t get me wrong, every victim is one too much, but I can´t find exact numbers, not in my books, not on the web. From where do you have those 30000?

BeBro · May 12, 2002, 14:32

--- sorry edited out

Oldenbarnevelt · May 12, 2002, 14:52

3rd ed. of Hugh Thomas, The Spanish Civil War, about the bombing of Guernica on April 26, 1937: "The number of persons killed is extremely difficult to establish. Estimates vary from 1,600 to 100. (...) Perhaps 1,000 died."

-

KrazyHorse · May 12, 2002, 14:56

Checked. You're right.

30 000 might be Rotterdam, but you probably shouldn't take my word on it.

Glad I included an IIRC.

Oldenbarnevelt · May 12, 2002, 15:01

Rotterdam was 700, IIRC.

-

Oldenbarnevelt · May 12, 2002, 15:13

Bombing of Rotterdam, May 14, 1940 (source: the Dutch WW II standard work by Dr Lou de Jong, III, p. 366):

"Official" number of victims (1940 and later): 814.

In 1969 the journalist Ad Wagenaar put the number somewhere between 600 and 900.

The 30,000 estimate was widespread and clung to people's memories, especially abroad. This was because the extent of the destruction made it hard to imagine that "only" hundreds of people had died.

-

Sprayber · May 12, 2002, 15:31

This man isn't European, but he was busy doing something that few others were doing in that era. Saving lives. And he did it in Europe.

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Hol.../sugihara.html

Paul Hanson · May 12, 2002, 15:31

The bombing of Rotterdam caused more in the way of physical damage than destruction of life, and it was the centre of the city that was hardest hit. My grandfather lived in the suburbs and can remember feeling quite safe watching the bombing from the top of a building.

VetLegion · May 12, 2002, 15:57

ok, about croatia

when germans invaded yugoslavia crumbled... the strength of the resistance (almost none) tells a lot about how people felt about that country. I think also with russia, they didnt resist too much and in ukraine germans were greeted like saviours... not for long though.

first partisan squad in yugoslavia (or perhaps in the europe? I dont remember well it was long time ago) was founded in croatian city of Sisak, 22. 6. 1941, and today we celebrate it as day of antifascihtic struggle

soon many oppresed people joined it and it really became a large movement. the fight in yugoslavia was fierce and bloody and centered mostly around communists and Tito.

we surely kicked german ass italian ass and our own colaborationist ass

Ecthy · May 12, 2002, 16:50

KH - how would the suffering of a German civilian be less serious than that of a British one?

TCO · May 12, 2002, 16:58

Quote:

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Suffering is listening to a German complain about the suffering they underwent in WWII.

Oh, we inflicted plenty of suffering on them. And they inflicted usffering on each other too...

TCO · May 12, 2002, 16:59

Quote:

Originally posted by Snapcase
I'm not a big fan of the policy, Hansson nor of the Swedish Model (pseudo-fascist nonsense), but I'm just trying to report the situation. Perhaps you should stop being sarcastic when the author isn't pursuing an agenda?

Shnappie, sometimes you can be quite insightful. Even though I'm about 10 miles right of you, have to say this...

Ecthy · May 12, 2002, 17:01

Now was THAT sarcastic, GP?