In the course of my research, I was surprised to discover how bellicose Sweden has been throughout its history. For example:
1434-1437, Engelbrektsson's Revolt, Sweden 1434-1437
1521-1523, Swedish War of Liberation
1534-1536, Conflict over Danish Throne
1554-1557 Swedish-Russian War
1563-1570, Swedish-Danish War . see also 1558-1582 Livonian War
1570-1595, Russo-Swedish War
1600-1611, Swedish-Polish War
1611-1613 Swedish-Danish War
1611-1617 Russo-Swedish War
1620-1629 Swedish-Polish War
1630-1648 30 Years' War, Sweden belligerent since 1630
1635 Swedish-Polish War
1643-1645 Swedish-Danish War
1653-1654 First Swedish War on Bremen
1655-1659 Colonial War; Dutch W.I.C. takes over New Sweden, Swedish outposts on Gold Coast
1655-1660 First Northern War
1663-1664 Imperial War on the Ottoman Empire contingents from (Swedish) Pomerania and (Swedish) Bremen-Verden participating
1666 Second Swedish War on Bremen
1675-1679 Swedish-Brandenburgian War
1683-1699 Imperial War on the Ottoman Empire contingents from (Swedish) Pomerania and (Swedish) Bremen-Verden participating
1689-1697 War of the Grand Alliance ; Sweden sent an auxiliary Corps 1690 to support the Allies
1700-1721 Great Northern War
1734-1735 War of Polish Succession (Imperial War on France) contingent from Swedish Pomerania participating
1741-1743 Russo-Swedish War
1756-1763 Seven Years War (Sweden concluding peace in 1762)
1788-1790 Russo-Swedish War
1792-1797 Second War of the Coalition Imperial War on France; Swedish Pomerania paying its share in contributions
1805-1807 Third War of the Coalition
1808-1809 Russo-Swedish War
1810-1812 Swedish-British War
1812-1813 Second Swedish war against France (War of Liberation)
1814 Swedish Campaign in Norway
1848-1850 First Schleswig War
1917-1918 Finnish Civil War; a Swedish Volunteer Regiment participated on the side of the Whites
Before they strike again, perhaps the United States should just outlaw Sweden by redrawing the map and moving the population to South America, where instead of focusing their minds on carnage, rape and pillage, the newly liberated Swedes can now occupy their time by learning to Salsa dance and cook a good Paella?
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterHehe, funny.
In the course of my research, I was surprised to discover how bellicose Sweden has been throughout its history. For example:
1434-1437, Engelbrektsson's Revolt, Sweden 1434-1437
1521-1523, Swedish War of Liberation
1534-1536, Conflict over Danish Throne
1554-1557 Swedish-Russian War
1563-1570, Swedish-Danish War . see also 1558-1582 Livoni ...[text shortened]... liberated Swedes can now occupy their time by learning to Salsa dance and cook a good Paella?
But you're right. We've had some violent history.
I'm happy to say that Sweden is now a peaceful country. Some other countries are not.
Sweden has no nuclear weapons, and Sweden has certainly not wiped out any cities with its population, even once, not even twice.
- Joined
- 02 Feb 06
- Moves
- 123634
Originally posted by FabianFnasIt must be nice to remain peaceful and neutral under all circumstances. Unfortunately, this also led to Sweden's shameful cooperation with the Nazi's in WWII. What did Sweden do when its neutral and peace loving neighbor Norway was invaded? Oh that's right ... NOTHING! Being peaceful doesn't excuse cowardice.
Hehe, funny.
But you're right. We've had some violent history.
I'm happy to say that Sweden is now a peaceful country. Some other countries are not.
Sweden has no nuclear weapons, and Sweden has certainly not wiped out any cities with its population, even once, not even twice.
As far as the atomic bombing of Japan. Well if you studied the war against Japan you'd realize that dropping the atomic bombs was the much less grisly alternative to an invasion of mainland Japan. And let's face it, Japan deserved no mercy after the atrocities it committed in China. Mass rape and murder on a scale never even hinted at by forces of the United States.
- Joined
- 21 Jul 06
- Moves
- 98470
Originally posted by UllrOf course, you're right. All those women and children deserved no mercy for their part in the "mass rape and murder" in China.
And let's face it, Japan deserved no mercy after the atrocities it committed in China. Mass rape and murder on a scale never even hinted at by forces of the United States.
Originally posted by UllrYes, we also have black periods of our history. Being neutral under thw WW2 saved us, but left us stained. This is no secret.
It must be nice to remain peaceful and neutral under all circumstances. Unfortunately, this also led to Sweden's shameful cooperation with the Nazi's in WWII. What did Sweden do when its neutral and peace loving neighbor Norway was invaded? Oh that's right ... NOTHING! Being peaceful doesn't excuse cowardice.
As far as the atomic bombing of Japan. Well ina. Mass rape and murder on a scale never even hinted at by forces of the United States.
And now back to the bombing, twice, of Japan. No else with nuclear weapons have ever used them, noone but US. Not even Sovjet. Not even China.
By solving a conflict, a war, by throwing a nuke isn't the way to end a war. What if every one did just that? The victims of these bombs was innocent, women, children, elderly, not to forget all the rest. They had nothing to do with the war. They happened to be citizens of a country who were in war.
Please don't tell me that killing innocents is a solution to get to an end of a war?
Remember, Seitse, why Finland is not a part of Sovjet. Eastern Karelen is still a part of Russia.
Remember, who supported Germany during part of WW2...
Originally posted by UllrTwo points:
It must be nice to remain peaceful and neutral under all circumstances. Unfortunately, this also led to Sweden's shameful cooperation with the Nazi's in WWII. What did Sweden do when its neutral and peace loving neighbor Norway was invaded? Oh that's right ... NOTHING! Being peaceful doesn't excuse cowardice.
As far as the atomic bombing of Japan. Well ...[text shortened]... ina. Mass rape and murder on a scale never even hinted at by forces of the United States.
Neutral countries actually serve a purpose during wartime, besides the obvious fact that you don't have to get involved with other people's battles all the time.
And don't come away with the galant American heroism rubbish. Waiting until 1943 isn't all that galant and forming European economies to suit American business isn't galant and squeezing Britain for all she was worth wasn't galant either.
As for Japan. A simple trade block around their islands would have brought them to their knees within months, without having to murder hundreds of thousands of civilians.
Originally posted by FabianFnasDid it?
Yes, we also have black periods of our history. Being neutral under thw WW2 saved us, but left us stained. This is no secret.
The US remained neutral until 1943.
Switzerland remained neutral and was a safe-haven for many a fleeing soldier.
Ireland remained neutral just to piss the English off.
Neutrality isn't bad. When the US went to war with Vietnam, do you think Sweden should have remained neutral? In hind sight, it's easy to say: "Oh... you should have fought the nazis."
However, up to the end of the fascist regime in Germany, companies all over the world were still trading with them. To many nations it was just another regime (like Britain...who had the largest empire on the planet) wanting more land. Why on earth get involved with that crap?
The non-capitalist issues of their various programmes (which probably were more an instrument to an end, rather than a final solution*) only came to "common" light after 1944.
The US, after the war, took nazi scientists and put them to work in the US... very cool...mhmmmm?
* Much like religion is never a cause for war, but more an instrument to motivate people (the true cause nearly always being power, land and money), the final solution (according to various sources) was sold as an end, but was actually more of a means.
Originally posted by shavixmirImperialism is not capitalism. It's mercantalism.
Did it?
The US remained neutral until 1943.
Switzerland remained neutral and was a safe-haven for many a fleeing soldier.
Ireland remained neutral just to piss the English off.
Neutrality isn't bad. When the US went to war with Vietnam, do you think Sweden should have remained neutral? In hind sight, it's easy to say: "Oh... you should have foug ...[text shortened]... ution (according to various sources) was sold as an end, but was actually more of a means.
Originally posted by shavixmirIf the Nazis had won the war, Sweden would not have remained neutral.
Two points:
Neutral countries actually serve a purpose during wartime, besides the obvious fact that you don't have to get involved with other people's battles all the time.
And don't come away with the galant American heroism rubbish. Waiting until 1943 isn't all that galant and forming European economies to suit American business isn't galant and ...[text shortened]... to their knees within months, without having to murder hundreds of thousands of civilians.
So why did Sweden really take a neutral stance?
- Joined
- 02 Feb 06
- Moves
- 123634
Originally posted by AThousandYoungI didn't say the Japanese Imperial government still existed but they are indeed the ones to blame for the destruction of the Japanese homeland and Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Japanase Imperial Government waged total war against China and the United States. By doing so they subjected their citizens to the repurcussions of total war.
The government is no longer Imperial and governments ruled by thug-lords (Emporers, Kings, Dukes etc) are not legitimate expressions of the peoples' will.