DogOnPorch Posted March 9, 2017 Report Posted March 9, 2017 4 minutes ago, Wilber said: They served the allies as well. Sweden shipped iron ore to the Allies? Do tell... Switzerland was allowed to exist for its banking services to the Third Reich. That the Allies found similar uses for Switzerland in terms of meetings and espionage was a side effect of Germany not flattening Switzerland like a pancake. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
-TSS- Posted March 9, 2017 Report Posted March 9, 2017 12 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said: Or sucking-up to Germany so they don't invade outright. Present-day Germans invade economically rather than militarily. 1 Quote
DogOnPorch Posted March 9, 2017 Report Posted March 9, 2017 3 minutes ago, -TSS- said: Present-day Germans invade economically rather than militarily. Agreed. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Wilber Posted March 9, 2017 Report Posted March 9, 2017 7 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said: Sweden shipped iron ore to the Allies? Do tell... Switzerland was allowed to exist for its banking services to the Third Reich. That the Allies found similar uses for Switzerland in terms of meetings and espionage was a side effect of Germany not flattening Switzerland like a pancake. They did what they had to do to survive, the assholes. Yes they shipped iron or to the Germans but they also used converted MTB's to blockade run ball bearings to the British aircraft industry, trained Danish and Norwegian resistance fighters, many Swedish businessmen spied for the allies and Sweden was a refuge for Jews and escaped POW's. Quote The Swedish Government made a few concessions, and sometimes breached the nation's neutrality in favor of both Germany and the Western Allies. During the German invasion of the Soviet Union, Sweden allowed the Wehrmacht to use Swedish railways to transport (June–July 1941) the German 163rd Infantry Division along with howitzers, tanksand anti-aircraft weapons and associated ammunition from Norway to Finland. German soldiers traveling on leave between Norway and Germany were allowed passage through Sweden — the so-called permittenttrafik. Iron ore was sold to Germany throughout the war. And for the Allies, Sweden shared military intelligence and helped to train soldiers made up of refugees from Denmark and Norway, to be used in the liberation of their home countries.[4][page needed] It also allowed the Allies to use Swedish airbases between 1944 and 1945. Sweden also became a refuge for anti-fascist and Jewish refugees from all over the region. In 1943, following an order to deport all of Denmark's Jewish population to concentration camps, nearly all of Denmark's 8,000 Jews were brought to safety in Sweden. Sweden also became a refuge for Norwegian Jews who fled from Nazi occupied Norway. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
DogOnPorch Posted March 9, 2017 Report Posted March 9, 2017 Individual Swedes aside, Sweden was in the Axis camp or it would have been INVADED like Norway and Denmark. And there wouldn't have been a damn thing Sweden could have done about it other than mount a futile defense against Guderian's Panzers. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Wilber Posted March 9, 2017 Report Posted March 9, 2017 29 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said: Individual Swedes aside, Sweden was in the Axis camp or it would have been INVADED like Norway and Denmark. And there wouldn't have been a damn thing Sweden could have done about it other than mount a futile defense against Guderian's Panzers. Of course the Germans could have invaded but it would have just been another black hole for occupation troops. There was little in it for them and combatants always need neutrals to maintain links between themselves and the rest of the world. Germany was isolated and neutrals like Sweden, Switzerland, Spain and Portugal were its only links to the world outside of Europe, other than what they could stuff into a submarine. It worked both ways, neutrals were sources of intelligence and ways to get people in an out of occupied territories. Almost all of the POW's who escaped, did so through neutrals. The only two successful escapees from the Great Escape, got away through Sweden. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
dre Posted March 9, 2017 Report Posted March 9, 2017 1 hour ago, Wilber said: Sure, being neutral means you have no alliances and have to take care of yourself. No it doesn't mean that at all. Defensive pacts can make sense. Beyond that though we should decide what to do on a case by case basis based on what we think is right, and based on our own self interest. Norad for example makes a lot of sense. Its a defensive treat, with the country that we would actually be relying on to help defend North America. Nato makes no sense at all for Canada. Its the gift that keeps on taking and we will NEVER get anything back. Do you think Estonia, or Turkey, or Abania, or Croatia are going to come to Canadas defense? Good luck with that. It will be the US. Ditch NATO... Strengthen Norad... and shift military spending more towards territorial defense and away from sad and counterproductive attempts to police the world. THAT is whats in Canadas interests. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Wilber Posted March 9, 2017 Report Posted March 9, 2017 1 minute ago, dre said: No it doesn't mean that at all. Defensive pacts can make sense. Beyond that though we should decide what to do on a case by case basis based on what we think is right, and based on our own self interest. Norad for example makes a lot of sense. Its a defensive treat, with the country that we would actually be relying on to help defend North America. Nato makes no sense at all for Canada. Its the gift that keeps on taking and we will NEVER get anything back. Do you think Estonia, or Turkey, or Abania, or Croatia are going to come to Canadas defense? Good luck with that. It will be the US. Ditch NATO... Strengthen Norad... and shift military spending more towards territorial defense and away from sad and counterproductive attempts to police the world. THAT is whats in Canadas interests. It does. Being neutral means not having military alliances. As soon as you ally yourself with someone else's interests, you are no longer neutral. Europe descended into WW2 because the western powers were not willing to stick by their alliances to weaker countries. Hitler could have been stopped in his tracks if they had stood up to him in the Rhineland, Austria, or Czechoslovakia, but the allies backed away. By the time Poland was invaded, it was too late. I think concentrating on the US is a mistake. Given the new isolationism in the US, the resurgence of Russian imperialism and the rise of China, a strong Europe and united EU is more important than ever before. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
betsy Posted March 9, 2017 Report Posted March 9, 2017 On 12/16/2016 at 3:15 PM, Argus said: For those who think the spat with the Russians is all a product of some nefarious US political operatives, Sweden has just ordered local municipalities to get the bunkers and sirens ready (some of which have been closed or sold), is moving troops to its borders, and getting ready to restart conscription because of Russia's belligerent actions in the neighbourhood. Meanwhile, Canada continues to let its military deteriorate in quality and shrink in size. The dramatic call came as Sweden returns to the Total Defence Strategy it maintained during the Cold War, reconstituting its old coastal anti-ship missile system, placing an armoured division on the exposed Baltic island of Gotland, and making plans to restart compulsory conscription as early as 2018. http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/cold-war-redux-amid-anxiety-over-russia-sweden-orders-towns-to-open-bunkers-and-prep-for-possible-attack I wonder if Sweden's conscription is really all about Russia? Quote
Wilber Posted March 9, 2017 Report Posted March 9, 2017 1 minute ago, betsy said: I wonder if Sweden's conscription is really all about Russia? Why? Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
dre Posted March 9, 2017 Report Posted March 9, 2017 5 minutes ago, Wilber said: It does. Being neutral means not having military alliances. That still doesn't mean you don't have friends. Dozens of countries that don't belong to formal military alliances have received help from other nations over the years. So the claim that... "You have to take care of yourself", is not necessarily true. 8 minutes ago, Wilber said: I think concentrating on the US is a mistake. Given the new isolationism in the US, the resurgence of Russian imperialism and the rise of China, a strong Europe and united EU is more important than ever before. Its not a mistake at all. There is absolutely no question that if there's an incursion onto our Territory it will be the US that we rely on because they have a self interest in helping us, and the have the means to do so, and that fact will not change, probably for centuries. We live next to a large and extremely well armed nuclear super power that we enjoy the largest trade partnership in the history of the human race with. And Norad is defensive in nature, so we don't risk being dragged into poorly though out, doomed to fail projects on the other side of the world. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
betsy Posted March 9, 2017 Report Posted March 9, 2017 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Wilber said: Why? It's not all because of Russia. That's what mainstream media would like you to believe - that it's all due to Russia. It's just partly because of Russia. Quote Sweden has announced that it will reintroduce compulsory military service starting this summer to respond to global security challenges including from Russia. "The government wants a more stable staff supply system and to boost its military capability because the security situation has changed," Swedish Defence Minister Peter Hultqvist told TT news agency on Thursday. "The new security situation is also a reality, partly in the form of Russian power politics which has long been underestimated and downplayed," Wilhelm Agrell, a security expert at Lund University, told AFP. http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/03/compulsory-11-month-military-service-face-threats-170302104725356.html Edited March 9, 2017 by betsy Quote
Wilber Posted March 9, 2017 Report Posted March 9, 2017 1 hour ago, dre said: That still doesn't mean you don't have friends. Dozens of countries that don't belong to formal military alliances have received help from other nations over the years. So the claim that... "You have to take care of yourself", is not necessarily true. Its not a mistake at all. There is absolutely no question that if there's an incursion onto our Territory it will be the US that we rely on because they have a self interest in helping us, and the have the means to do so, and that fact will not change, probably for centuries. We live next to a large and extremely well armed nuclear super power that we enjoy the largest trade partnership in the history of the human race with. And Norad is defensive in nature, so we don't risk being dragged into poorly though out, doomed to fail projects on the other side of the world. It's a huge mistake to think you can just crawl into your own corner of the world and hope the rest of it goes away. Not going to happen. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
DogOnPorch Posted March 10, 2017 Report Posted March 10, 2017 6 hours ago, Wilber said: Of course the Germans could have invaded but it would have just been another black hole for occupation troops. There was little in it for them and combatants always need neutrals to maintain links between themselves and the rest of the world. Germany was isolated and neutrals like Sweden, Switzerland, Spain and Portugal were its only links to the world outside of Europe, other than what they could stuff into a submarine. It worked both ways, neutrals were sources of intelligence and ways to get people in an out of occupied territories. Almost all of the POW's who escaped, did so through neutrals. The only two successful escapees from the Great Escape, got away through Sweden. Works both ways: Sweden allowed German troop movements via rail through the nation to the Russian Front north of Leningrad. How many Russians perished as a result? Who can say? But, more than a few. Coastal waters were also open to German sea traffic, if I recall. Sweden would have likely been treated like Norway had it been invaded. Norway had an almost fatalistic indifference after Narvik...refit the odd German battleship...host the odd bomber Luftflotte...raise the odd SS Division. Norway was never retaken...an oddity in WW2. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
dre Posted March 10, 2017 Report Posted March 10, 2017 4 hours ago, Wilber said: It's a huge mistake to think you can just crawl into your own corner of the world and hope the rest of it goes away. Not going to happen. That's just a platitude. Rest of what goes away? And the reality is that interventionalist policy doesn't make any of it go away either. In increases "it", and it damages our own security, and wasted our money and the lives of our soldiers while accomplishing nothing. People that cant keep their hands to themselves are eventually going to face consequences. We mostly just make things worse. Like overthrowing the baathists which created ISIL, and inadvertantly handed Iraq over to Iran. Or overthrowing the Taliban and putting a drug lord in charge. Or like the whole GWOT in general which has resulted in a huge increase in terrorism and wasted trillions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
eyeball Posted March 10, 2017 Report Posted March 10, 2017 On 3/9/2017 at 0:39 PM, Wilber said: It's a huge mistake to think you can just crawl into your own corner of the world and hope the rest of it goes away. Not going to happen. There is only one country that could or ever would invade us and that is the US. If that happens most of us will go meh and if we did arm ourselves against that we'd probably only inspire our invasion. I still say the most egregious contribution we can make to our neighbours expansion of their empire is the moral shine we bring to the effort. Having Canada on your side is like having a Hobbit on your side. Makes me want to puke. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Wilber Posted March 10, 2017 Report Posted March 10, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, dre said: That's just a platitude. Rest of what goes away? And the reality is that interventionalist policy doesn't make any of it go away either. In increases "it", and it damages our own security, and wasted our money and the lives of our soldiers while accomplishing nothing. People that cant keep their hands to themselves are eventually going to face consequences. We mostly just make things worse. Like overthrowing the baathists which created ISIL, and inadvertantly handed Iraq over to Iran. Or overthrowing the Taliban and putting a drug lord in charge. Or like the whole GWOT in general which has resulted in a huge increase in terrorism and wasted trillions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives. NORAD is an air defence treaty. If we wind up in some kind of territorial dispute with another country, and the US decides it isn't in its best interest to back us, we are on our own. Arctic sovereignty for instance, the US in fact is one country we could find disputing our claims, in fact they already have. As for the rest, we did not join the US in its invasion of Iraq and I suppose you think what the Taliban was doing in Afghanistan was just fine. The fact is, we do need some sort of policing in the world to remind countries just what is acceptable behaviour for nations and what isn't. That is what the UN was supposed to be all about. On edit. You people are all the same, in one breath you blame the US for all the world's ills and in the next you expect them to defend this country without lifting a finger or spending a dime to do it yourself. Edited March 10, 2017 by Wilber Addition 1 Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
eyeball Posted March 10, 2017 Report Posted March 10, 2017 Just for the record I'm all for a robust southern border defence policy, a nuclear one makes the most sense. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Army Guy Posted March 10, 2017 Report Posted March 10, 2017 On 3/9/2017 at 2:02 PM, -TSS- said: Present-day Germans invade economically rather than militarily. I think modern German's may be rethinking that course of action , with all the new guests in their country now.... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Wilber Posted March 10, 2017 Report Posted March 10, 2017 36 minutes ago, eyeball said: Just for the record I'm all for a robust southern border defence policy, a nuclear one makes the most sense. Why, so we can commit suicide? What is the point of having weapons you can never use as your only defence? Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
Army Guy Posted March 10, 2017 Report Posted March 10, 2017 1 hour ago, Wilber said: NORAD is an air defence treaty. If we wind up in some kind of territorial dispute with another country, and the US decides it isn't in its best interest to back us, we are on our own. Arctic sovereignty for instance, the US in fact is one country we could find disputing our claims, in fact they already have. As for the rest, we did not join the US in its invasion of Iraq and I suppose you think what the Taliban was doing in Afghanistan was just fine. The fact is, we do need some sort of policing in the world to remind countries just what is acceptable behaviour for nations and what isn't. That is what the UN was supposed to be all about. On edit. You people are all the same, in one breath you blame the US for all the world's ills and in the next you expect them to defend this country without lifting a finger or spending a dime to do it yourself. Amen brother..... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
dre Posted March 10, 2017 Report Posted March 10, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Wilber said: You people are all the same, in one breath you blame the US for all the world's ills and in the next you expect them to defend this country without lifting a finger or spending a dime to do it yourself. I never said the US is to blame for "all the worlds ills". You just flat out made that blatant straw man up and lied about what I said. And I guarantee I pay twice as much as you towards our military. And I would gladly pay more if we had a defensive military doctrine and sensible policies. But until we have those things reasonable people have no choice but to starve civilian leaders of the tools needed to pursue interventionalist foreign policy. Out civilian leaders just flat out cant be trusted to have a powerful military. Quote and I suppose you think what the Taliban was doing in Afghanistan was just fine I don't like it but there's things like that, and worse happening in dozens and dozens of places around the world. We cant fix the world, and we usually make things worse, and even if we could why should I have to pay for it? Edited March 10, 2017 by dre Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Wilber Posted March 10, 2017 Report Posted March 10, 2017 First off, you can't guarantee anything. So you would gladly pay for more for a military as long as it was under your personal control so you could guarantee it could do nothing. What absolute bullshit. 1 Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
Army Guy Posted March 12, 2017 Report Posted March 12, 2017 On 3/10/2017 at 6:50 PM, dre said: I never said the US is to blame for "all the worlds ills". You just flat out made that blatant straw man up and lied about what I said. And I guarantee I pay twice as much as you towards our military. And I would gladly pay more if we had a defensive military doctrine and sensible policies. But until we have those things reasonable people have no choice but to starve civilian leaders of the tools needed to pursue interventionalist foreign policy. Out civilian leaders just flat out cant be trusted to have a powerful military. I don't like it but there's things like that, and worse happening in dozens and dozens of places around the world. We cant fix the world, and we usually make things worse, and even if we could why should I have to pay for it? I just like to point out , that regardless of how much taxes you pay, each Canadian citizen has but one vote, each one being of equal value, one tax payer does not have more say or influence than the other based on taxes paid ....Second each Citizen does not have a say as to where each of their tax dollars is invested, you can express your dislike through media, or rallies etc etc but one does not get to say i want all my tax dollars going to support health care for instance....so to guarantee you pay more in taxes than the rest of us is a mout point, and more of a dick measuring contest..... The government has a responsibility to invest funding into what is best for the country....some of these policies may not be popular, but they still need to be taken seriously.....and they still need to be funded.....People like you forget that each one of our soldiers, are tax paying , canadian men and women, and when you tell the government you want to starve them, it means you place their lives in danger though cheap equipment, and supplies, and reduced training.....but then again, it all comes down to money for some canadians, it is cheaper to bury our own citizens than to pay for good equipment.....unless it is your son or daughter. It is this attitude that is spreading across the country....you should be so proud, to place a money value on live itself.....if this is what we value our soldiers what do you think your life is worth...... Your comment about starving civilian leaders of the tools because they can not be trusted is "paranoid" and unwarranted for our nation, i could see that if we lived in north korea, or some unstable country on the african continent or middle east.....but Canada come on really, maybe if someone messed with Hockey night in Canada, or closed the beer stores, or said no sex when it is 20 below.....but that is not the case......and you call the right fear mongering.... First of why elect them if they can not be trusted,.... with running the entire nation.....i mean one could destroy our way of living without even touching our military, through destruction of health care, or economy, etc etc you get the point..... ...to even suggest that Canada has a powerful military is even crazier than your "i can't trust them" comment.....it would take decades upon decades to build a military that could influence the out side world.....today we may have a military that might be able to influence PEI..... Here in Canada the land of plenty, with excesses of everything ever where you look, you've come up with It's all mine , all mine, precious .....and i don't want to share with anyone.....regardless of circumstances....they are starving, or destroyed by conflict, your attitude is to Ffffeeing bad i can't fix the world...Sounds like a Canadian thing to do....or is it just you... I tell you what you send me your portion of your tax bill that goes to the military....and i'll pay for it....and you can stay in the basement with all the women and children...I'd rather be accused of FFFFeeee things up while trying...... than to be that guy in the basement with his head in the sand because he was to cheap.....or thoughtless.... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Argus Posted March 12, 2017 Author Report Posted March 12, 2017 On 3/10/2017 at 5:50 PM, dre said: And I would gladly pay more if we had a defensive military doctrine and sensible policies. But until we have those things reasonable people have no choice but to starve civilian leaders of the tools needed to pursue interventionalist foreign policy. Out civilian leaders just flat out cant be trusted to have a powerful military. General dre says "We do nothing until after they're bombing our cities! Then we will consider what to do!" Wait... didn't they bomb a US city, and isn't that why we went into Afghanistan? Oh, wait, General dre doesn't want any defensive alliances. 1 Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.