Sweden's "neutrality" in WW2

[RA]

I confused your post with logans post(post number 11 in this thread).



When the second front was opened the tide had already turned. Germany was already scraming from russia while russians army marched on. The american and brittish firebomings of all german major cities was probably very important in breaking germany though.



Yeah I confused the posts But I never meant to belittle american deaths either.

Im glad johan

I do think the numbers you posted are flawed. The battle of the bulge had 19000 american deaths and 81,000 casulties

[J.S.N.]

so I guess that the answer is yes than........

is something miswired in yoiur brain? america aided the brit's for 3 years as a neutral country, and were at war with the central powers 1 year as an active combatant.

[Logan13]

is something miswired in yoiur brain? america aided the brit's for 3 years as a neutral country, and were at war with the central powers 1 year as an active combatant.

So you are saying that we had zero trade with the UK before the war and just started trading with them after the war started? Again, do we need a history lesson? Please research before posting about what you are guessing occurred........

[J.S.N.]

So you are saying that we had zero trade with the UK before the war and just started trading with them after the war started? Again, do we need a history lesson? Please research before posting about what you are guessing occurred........

what is the point? we traded with germany as well... and sweden traded with germany before ww2.

[Logan13]

what is the point? we traded with germany as well... and sweden traded with germany before ww2.

Ever see that rootbeer commercial........thick-headed. Not to be a dick, but please quit wasting my time with semantics. If you have a legitimate point, please make it and quit picking apart sentences.

[Flagg]

Oh yeah, I forgot, thats who stormed the beaches at normandy. Thats who fought the battle of the bulge. I could go on but if your not completely thick you get my point. Go to Arlington and see if it was just Russians who defeated Germany

I dont know what your problem is with me dickhead, but you sound more and more like a typical media spoonfed yank that walks around with a flag in one hand, a gun in the other singing "March on christian soldier"

Do you REALLY know your world war 2 history or are you just making observations from films like Saving Private Ryan? Why is so important to you to prove America being superior? I dont think ANYONE else from other countries on this board goes on about how brilliant their countries are.


The Soviets beat 607 German divisions. The allies destroyed 176,they saved the world and its civilisation and at the time there was no force other than the Soviets that could have defeated the Nazis.

And since when do stats and death tolls play a part in things? If you really want to split hairs more than 25 million soviet soldiers and civilians died in the war and Russia was the scene of some of the fiercest battles. By comparison, Britain and the United States lost fewer than 1 million people.

Before you spout on about the Battle of the Bulge or Normandy, why don't you look up the battle of Kursk when Russian tank riders turned away the Nazis.

I don't claim to be clever, but you shouldn't pretend to be.

[Logan13]

I dont know what your problem is with me dickhead, but you sound more and more like a typical media spoonfed yank that walks around with a flag in one hand, a gun in the other singing "March on christian soldier"

Do you REALLY know your world war 2 history or are you just making observations from films like Saving Private Ryan? Why is so important to you to prove America being superior? I dont think ANYONE else from other countries on this board goes on about how brilliant their countries are.


The Soviets beat 607 German divisions. The allies destroyed 176,they saved the world and its civilisation and at the time there was no force other than the Soviets that could have defeated the Nazis.

And since when do stats and death tolls play a part in things? If you really want to split hairs more than 25 million soviet soldiers and civilians died in the war and Russia was the scene of some of the fiercest battles. By comparison, Britain and the United States lost fewer than 1 million people.

Before you spout on about the Battle of the Bulge or Normandy, why don't you look up the battle of Kursk when Russian tank riders turned away the Nazis.

I don't claim to be clever, but you shouldn't pretend to be.

Who would you say won the Cold War then...........?

[J.S.N.]

Ever see that rootbeer commercial........thick-headed. Not to be a dick, but please quit wasting my time with semantics. If you have a legitimate point, please make it and quit picking apart sentences.

i'm sorry logan i've tried to be nice to you, but you are so incredibly dumb i'm going to have to put you on ignore. semantics refers to the meanings of a words, which is something very apart from the quibbles you've brung up in the fact that you believe just because a state's stance changes later then it's alright to be officially neutral yet pursue nonneutral policies while at the same time "exposing" sweden for doing so.

[RA]

I dont know what your problem is with me dickhead, but you sound more and more like a typical media spoonfed yank that walks around with a flag in one hand, a gun in the other singing "March on christian soldier"

Do you REALLY know your world war 2 history or are you just making observations from films like Saving Private Ryan? Why is so important to you to prove America being superior? I dont think ANYONE else from other countries on this board goes on about how brilliant their countries are.


The Soviets beat 607 German divisions. The allies destroyed 176,they saved the world and its civilisation and at the time there was no force other than the Soviets that could have defeated the Nazis.

And since when do stats and death tolls play a part in things? If you really want to split hairs more than 25 million soviet soldiers and civilians died in the war and Russia was the scene of some of the fiercest battles. By comparison, Britain and the United States lost fewer than 1 million people.

Before you spout on about the Battle of the Bulge or Normandy, why don't you look up the battle of Kursk when Russian tank riders turned away the Nazis.

I don't claim to be clever, but you shouldn't pretend to be.

Apparently you havent read many of my posts in this thread. Maybe you should do that now

[RA]

Would Russia have defeated Germany on their own? Possibly. Would it have taken much much longer and cost more lives? For certain. Our bombers knocked out much of the German infrastructure. I dont discount what Russia did but dont try to tell me the mfkrs did all the work.

[Logan13]

i'm sorry logan i've tried to be nice to you, but you are so incredibly dumb i'm going to have to put you on ignore. semantics refers to the meanings of a words, which is something very apart from the quibbles you've brung up in the fact that you believe just because a state's stance changes later then it's alright to be officially neutral yet pursue nonneutral policies while at the same time "exposing" sweden for doing so.

lol!!!

[Terinox]

Do you think norway and denmark helped the nazi aswell? After all they put down there arms and let them invade without resistance. What about czechoslovakia. What about finland that was on the side of the axis because they where at war with the soviet union?

Like I wrote in the other thread. Only a stupid man fights a fight he cant win.

Correction: Only a stupid man fights. Period.

[biglouie250]

Would Russia have defeated Germany on their own? Possibly. Would it have taken much much longer and cost more lives? For certain. Our bombers knocked out much of the German infrastructure. I dont discount what Russia did but dont try to tell me the mfkrs did all the work.

germany would have won had they not declared war on both fronts and kept russia as an ally. the winter in siberia and the subsequent superiority of russian tanks over both allied and axis tanks all but destroyed german hopes of victory. do we win without russia? NO. Does Russia win without us? NO. Does England win without us? NO.

[RA]

germany would have won had they not declared war on both fronts and kept russia as an ally. the winter in siberia and the subsequent superiority of russian tanks over both allied and axis tanks all but destroyed german hopes of victory. do we win without russia? NO. Does Russia win without us? NO. Does England win without us? NO.

Ill go with that take on it

[biglouie250]

Ill go with that take on it

yea i mean most people really dont realize how close we were to actually be typing in german here lol.