It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Hitler and Sweden

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 05:03 PM
link   
This is a question i tryed many times to get a strait and believeble answer about but never got..

Why did never Hitler Invaded Sweden ??



posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 05:08 PM
link   
I think because they were his bank, they funded both sides of the war. Also there was no reason, it would have just been a waist of resources.



posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by OddTimeSignature
 


Because he didn't need to.
Why waste divisions on an unnecessary campaign when you need them in so many other places?
The military purpose of invading the countries on the North Sea coast was to pre-empt any British approaches by that route. But once he had Norway and Denmark, the British could not get to Sweden.



edit on 19-10-2010 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by theuhstuf
I think because they were his bank, they funded both sides of the war. Also there was no reason, it would have just been a waist of resources.


Ok thanks for the answer..but there where enormus resouses in sweden then..as iron, stel, forrest, aircraft industri, harbuors shipyards and so on..??



posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by OddTimeSignature
 

They probably were shipping a lot of those resources over to Germany.



posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by OddTimeSignature
Ok thanks for the answer..but there where enormus resouses in sweden then..as iron, stel, forrest, aircraft industri, harbuors shipyards and so on..??

Yes, but buying them, as long as the Swedes were willing to sell, was easier than trying to take them by force.
If you send an occupation army into Sweden, you can't use those forces in Africa or on the Russian front.



posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by theuhstuf
reply to post by OddTimeSignature
 

They probably were shipping a lot of those resources over to Germany.



Well i heard many stories about swedish politics where pro Hitler and so where the royals and the society..



posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by OddTimeSignature
 


it's true, in fact USA's government was pro Hitler too! (still is I think)



posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   
Sweden is a neutral country country, just as Switzerland. It is the oldest neutral country.

New and improved second line, with more fluff!



posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by hinky
 

In 1940, The Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg were also neutral.
That, on its own, wasn't enough to stop Hitler invading them.



posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by theuhstuf
I think because they were his bank, they funded both sides of the war. Also there was no reason, it would have just been a waist of resources.

I think you're thinking of Switzerland. At least that's the one I recall as the neutral "bank" in WW2 (don't know for sure and I might just be thinking of their status today with "Swiss bank accounts" and whatnot).



posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI
reply to post by hinky
 

In 1940, The Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg were also neutral.
That, on its own, wasn't enough to stop Hitler invading them.



They were all in the way, Sweden was not.



posted on Oct, 19 2010 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


Your confusing a couple of things. Only one of the countries you listed were actually neutral in international terms.

Belgium neutrality was abolished after WW1. The Netherlands was self imposed after 1940 (after the war started) and has since abolished it's neutrality.

Luxembourg was in the way as stated and had neutral status. Those darn nazies just don't play fair.



posted on Oct, 20 2010 @ 02:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by js331975

Originally posted by DISRAELI
reply to post by hinky
 

In 1940, The Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg were also neutral.
That, on its own, wasn't enough to stop Hitler invading them.



They were all in the way, Sweden was not.

Thank you for taking up and agreeing with the point I made in my earlier reply, the first in the thread.



posted on Oct, 20 2010 @ 03:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by hinky
Luxembourg was in the way as stated and had neutral status. Those darn nazies just don't play fair.

Precisely, and that is the point I was getting at; that Sweden's neutral status would not have prevented the Nazis from invading if they had seen any military necessity in it..
The Nazis would have invaded Switzerland if there had been a compelling military reason. There wasn't.



posted on Oct, 20 2010 @ 09:06 AM
link   
hi there,

it was the same for Portugal....they were neutral and left alone ....

however...Portugal was shipping gold out to the South Americas for the Nazis , and providing them with Wolfram (Tungsten)....but it wasnt just one sided, they also supplied it to the allies.
coastal resorts around Lisbon were teaming with spys and other such types.

more to it than meets the eye..

snoopyuk



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join