Norwegin Aces

[Angus]

Hangtime, note this:
The UK and France picked a fight with Germany. Germany picked a fight with the USA. Japan picked a fight with both the UK and the USA.
On Norwegian soil there were no US soldiers. Just Norse, British and some French.
Now ponder on Churchill's theory, what it could have brought on the USA had the Axis won the British...

[FLOTSOM]

Basing your identity now on your ancestry is a bad idea........ Wars are started on that kind of bs.

Ohh and veiled threats of stepping on a person's neck over the internet disgust me. WTG tuff guy.
(Image removed from quote.)

first off only one who is ashamed of their ancestry (like you maybe) feels that understanding it and identifying oneself with it is a bad idea. your cultural identity comes from your ancestry, along with many other traits both physical and psychological.

and once again the brave bronk jumps himself into a conversation like a tardlet and misstates the meaning of someones post just to give himself something to run his mouth about.

reread the post you quoted, its written in english and clearly it states that my ancestors stepped on the neck of his. i can safely say this because the odds are in my favor that my ancestors did just that to his (yours too maybe? is that why your hostile about it). my ancestors have a long and rich history of war and conquest, so the odds a very likely that his were among them.

this statement holds not implication or insinuation that i would do this to him, thus it is clearly a statement of ancestral history and not a veiled threat as you would claim.

in every post that you run your mouth in you do this, manipulate a quote to say something different than the poster had intended. grow up get a life and stay out of the conversations that you cant add something more to besides childish little twerpy word games.

Bronk, it is quite obvious that since I've enver been fired upon and that my mother was French and my dad was Norwegian I have no say in this argument.  I'm sorry but my inner instinct is to cut and run from this thread, and I should given my ancestry, but as an American I can't...and I won't!

sad thing if that is your lineage and thats all you can get from it.

whether you have ever been fired upon is really not the point, the point is that you are implying that they should have fought longer or died in bigger numbers to please you. they made the decisions that they felt were correct for their families, who are any of us that weren't there and whose families weren't there, to judge them?

you say "was" in reference to your parents, have they passed away? if they have and that wasn't just a misprint then i offer to you my condolences.

FLOTSOM

[DiabloTX]

Yes, they "was" French and Norwegian.  But they surrendered to Death, it wasn't much of a battle, kind of like 1940.

[Angus]

When a nation with less than 4 mi people jostles with the biggest warpower in the world for several weeks, it doesn't smell like surrender.
France stepped down, Norway was overpowered.
BTW, the Germans were very fast in capturing key points, like the capital. However one of their cruisers was sunk by the Norse and the casualties were great.
I do not think the US ever sank a German cruiser 

[bongaroo]

This thread is like a who's who of O'club forum trolls with no politics to debate.   

Guys, quit feeding the trolls.

[Rich46yo]

To dig up the German view, they considered the USA to be softest, which is why the Ardennas offensive was aimed at the Americans

You were doing well until this Angus, which is pure stupidity. The Germans were petrified of our use of combined arms and our limitless supply. Also look up the origins of "devil dog", "teufelhunden". Their reasons for attacking the Ardennes, "learn to spell" had nothing to do with who was there. It was the weakest part of the allied front lines, "least troops and armor", and had valuable fuel stocks within reach of the offensive. And as it turned out the American army ended up beating the Germans and driving them back, cutting months off the war. Type Bastogne into a search engine.

To the Germans we were violent gangsters, cowboys, and devil dogs. In fact I think they still see us that way. And well the tyrannical world should because we are the most powerful military force its ever seen. Little bitty cute little IceLand is lucky the British and Yank Navy was around to protect them. Cause Hitler had you in his sights too.

[CAVPFCDD]

My god diablo and hangtime you two are just ignorant and immature

the facts speak for themselves, I'm done with this thread

i vote for it to be locked

[FLOTSOM]

Yes, they "was" French and Norwegian.  But they surrendered to Death, it wasn't much of a battle, kind of like 1940.

diablo you in my opinion are a disgusting and deplorable individual.

i hope some day your children respect and hold you in the same level of regard as you have shown to your parents here today. but my hope is that they do it while you are alive and present so you can witness it first hand. so that you will know in your heart the level of pain this type of callousness would bring to a parent.

FLOTSOM

[Rich46yo]

Good thing we had the Atlantic ocean between us and Germany in 1939. What was the size of the American army then?

Oh the citizens probably would have fought, some of them at least. But having the Germans shoot their wives and kids, or putting them in C-camps, would have dampered the enthusiasm of most. Besides, there were plenty of racists in America back then, even Hitler supporters, who would have pulled a Quisling. We elected the son of one as President in 1960.

Ive been to Europe. I understand their dislike of war better then most Americans. They've been ravaged by two and in 1939 still remembered an entire generation lost in one. Maybe cause of it I have a better understanding why the Norwegians didn't want their civilian population slaughtered, their country destroyed, fighting a battle they had no hope of winning. Be that as it may 95% hated the occupiers, many of her sons fought against them, and those that were traitors faced the fury of the nation after the war.

Those are the facts of history. Maybe not the Americanized version. But we've never been invaded by a far superior, and ruthless force have we?

[Angus]

Rich:
It just so happened that I was reading an article on the Ardennas, and there was a quote directly on this. The view was that it would be more succesful to attack the Americans than the ENGLISH, since the English were doggedly stubborn once dug in. Two things on top of that, - Hitler had that opinion, and the geographical condition also favoured it.
Bear in mind that Hitler said that a democratical nation could not muster a tough army. (close enough)
Anyway, it was the last proper Axis offence, and failed.
Now, you had the Atlantic between you and the Nazis, true enough. Not just the Atlantic though, you also had the BRITISH between you and the Nazis. Just a minute, were the Nazis direct enemies of the USA? Not exactly so much. There were indeed many Hitler supporters, although many of those were rather pro-German than the whole cake (which they would not have known), - that is somewhat understandable.
Not all americans know for instance that the lend-lease deal to the British (Where Roosevelt used the "firehose vs the neighbours fire" as a paralell to the situation in Europe) was accepted by just a margin. It almost flushed, and would have done so without the push from the white house.
Today, one runs across short-read posters however, who think the USA jumped into WW2 to save Europe and hardly ever lost a fight defending those submittive sissies, and this is bound to make people grind their teeth a bit.
The USA didn't get invaded by a far superior force, yet got kicked out of a big part of the globe, and the turnpoint was by a margin. But there was no experience of being under the heel of a cruel state, so I think that some here would be better of looking a little more at things in perspective.
Say the USA was a 4 Million nation, living in one state, , being bullied by the Canadians across the lakes counting 20 to 1, yet fighting for 6 weeks plus....somehow I do not see an Alamo there....
And what was Alamo anyway. Lost...

[FLOTSOM]

Rich:
It just so happened that I was reading an article on the Ardennas, and there was a quote directly on this. The view was that it would be more succesful to attack the Americans than the ENGLISH, since the English were doggedly stubborn once dug in. Two things on top of that, - Hitler had that opinion, and the geographical condition also favoured it.
Bear in mind that Hitler said that a democratical nation could not muster a tough army. (close enough)
Anyway, it was the last proper Axis offence, and failed.
Now, you had the Atlantic between you and the Nazis, true enough. Not just the Atlantic though, you also had the BRITISH between you and the Nazis. Just a minute, were the Nazis direct enemies of the USA? Not exactly so much. There were indeed many Hitler supporters, although many of those were rather pro-German than the whole cake (which they would not have known), - that is somewhat understandable.
Not all americans know for instance that the lend-lease deal to the British (Where Roosevelt used the "firehose vs the neighbours fire" as a paralell to the situation in Europe) was accepted by just a margin. It almost flushed, and would have done so without the push from the white house.
Today, one runs across short-read posters however, who think the USA jumped into WW2 to save Europe and hardly ever lost a fight defending those submittive sissies, and this is bound to make people grind their teeth a bit.
The USA didn't get invaded by a far superior force, yet got kicked out of a big part of the globe, and the turnpoint was by a margin. But there was no experience of being under the heel of a cruel state, so I think that some here would be better of looking a little more at things in perspective.
Say the USA was a 4 Million nation, living in one state, , being bullied by the Canadians across the lakes counting 20 to 1, yet fighting for 6 weeks plus....somehow I do not see an Alamo there....
And what was Alamo anyway. Lost...

wow you are really going out of your way to get under the skin of some people here aren't ya?!

go get em.......and good luck

your gonna need it in this argument

FLOTSOM

[Angus]

I actually thought Rich's posts were okay, but Hangtime and Diablo, yeacchhh.
Good for them to see whats crabbing under their skin 

[airguard]

at that time we had about 3.5 millions people living in norway, do your math and chech out in percent how many we lost vs the rest of the allied forces.
and another little thing hard learned, a country who choosed to be neutral and cut down military forces for years did learn it the hard way.

Norway was kind enough to give the English language a word to describe 'traitors, collaborators, surrender monkeys and scumbags' without having to type all that.

Look up 'Quislings'.

If the United States was invaded by a hostile Army, would 1,330 casualties be enough to convince the privileged elite and the King (with the national treasury) to flee before the the remaining government and population capitulated and surrendered? That's all it took to convince the Norwegians it's time to quit... Well, all except the folks with the crown and the cash.

During the German invasion of Norway and the campaign that lead to it's capitulation the Norwegians suffered 1,335 casualties, the French and Poles 550. The British suffered most heavily, taking 4,400 casualties. Nearly a third of those loses came after the end of the land campaign, when the aircraft carrier HMS Glorious was sunk by the German battlecruisers Gneisenau and Scharnhorst while returning to Britain with an escort of two destroyers.

Yes indeed, little Norway's government in exile did continue the fight... losing another 1,700 or so troops during the war. Thing is, the German SS Norwegian Divisions, made up of Quislings sacrificed far more for the Nazi cause than they did for the 'allied' cause.

http://www.frontkjemper.com/

War Casualties, by nation WWII

France: 217,000
Poland: 240,000
England: 382,000
United States: 417,000

Norway: 3,000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

Yah.. brave; ain't they? Such resolve.. such sacrifice! Yes, lets single out Norway for it's exemplary determination and sacrifice in defeating the Nazi Scourge!

LOL!

[airguard]

hangtime and diablo, I probably dont put this right in english:  but did you have a childhood who messed you up badly ?

[Hangtime]

Angus..

we're talking about norway's surrender, it's occupation, it's descendants claims of greatness in the war, the facts of it's minimal participation and it's real losses and real determination and resistance to the 'boot' as compared to other countries that suffered a similar fate.

In other words.. their version is revisionist history. Reality is, they put up some resistance, surrendered, had an exiled dane as king, and were granted their country back by the victorious allies at the end of the war.

The Norwegian position as swung from 'we never surrendered' and 'we were vikings once, and feared by all' to 'well, we had a big merchant marine and 13 fighter pilots.."

LOL!

Was fun, but no cigar for you revisionists.. facts reveal the true story, comparatively; Norway suffered far less than others under Hitlers boot.. and many others paid far more dearly for final victory than Norway did. Nonetheless, they reaped great rewards, compared to the price paid by the Poles, French, Finns, and Czech's.. Norway has nothing much to brag about.

..and somehow, they feel deprived by that.