Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Curlew on December 19, 2008, 02:35:08 PM
-
The Norwegian air aces, Ola, Lars and Sven, who had gotten out of Norge and joined the RAF. They became very famous, each recording many kills.
Early in the 1940's, Ola was sent to Chicago to help with a USA savings bond drive.
One morning, during a radio interview, Ola was asked by the host to describe one of their more prominent battles.
Ola responded, "Ja Ja, there was that day in the skies over France when Lars, Sven and I were attacked by 23 fokkers and a mighty battle followed.
Sven was able to knock down 7 of those fokkers, and Lars bagged 7 fokkers, while I shot down the remaining 9 fokkers."
At this point, the radio interviewer was getting queasy and attempted to clarify, "For the benefit of our listening audience, the Fokker is a German airplane second in popularity only to the Messerschmidt. Isn't that right Ola?"
He responded, "Ja Ja, but in this case, those fokkers were flying Messerschmidts." :rock
-
Ouch.... I'm sure a few people listening appreciated that. :lol
-
Who cares, they surrendered like France did...
heh.
-
Who cares, they surrendered like France did...
heh.
this is the second time I've had to do this on this thread, go read some history books, they did alot to keep their assests away from the Germans and fought bravely against overwhelming odds
as a norwegian american and having many family members who were reistance fighters, it's kind of offence
<EDIT> forgot to mention that the joke is funny though, lol
-
France had a resistance, too.
France, also, had a German occupying force.
Therefore, Norway surrendered just like France did.
-
And, again, Curlew, it's Ens. Pulver, not Palmer. I guess you didn't see that in your book did you CAVwhatthediddlyever....
-
bah i'm doing this on two threads now, anyway, france didn't just surrender neither did norway
back on topic as a norwegian it's a funny joke
-
Lmao Diablo. Not even gonna bother to comment on your lack of history knowledge. :lol
I am gonna give you a little quiz though Diablo. For 100$: What date did norway surrender to germany?
-
Who cares, they surrendered like France did...
heh.
Actually the Free French Forces numbered at least 500,000 and they fought well, and bravely, in every theater of the war. FF Pilots earned great honor while flying in both the western and eastern fronts. Most of all eastern. Many, many sons of France fought with distinction against the German occupiers.
Thats what actually happened. I know a lot of Yanks like to call them surrender monkeys in WW 2 but I'm afraid it just wasn't so. I despise the Vichy Govt. and Police forces but as far as Frances sons many did fight well. Please read your history before making such blanket statements.
P.S. You didn't want to be a German, or a Norwegian woman of a German, after the war in Norway. Didn't the Norwegians force German POWs to clear minefields by forcing them to run thru them? Almost all the Norwegians hated the German occupiers and there was a lot of resistance. After the war there was an awful lot of retribution as well.
-
"Ja Ja, but in this case, those fokkers were flying Messerschmidts."
:rofl
-
Nope, they surrendered just like monkeys. Cheese-eating monkeys that is.
-
Nope, they surrendered just like monkeys. Cheese-eating monkeys that is.
How many times have you been under fire?
-
Norway capitulated (though Norwegian armed forces continued fighting the Germans abroad and at home until the German capitulation on 8 May 1945) on 10 June 1940, two months after Wesertag, this made Norway the occupied country which had withstood a German invasion for the longest time before succumbing.
-
How many times have you been under fire?
Irrelevant.
But I did spend 10 years in uniform so it's not like I'm a total rookie.
-
so why are you quoting a source that proves yourself wrong? lol
Nope, they surrendered just like monkeys. Cheese-eating monkeys that is.
and this doesnt even make sense, there are alot of stereotypes you could have used for norwegians, this isn't one of them.
you finally got the history part right, i wish the people in the sock and awe thread would read that and stop making unfounded comments
-
Post a source that proves me wrong then mr-I-know-it-all.
-
Wrong Diablo
General Ruge who signed the "surrender" treaty never had the proper authorization to surrender and the war went on without Norway having signed any any valid surrender.
-
Nils, shhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!, don't ruin my fun!
-
Wrong Diablo
General Ruge who signed the "surrender" treaty never had the proper authorization to surrender and the war went on without Norway having signed any any valid surrender.
Well when the ruling class flee like scalded cats.... who else?
-
See? I told you so!
-
Even worst.
(http://www.axishistory.com/fileadmin/user_upload/h/hitler-quisling.jpg)
:noid
-
Well when the ruling class flee like scalded cats.... who else?
oh my...
-
Well when the ruling class flee like scalded cats.... who else?
Did they, really?
-
'Bug out Doug' ran away. :devil
-
'Bug out Doug' ran away. :devil
And because he did the Philippines were never surrendered..... like norway.....right?
:noid
-
Dont let the facts get in your way Bronk :rolleyes:
-
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!
-
Oh and Hangtime chimes in with no real insight as usual... lmao nice try kid :rofl
-
That's right, Nils.
No 'real' insight.
Just the Facts with supporting links. Of course, it being the truth; with links, it's not quite what your used to, is it?
-
Tell me how many Yanks thru their hands up when surrounded and/or outgunned? How many Brits? Canucks? Germans? Russians? Hundreds of thousands or Millions?
Scary stuff being outgunned and downrange. Little Norway was way over-matched. But 95% of her population never hugged the German occupiers. The Germans would execute or send your entire family to C-camps for resisting.
How brave would all you gunslingers be then?
While its true there were a lot of Norwegian volunteers for the Waffen SS I'm unaware of any atrocities committed by them and they spent the entire war on the eastern front. Many were motivated to fight the Russians in support of Finland. Do remember this was the same Stalinist Russia that enslaved all of eastern Europe for 45 years, murdered countless millions in cold blood, "worse then Hitler", and were mortal enemies of America and the west for decades.
So the whole Norway thing is complicated. I dont think blanket one liners, "surrender monkeys" really begins to describe it. Most of all if your a big arsed middle class American whiteboy, sitting in front of a computer, thats never even been in a fistfight.
-
Oh, I dunno, Rich.. got any examples of a WWII Norwegian version of Guam, Corregidor or Java Sea?
Right.
And Rich, I spent my time in the land of bad things.. I know what it's like to be downrange. I'm not taking a 'cheap shot'.. rather a well aimed kick at a revisionist.
You can certainly take issue with the presentation.. but the facts remain.
-
That's right, Nils.
No 'real' insight.
Just the Facts with supporting links. Of course, it being the truth; with links, it's not quite what your used to, is it?
I know this may be above your head Hangtime but you should try to look at the numbers in perspective. Think _really_ hard and do some more research before you post the next time. ;)
-
i posted this in a different thread, but i figure this one could use it as well
http://www.nuav.net/ndWW2.html (http://www.nuav.net/ndWW2.html)
read the history without the propaganda.
and a thought for those who were not there but would judge harshly the actions of others, just what do you think the outcome would be if in 1940 Germany had dumped a million soldiers fully mechanized and outfitted along with a navy and formidable air force on the east coast of America? do you really think that the military of America could have fought them of? doubt it very much.
Norway was not equipped to fight a military as advanced as the Germans in tactics and technology. the fact that they managed to hold out for the 2 months that they did is amazing.
seeing how you are so willing to cast disparaging judgments hangtime, what nationality are you? what is your heritage? where is the perfection in your history that allows you to be the judge of others?
did you bother to read any of the information found within the sight you yourself posted? the one thing it absolutely does is state that those Norwegians that volunteered to fight for the Germans saw extensive action in all theaters through to the end of the war. it says nothing about them retreating or surrendering or in any other way disgracing themselves.
that is the presentation
those are the facts that remain.
so your implication that the Norwegians are a people without the courage to fight is completely undermined and defeated within the very text and evidence that you would use to support your malicious and unfounded claims.
i by no means am what you would call a revisionist, (unless my want for people to know and understand historical facts and not the over blown propaganda passed around by the masses who are to lazy to bother to take the time to read for themselves and reach there own conclusion makes me a revisionist) nor have i any Norwegian ancestry that i am aware of, so my motives in this are clear and unbiased.
but i do believe that if you were not the person standing there, with the guns of your enemies pointed at your home and your family, then you have no right to make judgments about the decisions made by another who was in that situation with the lives of their families at stake.
FLOTSOM
-
I know for a fact after watching Red Dawn that America would have kicked their cabbage-eating azzes back to the Rhine.
-
A memorial in Finland... for Norwegian volunteers who fought in Winter War :salute
(http://www.norja.fi/NR/rdonlyres/00558979-5A9E-4839-A96F-D39EF46E9498/29635/Minnesten.jpg) (http://www.norja.fi/NR/rdonlyres/00558979-5A9E-4839-A96F-D39EF46E9498/29634/Vakt.jpg)
-
Give me Norway over America any day of the week.
-
Give me Norway over America any day of the week.
Not gonna give it away for free :noid , but I would gladly trade a few square miles for a few square miles in a really warm part of Australia right now :cool:
-
A memorial in Finland... for Norwegian volunteers who fought in Winter War :salute
(http://www.norja.fi/NR/rdonlyres/00558979-5A9E-4839-A96F-D39EF46E9498/29635/Minnesten.jpg) (http://www.norja.fi/NR/rdonlyres/00558979-5A9E-4839-A96F-D39EF46E9498/29634/Vakt.jpg)
:salute
-
Not gonna give it away for free :noid , but I would gladly trade a few square miles for a few square miles in a really warm part of Australia right now :cool:
My philosophy on that issue is that there are only so many clothes that you can take off in order to get cool without being arrested. :lol
There is no limit to the amount of clothes you can put on.
Having said that, I do not fancy having to dig my car out of the snow just to drive to work, no do I fancy driving a Ford in icy conditions. It's bad enough in the wet, let alone ice.
Definitely a sunny-weather car.
-
Who cares, they surrendered like France did...
This has to be one of the lamest and equally arrogant posts EVER. A little history lesson is therefore necessary.
Some points:
- Norway had the population of less that 1/20th of just Germany
- Norway was taken by surprize, but yet struggled longer than France.
- Norway fought on on many fronts none the less. There were Norwegian squadrons in the UK, and up to Iceland even.
- AFAIK Norway mustered one of or the largest merchant navy in the world, - which worked for the allies.
- The Norwegian resistance was one tough bunch and did many a job.
- Basically, Norwegian resistance and their stoutness tied up quite some German forces.
- German countermeasures were cruel, many Norwegians were execured or sent to the infamous nazi camps in Europe. Towns were also razed.
who cares ... :mad:
heh.
-
Curlew,
I have a Norwegian book from my grandfather from WWII, that gives in great detail, pictures and written accounts of the occupation and finally the withdrawal from Norway. Unfortunately, it is written in Norwegian and I have had to extrapolate the information by looking at and deciphering the pictures. If you would like, I can scan some of the pics and captions and email them to you. Let me know...
-
Seems to be a lot of Norwegian bashing going on lately, i myself have had the plaesure of knowing online through Aces high several from Norway, all solid guys. Now IMHO if we look at any countries past, they've all had shining moments and let us say tarnished ones as well. What is done is done, let it lay and go on to better things :salute
-
Oh, I dunno, Rich.. got any examples of a WWII Norwegian version of Guam, Corregidor or Java Sea?
http://www.lawzone.com/half-nor/haukelid.htm Does that count? We beat the Germans to the bomb due to courageous Norwegians.
-
http://www.lawzone.com/half-nor/haukelid.htm Does that count? We beat the Germans to the bomb due to courageous Norwegians.
hey, now that's not funny! :(
i was gonna mention this event in my post but decided i was gonna save it to counter any response he threw back out in regards to the Norwegians not continuing the fight against the Germans.
you stole my thunder Rich :furious
:aok
FLOTSOM
-
hey Flotsam.. nice appeal. My heart pumps peanut butter for 'em.
Again.. any Norwegian equivalents of Corregidor? Surrounded, no resupply; not even defending their homes; how long did those americans hold out? Why did they do that? What became of them? Any Norwegian Bataan's?
Fact: The King and the treasury bolted.. the military folded; the country was occupied without much of a fight. You'll argue that there's nothing else they could do.. yet Finland managed to throw back the Russians and the Germans. Three times.
Norway was no Finland, No Poland, No England. It was just another snack for the germans, who they seemed to have more in common with than the other allied nations that bled for them and restored for them their country after paying a much higher price in blood for it in than they did themselves.
No Crying. Poland was screwed. Norway was treated with kid gloves in comparison... before, during and after the war. They don't deserve anything more than the footnote in history that explains 'Quislings'.
-
Keep burrying yourself deeper in the poo Hangtime. :lol
-
Typical Nils.. stand back and toss one liners.. minimal effort, while you wait for others to do your heavy lifting.
:aok
-
hey Flotsam.. nice appeal. My heart pumps peanut butter for 'em.
Again.. any Norwegian equivalents of Corregidor? Surrounded, no resupply; not even defending their homes; how long did those americans hold out? Why did they do that? What became of them? Any Norwegian Bataan's?
Fact: The King and the treasury bolted.. the military folded; the country was occupied without much of a fight. You'll argue that there's nothing else they could do.. yet Finland managed to throw back the Russians and the Germans. Three times.
Norway was no Finland, No Poland, No England. It was just another snack for the germans, who they seemed to have more in common with than the other allied nations that bled for them and restored for them their country after paying a much higher price in blood for it in than they did themselves.
No Crying. Poland was screwed. Norway was treated with kid gloves in comparison... before, during and after the war. They don't deserve anything more than the footnote in history that explains 'Quislings'.
well i have spent more than enough of my time on this topic, so this will be my last entry on this topic.
i will concede that you have conceived some version of history to hug and snuggle and call your very own and that you derive great warmth and pleasure from it. thus i will leave you to your ignorance and self imposed blindness and hope you find many a happy night fondling your historical fantasies to your utmost delights.
but i will mention one word that you may or may not be familiar with.
one word that before you throw dirt or disparaging remarks in the direction of the Norwegians that you should take into account.
one word that you in your utter ignorance of history may not realize changed the entire world.
one word that for centuries was a scream made in fear
one word that was a guarantee of death and destruction
its a simple word......
the word is.....
NORSEMEN
maybe you should look it up before you throw rocks at the historical bravery and willingness to fight of an entire nation.
FLOTSOM
-
"Norsemen". LOL! Thieves. Plunderers. Barbarians.
Kinda like Mongols without horses.
Now, just Quislings.
and Viking Kittens.
(http://ickmusic.com/pics/viking.jpg)
-
the king and the treasury bolted to save it from being plundered by the germans and aiding their war, so that is not a valid argument, that was done to save it so there could be a norway after the war and so the nazis couldn't get more funding for their war.
also if you're looking at norwegians killed, its all relative, norway is a tiny country and is definatly not an agressive country with a vast military might like UK, USA, Germany, France and Russia... the norwegians were trying their very best to stay out of the war because they knew they didnt stand a chance.
And with the norwegians fighting in the SS, well look up some history, the main defenders on the coast of france were Eastern Europeaners who had the choice of joining the German army, so people from all countries fought in the german army to avoid oppression, you have to realize at the time it looked like Germany was going to rule the world, so if you can't beat em join em.
Norway fought the longest of any european country before surrendering and they had no where near the resources or man power of France or Russia or even Poland.
These cowardice claims are just out right false and offense to me as a norwegian, we're a very proud people, and proud of our heritage, I have family and know plenty of people who stood up and fought the germans.
Also, many of norwegian pilots managed to flee the country and get to the UK and fight for the RAF, there was even a month were the norwegian pilots scored the more kills than every other RAF unit.
So find another country to call cowards, because norwegians are far from it
-
Hangtime, you seem to need some read-ups as well.
Norway did not fall on their back and hand itself over to the Nazis, although Vidkun Quisling was there.
They were more pro-Brit, and horrified with the German "Success".
In a position far safer was the U$A, and at the time, nowhere nearly on the "Allied" side as were the Norwegians.
-
My people are from Sweden so I know something about Norsemen, and of course, history.
Its a totally different story then what youv seen in a Monty Python movie.
-
These cowardice claims are just out right false and offense to me as a norwegian, we're a very proud people, and proud of our heritage, I have family and know plenty of people who stood up and fought the germans.
LOL.. yup. And every Frenchman I ever met was in the Maquis too.
Now as to the 'cowardice claims', and just where in this thread did I call norwegians cowards? I did kick the props out of the Norwegian Revisionist History Club's dissertation with facts and supporting data... but I didn't call them Cowards. I just refuted claims of exalted status when compared with the contributions of several other european nations that bled more, suffered more and paid more for the ultimate allied victory in Europe than the Norwegians did.
-
LOL.. yup. And every Frenchman I ever met was in the Maquis too.
Now as to the 'cowardice claims', and just where in this thread did I call norwegians cowards? I did kick the props out of the Norwegian Revisionist History Club's dissertation with facts and supporting data... but I didn't call them Cowards. I just refuted claims of exalted status when compared with the contributions of several other european nations that bled more, suffered more and paid more for the ultimate allied victory in Europe than the Norwegians did.
umm.. every person who said norway just "surrendered"... the entire reason this whole debate started
and what are you implying with your first sentence there? People should be proud of where they came from... are you trying to say the norwegians and french shouldn't be proud for some reason?
-
Facts and supporting data? :lol
Heres some "supporting data". The Nazis occupied little Norway with 400,000 professional troops. Thats how important they considered their trade routes were for Swedish ore and minerals. The Norwegians actually put up some stiff resistance at first and several German warships were sunk. They were simply overwhelmed by far superior forces. Kinda like we Americans were at Corregidor. Remember? When the Yank Supreme Commander deserted his troops under battle? The same guy we gave the Medal Of Honor to?
The Norwegian Govt. never surrendered. The German installed Quisling Govt. did, and did conspire with the Germans.
BTW Quisling was executed after the war for treason. The rest of the Norwegians who helped the Germans experienced severe retribution. Two of his co-conspirators were also placed in front of firing squads.
-
Still doesn't change the fact that Norway was occupied by German forces thusly they surrendered. Nowhere in this thread does surrender = cowardice, it's just an assumption by thin-skinned Vikings, who for some reason are acting more like knee-jerk Frenchmen. Ask any WWII vet who treated the Allied invading armies better and they will say overwhelmingly that the German civilians treated them better than the freed French. I'm sure Norway was grateful, too, but as stated before, even though Norway never "surrendered", yeah right, the Germans occupied the country up to the end.
-
Still doesn't change the fact that Norway was occupied by German forces thusly they surrendered. Nowhere in this thread does surrender = cowardice, it's just an assumption by thin-skinned Vikings, who for some reason are acting more like knee-jerk Frenchmen. Ask any WWII vet who treated the Allied invading armies better and they will say overwhelmingly that the German civilians treated them better than the freed French. I'm sure Norway was grateful, too, but as stated before, even though Norway never "surrendered", yeah right, the Germans occupied the country up to the end.
ok diablo i was going to refrain from bothering to post any more in this thread because the stupidity of some was just to deliberate. but you managed to get my attention, your utter STUPIDITY tops it all.
i am half French and half German and damn proud of it!
what kind of mutt are you???
English? Spanish? what? there is not a part of Europe or Asia that at one point in time or another that one of my ancestors didn't stomp into submission.
so where is your ancestry from?
why dont you be brave and put it on the table so that the rest of us may feel inspired by your historical greatness, so that we may find ourselves in awe of your lineage and pedigree.
or if you are just a cowardly little snot afraid of putting up then why don't you just shut up instead?
FLOTSOM
-
Irrelevant to the discussion.
DIABLO
-
i'm far from thin skinned, people just make comments without knowing the facts, yes norway eventually surrendered, but they put up one heck of a fight for such a small country with little military might, most of europe surrendered, so if you want to make your little joke about countries just simply caving in, don't make it about norway because thats just not true
keep in mind that norway has a population of 4 million....there are 8 million people in new york city alone
-
Irrelevant to the discussion.
DIABLO
actually it is very relevant,
but ain't you a funny guy, you lose your brave heart bs attitude when someone challenges you?
you got it into your brave self to run your mouth about the history of others, well lets see what it is that makes you great.
lets see who you think you are that gives you the right to judge others, or to even open your mouth in the conversations of adults.
you got to say your peace and insinuate your trash, now why don't you either put up or shut up.
i would be more than happy to rub the history of my ancestors stepping on the necks of yours into the sore wounds of shame that you must carry over it. your wounds and shame over who they were is plainly apparent in the silence you would proffer instead of stating boldly and with pride who your ancestors were.
my ancestors have had their ups and their downs their good and their bad, but my pride in them as a people is one of my most important and personality defining possessions. i will never be shy about where my family comes from, if you have such a deplorable and shameful ancestry then i suggest you just refrain from putting your opinion into any conversation about the ancestry and history of another.
cowardly people disgust me
FLOTSOM
-
They were simply overwhelmed by far superior forces. Kinda like we Americans were at Corregidor. Remember? When the Yank Supreme Commander deserted his troops under battle? The same guy we gave the Medal Of Honor to?
Kinda like Corregidor?
Hardly.
The Norwegians were supposedly defending their homeland... and folded in two months, with 1,300 men lost. To compare that to Bataan and Corrigedor, where starving men, cut off from all re-supply; knowing they could not win, fought on for 5 1/2 months. The furious resistance of the Americans and Filipinos are simply not in the same league as the Norwegian scuffle.
MacArthur was ordered out. Norway's King did what again? Oh, that's right... he bolted; leaving his homeland... oh; wait. That's right. Norways King wasn't even Norwegian. He was a Danish Prince. LOL.
-
The furious resistance of the Americans and Filipinos are simply not in the same league as the Norwegian scuttle.
Fixed
-
It's nice to see cooler heads prevailing here.
-
Typical Nils.. stand back and toss one liners.. minimal effort, while you wait for others to do your heavy lifting.
:aok
Yeah i have another one liner too.
You seem to be so hung up on numbers so here you have one. 0,32% of our population perished in the war. That is the same as ...... the US.
Maybe ill spend som more time on you and diablo later. If you have some _real questions_ then feel free, but what you have come up with so far really isnt much... :)
-
Kinda like Corregidor?
Hardly.
The Norwegians were supposedly defending their homeland... and folded in two months, with 1,300 men lost. To compare that to Bataan and Corrigedor, where starving men, cut off from all re-supply; knowing they could not win, fought on for 5 1/2 months. The furious resistance of the Americans and Filipinos are simply not in the same league as the Norwegian scuffle.
MacArthur was ordered out. Norway's King did what again? Oh, that's right... he bolted; leaving his homeland... oh; wait. That's right. Norways King wasn't even Norwegian. He was a Danish Prince. LOL.
The King of Norway left for Britain together with the Norwegian gold stock, to become a king in exile. He merely escaped, and could "rule" in excile, encouraging his countimen to aid the Allies. AFAIK the Norwegian merchant navy was the largest in the world at the outbreak of WW2, and that was quite some aid to the British.
Norway vs Germany was a no-win situaton, - a small nation vs the biggest warmachine on earth. The only chance would have been if the RN had intercepted the German fleet, which narrowly failed.
Now, since this was the situation the Norwegian fleet could haul goods that the Brits bought from the USA, instead of hauling goods that the Germans could have bought from the USA.....bear in mind that the U.S. shop was open to the Germans too, - there was just the problem of picking up...
Anyway, back to the aces. The little Nation that fell to the Nazis produced some 15 of them. Not bad at all, especially considering that much of their air-jobs was anti-shipping and such.
They were well known for their determination and toughness, both among the Allies, as well as to the Germans.
To dig up the German view, they considered the USA to be softest, which is why the Ardennas offensive was aimed at the Americans :devil
-
Hangtime, I hope you are aware of the fact that you could fit the entire Norwegian population in New York (city) - twice.
-
Of course Norway stood no chance... a nation of 3 million, capitulated after sacrificing 1,300 valiant defenders.. it was inevitable.
They were forced to surrender, but the exiled King and his expat military struggled on bravely from fortress england till wars end and finally returned in triumph to their war ravaged homeland at wars end.
I get it.
:salute
Hangtime, I hope you are aware of the fact that you could fit the entire Norwegian population in New York (city) - twice.
Yup. I'm also aware that the population of Manhattan is three million... more New Yorkers perished on 9/11 than fell defending Norway a half a century ago. AFIK, we didn't 'surrender' or 'capitulate' lower manhattan. NY'ers wouldn't stand for it.
So, whats your point?
-
actually it is very relevant,
but ain't you a funny guy, you lose your brave heart bs attitude when someone challenges you?
you got it into your brave self to run your mouth about the history of others, well lets see what it is that makes you great.
lets see who you think you are that gives you the right to judge others, or to even open your mouth in the conversations of adults.
you got to say your peace and insinuate your trash, now why don't you either put up or shut up.
i would be more than happy to rub the history of my ancestors stepping on the necks of yours into the sore wounds of shame that you must carry over it. your wounds and shame over who they were is plainly apparent in the silence you would proffer instead of stating boldly and with pride who your ancestors were.
my ancestors have had their ups and their downs their good and their bad, but my pride in them as a people is one of my most important and personality defining possessions. i will never be shy about where my family comes from, if you have such a deplorable and shameful ancestry then i suggest you just refrain from putting your opinion into any conversation about the ancestry and history of another.
cowardly people disgust me
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.
(http://www.prometheus6.org/images/toughguy1.jpg)
-
The point is, Hang, that obviously the Norwegians were too busy surrendering to the Germans to procreate any more Norwegians and thusly explains the HIGH amount of New Yorkers in such a small area as New Yorkers seem to want to screw everybody. I thought that was pretty crystal clear...no?
-
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!
-
This guy lives in an area surrounded by snow, and Norwegians:
My God, Norway rolled over like an Apple Turnover in WWII.
He know what the heck he's talking about. AND he's seen Fargo 37 times PROJECTED, not on laser disc or DVD, and personally KNOWS a lutefisk cargo hold of Norwegians. I think Jaysonovagunderson knows what he's talking about, heck yeah he does! More like a baked apple turnover I tell ya...
-
Hey, no biggie diablo; this is melting pot america... this nation is filled with refugees and their descendants from failed european states and economies.
You just need to get in touch with your inner surrender monkey.
once you do, and suppress your Texan Americanism, it all begins to make perfect sense.
-
Yeah i have another one liner too.
You seem to be so hung up on numbers so here you have one. 0,32% of our population perished in the war. That is the same as ...... the US.
Maybe ill spend som more time on you and diablo later. If you have some _real questions_ then feel free, but what you have come up with so far really isnt much... :)
pssst.. Nils.. we were defending and liberating your countries. Not repelling invaders in ours. If we were repelling an invasion, the loss ratio would have been higher. Like France, with 1.35%, Czechoslovakia 2.25%, Finland 2.62%, Poland 16.7%...
but hey, it's just 'numbers'.. :lol
-
You are wrong Hangtime as usual
Line up your stuff and ill answer them all again.
Lets go hang.. keep it short and to the point if you have that ability :)
-
pssst.. Nils.. we were defending and liberating your countries. Not repelling invaders in ours. If we were repelling an invasion, the loss ratio would have been higher. Like France, with 1.35%, Czechoslovakia 2.25%, Finland 2.62%, Poland 16.7%...
but hey, it's just 'numbers'.. :lol
omg.. you just killed your own point :lol
-
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...
-
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.
(http://www.prometheus6.org/images/toughguy1.jpg)
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
-
Yes, they "was" French and Norwegian. But they surrendered to Death, it wasn't much of a battle, kind of like 1940.
-
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 :t
-
This thread is like a who's who of O'club forum trolls with no politics to debate. :rolleyes:
Guys, quit feeding the trolls.
-
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.
-
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
-
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
-
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?
-
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...
-
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
-
I actually thought Rich's posts were okay, but Hangtime and Diablo, yeacchhh.
Good for them to see whats crabbing under their skin :devil
-
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!
-
hangtime and diablo, I probably dont put this right in english: but did you have a childhood who messed you up badly ?
-
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.
-
I again suggest you read up on your history Hangtime. Plenty of reading out on the internet if you bother to search for it reather than revise history to fit your own view.
-
well you must understand that we Americans (US citizens that is) are very big on self righteousness, egotism and we are the world police. when we do not like anybody elses reality so we will simply substitute our own.
but heaven forbid and hell be damned should anyone point out any of our short comings or flaws and especially may they be damned if they dare to mention any of our failures.
we are an arrogant and obnoxious nation.
but i love us just the same :D
by the way just as a foot note, the Alamo had nothing to do with the US, they were Texans and Mexicans, not US citizens.
some of the major players involved at the Alamo were the US residents who moved to Texas and became Mexican citizens. then they staged a revolt and attempted to win the freedom of Texas a an independent sovereign nation.
the fact that brown men dared to raise a hand against white men and then dared to actually kill these white men for putting up a fight was the act that mobilized the united states to send help. but that help was slow and in reality not of much substance. the most help the Texans received from America were the volunteers that went to fight with the Texas army on their own and without the approval or sanction of the U.S. government.
http://www.sonofthesouth.net/texas/flags-republic-texas.htm (http://www.sonofthesouth.net/texas/flags-republic-texas.htm) if your interested check this site and those listed therein.
but keep in mind that Texas did not become apart of the US until a few years later.
Im not berating or belittling you Angus, but if you stick your finger into wounds that are still sore in the hearts of some then you need to be sure that you can support your statements with facts.
once again, good luck
FLOTSOM
-
history is always written by winners thats a fact.
nevertheless I dont think any norwegian ever had a swung word about ww2, we would be better off without it. heros or not. in war there is no heros, just a few lucky guys that survives. the exiled dane king was our first after years with other countries constitution to live after, we got our own elected and wanted him as our king that time.
If he woulda stayed the germans for sure woulda used him as a hostige for the rest of the norwegian people. no fuking sigar for the norwegian people under the war or until the late 60's.
blah blah blah...
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.
-
I again suggest you read up on your history Hangtime. Plenty of reading out on the internet if you bother to search for it reather than revise history to fit your own view.
Ah, but Nils, I have.. I didn't pull this information out of my backside, my viking friend. I'm still waiting for links to data that indicate that Norway was not invaded, defeated, occupied. I have posted links to accurate information regarding losses, and compared them to the losses to other nations, both scandanavian and european that suffered the same fate.
The data does not lie.. I did note your attempt to compare loss ratios of your population compared to ours, which I answered.. we were not invaded; you were, and if we had been invaded I daresay our loss ratios would look more like Frances, Finlands or Polands.. and a lot less like yours... the only conjecture I've posted in relation to the issue under discussion.
I have not bragged, claimed for my nation false accolades or attempted to skew the facts or the numbers... and have, for those reasoned efforts, been roundly condemned, vilified, insulted and abused for speaking nothing but the truth.
But that's ok. I'm not laboring under false pretenses or hiding behind insults or internet tuff guy BS. Just having a reasonable discussion with some european fanboi's and revisionists with some Viking ancestry to brag about.
Baseless bragging, I might add. ;)
-
ahh understand now we lost to few in your little mind, what about the russians they for sure gave alot....
-
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)
Hitler was an ego maniacal, delusional, racist, moron. He thought the eastern subhumans would fold due to a lack of a high enough forehead.
That and he had chased the bloody English across France to Dunkirk. Read your history. The Germans had specific targets for the Ardennes offensive and strategic objectives. That and they had pulled it off once before in '40. Its no secret American forces in the region were very undermanned because Allied Intel had figured the Germans didn't have the resources needed for such an offensive operation anymore.
Their goal was to split their enemy in half, take Antwerp "most of all the port", capture vital fuel depots, and then encircle and destroy the allied armys. Unfortunatly for them they had to go thru a lightly armed US Airborne division at the vital crossroads town of Bastogne. The rest is history.
-
ahh understand now we lost to few in your little mind, what about the russians they for sure gave alot....
We're not talking about Russians here, Airguard. We're talking about Norway and revisionist history as presented by the Norwegian fanboi's.
Start another thread about how much europe and the allies owe to the 20 million russian dead from WWII.
-
ok whos to many then ?
-
I don't understand your question, Airguard.
If it's 'how many must die', are you asking how much history you need to change to be worthy of the same honor and respect the Finns enjoy for their furious and effective defense of their homeland?
LOL!
You can't change history, Airguard. Whats past is past.. and honor, respect and accolades for the sacrifices of those that went before us are what they are... or are not.
And that's the point.. the facts of history stand in mute testimony to the courage and national determination of those nations involved.
-
well i do understand pasta, respect and chockolade determination will kill us all.
on the other side the nations involved will reject it... :devil
-
The Finns allied with the Nazis. Did you forget that little tidbit of history? And before that they made a separate peace with the Soviets ceding 10% of their territory and 20% of their Industrial capacity.
Don't they teach history in those one room school houses Hangtime? The ones with 9 hound dogs sleeping under the porch?
-
The King of Norway left for Britain together with the Norwegian gold stock
I equate it like this.
King is the captain of a ship. Captain suppose to go down with the ship.
Gentleman... do not go on Norwegian Cruise line. If the ship starts sinking. The captain will grab the ship's safe and leave the passengers to fend for themselves. :O
-
That is an excellent analogy there Bronk, let that be a lesson for all!
-
The Finns allied with the Nazis. Did you forget that little tidbit of history? And before that they made a separate peace with the Soviets ceding 10% of their territory and 20% of their Industrial capacity.
Don't they teach history in those one room school houses Hangtime? The ones with 9 hound dogs sleeping under the porch?
The Finns were invaded by the Russians... and resisted fiercely. They were forced to cede territory.. but never suffered occupation, never capitulated and did in fact declare war on Germany. Finlands interest in the war was Finland.. and it defended itself and it's sovereignty effectively.
The Republic of Finland was attacked by the USSR on 30 November 1939.[8] Later Finland and the Kingdom of Denmark officially joined the Axis Anti-Comintern Pact. The Kingdom of Sweden remained officially neutral. Following the Moscow armistice of September 1944, Finland effectively joined the Allies and expelled German forces. This led to a series of armed clashes called the Lapland War.
Also, see 'Winter War'. Learn. Be amazed. And what's with the childish petulant insults, Rich? That all you got?
-
ok hangtime we aren't arguing that they didn't surrender, everyone was making comments that norway rolled over and died at the first sign of trouble, which they didn't they fought the longest before surrendering of any of the german occupied countries, so we are arguing the fact that it is false to say norway just surrendered immediatly.
2nd of all the king and the gold leaving the country as i said before was a small victory so the country could go on after the war and so the NAZIS wouldn't get the gold to fuel their war
-
:confused: wow 7 pages to go from a (actually pretty funny) joke to the familiar old *pick any non-US country* bashing thread.
since you plainly cant be bothered/aren't capable of putting historical events in perspective, or presenting any consistent argument to support your (I'll be polite) theories how about just cutting the cr@p.
just post "if you're not Amerkin you're a f@g" and leave it there. then we'll all be clear.
-
:confused: wow 7 pages to go from a (actually pretty funny) joke to the familiar old *pick any non-US country* bashing thread.
since you plainly cant be bothered/aren't capable of putting historical events in perspective, or presenting any consistent argument to support your (I'll be polite) theories how about just cutting the cr@p.
just post "if you're not Amerkin you're a f@g" and leave it there. then we'll all be clear.
LOL.. another Euro-revisionist fanboi check-in, Holmes?
Perfect.
Ok.. dispute the facts; or is all you can do here is toss more poo?
ok hangtime we aren't arguing that they didn't surrender, everyone was making comments that norway rolled over and died at the first sign of trouble, which they didn't they fought the longest before surrendering of any of the german occupied countries, so we are arguing the fact that it is false to say norway just surrendered immediatly.
2nd of all the king and the gold leaving the country as i said before was a small victory so the country could go on after the war and so the NAZIS wouldn't get the gold to fuel their war
Shall I wade up through this thread and drag out the claims that Norway did not surrender? Good of you to finally concede that point.. BUT, as Holmes points out; that only took 7 pages. A case could be made that the revisionist fanboi's have invested more effort in denying the facts than Norway did in actually repelling an invader.
-
I do not think the US ever sank a German cruiser :t
Prinz Eugen :p
And ragarding other points, how big actually were german forces invading Norway in comparison to those invading France/Poland .
One more question, did the fact that Norwegian were considered aryan, play any role in the invasion of Norway?
-
Shall I wade up through this thread and drag out the claims that Norway did not surrender? Good of you to finally concede that point.. BUT, as Holmes points out; that only took 7 pages. A case could be made that the revisionist fanboi's have invested more effort in denying the facts than Norway did in actually repelling an invader.
not once do I or anyone else say they didn't surrender, we were saying they didn't just fold instantly like some of you are claiming
-
The Finns were invaded by the Russians... and resisted fiercely. They were forced to cede territory.. but never suffered occupation, never capitulated and did in fact declare war on Germany. Finlands interest in the war was Finland.. and it defended itself and it's sovereignty effectively.
The Republic of Finland was attacked by the USSR on 30 November 1939.[8] Later Finland and the Kingdom of Denmark officially joined the Axis Anti-Comintern Pact. The Kingdom of Sweden remained officially neutral. Following the Moscow armistice of September 1944, Finland effectively joined the Allies and expelled German forces. This led to a series of armed clashes called the Lapland War.
Also, see 'Winter War'. Learn. Be amazed. And what's with the childish petulant insults, Rich? That all you got?
Oh I got a lot more then that. I think the entire concept of the Scandinavian countries of WW-2 was to stay alive. Thats actually the premier goal in a war. To preserve your society. Most of all when up against foes far more powerful then yourself. The alternative, of course, was to end up a smoking ruin like Japan and Germany. Whose societies ended up on the verge of annihilation.
The northern countries accomplished it with a mix of neutrality, resistance, shifting alliances, and to some degree treasonable activities. When compared to the great war crimes of WW-2 their sins pale in comparison. They were all alone. Against enemies they could not beat. Not even Finland.
Dont speak so cavalier about war and violence if you've never experienced it hangtime. It gives you no right to judge either courage or cowardliness.
I'm done with this. :salute To the sons of Norway who fought their oppressors in WW-2.
-
The alternative, of course, was to end up a smoking ruin like Japan and Germany. Whose societies ended up on the verge of annihilation.
That is an overstatement of the facts. Neither society was on the verge of annihilation.
-
The Finns allied with the Nazis. Did you forget that little tidbit of history? And before that they made a separate peace with the Soviets ceding 10% of their territory and 20% of their Industrial capacity.
Don't they teach history in those one room school houses Hangtime? The ones with 9 hound dogs sleeping under the porch?
This is an over simplification of what happened to the point that it is nearly a lie by omission of the facts.
The only reason the Finns allied with Germany was because there was no one else to help them against the USSR.
-
not once do I or anyone else say they didn't surrender, we were saying they didn't just fold instantly like some of you are claiming
Better let nilsen know then.
General Ruge who signed the "surrender" treaty never had the proper authorization to surrender and the war went on without Norway having signed any any valid surrender.
-
Dont speak so cavalier about war and violence if you've never experienced it hangtime. It gives you no right to judge either courage or cowardliness.
Rich, I spent 11 months at Ben Luc, 1st Brigade, 9th Infantry, in a service and evac outfit; hosing blood and brains of my buddies out of the wrecked equipment I was sent out to recover. I spent 41 days of that time under pretty much constant mortar and sapper attack and came home a few ounces heavier in lead than when I left.
You can take yer sanctimonious pronouncements and fold 'em up till they are all sharp pointy corners and shove 'em someplace where the sun don't shine, puppy.
I've tried to deal with your BS politely, but you just can't seem to grasp that.. and seem to be beggin for a slap down. I may be old, puppy; but I'm no moron and I'm still young enough to make your eyes water if that's what you need to set your head back up where it belongs.
Now go on out in traffic and play a nice little game of hide and go hump yerself.
-
Rich, I spent 11 months at Ben Luc, 1st Brigade, 9th Infantry, in a service and evac outfit; hosing blood and brains of my buddies out of the wrecked equipment I was sent out to recover. I spent 41 days of that time under pretty much constant mortar and sapper attack and came home a few ounces heavier in lead than when I left.
You can take yer sanctimonious pronouncements and fold 'em up till they are all sharp pointy corners and shove 'em someplace where the sun don't shine, puppy.
I've tried to deal with your BS politely, but you just can't seem to grasp that.. and seem to be beggin for a slap down. I may be old, puppy; but I'm no moron and I'm still young enough to make your eyes water if that's what you need to set your head back up where it belongs.
Now go on out in traffic and play a nice little game of hide and go hump yerself.
:rofl :rofl
(http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa48/KanetsuguNaoe/PWNED.jpg)
-
I dont care what you say you've experienced or where you say you have done it. The fact is you broke into a thread like a troll and insulted some of these guys with your twisted version of history, in a way that had nothing to do with the original subject. You acted like an ignorant fool. And you still are doing so.
And frankly I dont believe your war stories or anything you say. I think your a BS artist and I have no respect for you.
People who have experienced that kind of fear aren't so cavalier about calling others "cowards". Your a phony Hangtime. A punk! Plain and simple.
Rich, I spent 11 months at Ben Luc, 1st Brigade, 9th Infantry, in a service and evac outfit; hosing blood and brains of my buddies out of the wrecked equipment I was sent out to recover. I spent 41 days of that time under pretty much constant mortar and sapper attack and came home a few ounces heavier in lead than when I left.
You can take yer sanctimonious pronouncements and fold 'em up till they are all sharp pointy corners and shove 'em someplace where the sun don't shine, puppy.
I've tried to deal with your BS politely, but you just can't seem to grasp that.. and seem to be beggin for a slap down. I may be old, puppy; but I'm no moron and I'm still young enough to make your eyes water if that's what you need to set your head back up where it belongs.
Now go on out in traffic and play a nice little game of hide and go hump yerself.
-
LAWLZ, epic reply...
-
I dont care what you say you've experienced or where you say you have done it. The fact is you broke into a thread like a troll and insulted some of these guys with your twisted version of history, in a way that had nothing to do with the original subject. You acted like an ignorant fool. And you still are doing so.
And frankly I dont believe your war stories or anything you say. I think your a BS artist and I have no respect for you.
People who have experienced that kind of fear aren't so cavalier about calling others "cowards". Your a phony Hangtime. A punk! Plain and simple.
In the more than a decade I've been here, I've never been known to tell war stories out of class. Those that know me, know why.
I'd be very interested to know where I called anybody a coward, here.. and frankly; my interest in this 'norway never surrendered' subject has little to do with you, your opinions or your cheap insults. I keep taking you off my hook and tossing you back, and you keep getting right back on the line.
Whatever argument you did bring to this discussion that had any information that wasn't an insult in it, I've dealt with frankly and factually.. without insulting you. And you have yet to bring a valid point that stands up to any kind of objective examination.
And here you are, back yet again, with more insults and innuendo.
You, apparently, are just another internet tuffguy newbie, still wet behind the ears and sonny boy; it's way past time for you to trot on home and tell yer mommy she loves you... your not ready for interaction with adults yet.
-
Valid points?
Like this one?
"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."
It's cool isn't it. Of course the USA wouldn't surrender if invaded by a country with a population 20 times bigger, as well as a reputation of being fast about the business.
Denmark fell in a day. Oslo was sneaked. So, no capital, - which in this case housed 1/4th of the nation.
Naaa, if the entire globe invaded the USA and all major cities and administration in their hands on day one, the Pres would stay and Hangtime would defend him with blazing guns :t
-
I doubt seriously that a single US Army Division, in the field, on it's home turf, standing between an invader and 3 million american men women and kids and their homes would surrender after the loss of only 1330 men.
Norway had 6 Divisions.
Your point again?
-
Of course the US would not retreat or surrender. It would "fight the other way", "tactically maneuver to fight another day" or just paint it pink. When was the last time the US was fighting on its soil? and I don't mean gang wars.
The simple fact is that the Norwegian surrendered to SAVE their civilians. They were being invaded about the time that the French and Brits were getting their tulips kicked out of mainland Europe and it was clear that this is a fight they cannot win. The Germans had no intent of enslaving or gassing the Norwegians like some others. Their dispersed population and way of life meant that they will suffer much less under occupation than other urbanite cultures. It would have been stupid to fight to the death at that point. Would have made a great heroic story of stupid men and some great Hollywood movies that's true. Perhaps "300 Norwegians"?
-
The Norwegian campaign was about to end when the Germans went for France and the lowlands (10th of may). But the Norse were fighting, in the vague hope that the UK and French might give a hand.
Those hopes were gone when the Panzers went rolling into the lowlands.
The point to save the civilians is IMHO quite valid, since the Germans had shown from the beginning (Polish campaign) that they would strike directly at the population. The Danish surrendered when LW bombers started buzzing over Copenhagen. The Polish surrendered after Warshaw was firebombed. And the Dutch were to surrender when Rotterdam was flattened.
Now hangtime:
"I doubt seriously that a single US Army Division, in the field, on it's home turf, standing between an invader and 3 million american men women and kids and their homes would surrender after the loss of only 1330 men."
Doubt as you like. Bear in mind that from day one all the biggest towns of Norway were in German hands.
Tough to be a division commander when you know the enemy already holds your wife and kids, and you can do nothing when enemy bombers buzz over your head to bomb civilian targets...perhaps.
All big words....
-
and there it is.
The crux... and the difference between our national cultures.
I believe we'd charge a much higher price for our Freedom than Norway did for theirs.
The price of Freedom is the willingness to do sudden battle, anywhere, any time and with utter recklessness...
...at home, or abroad.
There it is.. read it and weep.
-
LAWLZ, epic reply...
Truly it was... Dickie boi made it all about service and under fire. Now for some strange reason it is not.
Wonder why that is? ( He asked knowingly.) :lol
-
The bigger the Lie. The more they believe.
Norway never surrendered.
The bigger the Lie. The more they believe.
:aok
-
Exactly. Why ask a question if you know you're not going to like the reply.
According to his arguement I shouldn't have an opinion on politics since I've never served a day in office, or football as I have played since little league, or an opinion on a BBS because, well, it's a BBS.
-
and there it is.
The crux... and the difference between our national cultures.
I believe we'd charge a much higher price for our Freedom than Norway did for theirs.
The price of Freedom is the willingness to do sudden battle, anywhere, any time and with utter recklessness...
...at home, or abroad.
There it is.. read it and weep.
Knowing the Norse as well as some Americans, I tend to think the Americans would buckle quicker in the same position. Much quicker. No weeping.
US forces have after all lost many battles without being in THAT position.
-
Hang Time you sound like the human equivalent of a Summers Eve product. Lemon if you must know.
Its isn't so much what you said but "how" you said it, and "why" you even bothered. A resident of a fellow NATO member voiced pride over some of Norway's sons who fought well and courageously in WW-2. And many did. Instead you turned it into an insult fest.
You sound like trash dude. And I have a policy myself. I dont make threats, or respond to them, unless I'm looking into someones eyeballs.
Sheesh, you got Bronk as a troll buddy here. Does that not tell you how low you sunk?
Just let it go man.
-
Knowing the Norse as well as some Americans, I tend to think the Americans would buckle quicker in the same position. Much quicker. No weeping.
US forces have after all lost many battles without being in THAT position.
I salute the Norse people for their courage and bravery thoughout history. They're a fine proud people that has my utmost respect.
Now, as far as the American people "buckling"....never! My government is weak and incompentent, not the people. We would fight any foreign invader with deer rifles and slingshots if need be to not be beat at home. God help the country that comes to our shores for a fight for we'll send them to back to hell with a vengence that would make Hitler look like a alter boy. The American people the world sees though our media and hollywood is not the people that represent the people I know, whatsoever.
the people I know are God fearing, hard working people that fight tooth and nail when pushed. My government my surrender to whoever they want to, but I assure you the American people will not....ever! :salute
Just for the record: the Norse people did not surrender
-
This thread is making me sad. :frown:
The USA and it's citizens have never faced what those countries faced at the time and attempts to compare and hypothesize what would have happened are unfair to all involved.
-
This thread is making me sad. :frown:
The USA and it's citizens have never faced what those countries faced at the time and attempts to compare and hypothesize what would have happened are unfair to all involved.
you beat me to it.
The US is a super power, Norway is not... apples to oranges
Norway stood up to a super power and fought them before surrendering the longest of any of the occupied countries...
That is bravery and will power... so lets end this discussion and name calling
Norway surrendered, but they did what they could with what they had and what they did do took some guts
besides norway later produced this
(http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y101/LadieK/monica_hansen_l4.jpg)
-
Norway didn't surrender :D
-
:salute To the sons and daughters of Norway who stood up to the aggressors, fought back, aided their allies, and stood by us for decades as NATO members against the terror of The Soviet Union.
Thats all this thread was about. A proud Norwegian paying homage to them. I apologize to the group for letting the flames get out of hand but I felt no-one had the right to insult these Allies of ours. Not in a thread like this.
-
The US is a super power, Norway is not... apples to oranges
Neither country was a Superpower prior to WW2....Apples to Apples.......
-
Norway didn't surrender :D
nah. they capitulated.
can't really blame 'em tho... they were on their march to destiny; their moment in History. There was much wailing, gnashing of teeth; the Poles, French and British came to help, lost more men in the process than Norway did, (2,700 Brits, 500 Poles and French died defending Norway) and they decided to accept the yoke... the capitulation is entirely understandable. It was Norway. Not England. There were no 'We shall fight on the beaches...' speeches.. just the cold reality of capitulation, collaboration and occupation. There's evidence the Norwegian troops were willing to fight.. Gloppedalsura comes tro mind.. Norways Thermopylae; a small Norwegian unit held up a German Battalion for a day. But orders are orders..
(http://department.monm.edu/classics/images/nordposter4clr_.jpg)
In the US Military, Divisional losses in combat in Europe during WWII often ran to excess of 50%.. to ignore that military standards and determination to fight in American units was and is of different standards than those of Norway while faced with the defense of their own nation is to ignore history and the facts.
Hang Time you sound like the human equivalent of a Summers Eve product. Lemon if you must know.
Its isn't so much what you said but "how" you said it, and "why" you even bothered. A resident of a fellow NATO member voiced pride over some of Norway's sons who fought well and courageously in WW-2. And many did. Instead you turned it into an insult fest.
You sound like trash dude. And I have a policy myself. I dont make threats, or respond to them, unless I'm looking into someones eyeballs.
Sheesh, you got Bronk as a troll buddy here. Does that not tell you how low you sunk?
Just let it go man.
Let what go? You? Sure.. it's abundantly clear your incapable of dealing with facts or even producing an argument containing any valid ones. All you've got is insults and innuendo in this thread. But your doing great as an apologist...
I apologize to the group for letting the flames get out of hand but I felt no-one had the right to insult these Allies of ours. Not in a thread like this.
The truth? Nope.. won't let that go. Watching Europe and Japan regurgitate revisionist BS without stepping in with a swift dose of truth would not be keeping the faith. We have a duty to the folks that fought and died for Freedom to not mince the truth... painful or not.
LOL.. you can't even handle a kiss off without botching it... what's with the slap at Bronk? Puppy, yer just an amazing pile of insecurity ain't yah? I bet if Bronk walked into a room you were in you'd pee on the floor like the puppy you are.
Tuff Guy. :aok
-
:salute To the sons and daughters of Norway who stood up to the aggressors, fought back, aided their allies, and stood by us for decades as NATO members against the terror of The Soviet Union.
Thats all this thread was about. A proud Norwegian paying homage to them. I apologize to the group for letting the flames get out of hand but I felt no-one had the right to insult these Allies of ours. Not in a thread like this.
geez, I just got all misty.
-
Waaaa My "did you come under fire?" qualification failed. Now I'll fling poo.
Did y'all get your new dickie boi BBS post translator? I did. :aok
-
Sorry I'm late fellas. Work and all keeping me busy. I can't be bothered to read 9+ pages of posts, could someone give me the Cliff's Notes and bring me up to speed?
-
Sorry I'm late fellas. Work and all keeping me busy. I can't be bothered to read 9+ pages of posts, could someone give me the Cliff's Notes and bring me up to speed?
Yes, the king of Norway bailed with the phat lewtz. One of his Generals surrendered and Quisling... well.... that speaks for itself.
That about covers it.
-
Oh yeah, the Ameritexianz had their collective azzes handed to them at Teh Alamoz.
Yeah, what Bronk said.
-
The Norwegians... Except those annoying loud students, who are getting the bloody nose from locals...
The one of Coolest nation in Scandinavia. What a wonderful combination of the sea, mountains, Ingrid's and The Attitude.
These ht kind of dorks are getting their wisdom from the very biased culture, school, partens, who never faced the horror of the defensed of their OWN soil / house / wife / family against enemy on border.
Now these idiots are telling to the Scandinavians how bad we were that time. US IQ...
-
These ht kind of dorks are getting their wisdom from the very biased culture, school, partens, who never faced the horror of the defensed of their OWN soil / house / wife / family against enemy on border.
So you're saying you have defended the above...personally? Wow .. didn't know you were that old.
-
The Norwegians... Except those annoying loud students, who are getting the bloody nose from locals...
The one of Coolest nation in Scandinavia. What a wonderful combination of the sea, mountains, Ingrid's and The Attitude.
These ht kind of dorks are getting their wisdom from the very biased culture, school, partens, who never faced the horror of the defensed of their OWN soil / house / wife / family against enemy on border.
Now these idiots are telling to the Scandinavians how bad we were that time. US IQ...
This topic seems convoluted enough, the focal point seems to be Norway and it's surrender in WW2. Now you're bringing Scandinavians into it?
-
So you're saying you have defended the above...personally? Wow .. didn't know you were that old.
Nope, I can still say today a DIRECT 'Thank You, Oiva!' to my mothers brother for OUR Independence, language and way of life.
So, you were just having a yet another tour of duty?... While others were fighting for their existence?
-
Did y'all get your new dickie boi BBS post translator? I did. :aok
LOL.. I just plugged in the enigma machine the norwegians captured. It still doesn't work. Mine comes up with 'Norway' is spelled 'No way did we surrender' and then it runs a Mac/PC commercial. John Hodgkins looks great in a Quisling suit, BTW.
Figures.
The Norwegians... Except those annoying loud students, who are getting the bloody nose from locals...
The one of Coolest nation in Scandinavia. What a wonderful combination of the sea, mountains, Ingrid's and The Attitude.
Yup. Norway was a very popular tourist spot and Stormtrooper R&R destination for the germans in WWII. It's natural beauty and accommodating people are legend.
These ht kind of dorks are getting their wisdom from the very biased culture, school, partens, who never faced the horror of the defensed of their OWN soil / house / wife / family against enemy on border.
Now these idiots are telling to the Scandinavians how bad we were that time. US IQ...
Well, those tenacious Finns with the Reindeer seemed to manage pretty well... seems they choose a different course when faced with those same choices. But hey.. why would you acknowledge Finlands tenacious defense of their homes... especially since they were successful where Norway was not.
Norway & Surrenders.. it's not just Euro Revisionism.. it's not just a policy; it's expected.
I mean, after all; what else could they do?
LOL!
-
Some might want to check the facts behind the UK surrendering in Singapore also, no shame in that, it's all about saving lives, The actions of the Norwegians saved a lot of lives, a lot of them went on to fight again, Anyone of us (Of reasonable mind) would do the same, for anyone to base their views on Combat capabilities by the amount of dead and other casualities is a bit misguided, In no shape or form do I wish to appear as any sort of Armchair General etc, just basing my views on personal experience, nobody is a coward in these sitiuations- nobody.
-
Now you're bringing Scandinavians into it?
Hoping to ride the coattails Finland.
-
You are getting softer... Only three us dorks are trying to bash me... Shame.
"Folks! It's a WW2 time! > Black corner: Germany and Blue corner: Norway... >Place the bets...."
Since the all mighty us cheap sale the finland with others to the russia, we didn't have a too much room for the surviving.
Laughs...
BTW
What about that your 'Tour of duty' vs our 'Scandinavian fight for life' question?
-
This topic seems convoluted enough, the focal point seems to be Norway and it's surrender in WW2. Now you're bringing Scandinavians into it?
You dumbazz, Scandinavia is a city, not a country!
-
Some might want to check the facts behind the UK surrendering in Singapore also, no shame in that, it's all about saving lives, The actions of the Norwegians saved a lot of lives, a lot of them went on to fight again, Anyone of us (Of reasonable mind) would do the same, for anyone to base their views on Combat capabilities by the amount of dead and other casualities is a bit misguided, In no shape or form do I wish to appear as any sort of Armchair General etc, just basing my views on personal experience, nobody is a coward in these sitiuations- nobody.
Prior to the collapse of Singapore, the Battle of Java Sea settled the question of re-supply and support of either the Philippines or Singapore. British, Dutch and American warships fought desperate battles.. and were overwhelmed. Losses were catastrophic for the British.. their entire force in Singapore was cut off, there would be No Retreat, No Dunkirk, no Evacuation of an Expeditionary Force as occurred in Norway.
On the evening of February 10, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, cabled Wavell, saying:
“ I think you ought to realise the way we view the situation in Singapore. It was reported to Cabinet by the C.I.G.S. [Chief of the Imperial General Staff, General Alan Brooke] that Percival has over 100,000 [sic] men, of whom 33,000 are British and 17,000 Australian. It is doubtful whether the Japanese have as many in the whole Malay Peninsula… In these circumstances the defenders must greatly outnumber Japanese forces who have crossed the straits, and in a well-contested battle they should destroy them. There must at this stage be no thought of saving the troops or sparing the population. The battle must be fought to the bitter end at all costs. The 18th Division has a chance to make its name in history. Commanders and senior officers should die with their troops. The honour of the British Empire and of the British Army is at stake. I rely on you to show no mercy to weakness in any form. With the Russians fighting as they are and the Americans so stubborn at Luzon, the whole reputation of our country and our race is involved. It is expected that every unit will be brought into close contact with the enemy and fight it out ... ”
Wavell subsequently told Percival that the ground forces were to fight on to the end, and that there should not be a general surrender in Singapore.
On February 11, knowing that Japanese supplies were running perilously low, Yamashita decided to bluff and he called on Percival to "give up this meaningless and desperate resistance". By this stage the fighting strength of the 22nd Brigade—which had borne the brunt of the Japanese attacks—had been reduced to a few hundred men. The Japanese had captured the Bukit Timah area, including most of the allied ammunition and fuel and giving them control of the main water supplies.
The next day the allied lines stabilised around a small area in the south-east of the island and fought off determined Japanese assaults. Other units, including the Malayan 1st Infantry Brigade, had joined in. A Malayan platoon, led by Lt Adnan bin Saidi, held the Japanese for two days at the Battle of Pasir Panjang. His unit defended Bukit Chandu, an area which included a major allied ammunition store. Adnan was executed by the Japanese after his unit was overrun.
On February 13, with the Allies still losing ground, senior officers advised Percival to surrender in the interests of minimising civilian casualties. Percival refused, but unsuccessfully sought authority to surrender from his superiors.
The following day the remaining Allied units fought on; civilian casualties mounted as one million people crowded into the area still held by the Allies, and bombing and artillery fire intensified. Civilian authorities began to fear that the water supply would give out.
At about 1pm on February 14 Japanese soldiers approached the Alexandra Barracks Hospital. No resistance was offered by anyone in the building, but the Japanese attacked and killed the medical staff and some patients, including an allied corporal who was lying on an operating table. The following day about 200 male staff members and patients, many of them walking wounded, were ordered to walk about 400 metres to an industrial area. Anyone who fell on the way was bayoneted. The men were forced into a series of small, badly ventilated rooms and were imprisoned overnight without water. Some died during the night as a result of their treatment. The remainder were bayoneted the following morning.
By the morning of Chinese New Year, February 15, the Japanese had broken through the last line of defence and the Allies were running out of food and ammunition. The anti-aircraft guns had also run out of ammunition and were unable to repel any further Japanese air attacks which threatened to cause heavy casualties in the city centre.
At 9:30 a.m, Percival held a conference at Fort Canning with his senior commanders. Percival posed two alternatives. Either launch an immediate counter-attack to regain the reservoirs and the military food depots in the Bukit Timah region and drive the enemy's artillery off its commanding heights outside the town, or capitulate. All present agreed that no counter-attack was possible. Percival opted for surrender.
Earlier that day Percival had issued orders to destroy before 4 p.m. all secret and technical equipment, ciphers, codes, secret documents and heavy guns. Yamashita accepted his assurance that no ships or planes remained in Singapore. According to Tokyo's Domei News Agency Yamashita also accepted full responsibility for the lives of British and Australian troops, as well as British civilians remaining in Singapore.
The Japanese Occupation of Singapore had begun. The Japanese sought vengeance against the Chinese and to eliminate anyone who held anti-Japanese sentiment. The Imperial authorities were suspicious of the Chinese because of the Second Sino-Japanese War, and killed many in the Sook Ching Massacre. The other races of Singapore, such as the Malays and the Indians were not spared. The residents would suffer great hardships under Japanese rule over the following three and a half years.
Many of the British and Australian soldiers taken prisoner remained in Singapore's Changi Prison. Most would never return home. Thousands of others were shipped on prisoner transports known as "hell ships" to other parts of Asia, including Japan, to be used as forced labour on projects such as the Siam-Burma Death Railway and Sandakan airfield in North Borneo. The majority of those aboard the ships perished.
iTunes, try as I might, I fail to see in any manner way shape or form any similarity between the fall of Singapore and it's consequences and the Norwegian Capitulation.
-
This topic seems convoluted enough, the focal point seems to be Norway and it's surrender in WW2. Now you're bringing Scandinavians into it?
you are aware norway is in scandinavia?
and if you didn't that would explain alot about you and your opinions
-
You are getting softer... Only three us dorks are trying to bash me... Shame.
"Folks! It's a WW2 time! > Black corner: Germany and Blue corner: Norway... >Place the bets...."
Since the all mighty us cheap sale the finland with others to the russia, we didn't have a too much room for the surviving.
Laughs...
BTW
What about that your 'Tour of duty' vs our 'Scandinavian fight for life' question?
'us dorks'?
Ahh. you mean 'Americans'.
Well then.. should you care to enlighten 'us dorks' how we managed to 'sell' you to the russians? That's a new one.
As for 'Tour' vs 'Fight for Life', American troops served WWII 'for the duration'. Where your troops fought for a few days out of two months and capitulated, American ground forces faced the Germans from 8 November 1942 till the war was finished.. and you were freed from your oppressors.
Oh, by the way; "Your Welcome".
-
Well, I think we should all thank the Norwegians for the help the underground gave the Brits when they bombed the cliff overhanging that heavy water plant with Mossies.
-
Oh, you betcha!
There were more than a few brave Norwegians in the resistance.... no question there. There were quite a few more Quislings though; 'collaborationisim' apparently being something of a National Pastime there.
Now Sweden, on the other hand, being Neutral, enjoyed sitting on the sidelines, making money with all sides. The Finns, over there to the east and facing the Russians.. well, they did a bit better, fought like lions. I guess the Scandinavians are picky about who occupies them.
-
Now Sweden, on the other hand, being Neutral, enjoyed sitting on the sidelines, making money with all sides. The Finns, over there to the east and facing the Russians.. well, they did a bit better, fought like lions. I guess the Scandinavians are picky about who occupies them.
hey dumb arse why dont you actually read about a subject you are going to run your mouth about??????
would you like a little taste of the actual history? try this for flavor.....
Finland lost in the Winter War Carelia and Salla regions and rented Hanko to the Soviet Union for 50 years. 420000 inhabitants left their homes and had to be resettled in to the remaining country. Severe peace terms were a hard blow and the nation was bitter towards Soviet Union. There was all the time a threat of a renewed attack by the Soviet Union. Armed forces were kept at high levels of readiness and had more men than normally in peacetime. Army consisted of 12 brigades and special units (cavalry , tank battalion, etc) at this time. Finland tried to seek protection from the Germany, because France and Britain were defeated in summer 1940. Hitler was more willing to deal with Finns than earlier, since he decided in Aug 1940 to deal with Soviet Union next summer and tried to get allies. There was a secret draft in Finland in order to get volunteers for a Finnish SS-battalion. Battalion was formed and it was part of the 5th SS-Panzergrenadierdivision 'Wiking'. Also Hitler refused to let the Soviets to deal finally with Finland, when Molotov asked Hitler's opinion on that matter in Nov 1940. Finns granted also a permission for German troops to traverse through the Finnish territory to the occupied Northern Norway. Finland mobilised it's army on the 17 June in anticipation of German attack on Soviet Union or Soviet attack on Finland. But 22 June when Germans attacked, Finland declared neutrality, though German planes had refueled in Finnish airbases when they returned from bombing Leningrad and German troops were ready to attack Murmansk in the Arctic. Russians bombed many towns on 25 June , and president Ryti stated that Finland is at war again. Finland's aims of the war were to get back areas lost in the Winter War and to get good positions to negotiate peace if Germans can't destroy the Soviet Union. Finns never considered themselves as Germany's allies, but as a co-belligerent waging own war with our goals.
the finns were german allies of a sort you tard! can you actually run your mouth so much about something you took no time to learn about?
http://www.lysator.liu.se/nordic/mirror/sa-int/hist.html (http://www.lysator.liu.se/nordic/mirror/sa-int/hist.html) here is the finnish time line in case your interested in actually learning something.
and here is one about the swedes in case your curios http://www.feldgrau.com/sweden.html (http://www.feldgrau.com/sweden.html)
it is people like you that give americans a bad name in the world. if you dont know what happened then either learn it or shut up about it.
FLOTSOM
-
Wow this thread is comedy gold. Some of you guys take history way to seriously...
What corner did flotsam and Rich46squeakslapped go to and weep softly together in? I want to point and laugh. :t
-
Wow this thread is comedy gold. Some of you guys take history way to seriously...
What corner did flotsam and Rich46squeakslapped go to and weep softly together in? I want to point and laugh. :t
and yet another tardlet queen heard from!
got nothing actual and factual to add to the conversation so instead lets just blubber stupidity and pretend we were funny!
must be great going through life this ignorant, takes alot of the pressure of REALITY off your shoulders doesnt it.
FLOTSOM
-
LAWLZ...even more epicness! ! !
-
hey dumb arse . . .
FLOTSOM
:lol The guy compliments Finland for their fighting spirit and you go off on a rant like it was an insult . . . think you earned your own label on that one.
-
:lol The guy compliments Finland for their fighting spirit and you go off on a rant like it was an insult . . . think you earned your own label on that one.
And from downtown....swish...nothing but net. :aok
-
and yet another tardlet queen heard from!
got nothing actual and factual to add to the conversation so instead lets just blubber stupidity and pretend we were funny!
must be great going through life this ignorant, takes alot of the pressure of REALITY off your shoulders doesnt it.
FLOTSOM
lighten up Francis...
:aok
-
What ever happened to LTARGlok anyway?
-
What ever happened to LTARGlok anyway?
Last Active . . . (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php?action=profile;u=21957)
-
What ever happened to LTARGlok anyway?
I kinda suspect its slamfire.
-
:lol The guy compliments Finland for their fighting spirit and you go off on a rant like it was an insult . . . think you earned your own label on that one.
and another twit heard from.
why dont you read everything instead of taking only a piece out of the middle.
The Finns were invaded by the Russians... and resisted fiercely. They were forced to cede territory.. but never suffered occupation, never capitulated and did in fact declare war on Germany. Finlands interest in the war was Finland.. and it defended itself and it's sovereignty effectively.
The Republic of Finland was attacked by the USSR on 30 November 1939.[8] Later Finland and the Kingdom of Denmark officially joined the Axis Anti-Comintern Pact. The Kingdom of Sweden remained officially neutral. Following the Moscow armistice of September 1944, Finland effectively joined the Allies and expelled German forces. This led to a series of armed clashes called the Lapland War.
the ceding of territory is occupation, as well as the forced renting of land against the owners will. and the finns didn't hold out against the Germans, they put up resistance against the Russians. he was being very selective about the facts he bothered to state.
he has been implying that the finn's fought against the Germans throughout the war. they did not, they joined the germans fought along side of the Germans and allowed Germany to place troops and equipment in Finland. the fins did fight like lions, for and along side of the germans.
they negotiated for peace with the russians after the war had turned against germany. but not before that. as long as the war was looking like it was going well for the germans they sided with them, then they turned on the germans.
yep thats really brave isnt it? your side losing well then switch, that's honorable right?
the finns did the smart thing and looked to make what ever deal was going to keep their population safest, nothing more nothing less. nothing different than any other country would have done if given the option.
the Norwegians did the same. they looked to saving the lives of their people in a war they stood no chance in. but they did have an underground resistance and they did aid the allies whenever possible. the finns did not.
i have never stated that the Norwegians didn't surrender, but i find it offensive when people who have never had to stand in their own backyards between their families and the war machine of their enemies make judgments on the actions of those who have.
you all talk so tough, like you would have done anything different.
i am especially offended by the Americans in this thread that would dare to judge these Europeans. it has never been our families that were under threat of bombardment and utter annihilation by a foreign aggressor so who the hell are we to ever make the demand that others should have held out longer?
it is far easier for a man to be willing to hold out till the last bullet is fired when his family is not being shelled until he does surrender. watching your family dieing is not a moral booster.
the brits only lasted because the Germans never put boots in England, had the Germans invaded things would have been very different for them. i think the "we will never surrender" statement would have been revisited at that point.
so before posting some selective and edited version why don't you take the time to learn the history.
FLOTSOM
-
lighten up Francis...
:aok
my name is Kevin.
FLOTSOM
-
and another twit heard from.
why dont you read everything instead of taking only a piece out of the middle.
FLOTSOM
I did.
You, on the other hand, are stuck on stupid.
I'll help you out a bit . . . The contrast between what the Finns did (fighting bravely and fiercely and with heavy losses against a much larger and more powerful foe) and what the Norwegians did (roll over and play Quisling) I believe was exactly Hangtime's point.
Thank you for continuing to make it for him.
-
hey dumb arse why dont you actually read about a subject you are going to run your mouth about??????
would you like a little taste of the actual history?
the finns were german allies of a sort you tard! can you actually run your mouth so much about something you took no time to learn about?
it is people like you that give americans a bad name in the world. if you dont know what happened then either learn it or shut up about it.
FLOTSOM
Well, gee. Who would have thought that at my advanced age I'd actually be in the position of schooling young euro fanboi's on their own history. I should be paid for this..
While you JUST went digging for info on the Finn's a little while ago, I learned about Scandinavian history from a fella happens to be Finnish. He fought in the Winter War, the Continuation War and the Lapland War.. where the Finns kicked the Germans out of Northern Finland and back into.. guess where? Norway. While I most certainly did not think a lot of the guys politics (he was a socialist) he got my attention due to his hatred of Russians. As for the 'pacifists' (what he called swedes and norwegians) he had little regard. He was a credit to his nation, and understood that freedom was something worth fighting for.
Oh.. and just in case you missed it (because you obviously did) eyeball the quote below. From yesterday. From me. About Finland.
The Finns were invaded by the Russians... and resisted fiercely. They were forced to cede territory.. but never suffered occupation, never capitulated and did in fact declare war on Germany. Finlands interest in the war was Finland.. and it defended itself and it's sovereignty effectively.
The Republic of Finland was attacked by the USSR on 30 November 1939.[8] Later Finland and the Kingdom of Denmark officially joined the Axis Anti-Comintern Pact. The Kingdom of Sweden remained officially neutral. Following the Moscow armistice of September 1944, Finland effectively joined the Allies and expelled German forces. This led to a series of armed clashes called the Lapland War.
Also, see 'Winter War'. Learn. Be amazed. And what's with the childish petulant insults, Rich? That all you got?
Imagine that. Yup. It's me... from yesterday. The ignorant american you presume to teach history too.. yup, that's right; the one that gives other americans a 'bad name'.
Why? Because we speak the truth? And you revisionist euro fanboi's can't stand the stench of your own groveling past; can't stand the idea that somebody else had to end your disgusting wars twice and fund the rebuilding of your bombed out cities and devastated economies. Well.. all except for Finland, who paid a much higher price after the war than any of her neighbors for defying the the Russians and the Germans.. and standing on her own.
Oh, BTW, and once again; "Your Welcome".
Class dismissed.
-
Oh give it up guys. Its Christmas.
Merry Christmas! There, I'll forget the pride and be the first.
-
I love how my joke totaly turned into a war
-
I love how my joke totaly turned into a war
You cannot fathom the irony of that statement.
-
cant fix stupid so i will leave you tards to your ignorance.
Oh give it up guys. Its Christmas.
Merry Christmas! There, I'll forget the pride and be the first.
Merry Christmas to you and yours Rich
FLOTSOM
-
he has been implying that the finn's fought against the Germans throughout the war. they did not, they joined the germans fought along side of the Germans and allowed Germany to place troops and equipment in Finland. the fins did fight like lions, for and along side of the germans.
they negotiated for peace with the russians after the war had turned against germany. but not before that. as long as the war was looking like it was going well for the germans they sided with them, then they turned on the germans.
Jezzuzus grapefruit, Kevin!
1. Where did I suggest the finns fought exclusively against the germans? Damn.. lying is just part of your argument now?
2. They did not 'Join the Germans'. In fact, a big part of Hitlers decision to launch Barbarossa was the drubbing little Finland put on the Russians in the Winter War. Russia got the Karielia, the Finns got half a million new rifles and 5 million rounds of ammo and war material from the frozen russian corpses. When the Germans came roaring through, they waved 'em on and helped 'em out. The Germans and Finns cooperated in the Continuation War, but only for as long as it was convenient to the Finnish intent of regaining it's own territory. The Finns refused to join the germans in an assault on Lenningrad. In fact, most of the Norwegian SS Divisions fought alongside the Finns right up to the Finnish/Russian border.. when the Norwegian Slaves in German Uniforms were invited to go on ahead... alone. Finally, when the Germans made demands that infringed on her sovereignty, they tossed 'em out. Forcibly.
At no time did either Germany or Russia call the shots in Finland... Finland was not an occupied country of either Russia or Germany.. It was certainly not Neutral like Sweden. When necessary and to protect her territory and sovereignty they (unlike the rest of scandanavia) fought. And you guys just cant stand that can yah???
LOL!
Oh give it up guys. Its Christmas.
Merry Christmas! There, I'll forget the pride and be the first.
And Merry Christmas to you, Rich. I accept your surrender.
:D
-
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3060/3009425719_22ed96d23f.jpg?v=0)
-
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3060/3009425719_22ed96d23f.jpg?v=0)
ROFL!
Yup. That sums it up. :aok
Thank you, Sir! <S!>
-
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3060/3009425719_22ed96d23f.jpg?v=0)
<--- 1/4 Finn ^^^^^^ :aok :aok :aok :aok
-
my name is Kevin.
FLOTSOM
LOL......
You don't say?
You still need to lighten up...
Francis. :lol
-
LOL......
You don't say?
You still need to lighten up...
Francis. :lol
you signed it with your name, thought it would be impolite not to give you mine.
FLOTSOM
-
you signed it with your name, thought it would be impolite not to give you mine.
FLOTSOM
OMG LOL how old are you?
-
thought it would be impolite not to give you mine.
FLOTSOM
You spelled it wrong however....
Flotsam
n.
1.
1. Wreckage or cargo that remains afloat after a ship has sunk.
2. Floating refuse or debris.
2. Discarded odds and ends.
3. Vagrant, usually destitute people.
Hmmm.....How.....appropriate.
:aok
-
You spelled it wrong however....
Flotsam
n.
1.
1. Wreckage or cargo that remains afloat after a ship has sunk.
2. Floating refuse or debris.
2. Discarded odds and ends.
3. Vagrant, usually destitute people.
Hmmm.....How.....appropriate.
:aok
did you spend alot of time trying so hard to find some way to feel relevant in this conversation, before someone else told you my in game name was misspelled?
the conversation was about my real name, but yet again you jump in with both feet in your mouth and your head up your arse, and show yourself to be a twit. i knew how to spell Flotsam, but chose to spell it with an O instead.
is that a problem for you? is it so confusing for you? is there something about a misspelled in game name that just disrupts your entire day? i understand that you are not very intelligent, but do you think with just a few more hours on the nice doctors couch youll be able to get over it?
in my opinion your an idiot in virtually every post you make. you spend your time running your mouth about things you seem to know nothing about. from the stupidity that oozes forth from you, you seam to be completely content to be ignorant and refuse to learn about anything before speaking.
you have nothing intelligent to say, mostly you just insult and provoke people.
you are a waste of posting space.
but i do wonder, is this forum your only way of proving to the world that you exist? are you so insignificant in real life that if your not acting like a tough guy here your afraid the entire world will forget about you? is that why you took the name of a mid 70's detective series? so you could pretend your some kind of tough guy? so you could pretend you were cool? so that you could pretend your life has some significance?
well its not working very well. your a nuisance but not a very significant one.
do us both a favor, never speak to me again. it will save you the time wasted in trying to find something stupid to say and it will save me the time of ignoring your posts.
OMG LOL how old are you?
what exactly does my age have to do with this? when someone tells me their name in a conversation manners dictate that i tell them mine. now i understand from the way alot of people talk on here that being polite is not generally a priority, but you were not being rude in that post and you told me your name. so i told you mine, is this a problem for you?
FLOTSOM
-
Best thread of the year.
-
do us both a favor, never speak to me again. it will save you the time wasted in trying to find something stupid to say and it will save me the time of ignoring you
my god; it's a woman!
-
Hey hangtime, I was trying to draw a comparison of what goes on in hopeless sitiuations RE: Singapore, however after reading the script you posted left me feeling very proud. I firmly belive that our(UK) intervention in Norway was for tactical reasons and not some Op to help the Norwegians, it'll always be the one of those "you had to be there to understand it" type things I'm afraid. Interesting to see how many British lives were lost in Norway.But overall I'm not surprised to read about the British fighting spirit, that's the first thing they drum into you, the Honour of the Regiment, you aee, the UK has a system where they put you into Regiments from your local area, that's why they instill regimental history and regimental fighting spirit.anyway, back to Norway, looks like they folded, however I would probably add that they folded once the UK decided to evacuate our guys and they were left with no choice.
-
Yup. Europe owes the UK and her far flung colonies an immense debt.. sometimes that gets lost in the chest beating and pip-squeek me-too's of the revisionists.
The raw deal the Poles and Czechs wound up with ... now that's another story. But in those dark early days, as Europe burned and reeled under the boots of the aggressors, post-chamberlain England's firm resolve was example and the beacon that was proved to be indispensable.
"Stiff upper lip, enh; wot?"
<S!>
-
Best thread of the year.
best avatar ever
-
Yup. Europe owes the UK and her far flung colonies an immense debt.. sometimes that gets lost in the chest beating and pip-squeek me-too's of the revisionists.
The raw deal the Poles and Czechs wound up with ... now that's another story. But in those dark early days, as Europe burned and reeled under the boots of the aggressors, post-chamberlain England's firm resolve was example and the beacon that was proved to be indispensable.
"Stiff upper lip, enh; wot?"
<S!>
Yep! to all counts in that post.
If not for the UK, there would have been no place to stockpile men and supplies for an invasion of mainland Europe. There would have been no place to station all those planes at that raided Germany so many times.
I am ashamed of what the Allies let happen to the Poles and the Czechs post war.
-
<----- Winna :aok
:rofl
-
did you spend alot of time trying so hard to find some way to feel relevant in this conversation, before someone else told you my in game name was misspelled?
the conversation was about my real name, but yet again you jump in with both feet in your mouth and your head up your arse, and show yourself to be a twit. i knew how to spell Flotsam, but chose to spell it with an O instead.
is that a problem for you? is it so confusing for you? is there something about a misspelled in game name that just disrupts your entire day? i understand that you are not very intelligent, but do you think with just a few more hours on the nice doctors couch youll be able to get over it?
in my opinion your an idiot in virtually every post you make. you spend your time running your mouth about things you seem to know nothing about. from the stupidity that oozes forth from you, you seam to be completely content to be ignorant and refuse to learn about anything before speaking.
you have nothing intelligent to say, mostly you just insult and provoke people.
you are a waste of posting space.
but i do wonder, is this forum your only way of proving to the world that you exist? are you so insignificant in real life that if your not acting like a tough guy here your afraid the entire world will forget about you? is that why you took the name of a mid 70's detective series? so you could pretend your some kind of tough guy? so you could pretend you were cool? so that you could pretend your life has some significance?
well its not working very well. your a nuisance but not a very significant one.
do us both a favor, never speak to me again. it will save you the time wasted in trying to find something stupid to say and it will save me the time of ignoring your posts.
what exactly does my age have to do with this? when someone tells me their name in a conversation manners dictate that i tell them mine. now i understand from the way alot of people talk on here that being polite is not generally a priority, but you were not being rude in that post and you told me your name. so i told you mine, is this a problem for you?
FLOTSOM
a lot
you're
seems
doctor's
Just trying to help. Spelling seems important to you.
-
NM -- decided I'm not feeling so helpful today after all.
-
Target...did you just surrender? ? ? ?
-
Target...did you just surrender? ? ? ?
Does that make him inherently Norwegian or are the two mutually exclusive? Is that another topic altogether?
-
Target...did you just surrender? ? ? ?
Actually, I just played the Great Britain to Francis's - er - Flotsam's - er - Flotsom's Norway and decided he was on his own. :D
-
Actually, I just played the Great Britain to Francis's - er - Flotsam's - er - Flotsom's Norway and decided he was on his own. :D
you mean you ran away to hide until others get around to saving you?
-
you mean you ran away to hide until others get around to saving you?
LOL -- now you are getting into the spirit!
Actually, I meant you were doing such a poor job defending yourself, that any help I could give was wasted effort, just as it was a waste for GB to try to save Norway.
But, since you show (finally) a little bit of a sense of humor, here is the link I deleted (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrllCZw8jiM&feature=related). It should give you some insight as to why GtoRA2 has been calling you "Francis." :aok
-
The similarities are...profound.
-
Actually, I meant you were doing such a poor job defending yourself, that any help I could give was wasted effort, just as it was a waste for GB to try to save Norway.
Oh snap.
-
LOL -- now you are getting into the spirit!
Actually, I meant you were doing such a poor job defending yourself, that any help I could give was wasted effort, just as it was a waste for GB to try to save Norway.
But, since you show (finally) a little bit of a sense of humor, here is the link I deleted (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrllCZw8jiM&feature=related). It should give you some insight as to why GtoRA2 has been calling you "Francis." :aok
i remember sneaking in to see that movie at the theaters when i was a kid. loved that movie. :rofl
have a good night sir :aok
FLOTSOM
-
interesting thread but jeez stop the bum chumming and get back on track.
hangtime has been repeatedly banging away with the truth and yet some of you dumb chits still don't get it.. must be genetics
to me its simple
if someone collaborates with savages in an attempt to to save their own arse while all around them said savages butchers their neighbours then they are DESPICABLE COWARDS.
that's all i can say on the subject without breaking some rule or pc law
-
Ahh back from celebrating Santa's birthday.
Does anyone care to sum up the thread so far? Anyting interesting new bits from Hangtime, Diablo and CO or are have they come up with any concrete things that they can back up?.
Keep it short please, im still in holiday mood. :)
What i have so far:
Quisling was scum... correct but that isnt news
Norway _never_ surrendered... correct and that is not news either
Royals and government left and set up in London from witch they continued the fight... correct
Anyting more i have missed?
-
What enabled the Royal family to escape was the bold sinking of the heavy cruiser Blucher in the Oslo fjord, correct.
They carried on fighting with their families under the Nazi boot,- correct.
The Nazi boot meant camps in Norway, abducting people under the cover of darkness, torture, executions, random executions, Sachenhausen and in one case a village raized, correct.
Generally the Norse patriots and fighters, both the resistance and armed forces were refered to as extremely tough and professional, correct.
And Merry christmas to you Norse Nilsen!
Here is a little christmas present.
Some years back, a Norse special force excercized with the US forces at the airbase in Keflavik. Some 10 Norsemen went into hiding within the perimeter, and the US were supposed to find them.
After the sweep, only one had been found. (They had stepped on his finger).
I belive this was some kind of a anti-terrorist sweep, probably in combination with a practise which is every few years.
As fine as they get in outdoor drills, the Norse. BTW, I came very close to applying for getting into the Norse army in 1989....
-
What enabled the Royal family to escape was the bold sinking of the heavy cruiser Blucher in the Oslo fjord, correct.
They carried on fighting with their families under the Nazi boot,- correct.
The Nazi boot meant camps in Norway, abducting people under the cover of darkness, torture, executions, random executions, Sachenhausen and in one case a village raized, correct.
Generally the Norse patriots and fighters, both the resistance and armed forces were refered to as extremely tough and professional, correct.
And Merry christmas to you Norse Nilsen!
Here is a little christmas present.
Some years back, a Norse special force excercized with the US forces at the airbase in Keflavik. Some 10 Norsemen went into hiding within the perimeter, and the US were supposed to find them.
After the sweep, only one had been found. (They had stepped on his finger).
I belive this was some kind of a anti-terrorist sweep, probably in combination with a practise which is every few years.
As fine as they get in outdoor drills, the Norse. BTW, I came very close to applying for getting into the Norse army in 1989....
Sounds like a pretty accurate summary Angus. Last week a new norwgian movie had a premiere. I dont know if you get norwegian movies on the cinemas in Iceland, but if you understand norwegian well enough to enjoy it you may want to get it when its released on DVD. Movie is called Max Manus and is the story of one of the most famous resistance fighters. It has gotten great reviews and when the missus har recoverd from her nasty flu ill take her :)
Im guessing the 10 norwegians were marinejegere (seals). Ive worked with them and one of my dads friends was one of them. Really tough guys.
Merry Christmas to you too Angus... :)
-
Ahh back from celebrating Santa's birthday.
Does anyone care to sum up the thread so far? Anyting interesting new bits from Hangtime, Diablo and CO or are have they come up with any concrete things that they can back up?.
Keep it short please, im still in holiday mood. :)
What i have so far:
Quisling was scum... correct but that isnt news
Norway _never_ surrendered... correct and that is not news either
Royals and government left and set up in London from witch they continued the fight... correct
Anyting more i have missed?
Oh, crap Nils.. sorry to be the one to tell you; but while you were out, Norway surrendered.
Again.
Do try and keep up next time.
Oh, and Merry Christmas to you and the rest of the surrender monkey team, and thanks for playing!
-
Oh, crap Nils.. sorry to be the one to tell you; but while you were out, Norway surrendered.
Again.
Do try and keep up next time.
Oh, and Merry Christmas to you and the rest of the surrender monkey team, and thanks for playing!
I still see you have _nothing_ Hangtime. Merry Christmas to you too and hopefully you got some books or other educational material for christmas.
-
Hello again!
Nilsen, I think you are right there. Anyway, they dug in for hiding in a perimeter where it's really hard to hide.
Moss and Lava, sort of sums it up. The one found was by an american steping on his finger!
This is how the tale goes, but I got it while at the U.S. base. I worked there once in the fields, so I know the scape, and then I was once a spectator for Jet inspection etc, which is when I was told this one.
Was kind of a hush-hush, since the outcome was embarrasing. Well, not for some :t
I'll have a lookie if there is something I find about this movie. I can understand Norwegian, as well as speak some....well the Norse think I'm a Swede, and the other way around :cry
My great aunt lived in Norway during the war and was AFAIK somewhat involved in the resistance. I visited her in Oslo (in the 80's), and the little she said was quite chilling. Got me thinking about how it was being "under the boot" in that way.
Anyway, merry Christmas to Hangtime as well. Maybe he did get literature (paper) to read. I recommend material about the first proper engagements between the USA and the Germans on land, which was years after the Europeans had a taste of the "machine works" of the Germans. Well....difficult to compare, I guess, but the USA had the distance from their homeland to learn the bloody lesson....after being lectured by the Brits about it. And their families were not under the power of the enemy...
-
Lets see, Nils takes a convenient break, lays back for 2 days, lets his 'allies' bear the brunt of the battle, they are defeated, they surrender, then Nils strolls back in and declares once again, 'Norway never surrendered'. LOL.. how very.. typical.
Angus; you picked the wrong 'example'. While the Germans enjoyed early success at Kasserine, they also found The Hammer was no longer theirs alone to wield. I am proud to say I served in the same Division that stopped him cold there..
Look up 9th Infantry Division Artillery Kasserine Pass.
Nils, I'd like you to learn a little too about Scandinavian History. Read up on the Winter War. Explain, contrast and compare the Finn's defiance and successful defense of their Nation with 30 tanks and 130 planes and 225,000 men.. against a force of 1 million, 6,500 tanks and 3,000 aircraft...
..with Norway's token defense and capitulation after the loss of only 1,330 men.
-
snip
Well....difficult to compare, I guess, but the USA had the distance from their homeland to learn the bloody lesson....after being lectured by the Brits about it. And their families were not under the power of the enemy...
That distance works both ways. It didn't stop us - and we took on Japan at the same time, went that distance, too.
America, **** yeah!
-
Lets see, Nils takes a convenient break, lays back for 2 days, lets his 'allies' bear the brunt of the battle, they are defeated, they surrender, then Nils strolls back in and declares once again, 'Norway never surrendered'. LOL.. how very.. typical.
Angus; you picked the wrong 'example'. While the Germans enjoyed early success at Kasserine, they also found The Hammer was no longer theirs alone to wield. I am proud to say I served in the same Division that stopped him cold there..
Look up 9th Infantry Division Artillery Kasserine Pass.
Nils, I'd like you to learn a little too about Scandinavian History. Read up on the Winter War. Explain, contrast and compare the Finn's defiance and successful defense of their Nation with 30 tanks and 130 planes and 225,000 men.. against a force of 1 million, 6,500 tanks and 3,000 aircraft...
..with Norway's token defense and capitulation after the loss of only 1,330 men.
Im sorry for not answering your posts, but its Xmas here and i have far better things to do than answer someone who has no idea what he is talking about or never have been invaded by anyone.
I dont know where you got if from that norway surrendered, but find proof. Again read a book and start learning some history before you spread lies that you cannot prove. A few years ago what you say would be nothing more than nazi propaganda.
Facts please..
-
Facts please..
Fact
King fled like a scalded cat carrying off his lewtz.
Fact
Fact general left defending had to surrender or else.
Fact
Quisling was such a huge collaborator, quisling is interchangeable with collaborator now.
Did I miss anything?
-
Fact
King fled like a scalded cat carrying off his lewtz.
No, he left for England for the purpose of continuing the fight and make sure he was not captured with the propaganda that would give the germans. He initially wanted to stay with his people but his "crew" persuaded him to leave for the above reasons. If the govenment and King had been captured they would have to surrender and the merchant fleet would fall into german hands etc etc... read up on it. Plenty of info.
Fact
Fact general left defending had to surrender or else.
The genral surrendered the soldiers under his comand because the brits and the french decided to leave because they where needed elsewere. He could do little but lay down the little arms he had left or be slaughthered.
Fact
Quisling was such a huge collaborator, quisling is interchangeable with collaborator now.
Yes. So what? One guy has become the synonymous with treason and collaberation. When was that ever debated or denied here or anywere?
Did I miss anything?
No not much, but what does this have to do with Hangtimes lies?
-
Denile is no longer a just a river in Egypt.
-
Denile is no longer a just a river in Egypt.
Hmm, both the Nile and the Germans who made Norway surrender moved south to north. Good point. Not just coincidence if you ask me. :noid
-
The surrender of Norway was a sound strategic move by the Allies. It forced Hitler to use his limted resources in securing and occupying Norway. Plus, his soldiers were very fertile and where better to spread your seed than Norway?
-
Hehe its so funny to see so many people that can not post or find any evidence of Norway's surrender yet continue to claim so. :rofl
weak.... really weak
-
Norway's declaration of neutrality was of little significance. On 9 April 1940, German forces attacked Norway. After an intense two-month struggle, and despite military assistance from Great Britain and France, Norway had no choice but to surrender. The Royal Family, the Government and some of the heads of the Ministry of Defence and the civil administration left for Great Britain, along with the withdrawing Allied troops. During the war the Norwegian government conducted its activities in exile.
http://www.norway.org/history/after1814/ww2/ww2.htm
It's from your official website, fer chrissake's...
-
That distance works both ways. It didn't stop us - and we took on Japan at the same time, went that distance, too.
America, **** yeah!
You didn't take Japan. It was about to be too costly. But there was the nuke.
Japan, once defending to the utmost definition of last man...surrendered.
No force in WW2 defended as doggedly as well as insanely as the Japanese. The proud stand of the US troops at Wake Island doesn't even compare to it.
But different....it was the country of other values.
As for the Norse, I think that if the govt and people would have been swapped with US folks, they would have surrendered :devil
BTW, many names in US politics were predicting the UK would surrender under the LW bombing in the BoB and Blitz. They would have been judging that from their own population rather than the actual spirit of the Brits. After all, no US city ever had to go through that, nor had US forces ever have to fight a lost fight in their homeland against a foe who already had almost all the ropes and their families more or less under their power.
Of course Hangtime wasn't there going gung-ho :devil
-
Hangtime doesn't run, he spins the earth with his feet.
-
I saw some where and will dig it up.
Norwegian births were up during the war and down after the war
unlike
US births down during war and up after the war.
I was wondering how that was?
-
http://www.norway.org/history/after1814/ww2/ww2.htm
It's from your official website, fer chrissake's...
Yep. No choice BUT surrender which they didn't.
Here is the King's words:
"I am deeply affected by the responsibility laid on me if the German demand is rejected. The responsibility for the calamities that will befall people and country is indeed so grave that I dread to take it. It rests with the government to decide, but my position is clear.
For my part I cannot accept the German demands. It would conflict with all that I have considered to be my duty as King of Norway since I came to this country nearly thirty-five years ago"
The government didn't surrender, the country was simply occupied and head figures were replaced.
Quisling was a puppy, the real boss (Terbhoven) was a German.
I have some items to add. Firstly a pure addition which I stumbled across. The Germans did indeed use terror bombing on Norwegian towns. Second, the attack was a complete surprize, the army wasn't even mobilized, and within a day all key points were captured. Third, they fought longer than I thought. The first allied land victories against the Germans happened in Norway, and had it not been for the German invasion into France and the lowlands, the Germans would IMHO have lost in Norway. But when the Allies pulled out it was over.
In Norway there was still fighting going on some weeks after all was going down the sink in France.
-
I saw some where and will dig it up.
Norwegian births were up during the war and down after the war
unlike
US births down during war and up after the war.
I was wondering how that was?
They were breeding members for the resistance.
:D
Actually, women having children with Germans had a hard time. The occupation was hard for the Norse.
Occupation...something that the US citizens (from USA) alive today do not know. Nor invasions, terror bombings on their towns, relatives in captivities, completely superior forces invading your homeland and such...
Feel lucky, and don't be so cocky about "my folks wouldn't and hadn't" etc. This is simple judging of cirkumstances hard to understand.
-
Going with the Germans
Norwegian women and the German occupiers contributed to a Norwegian wartime birth rate that reached record highs.
Found it :aok :O
-
So then it could be argued that Norwegians are technically German, Baitman?
-
Ooops...breeding with German stock myself. And I surrender any time she wants :D
-
See? It's not just Norwegians...
Angus, I heard Iceland surrendered to the British in WWII. Is that true?
-
Yes it appears the Norwegian King may not have surrendered but the Norwegian women sure did. :eek:
Maybe the Germans had some thing the Norwegian Men Didn't. :D
-
So then it could be argued that Norweigans are technically German, Baitman?
It appears that there is more German blood in the new Norway than Norwegian :aok
Technically they are more German than Norwegian Yes :aok
-
Well, that certainly explains GScholtz.
-
Well, that certainly explains GScholtz.
:rofl :devil
-
Hehe its so funny to see so many people that can not post or find any evidence of Norway's surrender yet continue to claim so. :rofl
weak.... really weak
Let's see -- Even if we were to buy into the claim that Norway did not technically surrender, this thread sure has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they didn't offer much resistance in any event. Heck, the Brits put up more resistance trying to save Norway than Norway itself.
On the sliding scale of conquests, Norway looks much more like the Anschluss than the fall of Poland.
So, I agree -- weak . . . really weak.
-
Nils, again; you just dodge; repeat the same 'norway never surrendered' line; then dive back under your mattress.
You hiding some germans under there?
Facts make no impression, examples of other nations making the hard choices, selling thier freedom far more dearly than you guys did are simply ignored. But that's ok.. we understand.
If Germany had won the war, you'd be supermensch today. at least, you'd think you were. And, that's what this is really about.. the 'denial' thing you folks seem to harbor. You really feel cheated.. and secretly regret having Germany crushed. Your nation was just getting comfortable with it's favored position in the new German Europe... but those damn stubborn brits and the oversexed americans just wouldn't leave well enough alone.
That's ok, Nils. You can still wear the super suit in private when you play house with the nazi's under your bed. You can go back to 'not surrendering' to them now.
Fröhliche Weihnachten!
-
Ahh back from celebrating Santa's birthday.
Does anyone care to sum up the thread so far? Anyting interesting new bits from Hangtime, Diablo and CO or are have they come up with any concrete things that they can back up?.
Keep it short please, im still in holiday mood. :)
What i have so far:
Quisling was scum... correct but that isnt news
Norway _never_ surrendered... correct and that is not news either
Royals and government left and set up in London from witch they continued the fight... correct
Anyting more i have missed?
Flotsoms name is Kevin, not Francis.
-
Flotsoms name is Kevin, not Francis.
dont even try to drag me back into this dumbarsed conversation!
i admit only that i completely missed the reference and thought he was signing his name to his comment. so being the polite person that i rarely ever am i decided i would respond in kind by telling him my name. should have stuck to tradition and just remained rude. my bad.
other than that single admission of a mistake in this thread, i will stick with factual history and leave the rest of you to bicker over the silly sheep herein.
FLOTSOM
-
Let's see -- Even if we were to buy into the claim that Norway did not technically surrender, this thread sure has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they didn't offer much resistance in any event. Heck, the Brits put up more resistance trying to save Norway than Norway itself.
On the sliding scale of conquests, Norway looks much more like the Anschluss than the fall of Poland.
So, I agree -- weak . . . really weak.
The American Indians didnt "technically" surrender either, and they put up one heck of a fight before they were defeated and driven off their land. Losers dont get to write (or rewrite now as it were) history unfortunately. I wonder what the Germans would have said if you had asked if they thought Norway surrendered? I bet I know what their answer would have been.
-
The American Indians didnt "technically" surrender either, and they put up one heck of a fight before they were defeated and driven off their land. Losers dont get to write (or rewrite now as it were) history unfortunately. I wonder what the Germans would have said if you had asked if they thought Norway surrendered? I bet I know what their answer would have been.
The Germans definitely knew the Norwegian women surrendered......
-
I would not say so.
Now, there was a comparison of the Fin-Rus war, which is not fair. I'll tell you why.
The Fins were invaded by an enemy they foresaw, and they had their guard up. The enemy didn't anticipate much resistance and sent a lot of green troops.
It was winter and the fight bogged down under horrible conditions in snow, frost and forests.
Key elements were not captured instantly and it was getting deeper into the winter as the fight stalled on.
Yet the outcome was inevitable, Finns had to negotiate for peace, and let a good chunk of land go.
Later on, there was war again, where the Finns were on the offensive with the Germans. That was lost too, and the Finns had to negotiate. This time with a price, they had to start war on the Germans. They did, and the Germans burned down Lappland before retreating to Norway (AFAIK).
But Norway did not negotiate, or surrender. Their enemy was the one and same all through. But the fight was lost from day one. The Germans sailed their troops straight into key ports, even flew them in for Oslo, and this was the first time in military history with para operations on a scale.
Choosing to fight on for weeks after that is more than most would have done IMHO.
I'll get later into how it was the first time the Yanks had to fight the Germans and what the Germans thought of them afterwards. Seems that despite other nations had fought them for 2-3 years before and had tales to tell, the US had many a "we wouldn't loose" guys at the helm. So it took a beating before things were up to scratch. And the conditions were nowhere near what the Norse had to deal with....
-
Enh? Just where were the battles for Finland fought? Who's cities were bombed, towns, villages & civilians destroyed?
Norway surrendered.
The outcome of the Winter War between the Russians the Finns led to the Finns finally being forced to cede a 16 mile wide corridor to the baltic. A Russian General said "We did not win enough land to bury our dead"... some 3/4 of million russian casualties. Finland is and remained a Democracy. There can be no doubt that if Finland did not defy the Russians and in turn the Germans that post war it would have suffered the same fate as poor poland. For this, after the war she was forced to pay heavy reparations and cede more land to the Russians. However, Finland remained a proud democracy, under it's own continuous rule since the nation became one in 1917.
Norway surrendered.
Norway owes it's existence to others... Finland stood alone, besieged in turn by the Allies, the Russians, the Germans and finally, again the Russians. They defied all comers and owes it's existence to it's peoples proud defense of Freedom. One can not help but admire the tenacity and resolve shown by their people.. in the most extreme of conditions, under the most relentless pressure, they stood fast. Neither the Nazi's or the Communists were able to defeat them.
Norway surrendered.
For examples of Americans fighting in conditions of utter hopelesness AND in a freezing hell... without surrender, see Bastogne and the Chosin Reservoir. At kasserine, american units under weak command were thrown back... till they ran into the 9th Infantry. Our artillery, with TOT barrages stopped the advance cold. The americans did not withdraw in dissarray to the beaches and return to america.. we learned, replaced the generals with men like Patton and we chased the Krauts back to Montgomery. Then we took Sicily. Invaded Italy. Normandy. Southern France. We fought through the finest land armies in the world defending THEIR homeland, crossed the Rhine and entered the Rhur.
Norway surrendered.
All other rhetoric is just revisionist mincing of the reality... defeated, occupied, Norway became the cradle of German R&R in WWII. Hardly a shining example of national resolve and courage. They have no just claim for anything beyond token resistance. They CAN claim the definition of collaboration. That point HAS been settled. Quislings.
Norway surrendered.
-
Norway Surrendered, Norway surrendered yadda yadda.
Repeat at will, I have already posted their government's answer to a surrender suggestion.
Surrender does not include armed forces still operating from a foreign soil.
They were overrun, which is a different thing.
Now, winter war.
The tough Finns played their cards right, and IMHO they are the ultimate example of doing things right.
They were aided somewhat though, first by the western allies, then by the Germans.
They may have saved them from being overrun by the USSR by refusing to advance further at Leningrad (Great disappointment to Hitler), - anyway, had the USSR decided (later) to grab them, I do not see them standing up to that. A deal was better.
But comparing the winterwar to the Norwegian campaign is like an apple vs a tomato. Why?
Ok, Finnish army stronger, mobilized to defend against THAT enemy. THAT enemy came with wrong estimations and with very little/wrong preparation and thereby poor performance. And THAT enemy did not have the capital and largest cities in it's hands on day one. Now name me some big towns quickly in USSR hands...
And here's one for you :D
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e6/Norwegian_Winter_War_Volunteers.jpg)
Norse volunteers in Finland.
It's simple really. Norway could not have won the fight without the western Allies, which had to abandon when the war started on mainland Europe. But the Finnish could stand ground more or less between their homes and the Russians. A totally different thing.
-
I'm confused now, am I supposed to start despising the Poles at some point?
-
Of course. If Hangtime had fought on their side, they would not have surrendered!
-
indeed :D
and had Diablo and Hangtime been in charge at Corregidor they would have made MacArthur stay and expected the garrison to fight to the death. anything less and they would be burger-munching surrender monkeys right? :rolleyes:
-
indeed :D
and had Diablo and Hangtime been in charge at Corregidor they would have made MacArthur stay and expected the garrison to fight to the death. anything less and they would be burger-munching surrender monkeys right? :rolleyes:
Ummm Mac left and it was surrendered anyway. That's the point. The revisionist just keep yelping "but the king ran so how could norway have surrendered?".
I'm thinking There was more of fight for the defense in the Philippines than norway. That was just territory and not homeland.
-
The king lead a government in exile so that the cards he had could help the Allies.
That was the Norwegian merchant navy, BIG at the time, as well as all those armed forces that got away (and kept getting away). So you had vessels and soldiers. You also had a resistance system which pulled quite some nasty stuff to the Germans, and the German bully-back was also evil.
It would have been much easier to surrender and collaborate, but that is just not what happened. There was neither an approved surrender, nor negotiations. Norway was overrun and power was shifted by the victor. This definately resulted in the dark times Norway had in WW2. Something unknown by living U.S. civilians.
And Hangtime:
"Norway became the cradle of German R&R in WWII. Hardly a shining example of national resolve and courage. They have no just claim for anything beyond token resistance. They CAN claim the definition of collaboration. That point HAS been settled. Quislings."
That point has not been settled, nor will that silly claim. Instead of calling you names and following steps like these, I will go back to Kasserine and correct some of your points. It must hurt to have to look at defeats and routings while trying to remember ONLY the greatest moments, however it's okay to have the facts clear. As with Norway....
-
The invasion of Iceland, codenamed Operation Fork, was a British military operation conducted by the Royal Navy and the Royal Marines during World War II.
The invasion began in the early morning of 10 May 1940 with British troops disembarking in Reykjavík, capital of neutral Iceland. Meeting no resistance, the troops moved quickly to disable communication networks, secure strategic locations and arrest German citizens. Requisitioning local means of transportation, the troops moved to Hvalfjörður, Kaldaðarnes, Sandskeiði and Akranes to secure landing areas against the possibility of a German counterattack. In the following days air defence equipment was deployed in Reykjavík and a detachment of troops was sent to Akureyri.
The invasion force consisted of 746 marines, ill-equipped and only partially trained. Although it succeeded in its mission, it was manifestly insufficient to defend an island of 103,000 km². On 17 May, 4,000 troops of the British Army arrived to relieve the marines. Later American forces occupied Iceland for the remainder of the war.
Wow even less resistance. Guess the Finn blood didn't make it out of Finland.
-
"Official" surrender or not, government in "exile" or not, when you leave your country and your women to be pillaged by the Germans you have de facto surrendered. Dress it up in semantics any way you want to help the loss of your self esteem but it does not change the facts. End of story.
-
"Official" surrender or not, government in "exile" or not, when you leave your country and your women to be pillaged by the Germans you have de facto surrendered. Dress it up in semantics any way you want to help the loss of your self esteem but it does not change the facts. End of story.
Bingo. :aok Now if their indomitable egos were there to defend Norway, the German's would have ran screaming. :)
-
Wonderful comparison Bronk! I'll give you a part here, since you will have to read years without ever catching what I have on that subject...
The Icelanders came from Norway and the Brisish isles, not Finland ,BTW. Iceland does not have an army, or any defences at all (except the cost guard and SWAT, hehe), nor back then. And the British were our friends, solving the danger of getting between the hammer and the anvil in any way. We were already doing pro-brit trade deals at the time, and the RN was all over the place.
You may bear in mind that the "invasion" was supported with cruisiers with ample firepower. HMS Berwick?
Of course there was no resistance. Our folks gathered up to say "Hello" etc, and followed the soldiers with curiousity all over the place. The place of interest was the German embassy. The not-liked ambassador was there, protected by diplomatic laws, but not any more. So he got busted.
My neighbour (now dead) guided the Navy guys to port. My grandfather who was a fisherman at the time had to abort his fishing day, but eagerly watched when the ambassador was seized. :devil
It was a relief, the Brits were there. They were ill equipped and not stocked up properly but that was solved when possible. Unlike the Germans, they wouldn't just take things, they would buy them, although many people would simply volunteerly aid them or give food etc.
They took over the defence of the country, and dind't meddle in the nations affairs, so there was a completely different issue than in Norway. Business went up with a boom.
Some Icelanders joined their forces or already had, like my great uncle who saddled on with the RAF and went ace with them. He embarked one month earlier by trawler, when the seafaring was already getting dangerous due to U-boats and mines of the Germans.
That became a threat, so we were bombed and lots of boats were sunk. My granny lost 2 of her brothers that way. Well, after all, we were working with the Brits with free will (without even bothering about the choice) as well as the Americans which were not in the war at the time, just watching.
Our losses came roughly to the same % as of the USA, almost exclusively seamen. Registered losses to the war presents a low number, since there were many missing.
Those were the days, and I was lucky to grow up with people who were there at the time, as well as getting to know more who also were.
Anyway, I guess Bronk and Hangtime WOULD HAVE opened fire on the crowd piling up on the peer thereby sealing their fate as the two dumbest persons on the planet.
(Sidenote. An Icelander grabbed the rifle off a Marine, and swiftly loaded it with a cigarette, handed it back and said "You should take better care". Now isn't that just about the coolest possible in the position?)
-
The Icelanders came from Norway
My point exactly if they were finns , they would have drove off the invaders with butter knives. If that's all they had.
-
Wonderful comparison Bronk!
Indeed it was. It would seem Iceland put up almost as much resistance against the Brits as the Norwegians did against the Germans.
-
A try with sheer ignorance.
The British didn't even attack, they just docked. No wonder, - Allies you see. Welcome!
But in Norway...the German leading battlecruiser with the VIP's on boards as well as the SS was sunk by a shore battery before reaching Oslo. Not to all the effect, since the fist actually LANDED on the Oslo airfield. The capital fell before fighting started so to say.
Now name me a capital in WW2 where after falling there was still fighting going on(with no hope) in 6 weeks?
-
Chicago
-
It would have been much easier to surrender and collaborate, but that is just not what happened.
But there was a sizable collaborationist movement within Norway. sample link (http://www.feldgrau.com/a-norway.html) In many ways I can understand that, as many in Europe considered Stalin a bigger threat than Hitler. Why not embrace that fact, rather than try to run from it? Iceland didn't consider the British to be a threat to their way of life, perhaps the majority of the Norwegians felt the same way about fellow nordic German stock?
That point has not been settled, nor will that silly claim. Instead of calling you names and following steps like these, I will go back to Kasserine and correct some of your points. It must hurt to have to look at defeats and routings while trying to remember ONLY the greatest moments, however it's okay to have the facts clear. As with Norway....
Not sure why you keep bringing up Kasserine, as it really has nothing to do with the point, nor does it bolster anything you have to say. In fact, it quite damages your point. In one battle, the US lost almost as many killed in action as the Norwegians lost during their so-called fight to save their country. Despite the drubbing the US forces took initially, they eventually halted and then reversed all the German's gains. They didn't sit and wait to be pounded, they regrouped and counter-attacked. Not sure exactly what the six Norwegian divisions were doing while the Germans were there, but with so few battle dead, it sure doesn't appear they were counterattacking with any vigor.
-
It is estimated that some 90%+ of the Norse were opposed to the Germans. Collaborators having a hard time then, and sometimes being killed. Hence, the resistance system was quite firm and effective.
So, the Norse endured torture, camps and executions.
Now most nations would have collaborators. Norway did too. But the size of their opposition (some in very close co-op with the UK) was impressive.
Embracing Stalin rather than Hitler? The Scandinavians went both Anti-USSR as well as Anti-Nazi when Stalin went for Finland. Why? He did it with a German agreement, just as was the case with Poland.
It was a hard time for Scandinavian commies you bet.
Now Kasserine is another issue. It is directly aimed at mouths like those of Hangtime, which claim that this and that would not happen or have happened if the Norse or their troops had been U.S.
Kasserine is the first time the US forces meet the Germans in a major engagement. This is years after the Blitzkrieg and the Allies were on the offensive. Material was ok, and there was plenty of information about how the Axis fought. Yet the US got their arse handed to them, and while Hangtime read up about the eventual outcome he skipped some of the more juicy parts, which I want to show him.
Just hate that attitude :"I would have", or "My nation would never", or "Our army would have", based on own gas and lack of knowledge. blehhh :t
-
Now, winter war.
The tough Finns played their cards right, and IMHO they are the ultimate example of doing things right.
They were aided somewhat though, first by the western allies, then by the Germans.
They may have saved them from being overrun by the USSR by refusing to advance further at Leningrad (Great disappointment to Hitler), - anyway, had the USSR decided (later) to grab them, I do not see them standing up to that. A deal was better.
But comparing the winterwar to the Norwegian campaign is like an apple vs a tomato. Why?
Ok, Finnish army stronger, mobilized to defend against THAT enemy. THAT enemy came with wrong estimations and with very little/wrong preparation and thereby poor performance. And THAT enemy did not have the capital and largest cities in it's hands on day one. Now name me some big towns quickly in USSR hands...
And here's one for you :D
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e6/Norwegian_Winter_War_Volunteers.jpg)
Norse volunteers in Finland.
It's simple really. Norway could not have won the fight without the western Allies, which had to abandon when the war started on mainland Europe. But the Finnish could stand ground more or less between their homes and the Russians. A totally different thing.
Angus... tsk, tsk.
You missed a small point.... on December 6, 1941 (Finland’s Independence Day) England declared war on Finland and Canada followed suit a day later. Imagine that.. Democracy's declaring war on a Democracy fighting for it's freedom from oppression from communists. What a world.
You'd think Finland would take the hint and just 'roll over' like Norway did, yah know?
Finland, by her insistence on fighting Russians and regaining her territory, and by using whatever the hell came to hand to do it with (including Germans at one point) wound up at one time or another tossing out first Russians then Brits, Germans, Norwegians in Kraut uniforms and anybody else that had designs on Finland.
They remained Free... unpopular. But Free. Gotta admire that.
Norway Surrendered.
LOL.. and as to Norways support for Finland prior to Norway's Surrender.. compare and contrast the 900 Norse Volunteers with the 8,700 Swede Volunteers that showed up. ROFL!
Norway Surrendered.
Hey, Angus; great write up on Iceland in the war... enjoyed that. BTW, is Nils still under his bed with the germans while his allies (you) continue with his defense?
-
Now Kasserine is another issue. It is directly aimed at mouths like those of Hangtime, which claim that this and that would not happen or have happened if the Norse or their troops had been U.S.
Kasserine is the first time the US forces meet the Germans in a major engagement. This is years after the Blitzkrieg and the Allies were on the offensive. Material was ok, and there was plenty of information about how the Axis fought. Yet the US got their arse handed to them, and while Hangtime read up about the eventual outcome he skipped some of the more juicy parts, which I want to show him.
Just hate that attitude :"I would have", or "My nation would never", or "Our army would have", based on own gas and lack of knowledge. blehhh :t
C'mon Angus.. I'm well aware we've lost battles.. run into lines we were unable to crack, failed offensives; you want me to list them? Anzio breakout? The fight for the Monte Casino? The Poles took that after we failed. Holland? There's plenty there...
But, you brought up Kasserine.. and it just so happens I'm real familiar with how that ended up, since the unit I served in 25 years later was the Division that held them and threw 'em back. And they (and we) were rightly, justifiably proud of our unit history. But yes; you are correct; we had our tulips handed to us for 3 days by a better officered and better trained german force. We learned. Quickly. VERY quickly. The point is, when we took a beating; we didn't just quit, toss in the towel and concede when blood got spilled and the news was bad.
Matters not how many time we get knocked down. What matters is that we stand back up.
As to Norwegian Resistance.. great Hollywood stuff. Norwegians in turtlenecks on skis! Wow!! brave Norway! LOL! Doesn't change the fact that the birth rate under occupation skyrocketed, that the country became a functional puppet of germany and that the place was treated with kid gloves compared to Poland and Czechoslovakia under the boot.
For further enlightenment on Norwegian attitudes relevant to German Supremacy review the fate of the Norwegian Jews, both during the war and the efforts made by other Scandinavian governments after the War. Norway did almost nothing.. Even denmarks efforts to protect it's jews far exceeded the Norwegian efforts.. but as with all things Norwegian during the war, 'token' best describes it.
Norway Surrendered.
So did Nils.. can't win a battle by not showing up... but Angus, I admire your determination. <S!>
-
Hangtime, tsk tsk. First response:
Now, where to begin? (I actually enjoy this)...hmm, yes:
"You missed a small point.... on December 6, 1941 (Finland’s Independence Day) England declared war on Finland"
And? I am actually surprized it wasn't sooner, since by Barbarossa started months earlier making the USSR allies in a whiff, and Finland saddled on with the Axis mighty swiftly. (Maybe it was clever, otherwise they'd have been at war with Germany...perhaps). So, the UK started a lot of operations against the Finnish, right?
Oh, and Norway did NOT surrender, and 900 is....900. More than the Spartans :t
As for under bed, I have to get INTO the bed with a German tonight, - my wife :rock
Second response:
Kasserine. Nice to know you're familiar with it, but I'll allow myself to fill in some...parts, since the Norwegians are under fire for buckling without surrender after 6 weeks of fighting the Germans.
- 3 days is...not fighting for 6 weeks.
- by those 3 days the US who were not taken by a surprize attack by one who was not an enemy a day before retreated as far as they could get.
- They had ample opportunity to know what they were up against, unlike the Norse.
- The German attack started, what on the 19th of feb, and the retreat was quite a bit for 2 days. Axis attack would be more correct, since a major Italian force was applied.
- The first allied success was at Thala when the BRITISH artillery denied the Axis the oporunity of cutting off the US 9th infantry.
- Thala was held with an amalgam of British, US and FRENCH forces, thereby enabling the application of using the US arty of...48 guns. They did fine. In the following day, the British were in the frontline. The Germans had to submit to the combined arty and withdraw.
- Another attack (Sbiba) was stopped by the Brits.
- Rommels thoughts: "Rommel was largely contemptuous of both the U.S. equipment and fighting ability and considered them a non-threat" (Wiki)
However, there were allies around, and an available buffer to learn from the mistakes made as well as getting better at estimating what one was up against. That was one chance the Norse did not have, since (my guess) more than halft the civil population was under Axis command in the first day. (Oslo counts alone for some 25%)
I do not think that swapping those armies (Norse 1940 and US 1943) would have made a difference fighting the Germans. So I guess the US would have surrendered? Well "Rolled over" you'd have put it....
Now, birth rates. From the top of my head in most countries during the war...up. Human nature. Jokes aside though, mothers to babies of the occupation force in Norway had a tough going and were "branded" for life. I know the norse word for them. If you think they had a booming increase due to horizontal collaborating, you are pissing into the wind.
And the resistance...well, here is some matter that indeed has been filmed, such as the heavy-water plant sabotage etc. Some act also damaged the Tirpitz as well as a network of spotters aided the British with air-raids, anti-shipping and commando raids.
There was also an "ice" wall against the Germans, such as never speaking to one (or pretending not to understand) and not even sit beneath one, i.e. on a bus. This pissed the Gerries so well of that it was made illegal not to sit in a bus if there was a place....
In all, due to resistance and intelligence fed by the Brits, the Germans had some hundreds of thousands of troops tied up in Norway. Wouldn't have been nice to run across those in Tunisia now would it.....
(However, my number data here is not consistent. This is a common reference)
So....determination mode off, I am off to bed to happily surrender to Germany :D
-
I am off to bed to happily surrender to Germany :D
Norwegian woman? :huh
Just can't wait to release your inner collaborationist.
-
- Rommels thoughts: "Rommel was largely contemptuous of both the U.S. equipment and fighting ability and considered them a non-threat" (Wiki)
That may have been his opinion before the battle. But this directly contradicts it:
"I have never seen any forces so inept at first as Americans in battle--or anyone who learned the hard lessons more quickly once the chips were down."
Erwin Rommel, The Rommel Papers, ed. B. H. Liddell Hart, 15th ed. (New York: Dacapo Press, 1953), 521
Doesn't sound like contempt to me.
-
That may have been his opinion before the battle. But this directly contradicts it:
"I have never seen any forces so inept at first as Americans in battle--or anyone who learned the hard lessons more quickly once the chips were down."
Erwin Rommel, The Rommel Papers, ed. B. H. Liddell Hart, 15th ed. (New York: Dacapo Press, 1953), 521
Doesn't sound like contempt to me.
You just don't know true contempt when you see it. :uhoh
:D
-
I keep wondering why this has been ignored. (Credit to Diablo for finding it.)
http://www.norway.org/history/after1814/ww2/ww2.htm
Norway's declaration of neutrality was of little significance. On 9 April 1940, German forces attacked Norway. After an intense two-month struggle, and despite military assistance from Great Britain and France, Norway had no choice but to surrender.
-
Hangtime, tsk tsk. First response:
Now, where to begin? (I actually enjoy this)...hmm, yes:
"You missed a small point.... on December 6, 1941 (Finland’s Independence Day) England declared war on Finland"
And? I am actually surprized it wasn't sooner, since by Barbarossa started months earlier making the USSR allies in a whiff, and Finland saddled on with the Axis mighty swiftly. (Maybe it was clever, otherwise they'd have been at war with Germany...perhaps). So, the UK started a lot of operations against the Finnish, right?
Nope. While declarations of war were tendered to shut stalin up, no western nation actually engaged finnish troops.
Oh, and Norway did NOT surrender, and 900 is....900. More than the Spartans :t
Ahh.. but compared to 'neutra'l swedens 8,700, the true 'commitment' is revealed.
As for under bed, I have to get INTO the bed with a German tonight, - my wife :rock
I admire your determined 'resistance'. :D
Second response:
Kasserine. Nice to know you're familiar with it, but I'll allow myself to fill in some...parts, since the Norwegians are under fire for buckling without surrender after 6 weeks of fighting the Germans.
Norway surrendered.
- 3 days is...not fighting for 6 weeks.
enh? The germans controlled the battle for 3 days.. then they didn't. We didn't stop fighting.. we just stopped losing ground. The Norwegians never controlled the battle.. for 6 weeks. Then they surrendered their country. The Germans captured some trucks, food and fuel from us.. in Norway, they got the whole enchilada.
- by those 3 days the US who were not taken by a surprize attack by one who was not an enemy a day before retreated as far as they could get.
Enh? not sure of the thought being communicated here.. however, in the absence of coherent upper echelon command, field commanders in key units displayed remarkable leadership, re-established local command and control, reformed a defensive line and stopped the German advance. Cold.
- They had ample opportunity to know what they were up against, unlike the Norse.
Oh, horsepucky. After Czech and Polish moves, every nation in Europe mobilized. Except Norway. Even when Denmark was squished.. the Norse remained complacent. It's not like they had no idea what was coming, especially with Denmark getting it first.
- The German attack started, what on the 19th of feb, and the retreat was quite a bit for 2 days. Axis attack would be more correct, since a major Italian force was applied.
Again.. the Axis enjoyed success for 3 days.. then their world turned to crap in Africa. In Norway they enjoyed 6 weeks of victory. Then a surrender celebration. Not theirs, btw.
- The first allied success was at Thala when the BRITISH artillery denied the Axis the oporunity of cutting off the US 9th infantry.
enh? Look, Kasserine demonstrated to Eisenhower that American Troops under British and French command was not going to work.. the early Axis success at Kasserine was NOT against Americans troops.. the French were routed TWICE. The Brit commander of the American troops after that wound up utterly unable to consolidate the Brit French & American forces.. and the American 9th Infantry was summoned to the front to bolster the crushed french and reeling brit defenses. Which they did very well.
Rommel was ordered to attack Le Kef - some 60 miles north of the Kasserine Pass. To attack Le Kef, he had to move his troops through the pass. General Alexander was given the command of Anderson's 1st Army and Montgomery's 8th Army. He was staggered at the confusion he saw in all the areas that the Allies controlled - he simply ordered that there would be no withdrawal from any positions.
On February 18th, there was little activity on the front and this allowed the Allies to tighten up their defenses. The arrival of the 9th Artillery Division did a lot to bolster morale - it had traveled 735 miles in four days. Between February 19th and 22nd, Rommel tried to reach his target - Le Kef. However, he realized that he did not have the means to launch a meaningful attack and on the 22nd February Rommel ordered that the attack be called off. His primary problem was the constant lack of supplies - men had been withdrawn from North Africa to fight in the Russian campaign - something that angered the 'Desert Fox'. He withdrew from the Kasserine Pass unbeknown to the Allies who failed to follow up his retreat. By February 25th, the Kasserine Pass was in the hands of the Allies and the Germans had been pushed back to the Eastern Dorsale.
- Thala was held with an amalgam of British, US and FRENCH forces, thereby enabling the application of using the US arty of...48 guns. They did fine. In the following day, the British were in the frontline. The Germans had to submit to the combined arty and withdraw.
Yep that little detachment of the 9th provided the Hammer necessary to stop the attack into the rear areas.. and their resolve became the rally point for the panicked French and Brit units.
- Another attack (Sbiba) was stopped by the Brits.
because they were there.
- Rommels thoughts: "Rommel was largely contemptuous of both the U.S. equipment and fighting ability and considered them a non-threat"
Yup. wasn't Rommels first mistake.. or his last.
-
Right...here goes:
"Oh, horsepucky. After Czech and Polish moves, every nation in Europe mobilized. Except Norway. Even when Denmark was squished.. the Norse remained complacent. It's not like they had no idea what was coming, especially with Denmark getting it first."
Denmark was not taken before, it just fell immediately. The operations commenced at the same hour. The invasion fleet to Norway left at different dates, for the plan was to seize all major ports and airfields simultaniously. That includes all major towns. Well, it worked. Now that leaves a position unique, - all key points captured immediately and supplies rolling in.
Lessons from land-warfare with the Germans? Only from the Poles, the Czech were annexed, and as I corrected, Denmark was simultaniously. (The Danish plot was brilliant in an evil way, for the Germans were holding a meeting with the Danish authorities WHILE the troops were pouring in).
Nice try though Hangie...
Now the Americans on the other hand were working with the British and the French, who both had been in action against the Axis, the British now in their 3rd year. Seems there was a language problem.
There was a long ongoing dispute between Churchill and US commanders who wanted to try to invade mainland Europe as soon as 1942. Churchill correctly belived that the US commanders didn't have a clue about what they were talking, and they needed to be blooded in a smaller deal for learnings. That happened in N-Africa, and definately proved him right.
More:
"Look, Kasserine demonstrated to Eisenhower that American Troops under British and French command was not going to work.. the early Axis success at Kasserine was NOT against Americans troops.. the French were routed TWICE. The Brit commander of the American troops after that wound up utterly unable to consolidate the Brit French & American forces.. and the American 9th Infantry was summoned to the front to bolster the crushed french and reeling brit defenses. Which they did very well."
I would like to see more on this, for everything I look up has it the other way around. It was the British who stopped the 9th from being cut off, and the original arty barrage was British, because they were there. The whole, in short the US would have had a worse day alone. The aftermath, well:
"While complete disaster had been averted, the Battle of Kasserine Pass was a humiliating defeat for US forces. Their first major clash with the Germans, the battle showed an enemy superiority in experience and equipment as well as exposed several flaws in the American command structure and doctrine. After the fight, Rommel dismissed American troops as ineffective and felt they did offer a threat to his command."
Rommel later had to eat his words. Later.
Now a little more of the command editing in the aftermath...General Alexander said to the US, "You surely have better men than that". So the US released their commander, and better men filled the gap. Bradley for instance :aok
-
well.. not quite sure how Kasserine refects on Norwegian failure to defend itself.. especially since the american losses alone there were over 6,000.. and we didn't capitulate africa, america or the war as a result. It was for sure a clear indicator that American Troops would not tolerate foreign command, that command and control left to rear echelon french and brit generals was a recipe for disaster. When the 9th's artillery and a regimental combat team, under new orders, arrived after a 750 mile dash from the coast, the situation changed dramatically
For a detailed history of the 9th's participation see:
http://www.lonesentry.com/gi_stories_booklets/9thinfantry/index.html
As to the early african battle overview and strategy, in February 1943, Kasserine Pass became the focal point in the North African campaign. The Axis powers planned to use the Kasserine Pass to prevent General Dwight Eisenhower from concentrating his forces against Tunis.
Fighting around the Kasserine Pass began in December 1942 when the German commander in Tunisia, Jürgen von Arnim of the German V Panzer Army, launched an attack west in an effort to link up with Rommel's army which was withdrawing from Libya to southern Tunisia. Arnim wanted to control the Eastern Dorsale - a range of mountains that extends south from Tunis. By doing this he would also control the mountain passes that controlled most movement through the Eastern Dorsale. If Arnim succeeded in doing this, he would push Eisenhower into using passes, such as the one at Kasserine, which were further south. This would push Eisenhower's men further away from their supply lines while allowing Arnim and Rommel to combine their forces.
In theory, the Axis forces in North Africa should have been at a disadvantage, primarily over the inability of the Germans to adequately supply their own forces. However, they did have one huge advantage over the Allies - a unified command structure. It was very clear who commanded the German forces in Tunisia. However, the Allies, in comparison, were in a mess. In theory, Eisenhower had full control of the Allied forces in the area. However, he was based in Algiers, 400 miles away from what was going on in Tunisia. Eisenhower appointed Major-General Lucien Truscott Jnr. to be his representative in the area - but Truscott based himself in Constantine, 200 miles from the frontline. Actual day-to-day command fell to Lieutenant-General Sir Kenneth Anderson, commander of the 1st British Army. Anderson himself faced a problem. Part of his force, the 19th French Corps led by Koeltz, would only take his orders from General Alphonse Juin, commander of French ground forces. Juin took his orders from General Henri Giraud. The French were still very resentful over the British attack on Mers el Kébir. In an effort to appease the French, Anderson had hoped to give them their own sector in Tunisia but the situation in the region did not allow him to fulfill this.
Anderson's situation was made even more complicated by the fact that he did not get on with the senior American commanders attached to his force. They saw him as cold and aloof. The 2nd US Corps was led by Major-General Lloyd Fredendall and he had a personal dislike for Anderson and he also had little confidence in Koeltz's men.
On January 3rd 1943, Arnim attacked the French positions with great success. Eisenhower took the decision to remove French troops to positions in the rear and replace them with newly arrived American troops. Before this could take place, Arnim struck again on January 30th and attacked more French troops - with equal success. By the end of January he had secured his bridgehead in Tunisia and had given Rommel a safe enclave to move into.
By February 1943, Arnim commanded about 100,000 men, Rommel had 70,000 men in his charge. In total the Allies had about 150,000 in the region.
On February 4th, Rommel suggested to Arnim that he should continue with his aggressive attacks against the Allies while he would do the same further south. Nazi Germany had just been stunned by the surrender of the German VI Army at Stalingrad, so a major victory in North Africa would go a long way to redressing this defeat. Also, after a retreat across North Africa, a victory would restore Rommel's reputation, especially as he had just learned that he was to be returned to Germany on the grounds of 'ill-health'. During the first two weeks of February, no-one in the Allied camp knew what Arnim and Rommel were planning. Then suddenly, and in a manner still not fully known, Allied intelligence told Anderson that they knew exactly what Arnim and Rommel were planning - a major attack against the French which would allow them to then attack the British. The French were ordered to withdraw their men from the positions that they held. This further damaged Anglo-French military relations as Koeltz did not want to pull back his men before they had been in a fight.
On February 14th, the Germans attacked during a sandstorm. They quickly destroyed 44 American tanks, 26 artillery guns and 22 trucks. Anderson believed that the attack was a diversion to disguise an attack further north. Ironically, both Anderson and Arnim believed that any decisive battle would be fought much nearer along the coast of Tunisia, yet here they were fighting inland.
On February 15th, the Americans launched a counter-attack. By February 17th, they had lost a further 98 tanks, 57 halftracks and 29 artillery guns. As they withdrew, the Americans destroyed vital supplies but the Germans managed to get hold of a vital 5,000 gallons of aviation fuel.
You'll note that crushed by superior armor, command, communications and maps, the Americans took a drubbing the first day and the next they counterattacked. .. and continued counterattacking until there was nothing left to counter attack with.
Next, Rommel was ordered to attack Le Kef - some 60 miles north of the Kasserine Pass. To attack Le Kef, he had to move his troops through the pass. General Alexander was given the command of Anderson's 1st Army and Montgomery's 8th Army. He was staggered at the confusion he saw in all the areas that the Allies controlled - he simply ordered that there would be no withdrawal from any positions.
On February 18th, there was little activity on the front and this allowed the Allies to tighten up their defenses. The arrival of the 9th Artillery Division did a lot to bolster morale - it had traveled 735 miles in four days. Between February 19th and 22nd, Rommel tried to reach his target - Le Kef. However, he realized that he did not have the means to launch a meaningful attack and on the 22nd February Rommel ordered that the attack be called off. His primary problem was the constant lack of supplies - men had been withdrawn from North Africa to fight in the Russian campaign - something that angered the 'Desert Fox'. He withdrew from the Kasserine Pass unbeknown to the Allies who failed to follow up his retreat. By February 25th, the Kasserine Pass was in the hands of the Allies and the Germans had been pushed back to the Eastern Dorsale.
The action in the Kasserine Pass cost the Germans 2,000 men and the Allies about 10,000 men, of which 6,500 were Americans.
Where in hell does ANY of this compare to Norways rollover? It took the Americans 3 days to rectify the situation on the ground in Africa.. Norway had six weeks.
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/kasserine_pass.htm
-
I keep wondering why this has been ignored. (Credit to Diablo for finding it.)
http://www.norway.org/history/after1814/ww2/ww2.htm
Yep. I mean it only states this on the main page, "Norway - the official site in the United States"
So, Norway says it's official. Game over.
-
thank god.
i wuz runnin low on cut 'n paste perkies.
-
Coincidently there is a new norwegian film about their resistance fighters. I hope it will be dubbed to English or at least released with english subtitles.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbK4WTQFf9U
<S> Norway!
(Btw. Nilsen and the other decent people here: Ignore the idiots.)
-
Coincidently there is a new norwegian film about their resistance fighters. I hope it will be dubbed to English or at least released with english subtitles.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbK4WTQFf9U
<S> Norway!
(Btw. Nilsen and the other decent people here: Ignore the idiots.)
way cool, I tried to say I knew people and family who fought in the resistance, but that all got lost in the ignorance of this thread, movie looks great
-
the ignorance of this thread
You mean like the definition of say... ummm... surrender?
-
How many times have you been under fire?
being married count ?
and I didn't even thought of reading the 17 next pages
-
well I don't really care of the opinion of peoples living in a continent where none had the thrilling experience of being neighbour of (put a tick mark in front of the your hereditary enemy)
Germany
England
Spain
Russia
Austria
France
Luxembourg (this one is a witty joke)
lastly my very humble opinion :p
-
Is Skuzzy on vacation or something?
-
hips
-
Hips?
-
hips : in France it's an alcohol generated hiccup
or a double post :)
-
Is Skuzzy on vacation or something?
If you feel the need for someone to police a historical discussion, then you have larger issues than the debate of Norway's surrender in World War 2.
-
This thread started with a good joke, but for some reason it was turned into a nasty troll. What I want to know is what Nilsen and the norwegians have done to deserve this? :huh
-
If you feel the need for someone to police a historical discussion, then you have larger issues than the debate of Norway's surrender in World War 2.
Have you read the rules?
This thread didn't last three posts before someone violated the rules. Why? Are these people truly so miserable that they have nothing better to do than troll a joke thread during the holiday season?
-
Shade Hard,
No one is attacking Nilsen or the other Norwegians. This is evidenced by the fact that they have not surrendered.
It's a discussion on whether or not Norway, the country, surrendered in World War 2. Since when are history discussions trolls?
-
This thread started with a good joke, but for some reason it was turned into a nasty troll. What I want to know is what Nilsen and the norwegians have done to deserve this? :huh
We have done nothing to nils or the Norwegians. I find Nilsen to be quite an agreeable person both here and ingame. His views on what constitutes surrender are quite suspect. I don't see why it's such a problem... I mean cmon... the Germans did steamroll a bunch of other countries. What is the diff?
-
The Norwegian air aces, Ola, Lars and Sven, who had gotten out of Norge and joined the RAF. They became very famous, each recording many kills.
Early in the 1940's, Ola was sent to Chicago to help with a USA savings bond drive.
One morning, during a radio interview, Ola was asked by the host to describe one of their more prominent battles.
Ola responded, "Ja Ja, there was that day in the skies over France when Lars, Sven and I were attacked by 23 fokkers and a mighty battle followed.
Sven was able to knock down 7 of those fokkers, and Lars bagged 7 fokkers, while I shot down the remaining 9 fokkers."
At this point, the radio interviewer was getting queasy and attempted to clarify, "For the benefit of our listening audience, the Fokker is a German airplane second in popularity only to the Messerschmidt. Isn't that right Ola?"
He responded, "Ja Ja, but in this case, those fokkers were flying Messerschmidts." :rock
Ouch.... I'm sure a few people listening appreciated that. :lol
Who cares, they surrendered like France did...
heh.
These are the first three posts in this thread. DiabloTX is obviously trolling and in violation of several posting rules, or don't you agree Bronk?
-
These are the first three posts in this thread. DiabloTX is obviously trolling and in violation of several posting rules, or don't you agree Bronk?
I think you need to review the rule about being a backseat moderator . . .
-
I think you need to review the rule about being a backseat moderator . . .
Yes I may very well be in violation of that rule.
-
I still fail to see how it is an attack on nilsen or the Norwegians.
Lay down some more straw...your man is a bit thin.
He stated an observation.
-
Shade Hard,
No one is attacking Nilsen or the other Norwegians. This is evidenced by the fact that they have not surrendered.
It's a discussion on whether or not Norway, the country, surrendered in World War 2. Since when are history discussions trolls?
This thread is not a discussion about whether or not Norway, the country, surrendered in World War 2. This thread is a good natured joke thread started by Curlew and trolled by DiabloTX for some reason. I just want to know what you guys have against Nilsen and the Norwegians that you would hijack and troll this thread?
-
I just want to know what you guys have against Nilsen and the Norwegians that you would hijack and troll this thread?
Nothing... see my post above.
-
It is quite clear that DiabloTX deliberately posted to "incite and annoy" the norwegians, and that other trolls, like you, just piled on. I just want to know why? Are you really THAT miserable this holiday season?
-
Cmon ..just come out with it you know you want to. :lol