Norwegin Aces

[Baitman]

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

Technically they are more German than Norwegian Yes

[DiabloTX]

Well, that certainly explains GScholtz.

[Angus]

Well, that certainly explains GScholtz.

 

[E25280]

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.  

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.

[Hangtime]

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!

[rabbidrabbit]

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.

[FLOTSOM]

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

[Grits]

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.

[Baitman]

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......

[Angus]

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....

[Hangtime]

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.

[Angus]

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

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.

[Scherf]

I'm confused now, am I supposed to start despising the Poles at some point?

[Angus]

Of course. If Hangtime had fought on their side, they would not have surrendered!

[RTHolmes]

indeed

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?