5 ms·

Unnecessarily hostile comment. Sweden remained neutral through the war and did not partake in the fighting, as far as I know. They didn't allow troop movements

Unnecessarily hostile comment. Sweden remained neutral through the war and did not partake in the fighting, as far as I know. They didn't allow troop movements into Norway, but did allow troops to move through from Norway, into Finland. They allowed off-duty German soldiers to travel between Norway and Germany, and sold iron ore to Germany. They also shared intelligence with the Allied forces, helped train Danish and Norwegian troops to liberate Denmark, allowed Allied forces use of its airbases, took in a lot of Jewish refugees from Norway and Denmark, The Swedish Red Cross sent buses to evacuate concentration camp inmates, and RAoul Wallenberg used his diplomatc status to save tens of thousands of Jews in Hungary as well.

outside1234 7y ago
I didn't mean it as hostile - it is just a statement of fact. To the original point, if they were "neutral", then what secrets did they have to hold? What does "off duty" even mean in a world war? Not destroying Sweden but allowing them to bring ammunition through to pound Norway? And if they were "neutral", why were they helping the Allies? All in all, your comment does not add up.
- detaro 7y ago
  Could you explain why you think a neutral country would not have secrets? E.g. currently being neutral doesn't mean you don't have preparations on what to do if you get attacked (indeed, both sides in WW2 considered an invasion of Sweden) and would like to keep those secret. You want to keep your diplomatic strategies secret to avoid them being exploited against you. Being neutral does neither necessarily mean "you allow everyone to do whatever they want in your country" nor "you do not interact with the warring parties at all".
- mstade 7y ago
  It's not a statement of fact that Sweden "rolled over" since Germany didn't invade Norway via Sweden, they came by sea and air: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Weserübung https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Weserübung Whether or not Sweden could be considered neutral is a different matter, but there's certainly no "rolling over" if you're never part of the operation in the first place.
- boomlinde 7y ago
  Okay, so you run a country that’s useful to more than one side of the conflict in terms of geography and resources. You want to maintain neutrality, sovereignty and trade. Do you a) let everyone know where your production happens, your military strength, your points of defense, where your most critical infrastructure is and how it works, your general opinion of the combatants, what trade is important to you etc. or b) urge anyone with strategically useful information to keep quiet about it to keep any interested party ignorant and wary? No one answered the question as you thought they would because they frankly assumed a more favorable interpretation. Neutrality is not a state of indefinite peace. It has to be maintained actively.
yakshaving_jgt 7y ago
Yeah, I don't know. Profiting by selling natural resources to the Nazis so they could massacre my ancestors doesn't seem particularly neutral. To whomever down-votes this: please learn your own country's history. https://www.thelocal.se/20120605/41252 https://www.thelocal.se/20120605/41252
- skinkestek 7y ago
  That link was actually interesting. That said, as a non Swede I still think we should make sure we don't blame Swedes today for what their ancestors did - and didn't.
  - yakshaving_jgt 7y ago
    I totally agree. To blame Swedes (or Germans, or Turks, or… most countries throughout human history) today for their history is pretty much the same kind of jingoism as English people today saying they “won the war”. The history of mankind is the history of war. It’s super complicated. We all should read about it, and try to learn its lessons. One of those lessons being to be skeptical of nationalism and xenophobia.
- papermachete 7y ago
  How does iron ore help Nazis massacre your ancestors? Why didn't your ancestors pick up a stick and fight?
  - yakshaving_jgt 7y ago
    Wow. You have essentially just asked me why the Polish didn't fight back. This is the worst take I have seen on this website.
    - papermachete 7y ago
      I'm playing rhetoric and you fell for it with the exact reaction I was expecting. Iron ore is iron ore, blame the ones who used its produce to harm your ancestors.
abbe98 7y ago
That Sweden were neutral during the war is a common saying that's slowly going away among Swedes. Sweden were never neutral, flexible but not neutral. Many Swedes did great things such as taking in Jewish refugees. The Swedish government however shifted sides as the war prospects changed.
- svrtknst 7y ago
  Yeah, but Sweden remained neutral regardless of what people say. It's a pretty well-defined term.
gopaz 7y ago
Also denied the Norwegian king entrance when fleeing Norway (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haakon_VII_of_Norway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haakon_VII_of_Norway) The Red Cross busses also transported prisoners in exchange for the Scandinian ones. Iirc the Swedish government also send a letter stating to rescue the Jews last. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Buses https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Buses) Strategic, rather than neutral I would call it.

outside1234 7y ago

I didn't mean it as hostile - it is just a statement of fact. To the original point, if they were "neutral", then what secrets did they have to hold? What does "off duty" even mean in a world war? Not destroying Sweden but allowing them to bring ammunition through to pound Norway? And if they were "neutral", why were they helping the Allies? All in all, your comment does not add up.

detaro 7y ago
Could you explain why you think a neutral country would not have secrets? E.g. currently being neutral doesn't mean you don't have preparations on what to do if you get attacked (indeed, both sides in WW2 considered an invasion of Sweden) and would like to keep those secret. You want to keep your diplomatic strategies secret to avoid them being exploited against you. Being neutral does neither necessarily mean "you allow everyone to do whatever they want in your country" nor "you do not interact with the warring parties at all".
mstade 7y ago
It's not a statement of fact that Sweden "rolled over" since Germany didn't invade Norway via Sweden, they came by sea and air: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Weserübung https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Weserübung Whether or not Sweden could be considered neutral is a different matter, but there's certainly no "rolling over" if you're never part of the operation in the first place.
boomlinde 7y ago
Okay, so you run a country that’s useful to more than one side of the conflict in terms of geography and resources. You want to maintain neutrality, sovereignty and trade. Do you a) let everyone know where your production happens, your military strength, your points of defense, where your most critical infrastructure is and how it works, your general opinion of the combatants, what trade is important to you etc. or b) urge anyone with strategically useful information to keep quiet about it to keep any interested party ignorant and wary? No one answered the question as you thought they would because they frankly assumed a more favorable interpretation. Neutrality is not a state of indefinite peace. It has to be maintained actively.

yakshaving_jgt 7y ago

Yeah, I don't know. Profiting by selling natural resources to the Nazis so they could massacre my ancestors doesn't seem particularly neutral. To whomever down-votes this: please learn your own country's history. https://www.thelocal.se/20120605/41252 https://www.thelocal.se/20120605/41252

skinkestek 7y ago
That link was actually interesting. That said, as a non Swede I still think we should make sure we don't blame Swedes today for what their ancestors did - and didn't.
- yakshaving_jgt 7y ago
  I totally agree. To blame Swedes (or Germans, or Turks, or… most countries throughout human history) today for their history is pretty much the same kind of jingoism as English people today saying they “won the war”. The history of mankind is the history of war. It’s super complicated. We all should read about it, and try to learn its lessons. One of those lessons being to be skeptical of nationalism and xenophobia.
papermachete 7y ago
How does iron ore help Nazis massacre your ancestors? Why didn't your ancestors pick up a stick and fight?
- yakshaving_jgt 7y ago
  Wow. You have essentially just asked me why the Polish didn't fight back. This is the worst take I have seen on this website.
  - papermachete 7y ago
    I'm playing rhetoric and you fell for it with the exact reaction I was expecting. Iron ore is iron ore, blame the ones who used its produce to harm your ancestors.

abbe98 7y ago

That Sweden were neutral during the war is a common saying that's slowly going away among Swedes. Sweden were never neutral, flexible but not neutral. Many Swedes did great things such as taking in Jewish refugees. The Swedish government however shifted sides as the war prospects changed.

svrtknst 7y ago
Yeah, but Sweden remained neutral regardless of what people say. It's a pretty well-defined term.

gopaz 7y ago

Also denied the Norwegian king entrance when fleeing Norway (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haakon_VII_of_Norway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haakon_VII_of_Norway) The Red Cross busses also transported prisoners in exchange for the Scandinian ones. Iirc the Swedish government also send a letter stating to rescue the Jews last. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Buses https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Buses) Strategic, rather than neutral I would call it.