4 ms·

That doesn't affect the EU as a whole. Sweden is skeptical about giving EU that role anyway, they're working for closer strategic ties to the US, and have signe

That doesn't affect the EU as a whole. Sweden is skeptical about giving EU that role anyway, they're working for closer strategic ties to the US, and have signed agreements to that effect. They already chose Patriot over a German/French project for air defense.

GekkePrutser 5y ago
They've never been team players. Don't forget they were happily building Nazi tank parts in WWII while playing nice with the allies. On the other hand, many EU countries have picked US fighters over Swedish offerings like the Gripen. It does go both ways. I'd love to see the EU more militarily independent from the US. Especially because they tend to start wars for economic reasons. Sponsoring the military industrial complex, oil reasons.. In Europe we view the military more as defense and not as a geopolitical or economical tool. We also view joining the military more as a job and less as a duty to our country. But if EU countries start opting out it'll never happen. We can still be friends with the US, but less military ties would be appreciated IMO.
- reducesuffering 5y ago
  > We also view joining the military more as a job and less as a duty to our country. That isn’t a good thing. See the former Afghan National Army (ANA)
- mariuolo 5y ago
  > They've never been team players. Don't forget they were happily building Nazi tank parts in WWII while playing nice with the allies. Please tell me what they could have done instead, being locked between a nazi-occupied country (Norway), one at war and partially occupied by the Soviets (Finland) and with a military monster to the south. Sweden had to play nice or risk being squashed like a bug. Pretty much the same Switzerland ended up doing.
  - GekkePrutser 5y ago
    Understood, I never really got why the Nazis left Sweden alone but did go after Norway and Denmark. And at the same time were so hell-bent on conquering the empty deserts in North Africa. But those ball bearings and other parts helped kill a lot of allies.
    - mariuolo 5y ago
      > Understood, I never really got why the Nazis left Sweden alone but did go after Norway and Denmark. And at the same time were so hell-bent on conquering the empty deserts in North Africa. Because Sweden had a credible military. Not that she could have resisted indefinitely to a German invasion, but subduing her would have taken time the Axis did not have. > And at the same time were so hell-bent on conquering the empty deserts in North Africa. Sweden was neutral. Britain and Free France weren't. > But those ball bearings and other parts helped kill a lot of allies. Poland was an ally. It was split between Germany and the Soviet Union (and sold off to the Soviets after the war, but that was yet to come). Do you think Sweden should have sacrificed herself after seeing that?

GekkePrutser 5y ago

They've never been team players. Don't forget they were happily building Nazi tank parts in WWII while playing nice with the allies. On the other hand, many EU countries have picked US fighters over Swedish offerings like the Gripen. It does go both ways. I'd love to see the EU more militarily independent from the US. Especially because they tend to start wars for economic reasons. Sponsoring the military industrial complex, oil reasons.. In Europe we view the military more as defense and not as a geopolitical or economical tool. We also view joining the military more as a job and less as a duty to our country. But if EU countries start opting out it'll never happen. We can still be friends with the US, but less military ties would be appreciated IMO.

reducesuffering 5y ago
> We also view joining the military more as a job and less as a duty to our country. That isn’t a good thing. See the former Afghan National Army (ANA)
mariuolo 5y ago
> They've never been team players. Don't forget they were happily building Nazi tank parts in WWII while playing nice with the allies. Please tell me what they could have done instead, being locked between a nazi-occupied country (Norway), one at war and partially occupied by the Soviets (Finland) and with a military monster to the south. Sweden had to play nice or risk being squashed like a bug. Pretty much the same Switzerland ended up doing.
- GekkePrutser 5y ago
  Understood, I never really got why the Nazis left Sweden alone but did go after Norway and Denmark. And at the same time were so hell-bent on conquering the empty deserts in North Africa. But those ball bearings and other parts helped kill a lot of allies.
  - mariuolo 5y ago
    > Understood, I never really got why the Nazis left Sweden alone but did go after Norway and Denmark. And at the same time were so hell-bent on conquering the empty deserts in North Africa. Because Sweden had a credible military. Not that she could have resisted indefinitely to a German invasion, but subduing her would have taken time the Axis did not have. > And at the same time were so hell-bent on conquering the empty deserts in North Africa. Sweden was neutral. Britain and Free France weren't. > But those ball bearings and other parts helped kill a lot of allies. Poland was an ally. It was split between Germany and the Soviet Union (and sold off to the Soviets after the war, but that was yet to come). Do you think Sweden should have sacrificed herself after seeing that?