Nope, you need to find the figures and sources for what the US spends protecting Europe, then prove it isn't tied in to defending the US.lowing wrote:
looks like it was already done for you. Now how about you tell me what Europe spends on helping defend the US.Dilbert_X wrote:
The US has two OCEANS as buffer.
Any potential enemy is on the other side of the world....
Please tell us how much the US spends on the defense of Europe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation … laborationVaregg wrote:
Can you elaborate on this, I'm really interested in Norways path of least resistance ... this is groundbreaking news in modern history that Norway fought on the Nazi side of the war so I'm very interested in the sources of this information ...lowing wrote:
You have a defense pact with the US because WE won...As I said, Norway history is that of the path of least resistance. You should feel provoked, but not because I am wrong, but because you need to come to grips with your country' actions and alliances. In other words, you would have no problem engaging in a "defense pact" with the 3rd Reich. Or was there another reason you fought along side Nazi Germany as well as the Allies? Wasn't sure who was going ot win?
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pi … 9#p3280859Dilbert_X wrote:
Nope, you need to find the figures and sources for what the US spends protecting Europe, then prove it isn't tied in to defending the US.lowing wrote:
looks like it was already done for you. Now how about you tell me what Europe spends on helping defend the US.Dilbert_X wrote:
The US has two OCEANS as buffer.
Any potential enemy is on the other side of the world....
Please tell us how much the US spends on the defense of Europe.
Yeah, except for the part when the Germans installed a puppet government....lowing wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation … laborationVaregg wrote:
Can you elaborate on this, I'm really interested in Norways path of least resistance ... this is groundbreaking news in modern history that Norway fought on the Nazi side of the war so I'm very interested in the sources of this information ...lowing wrote:
You have a defense pact with the US because WE won...As I said, Norway history is that of the path of least resistance. You should feel provoked, but not because I am wrong, but because you need to come to grips with your country' actions and alliances. In other words, you would have no problem engaging in a "defense pact" with the 3rd Reich. Or was there another reason you fought along side Nazi Germany as well as the Allies? Wasn't sure who was going ot win?
As i said, you fought on both sides.
Sorry a post on a forum is not really a source.lowing wrote:
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pi … 9#p3280859Dilbert_X wrote:
Nope, you need to find the figures and sources for what the US spends protecting Europe, then prove it isn't tied in to defending the US.lowing wrote:
looks like it was already done for you. Now how about you tell me what Europe spends on helping defend the US.
I said it looks like it was already provided to you.
Protecting our allies is of course a benefit to the US. Who ever said it wasn't? We just bow to the fact that someone has to protect you.
Yeah except for the part where 15,000 citzens signed on to support and fight for the Nazis.Pug wrote:
Yeah, except for the part when the Germans installed a puppet government....lowing wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation … laborationVaregg wrote:
Can you elaborate on this, I'm really interested in Norways path of least resistance ... this is groundbreaking news in modern history that Norway fought on the Nazi side of the war so I'm very interested in the sources of this information ...
As i said, you fought on both sides.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasjonal_Samling
Sorry, the bases, the men, the equipment, the planes, the tanks, the logistics, the fuel, stationed all over Europe, does the numbers really matter? Can we not agree that it cost a hell of a lot? Can we also not agree, that it is more than any single European nation provides?Dilbert_X wrote:
Sorry a post on a forum is not really a source.lowing wrote:
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pi … 9#p3280859Dilbert_X wrote:
Nope, you need to find the figures and sources for what the US spends protecting Europe, then prove it isn't tied in to defending the US.
I said it looks like it was already provided to you.
Protecting our allies is of course a benefit to the US. Who ever said it wasn't? We just bow to the fact that someone has to protect you.
Yeah, the party had 2% of the vote...sounds like a majority there.lowing wrote:
Yeah except for the part where 15,000 citzens signed on to support and fight for the Nazis.Pug wrote:
Yeah, except for the part when the Germans installed a puppet government....lowing wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_Norway_by_Nazi_Germany#Acceptance_and_collaboration
As i said, you fought on both sides.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasjonal_Samling
Last edited by Pug (2010-08-17 09:10:12)
Norway had a Nazi sympathetic govt. installed, the people not only let it happen, it was supported, and fought for.Pug wrote:
Yeah, the party had 2% of the vote...sounds like a majority there.lowing wrote:
Yeah except for the part where 15,000 citzens signed on to support and fight for the Nazis.Pug wrote:
Yeah, except for the part when the Germans installed a puppet government....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasjonal_Samling
You do realize that a few thousand American with German blood citizens fought for the Germany right?
So what point are you making exactly?
That happens in most threads he participates in.JohnG@lt wrote:
lowing, just bow out of the discussion, you're being stubborn to the point that you are ignoring facts in order to maintain your opinion.
all those nazi sympathisers with their socialised, just-fine european political systems...JohnG@lt wrote:
lowing, just bow out of the discussion, you're being stubborn to the point that you are ignoring facts in order to maintain your opinion. Norway was neither a nazi sympathizing nation, nor did it 'open its gates'. They fought stubbornly in defense of their nation. There were people who worked with the Nazi's in every country that they invaded, this is not unique to history, it's happened in ever single fucking war fought in the history of mankind. Even Cortez had native american allies when he conquered the Aztecs.
quite easily lowing not everybody does everything in self interest , some people actually do care, and would happily give up what they have to make life better for others, you cant argue against this because you're so close minded.lowing wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76frHHpoNFs&feature=related
please watch and comment. How can you argue against this?
Norway built a Norwegian army that fought against the allies. 15,000 man army is not a few traitors or calvery scouts under custer. What I said was absolutely true. Norway fought for both sides of the war.JohnG@lt wrote:
lowing, just bow out of the discussion, you're being stubborn to the point that you are ignoring facts in order to maintain your opinion. Norway was neither a nazi sympathizing nation, nor did it 'open its gates'. They fought stubbornly in defense of their nation. There were people who worked with the Nazi's in every country that they invaded, this is not unique to history, it's happened in ever single fucking war fought in the history of mankind. Even Cortez had native american allies when he conquered the Aztecs.
lol I guess you missed the part where he said "greed" drove all societies. Or the part where he said captialism rendered the highest quality of life for everyone more than any other system in history.LostFate wrote:
quite easily lowing not everybody does everything in self interest , some people actually do care, and would happily give up what they have to make life better for others, you cant argue against this because you're so close minded.lowing wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76frHHpoNFs&feature=related
please watch and comment. How can you argue against this?
15,000 soldiers in a war that saw fifteen million people die. Do you understand how ridiculous your statement is?lowing wrote:
Norway built a Norwegian army that fought against the allies. 15,000 man army is not a few traitors or calvery scouts under custer. What I said was absolutely true. Norway fought for both sides of the war.JohnG@lt wrote:
lowing, just bow out of the discussion, you're being stubborn to the point that you are ignoring facts in order to maintain your opinion. Norway was neither a nazi sympathizing nation, nor did it 'open its gates'. They fought stubbornly in defense of their nation. There were people who worked with the Nazi's in every country that they invaded, this is not unique to history, it's happened in ever single fucking war fought in the history of mankind. Even Cortez had native american allies when he conquered the Aztecs.
Ummmm John? Form what I read, only 11,000 served to fight WITH the allies...So tell me, how is what I said untrue? Norwegians fought for both sides, and in fact, sided MORE with the axis. If 15,000 is insignificant. Also today the Norways military only has about 22,000 men today....How significant is that? Is 22,000 men significant to you?JohnG@lt wrote:
15,000 soldiers in a war that saw fifteen million people die. Do you understand how ridiculous your statement is?lowing wrote:
Norway built a Norwegian army that fought against the allies. 15,000 man army is not a few traitors or calvery scouts under custer. What I said was absolutely true. Norway fought for both sides of the war.JohnG@lt wrote:
lowing, just bow out of the discussion, you're being stubborn to the point that you are ignoring facts in order to maintain your opinion. Norway was neither a nazi sympathizing nation, nor did it 'open its gates'. They fought stubbornly in defense of their nation. There were people who worked with the Nazi's in every country that they invaded, this is not unique to history, it's happened in ever single fucking war fought in the history of mankind. Even Cortez had native american allies when he conquered the Aztecs.
Now look up how many Russians fought for the Germans even though their country was invaded and people were being killed off by the Gestapo in droves. No population on the planet is uniform in their opinions. There were communist and nazi sympathizers right here in America that either did fight for them, or would've fought with them if it didn't entail a trip across the Atlantic. You have this black and white, us vs them, view of the world and it's just all wrong.lowing wrote:
Ummmm John? Form what I read, only 11,000 served to fight WITH the allies...So tell me, how is what I said untrue? Norwegians fought for both sides, and in fact, sided MORE with the axis. If 15,000 is insignificant. Also today the Norways military only has about 22,000 men today....How significant is that? Is 22,000 men significant to you?JohnG@lt wrote:
15,000 soldiers in a war that saw fifteen million people die. Do you understand how ridiculous your statement is?lowing wrote:
Norway built a Norwegian army that fought against the allies. 15,000 man army is not a few traitors or calvery scouts under custer. What I said was absolutely true. Norway fought for both sides of the war.
So what is your argument then? That Norway is not alone in fighting with the Nazis? Not a very compelling argument against what I said. Norway fought for both sides.JohnG@lt wrote:
Now look up how many Russians fought for the Germans even though their country was invaded and people were being killed off by the Gestapo in droves. No population on the planet is uniform in their opinions. There were communist and nazi sympathizers right here in America that either did fight for them, or would've fought with them if it didn't entail a trip across the Atlantic. You have this black and white, us vs them, view of the world and it's just all wrong.lowing wrote:
Ummmm John? Form what I read, only 11,000 served to fight WITH the allies...So tell me, how is what I said untrue? Norwegians fought for both sides, and in fact, sided MORE with the axis. If 15,000 is insignificant. Also today the Norways military only has about 22,000 men today....How significant is that? Is 22,000 men significant to you?JohnG@lt wrote:
15,000 soldiers in a war that saw fifteen million people die. Do you understand how ridiculous your statement is?
Barring you picking up a book and actually reading into the history before taking up a stupid and ignorant position, at least read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Norway
It isn't. Basically "eggy"needs to learn not to throw stones.FatherTed wrote:
how is shitting on wherever eggy is from relevant to this thread?
lol. Read all of that.......It still changes nothing..........15,0000 norwegians fought for Nazi Germany, 11,000 fought for the allies....What I said is true, Norway fought for BOTH sides. Only thing ignorant is to try and deny that.Varegg wrote:
You are just fucking unbelievable lowing ... your ignorance has truly reached new heights.
A short history lesson about Nazi Norway: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_ … e_movement
The above link is from the same page you linked from, and the text was slightly 2 centimeters below the few lines about collaboration ... but as usual you just hunt down and process that tiny picture that fits your agenda ...
You have yet again shown yourself to be an intellectual retard ...
Last edited by lowing (2010-08-18 06:08:45)
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2010-08-18 06:10:47)
Ok, lets go back to the original quote.lowing wrote:
You have a defense pact with the US because WE won...As I said, Norway history is that of the path of least resistance. You should feel provoked, but not because I am wrong, but because you need to come to grips with your country' actions and alliances. In other words, you would have no problem engaging in a "defense pact" with the 3rd Reich. Or was there another reason you fought along side Nazi Germany as well as the Allies? Wasn't sure who was going ot win?
