Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

35

Sweden was a vital source of iron ores to Germany, an important strategic resource for her war effort. Because the allies controlled the seas, Scandinavia was Germany's main source of good quality iron. Attacking Sweden would have disrupted the supply for no real gain. Production of high-grade steel suitable for armour plate and gun barrels depended ...


17

For the same reason he did not invade Switzerland, the cost-benefit ratio was not good. Also, you should realize that the Germans were not just a bunch of frenzied madmen attacking everybody. They were happy to co-exist with other countries that were friendly, such as Sweden. After the war started, many countries, including the United States, Britain and ...


6

Sweden like Switzerland was a neutral country and not involved in the conflict. Attacking Sweden would have tied up military resources and it wasn't really necessary since the resources Germany needed from Sweden could be obtained by trade or diplomacy. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden_during_World_War_II for more information. There was also an ...


5

It is widely held that Gustavus Adolphus sought to become emperor. This is not a modern development, either. In fact, some of his own contemporaries thought Gustavus intended to create a Protestant Germany with him as emperor. The intervention was a war of conquest, it can be claimed ... Historians who have taken this line of reasoning have often ...


4

The problem with doing that is that there was an established precedent in Western Europe that an "emperor" had to be proclaimed as such by the pope. Even Napoleon, who held a popular referendum on his accession to Emperor, required a Papal ceremony to make it official. For a protestant ruler, that's obviously not going to happen. Now, he could I suppose ...


3

It is somewhat important to realize that even Hitler was not so mad as to actually consider invading all of Europe, and getting away with it. He had to consider cost vs. benefit. Hitler's target -- "the plan", as early as 1925 -- was Russia. That's where his ideological enemy was: Bolshevism. That's where his whole screwed "Lebensraum" vision played out: ...


2

Why would it seem like a much better strategic move than invading Russia? They are extremely different propositions, it seems to me. It proved true that Sweden did not need to be invaded. It continued to supply trade and needed resources (mainly iron), and not invading it had advantages such as having a neutral country nearby, which is useful for other ...


1

@Jack Smith Which great wars would those be? If they took place prior to 1871 the Swedes can't have sided with Germany, as it didn't exist. What's more the separate states (Bavaria, Prussia...) would frequently be on opposite sides.


1

It was because there was no STRATEGIC reason for Hitler to attack Sweden. Hitler goal is to colonize Slavic lands in eastern Europe, especially Poland and Russia. He attacked Norway to keep the Allies from opening a second font in the north. He attacked Belgium because it was on the way to France. He attacked France because France didn't want let him attack ...


1

Sweden cooperated with Germany in World War II. (Although the Allies did manage to "launch" Eric Ericcson, a Swedish-American spy, from Sweden, in large part because Germans felt that Sweden was a potential "safe haven" for German "flight capital" by high-ranking Nazis.) My Swedish friends tell me that Sweden allowed Germany overflights to Norway during the ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible