WikiAnswers – Why did Germany not invade Sweden in World War 2


#wikianswers

#

During the invasion of Scandinavia, Sweden kept neutral, but because much of their income was generated by exporting iron, they continued to sell it to Nazi Germany. Sweden would not help Finland fight off the Soviet attack, but 8,000 Swedes volunteered for the Finnish army. Sensing the impending trouble, nearly everyone in the country pitched in to bolster the Swedish defense lines. The meager Swedish army nearly doubled overnight from volunteers and by war�s end tripled from that. Civilians built shelters, scanned the skies for enemy aircraft, donated time and money and made military vehicles and supplies. Germany told Sweden to stay neutral, but “pro-German,” meaning they would have to abide by Germany�s demands. The Swedes would not listen to Germany�s threats and told them if Sweden was invaded they would blow up the iron ore mines. Although Sweden was surrounded by chaotic war, its citizens led relatively normal lives. However, every Swedish family was affected by it because so many civilians were called into the military reserves.

After Germany conquered Denmark and Norway they blockaded Sweden from the outside, forcing Sweden to deal exclusively with Germany. This imposed terrible food and supply shortages, but the resilient Swedes made the best out of a bad situation. They pushed their food production to the limit and used enormous amounts of timber for countless by-products. Censorship was rampant and anti-German and anti-Communist sentiments abounded, which was only compounded when Sweden�s King Gustav V let Germany move their troops across Swedish land. Hitler did not invade Sweden because he did not want to waste valuable troops in Scandinavia when he had other concerns. The Swedes proved their neutrality by not letting Germany use Swedish airspace: when the Germans flew over Sweden to attack Norway, the Swedes fired back with anti-aircraft guns. The Swedish reluctance to bend under German pressure infuriated Hitler, but he had more important things to worry about–the invasion of western Europe.

Hitler did not invade Sweden because Sweden was traditonally a neutral country for over 200 years and Hitler did not want to bother Sweden when he already had Norway, a more strategically located nation.

Germany was already receiving iron ore from Sweeden on a cash and carry basis. Germany also needed a neutral country as a conduit for goods and foreign currency, and a stage for negotiations and an outlet to the world. As bizarre as it sounds, some goods and materials were purchased by neutral 3rd countries from Allied nations (the US for example) and sold to the Germans via Sweeden.

Why should they? The Swedes were willing to trade freely with Germany, offered no great strategic improvement to Germany should they be occupied, and had a military that was of no threat to any of its neighbors.

Contrast this with Russia which had a highly aggressive and expansionist military and political system. Occupation of their territory was Germany’s PRIMARY goal in WWII. Also, Stalin, while willing at times to trade vital materials with Germany was extremely unreliable and would have cut off trade when he thought it would best leverage the Soviet position.

Only nations that posed a threat to Germany, one way or the other, were attacked by the Germans. Despite popular mythology to the contrary, Germany was not on a rampage to take over the world in WWII. They were interested in improving their national security and sought to do this via military means.

Because of its geographic location it was not strategically important, it had no vital resources they wanted to steal and since the Swedes are Nordics the Nazis did not want to eliminate them. Michael Montagne

“since the Swedes are Nordics the Nazis did not want to eliminate them.”

People being Nordic did not stop them invading Norway.

Sweden actually did provide Germany with iron ore throughout most of the war. The Swedes were cooperative with the Germans (while they were still powerful) knowing full well they were at risk of invasion otherwise. As long as they cooperated the germans had no need to launch a costly invasion.

The invasion of Norway was to: Protect the shipping route for Swedish iron from any Allied interdiction.

Actually, this question should be in one of the top positions in questions asked. Sweden provided steel to the nazis, the even provided their railways to them when they invaded Norway. There are many documents on the net and documentaries aired on swedish state television regarding the “swedish-nazi” cooperation during WWII. It was not by chance that Sweden was Europes richest nation at the end of WWII. Today, pro-nazi sentiments still exist making Sweden the No.1 country in the world for self-declared nazis pro-capita. they even have their own political party which is allowed to exist despite WWII and despite present and on-going acts of violence and brutality towards non-native/immigrant individuals. Alot is hush-hush and very little is mentioned in the papers. racism is a problem which unfortunately is underplayed. To be factual..there race or neo-nazi related crimes in Stockholm everyday but they are often just reported for the “text-book” crimes that are committed and the fact that the individuals perpetrating these crimes are neo-nazis and in most of the cases are not first-time offenders is simply omitted.

Im half Swedish and have been wondering about that question forever. Sweden did help Norway when they were invaded. They made a sort of underground resistance with Norway. If a German pilot crashed in Sweden then the Swedes would put him in jail, but if an Allied pilot crashed in Sweden they would let him walk about freely. My grandfather says he rembered seeing a few Allied pilots at some parties in Sweden. What I dont get is that why would Sweden help Norway and also provide the Nazis with iron because if they got caught things could go downhill very fast with the Germans.

sweden had really bad with military units during this time but they played it smart. they took almost all of their units and walkt along the danish line so they germans sholud see thet they had many military (witch they didnt have) and when they had walkt along the line they walked like a D after they had walked with the line they walked back over the land and walked beside the line again :). and german got ALOT of iron from sweden and was afraid thet if they got bad with sweden they shold loose the war becaus they hadent enough iron to built weapons for.

The reason Sweden wasnt invaded were because the germans needed their troops elsewhere.

Germany had planned to attack Sweden several times during world war II, last time was in 1944 when they planned to shoot Vi and V2 rockets against Stockholm from Norway.

As the swedish military grew and became stronger Sweden started to say no to German demands and cutting down on the iron ore export.

Ways to contribute:

  1. Improve the answer by adding new information, removing something incorrect, or fixing spelling or grammar. This answer page might need some special editorial work because it was imported from our old FAQ Farm system. ( You can view the removed content in the question history. )
  • Discuss the question or add other comments that do not directly answer “Why did Germany not invade Sweden in World War 2?”


  • Did Peter Have a Wife? #answer.com #for #kids


    #peters answers

    #

    Catholic Answers Magazine

    Did Peter Have a Wife?

    Apparently so, since he had a mother-in-law. Customarily the two go together. Sometimes they even remain together, both staying in a fellow’s home. This has been the source of many jokes and sad tales, none of which need be recounted here. Instead, let’s consider Matthew 8:14-15 and Luke 4:38-39, which say that Peter’s mother-in-law was sick with a fever. Jesus rebuked the fever. It left her, and she got up and served him and his companions.

    What about Peter’s wife? She is nowhere mentioned. I find this strange. Imagine the scene. There is the mother-in-law, lying in bed. At her side, as one would expect, is her dutiful daughter—except that Matthew and Luke make no reference to her daughter. Leaving her out of the story is strange. It is not the way a writer would be expected to handle the incident, since a daughter usually is the one most frantic about a mother’s condition. The story is tantalizingly brief. Maybe the Evangelists decided to leave out all but the most salient facts. Or maybe it was because Peter’s wife wasn’t there—she already may have died. I think this is the most likely explanation for her non-appearance.

    Those who disagree cite 1 Corinthians 9:5: “Do we not have the right to be accompanied by a wife, as the other apostles and the brethren of the Lord and Cephas?” (RSV-CE). This suggests that in his travels Peter (known as Cephas) journeyed with his wife. The issue is whether the RSV-CE and similar translations are correct. Should the underlying Greek be rendered as “wife” or as something else? I think the stronger case is with the something else.

    In this passage Paul defends himself and the other apostles against charges from a few disgruntled people. He says he is giving “my defense to those who would examine me” (1 Cor. 9:3). He talks about a situation that applies to himself, not just to the others, yet he certainly was not accompanied by his wife, since he had no wife. We know from other testimony of his that he was unmarried. He does not speak of a theoretical marriage, one that he might someday have but does not yet have. He responds to complaints concerning whichever women actually did accompany him and his male companions. This indicates to me that “wife” is not the right translation here.

    The key Greek words in 1 Corinthians 9:5 are “adelphaen gunaika .” The first means “sister,” and the second can be translated as either “woman” or “wife.” This means the phrase translates as “sister woman” or “sister wife,” with “sister” indicating not a biological but a spiritual relationship. It would make sense for the apostles to be accompanied by “sister women” who could assist them in ministering to women—for example, at full-immersion baptisms, where a question of modesty could arise, or in cases where it would be more appropriate for a woman to perform a charitable or catechetical function.

    This finds support in the Fathers. “Sister woman” is found in Jerome’s Vulgate, and Jerome wrote that “It is clear that [they] must not be seen as wives but, as we have said, as women who assisted [the apostles] with their goods” (Ad. Jovinian I, 26). Clement of Alexandria agreed, saying the women were not the wives of the apostles but were female assistants who could enter the homes of women and could teach them there (Stromata III, 6).

    In short, I think Peter was a widower at the time his mother-in-law was healed.

    Karl Keating is founder and senior fellow at Catholic Answers. He is the author of seven books, including his most recent, The New Geocentrists and The Ultimate Catholic Quiz. His books Catholicism and Fundamentalism and What Catholics Really Believe have been.


    History, Politics – What did Americans do to support the Korean War


    #answer.com for kids

    #

    History, Politics & Society Supervisors

    Experts you should follow

    Yes. Indeed, since they made more use of paper (news papers, legal papers of all kinds, etc.) they bore by far the greatest share of the tax. Michael Montagne

    You need to be more specific about which war in Lebanon you are referring to. There have been several in the last 30 years. If you are referring to the latest clashes in southern Lebanon (circa 2006), that fighting was between the IDF (Israeli Defense Force) and Hezbollah (one of the major paramili

    The 8 rays of the sun stand for the first 8 provinces that revolted against Spain. These provinces were: Manila, Bulacan, Tarlac, Pampanga, Nueva Ecija, Laguna, Batangas, and Cavite. br / The 8 rays of the sun stands for the first eight provinces particularly in Luzon who revolted against th

    Since your question was put under history I will take it as that, but it’s a difficult question to answer because it involves many countries of the world and each government is different to protect ancient ruins, etc. In the U.S. President George Bush signed the Native American Graves Protection

    Nat Turner or Gabriel Prosser Answer You may be surprised to learn the first uprising was actually in 1800 by Gabriel Prosser. Born circa 1775, near Richmond, VA. Died September 1800, Richmond, VA. He was an American slave who planned the first major slave rebellion in U.S. history (Aug. 3

    To the lower class, he presented himself as a man of the people. He promised changed and gave people hope in a better life without war. And I would think that at one point, people only followed him due to fear. Many people would admit that although he was heavily crude, he was efficient and accomp

    The British applied that nickname to Washington, at least early in the War for Independence. The Continental Army had performed so poorly in the New York campaign that the British musicians had started playing fox hunting calls whenever the inevitable retreat began. Thus they were saying that this

    Answer When the new Republic of Czechoslovakia was declared in 1918, it included an area shaped like a horseshoe around Bohemia and Moravia, with a large number of German speaking inhabitants. This area was known as Sudertenland. This German speaking Sudetenland minoirty was used as an excuse by

    Through the reforms; Charles and Philip were from the house of Bourbon. They installed the mercantile reforms in the 18 century in tropical America, to grow sugar for profit.

    It is very important to study and remember the past to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past. History is littered with politicians who have not studied the past and have fallen into the same trap as their predecessors. British, French and German Generals dismissed the lessons of the machine gun u

    Look up each individual nation. Try something like ” When did the United States become a full nation?”

    Hitler did not like democracy. He was born in 1889 in a time of European monarchies and that is the only form of government that he was familier with. He despised them too and thought that they had become corrupt and were responsible for the lack of hope in the lower classes of the people that he gr

    In the late 1930’s the US hero Charles Lindbergh joined with many other Americans to create an anti war atmosphere. Whatever the value of joining the war before 1941, it seemed correct as the US was not until late 1941 that the US faced the Pearl Harbor disaster.

    The states that played major roles in the US Civil War was the border states they were the states that bordered both the south and the north. Although most of the states favored the North.

    Japan withdrew from the League of Nations as a result of the Manchurian Railway Incident in northen China. When the League did not support them and under pressure from other nations Japan withdrew as it no longer supported the concepts of the League. New Answer Headline The Mukden Incident was the d

    The original answer here was not mine. I have no idea how it said it was. My answer is stated above.

    I agree that World War II could have been avoided if the League of Nations had been more assertive, but the other countries could not have just stand there and do nothing. If they had done that, Germany could have taken over the whole of Europe. All wars are preventable by negotiation beforehand,

    The border between Maryland and Virginia is the Potomac River. Washington D.C. is on the north bank of the Potomac, on land ceded to the federal government by the Maryland. Thus, if Maryland had seceeded and joined the Confederacy, the Capital of the United States would have been in the middle of th


    WikiAnswers – Why did Germany not invade Sweden in World War 2


    #wikianswers

    #

    During the invasion of Scandinavia, Sweden kept neutral, but because much of their income was generated by exporting iron, they continued to sell it to Nazi Germany. Sweden would not help Finland fight off the Soviet attack, but 8,000 Swedes volunteered for the Finnish army. Sensing the impending trouble, nearly everyone in the country pitched in to bolster the Swedish defense lines. The meager Swedish army nearly doubled overnight from volunteers and by war�s end tripled from that. Civilians built shelters, scanned the skies for enemy aircraft, donated time and money and made military vehicles and supplies. Germany told Sweden to stay neutral, but “pro-German,” meaning they would have to abide by Germany�s demands. The Swedes would not listen to Germany�s threats and told them if Sweden was invaded they would blow up the iron ore mines. Although Sweden was surrounded by chaotic war, its citizens led relatively normal lives. However, every Swedish family was affected by it because so many civilians were called into the military reserves.

    After Germany conquered Denmark and Norway they blockaded Sweden from the outside, forcing Sweden to deal exclusively with Germany. This imposed terrible food and supply shortages, but the resilient Swedes made the best out of a bad situation. They pushed their food production to the limit and used enormous amounts of timber for countless by-products. Censorship was rampant and anti-German and anti-Communist sentiments abounded, which was only compounded when Sweden�s King Gustav V let Germany move their troops across Swedish land. Hitler did not invade Sweden because he did not want to waste valuable troops in Scandinavia when he had other concerns. The Swedes proved their neutrality by not letting Germany use Swedish airspace: when the Germans flew over Sweden to attack Norway, the Swedes fired back with anti-aircraft guns. The Swedish reluctance to bend under German pressure infuriated Hitler, but he had more important things to worry about–the invasion of western Europe.

    Hitler did not invade Sweden because Sweden was traditonally a neutral country for over 200 years and Hitler did not want to bother Sweden when he already had Norway, a more strategically located nation.

    Germany was already receiving iron ore from Sweeden on a cash and carry basis. Germany also needed a neutral country as a conduit for goods and foreign currency, and a stage for negotiations and an outlet to the world. As bizarre as it sounds, some goods and materials were purchased by neutral 3rd countries from Allied nations (the US for example) and sold to the Germans via Sweeden.

    Why should they? The Swedes were willing to trade freely with Germany, offered no great strategic improvement to Germany should they be occupied, and had a military that was of no threat to any of its neighbors.

    Contrast this with Russia which had a highly aggressive and expansionist military and political system. Occupation of their territory was Germany’s PRIMARY goal in WWII. Also, Stalin, while willing at times to trade vital materials with Germany was extremely unreliable and would have cut off trade when he thought it would best leverage the Soviet position.

    Only nations that posed a threat to Germany, one way or the other, were attacked by the Germans. Despite popular mythology to the contrary, Germany was not on a rampage to take over the world in WWII. They were interested in improving their national security and sought to do this via military means.

    Because of its geographic location it was not strategically important, it had no vital resources they wanted to steal and since the Swedes are Nordics the Nazis did not want to eliminate them. Michael Montagne

    “since the Swedes are Nordics the Nazis did not want to eliminate them.”

    People being Nordic did not stop them invading Norway.

    Sweden actually did provide Germany with iron ore throughout most of the war. The Swedes were cooperative with the Germans (while they were still powerful) knowing full well they were at risk of invasion otherwise. As long as they cooperated the germans had no need to launch a costly invasion.

    The invasion of Norway was to: Protect the shipping route for Swedish iron from any Allied interdiction.

    Actually, this question should be in one of the top positions in questions asked. Sweden provided steel to the nazis, the even provided their railways to them when they invaded Norway. There are many documents on the net and documentaries aired on swedish state television regarding the “swedish-nazi” cooperation during WWII. It was not by chance that Sweden was Europes richest nation at the end of WWII. Today, pro-nazi sentiments still exist making Sweden the No.1 country in the world for self-declared nazis pro-capita. they even have their own political party which is allowed to exist despite WWII and despite present and on-going acts of violence and brutality towards non-native/immigrant individuals. Alot is hush-hush and very little is mentioned in the papers. racism is a problem which unfortunately is underplayed. To be factual..there race or neo-nazi related crimes in Stockholm everyday but they are often just reported for the “text-book” crimes that are committed and the fact that the individuals perpetrating these crimes are neo-nazis and in most of the cases are not first-time offenders is simply omitted.

    Im half Swedish and have been wondering about that question forever. Sweden did help Norway when they were invaded. They made a sort of underground resistance with Norway. If a German pilot crashed in Sweden then the Swedes would put him in jail, but if an Allied pilot crashed in Sweden they would let him walk about freely. My grandfather says he rembered seeing a few Allied pilots at some parties in Sweden. What I dont get is that why would Sweden help Norway and also provide the Nazis with iron because if they got caught things could go downhill very fast with the Germans.

    sweden had really bad with military units during this time but they played it smart. they took almost all of their units and walkt along the danish line so they germans sholud see thet they had many military (witch they didnt have) and when they had walkt along the line they walked like a D after they had walked with the line they walked back over the land and walked beside the line again :). and german got ALOT of iron from sweden and was afraid thet if they got bad with sweden they shold loose the war becaus they hadent enough iron to built weapons for.

    The reason Sweden wasnt invaded were because the germans needed their troops elsewhere.

    Germany had planned to attack Sweden several times during world war II, last time was in 1944 when they planned to shoot Vi and V2 rockets against Stockholm from Norway.

    As the swedish military grew and became stronger Sweden started to say no to German demands and cutting down on the iron ore export.

    Ways to contribute:

    1. Improve the answer by adding new information, removing something incorrect, or fixing spelling or grammar. This answer page might need some special editorial work because it was imported from our old FAQ Farm system. ( You can view the removed content in the question history. )
  • Discuss the question or add other comments that do not directly answer “Why did Germany not invade Sweden in World War 2?”


  • Did Peter Have a Wife? #math #problems #and #answers


    #peters answers

    #

    Catholic Answers Magazine

    Did Peter Have a Wife?

    Apparently so, since he had a mother-in-law. Customarily the two go together. Sometimes they even remain together, both staying in a fellow’s home. This has been the source of many jokes and sad tales, none of which need be recounted here. Instead, let’s consider Matthew 8:14-15 and Luke 4:38-39, which say that Peter’s mother-in-law was sick with a fever. Jesus rebuked the fever. It left her, and she got up and served him and his companions.

    What about Peter’s wife? She is nowhere mentioned. I find this strange. Imagine the scene. There is the mother-in-law, lying in bed. At her side, as one would expect, is her dutiful daughter—except that Matthew and Luke make no reference to her daughter. Leaving her out of the story is strange. It is not the way a writer would be expected to handle the incident, since a daughter usually is the one most frantic about a mother’s condition. The story is tantalizingly brief. Maybe the Evangelists decided to leave out all but the most salient facts. Or maybe it was because Peter’s wife wasn’t there—she already may have died. I think this is the most likely explanation for her non-appearance.

    Those who disagree cite 1 Corinthians 9:5: “Do we not have the right to be accompanied by a wife, as the other apostles and the brethren of the Lord and Cephas?” (RSV-CE). This suggests that in his travels Peter (known as Cephas) journeyed with his wife. The issue is whether the RSV-CE and similar translations are correct. Should the underlying Greek be rendered as “wife” or as something else? I think the stronger case is with the something else.

    In this passage Paul defends himself and the other apostles against charges from a few disgruntled people. He says he is giving “my defense to those who would examine me” (1 Cor. 9:3). He talks about a situation that applies to himself, not just to the others, yet he certainly was not accompanied by his wife, since he had no wife. We know from other testimony of his that he was unmarried. He does not speak of a theoretical marriage, one that he might someday have but does not yet have. He responds to complaints concerning whichever women actually did accompany him and his male companions. This indicates to me that “wife” is not the right translation here.

    The key Greek words in 1 Corinthians 9:5 are “adelphaen gunaika .” The first means “sister,” and the second can be translated as either “woman” or “wife.” This means the phrase translates as “sister woman” or “sister wife,” with “sister” indicating not a biological but a spiritual relationship. It would make sense for the apostles to be accompanied by “sister women” who could assist them in ministering to women—for example, at full-immersion baptisms, where a question of modesty could arise, or in cases where it would be more appropriate for a woman to perform a charitable or catechetical function.

    This finds support in the Fathers. “Sister woman” is found in Jerome’s Vulgate, and Jerome wrote that “It is clear that [they] must not be seen as wives but, as we have said, as women who assisted [the apostles] with their goods” (Ad. Jovinian I, 26). Clement of Alexandria agreed, saying the women were not the wives of the apostles but were female assistants who could enter the homes of women and could teach them there (Stromata III, 6).

    In short, I think Peter was a widower at the time his mother-in-law was healed.

    Karl Keating is founder and senior fellow at Catholic Answers. He is the author of seven books, including his most recent, The New Geocentrists and The Ultimate Catholic Quiz. His books Catholicism and Fundamentalism and What Catholics Really Believe have been.


    History, Politics – What did Americans do to support the Korean War


    #answer.com for kids

    #

    History, Politics & Society Supervisors

    Experts you should follow

    Yes. Indeed, since they made more use of paper (news papers, legal papers of all kinds, etc.) they bore by far the greatest share of the tax. Michael Montagne

    You need to be more specific about which war in Lebanon you are referring to. There have been several in the last 30 years. If you are referring to the latest clashes in southern Lebanon (circa 2006), that fighting was between the IDF (Israeli Defense Force) and Hezbollah (one of the major paramili

    The 8 rays of the sun stand for the first 8 provinces that revolted against Spain. These provinces were: Manila, Bulacan, Tarlac, Pampanga, Nueva Ecija, Laguna, Batangas, and Cavite. br / The 8 rays of the sun stands for the first eight provinces particularly in Luzon who revolted against th

    Since your question was put under history I will take it as that, but it’s a difficult question to answer because it involves many countries of the world and each government is different to protect ancient ruins, etc. In the U.S. President George Bush signed the Native American Graves Protection

    Nat Turner or Gabriel Prosser Answer You may be surprised to learn the first uprising was actually in 1800 by Gabriel Prosser. Born circa 1775, near Richmond, VA. Died September 1800, Richmond, VA. He was an American slave who planned the first major slave rebellion in U.S. history (Aug. 3

    To the lower class, he presented himself as a man of the people. He promised changed and gave people hope in a better life without war. And I would think that at one point, people only followed him due to fear. Many people would admit that although he was heavily crude, he was efficient and accomp

    The British applied that nickname to Washington, at least early in the War for Independence. The Continental Army had performed so poorly in the New York campaign that the British musicians had started playing fox hunting calls whenever the inevitable retreat began. Thus they were saying that this

    Answer When the new Republic of Czechoslovakia was declared in 1918, it included an area shaped like a horseshoe around Bohemia and Moravia, with a large number of German speaking inhabitants. This area was known as Sudertenland. This German speaking Sudetenland minoirty was used as an excuse by

    Through the reforms; Charles and Philip were from the house of Bourbon. They installed the mercantile reforms in the 18 century in tropical America, to grow sugar for profit.

    It is very important to study and remember the past to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past. History is littered with politicians who have not studied the past and have fallen into the same trap as their predecessors. British, French and German Generals dismissed the lessons of the machine gun u

    Look up each individual nation. Try something like ” When did the United States become a full nation?”

    Hitler did not like democracy. He was born in 1889 in a time of European monarchies and that is the only form of government that he was familier with. He despised them too and thought that they had become corrupt and were responsible for the lack of hope in the lower classes of the people that he gr

    In the late 1930’s the US hero Charles Lindbergh joined with many other Americans to create an anti war atmosphere. Whatever the value of joining the war before 1941, it seemed correct as the US was not until late 1941 that the US faced the Pearl Harbor disaster.

    The states that played major roles in the US Civil War was the border states they were the states that bordered both the south and the north. Although most of the states favored the North.

    Japan withdrew from the League of Nations as a result of the Manchurian Railway Incident in northen China. When the League did not support them and under pressure from other nations Japan withdrew as it no longer supported the concepts of the League. New Answer Headline The Mukden Incident was the d

    The original answer here was not mine. I have no idea how it said it was. My answer is stated above.

    I agree that World War II could have been avoided if the League of Nations had been more assertive, but the other countries could not have just stand there and do nothing. If they had done that, Germany could have taken over the whole of Europe. All wars are preventable by negotiation beforehand,

    The border between Maryland and Virginia is the Potomac River. Washington D.C. is on the north bank of the Potomac, on land ceded to the federal government by the Maryland. Thus, if Maryland had seceeded and joined the Confederacy, the Capital of the United States would have been in the middle of th


    WikiAnswers – Why did Germany not invade Sweden in World War 2


    #wikianswers

    #

    During the invasion of Scandinavia, Sweden kept neutral, but because much of their income was generated by exporting iron, they continued to sell it to Nazi Germany. Sweden would not help Finland fight off the Soviet attack, but 8,000 Swedes volunteered for the Finnish army. Sensing the impending trouble, nearly everyone in the country pitched in to bolster the Swedish defense lines. The meager Swedish army nearly doubled overnight from volunteers and by war�s end tripled from that. Civilians built shelters, scanned the skies for enemy aircraft, donated time and money and made military vehicles and supplies. Germany told Sweden to stay neutral, but “pro-German,” meaning they would have to abide by Germany�s demands. The Swedes would not listen to Germany�s threats and told them if Sweden was invaded they would blow up the iron ore mines. Although Sweden was surrounded by chaotic war, its citizens led relatively normal lives. However, every Swedish family was affected by it because so many civilians were called into the military reserves.

    After Germany conquered Denmark and Norway they blockaded Sweden from the outside, forcing Sweden to deal exclusively with Germany. This imposed terrible food and supply shortages, but the resilient Swedes made the best out of a bad situation. They pushed their food production to the limit and used enormous amounts of timber for countless by-products. Censorship was rampant and anti-German and anti-Communist sentiments abounded, which was only compounded when Sweden�s King Gustav V let Germany move their troops across Swedish land. Hitler did not invade Sweden because he did not want to waste valuable troops in Scandinavia when he had other concerns. The Swedes proved their neutrality by not letting Germany use Swedish airspace: when the Germans flew over Sweden to attack Norway, the Swedes fired back with anti-aircraft guns. The Swedish reluctance to bend under German pressure infuriated Hitler, but he had more important things to worry about–the invasion of western Europe.

    Hitler did not invade Sweden because Sweden was traditonally a neutral country for over 200 years and Hitler did not want to bother Sweden when he already had Norway, a more strategically located nation.

    Germany was already receiving iron ore from Sweeden on a cash and carry basis. Germany also needed a neutral country as a conduit for goods and foreign currency, and a stage for negotiations and an outlet to the world. As bizarre as it sounds, some goods and materials were purchased by neutral 3rd countries from Allied nations (the US for example) and sold to the Germans via Sweeden.

    Why should they? The Swedes were willing to trade freely with Germany, offered no great strategic improvement to Germany should they be occupied, and had a military that was of no threat to any of its neighbors.

    Contrast this with Russia which had a highly aggressive and expansionist military and political system. Occupation of their territory was Germany’s PRIMARY goal in WWII. Also, Stalin, while willing at times to trade vital materials with Germany was extremely unreliable and would have cut off trade when he thought it would best leverage the Soviet position.

    Only nations that posed a threat to Germany, one way or the other, were attacked by the Germans. Despite popular mythology to the contrary, Germany was not on a rampage to take over the world in WWII. They were interested in improving their national security and sought to do this via military means.

    Because of its geographic location it was not strategically important, it had no vital resources they wanted to steal and since the Swedes are Nordics the Nazis did not want to eliminate them. Michael Montagne

    “since the Swedes are Nordics the Nazis did not want to eliminate them.”

    People being Nordic did not stop them invading Norway.

    Sweden actually did provide Germany with iron ore throughout most of the war. The Swedes were cooperative with the Germans (while they were still powerful) knowing full well they were at risk of invasion otherwise. As long as they cooperated the germans had no need to launch a costly invasion.

    The invasion of Norway was to: Protect the shipping route for Swedish iron from any Allied interdiction.

    Actually, this question should be in one of the top positions in questions asked. Sweden provided steel to the nazis, the even provided their railways to them when they invaded Norway. There are many documents on the net and documentaries aired on swedish state television regarding the “swedish-nazi” cooperation during WWII. It was not by chance that Sweden was Europes richest nation at the end of WWII. Today, pro-nazi sentiments still exist making Sweden the No.1 country in the world for self-declared nazis pro-capita. they even have their own political party which is allowed to exist despite WWII and despite present and on-going acts of violence and brutality towards non-native/immigrant individuals. Alot is hush-hush and very little is mentioned in the papers. racism is a problem which unfortunately is underplayed. To be factual..there race or neo-nazi related crimes in Stockholm everyday but they are often just reported for the “text-book” crimes that are committed and the fact that the individuals perpetrating these crimes are neo-nazis and in most of the cases are not first-time offenders is simply omitted.

    Im half Swedish and have been wondering about that question forever. Sweden did help Norway when they were invaded. They made a sort of underground resistance with Norway. If a German pilot crashed in Sweden then the Swedes would put him in jail, but if an Allied pilot crashed in Sweden they would let him walk about freely. My grandfather says he rembered seeing a few Allied pilots at some parties in Sweden. What I dont get is that why would Sweden help Norway and also provide the Nazis with iron because if they got caught things could go downhill very fast with the Germans.

    sweden had really bad with military units during this time but they played it smart. they took almost all of their units and walkt along the danish line so they germans sholud see thet they had many military (witch they didnt have) and when they had walkt along the line they walked like a D after they had walked with the line they walked back over the land and walked beside the line again :). and german got ALOT of iron from sweden and was afraid thet if they got bad with sweden they shold loose the war becaus they hadent enough iron to built weapons for.

    The reason Sweden wasnt invaded were because the germans needed their troops elsewhere.

    Germany had planned to attack Sweden several times during world war II, last time was in 1944 when they planned to shoot Vi and V2 rockets against Stockholm from Norway.

    As the swedish military grew and became stronger Sweden started to say no to German demands and cutting down on the iron ore export.

    Ways to contribute:

    1. Improve the answer by adding new information, removing something incorrect, or fixing spelling or grammar. This answer page might need some special editorial work because it was imported from our old FAQ Farm system. ( You can view the removed content in the question history. )
  • Discuss the question or add other comments that do not directly answer “Why did Germany not invade Sweden in World War 2?”


  • Solar power in Germany: How a cloudy country became the world leader


    #

    Even Environmentalists Are Beginning to Grumble About Germany’s Solar Boom

    Even Environmentalists Are Beginning to Grumble About Germany’s Solar Boom

    Can You Have Too Much Solar Energy?

    Photo by Michaela Rehle/Reuters

    It s been a long, dark winter in Germany. In fact, there hasn t been this little sun since people started tracking such things back in the early 1950s. Easter is around the corner, and the streets of Berlin are still covered in ice and snow. But spring will come, and when the snow finally melts, it will reveal the glossy black sheen of photovoltaic solar panels glinting from the North Sea to the Bavarian Alps.

    Solar panels line Germany s residential rooftops and top its low-slung barns. They sprout in orderly rows along train tracks and cover hills of coal mine tailings in what used to be East Germany. Old Soviet military bases, too polluted to use for anything else, have been turned into solar installations.

    Twenty-two percent of Germany s power is generated with renewables. Solar provides close to a quarter of that. The southern German state of Bavaria, population 12.5 million, has three photovoltaic panels per resident, which adds up to more installed solar capacity than in the entire United States .

    With a long history of coal mining and heavy industry and the aforementioned winter gloom, Germany is not the country you d naturally think of as a solar power. And yet a combination of canny regulation and widespread public support for renewables have made Germany an unlikely leader in the global green-power movement and created a groundswell of small-scale power generation that could upend the dominance of traditional power companies.

    Twenty years ago, it was clear solar power wasn t going to get anywhere by itself. Photovoltaic panels were expensive and inefficient. Even solar systems designed to heat water, a far less technologically tricky task, were bad buys on the open market. Producing electricity from sunlight costs 10 times more than generating power using coal or nuclear energy. The early systems might as well have been made out of gold, says David Wedepohl, a spokesman for Germany s Solar Industry Association.

    In 1991, German politicians from across the political spectrum quietly passed the Erneuerbare Energien Gesetz (renewable energy law), or EEG. It was a little-heralded measure with long-lasting consequences.

    The law guaranteed small hydroelectric power generators mostly in Bavaria, a politically conservative area I like to think of as the Texas of Germany a market for their electricity. The EEG required utility companies to plug all renewable power producers, down to the smallest rooftop solar panel, into the national grid and buy their power at a fixed, slightly above-market rate that guaranteed a modest return over the long term. The prices were supposed to balance out the hidden costs of conventional power, from pollution to decades of coal subsidies.

    Investors began to approach solar and wind power as long-term investments, knowing there was a guaranteed future for renewable energy and a commitment to connecting it to the grid. Paperwork for renewables was streamlined a big move in bureaucracy-loving Germany. The country invested billions in renewables research in the 1990s, and German reunification meant lots of money for energy development projects in the former East.

    Now German companies lead the world in solar research and technology. The handful of companies that make inverters, the devices that reverse the flow of electricity and feed power from rooftop solar panels back into national grids, are almost all German. On a sunny day last May, Germany produced 22 gigawatts of energy from the sun half of the world s total and the equivalent of 20 nuclear power plants.

    The feed-in laws and subsidies pushed innovation to the point where solar panels are cheap enough to compete on the open market in Germany and elsewhere. The price for solar panels has fallen 66 percent since 2006, and the cost of solar-generated power may be competitive with coal in a few years, according to a study by UBS. Already, solar projects are thriving in places like India and Italy despite a lack of government subsidies or support, and a recent Deutsche Bank report predicted grid parity in Bavaria by next year.

    You might think Germany would be smug about all its solar success. But, as usual, folks here are full of doubts. Part of the reason solar panels are getting cheaper is competition from China, which is threatening to push more expensive German producers out of business. Last year, German conservatives tried to end solar subsidies entirely, arguing that plummeting prices were encouraging too many people to install solar panels. They said that the subsidies come at the expense of city dwellers without solar-ready roofs, low-income electricity consumers, and investments in other forms of renewable energy. Even environmentalists have begun to grumble about the solar boom, which sucks up half of Germany s funding for renewables but provides just 20 percent of green power.

    The proliferation of privately owned solar has large power companies in Germany worried. For two decades, they ve been forced to facilitate and finance their competition, helping turn customers into producers. Soon, rooftop solar and other small-scale, locally owned renewables could upset the market for coal and nuclear power.

    Here s why that s a problem: Renewable energy sources like wind and solar generate power intermittently, dependent on the sun or fickle breezes. Until researchers can find a way to store energy at a large scale. coal and nuclear plants which can t simply be switched on and off at will must be kept running to guarantee a steady stream of electricity when the sun isn t shining.

    That means overproduction of power during daylight hours, as the country s ample solar energy floods onto the grid along with electricity produced by power plants. Power companies traditionally charge more during the day, when offices are full and manufacturing plants are in full swing, so the glut of daytime solar power reduces their profit. The proliferation of solar panels on homes also takes high-margin residential customers off the grid at peak hours. And the energy surplus has driven prices for traditional coal and nuclear power down, even as renewables are still guaranteed more-than-competitive rates. As power companies try to pass the costs to consumers in the form of higher bills, that just encourages more people to put solar panels on their roofs.

    Already, Germany s power companies are closing power plants and scrapping plans for new ones. Germany had a national freak-out after the Fukushima disaster and decided to abolish nuclear power by 2023. Meanwhile, energy prices continue to sink, and solar installation continues to grow. By decentralizing power generation, the renewables boom could do to the power industry what the Internet did to the media: Put power in the hands of the little guy, and force power companies to rethink how they do business. As soon as the sun comes out, that is.


    Did Peter Have a Wife? #answer #to #questions


    #peters answers

    #

    Catholic Answers Magazine

    Did Peter Have a Wife?

    Apparently so, since he had a mother-in-law. Customarily the two go together. Sometimes they even remain together, both staying in a fellow’s home. This has been the source of many jokes and sad tales, none of which need be recounted here. Instead, let’s consider Matthew 8:14-15 and Luke 4:38-39, which say that Peter’s mother-in-law was sick with a fever. Jesus rebuked the fever. It left her, and she got up and served him and his companions.

    What about Peter’s wife? She is nowhere mentioned. I find this strange. Imagine the scene. There is the mother-in-law, lying in bed. At her side, as one would expect, is her dutiful daughter—except that Matthew and Luke make no reference to her daughter. Leaving her out of the story is strange. It is not the way a writer would be expected to handle the incident, since a daughter usually is the one most frantic about a mother’s condition. The story is tantalizingly brief. Maybe the Evangelists decided to leave out all but the most salient facts. Or maybe it was because Peter’s wife wasn’t there—she already may have died. I think this is the most likely explanation for her non-appearance.

    Those who disagree cite 1 Corinthians 9:5: “Do we not have the right to be accompanied by a wife, as the other apostles and the brethren of the Lord and Cephas?” (RSV-CE). This suggests that in his travels Peter (known as Cephas) journeyed with his wife. The issue is whether the RSV-CE and similar translations are correct. Should the underlying Greek be rendered as “wife” or as something else? I think the stronger case is with the something else.

    In this passage Paul defends himself and the other apostles against charges from a few disgruntled people. He says he is giving “my defense to those who would examine me” (1 Cor. 9:3). He talks about a situation that applies to himself, not just to the others, yet he certainly was not accompanied by his wife, since he had no wife. We know from other testimony of his that he was unmarried. He does not speak of a theoretical marriage, one that he might someday have but does not yet have. He responds to complaints concerning whichever women actually did accompany him and his male companions. This indicates to me that “wife” is not the right translation here.

    The key Greek words in 1 Corinthians 9:5 are “adelphaen gunaika .” The first means “sister,” and the second can be translated as either “woman” or “wife.” This means the phrase translates as “sister woman” or “sister wife,” with “sister” indicating not a biological but a spiritual relationship. It would make sense for the apostles to be accompanied by “sister women” who could assist them in ministering to women—for example, at full-immersion baptisms, where a question of modesty could arise, or in cases where it would be more appropriate for a woman to perform a charitable or catechetical function.

    This finds support in the Fathers. “Sister woman” is found in Jerome’s Vulgate, and Jerome wrote that “It is clear that [they] must not be seen as wives but, as we have said, as women who assisted [the apostles] with their goods” (Ad. Jovinian I, 26). Clement of Alexandria agreed, saying the women were not the wives of the apostles but were female assistants who could enter the homes of women and could teach them there (Stromata III, 6).

    In short, I think Peter was a widower at the time his mother-in-law was healed.

    Karl Keating is founder and senior fellow at Catholic Answers. He is the author of seven books, including his most recent, The New Geocentrists and The Ultimate Catholic Quiz. His books Catholicism and Fundamentalism and What Catholics Really Believe have been.


    History, Politics – What did Americans do to support the Korean War


    #answer.com for kids

    #

    History, Politics & Society Supervisors

    Experts you should follow

    Yes. Indeed, since they made more use of paper (news papers, legal papers of all kinds, etc.) they bore by far the greatest share of the tax. Michael Montagne

    You need to be more specific about which war in Lebanon you are referring to. There have been several in the last 30 years. If you are referring to the latest clashes in southern Lebanon (circa 2006), that fighting was between the IDF (Israeli Defense Force) and Hezbollah (one of the major paramili

    The 8 rays of the sun stand for the first 8 provinces that revolted against Spain. These provinces were: Manila, Bulacan, Tarlac, Pampanga, Nueva Ecija, Laguna, Batangas, and Cavite. br / The 8 rays of the sun stands for the first eight provinces particularly in Luzon who revolted against th

    Since your question was put under history I will take it as that, but it’s a difficult question to answer because it involves many countries of the world and each government is different to protect ancient ruins, etc. In the U.S. President George Bush signed the Native American Graves Protection

    Nat Turner or Gabriel Prosser Answer You may be surprised to learn the first uprising was actually in 1800 by Gabriel Prosser. Born circa 1775, near Richmond, VA. Died September 1800, Richmond, VA. He was an American slave who planned the first major slave rebellion in U.S. history (Aug. 3

    To the lower class, he presented himself as a man of the people. He promised changed and gave people hope in a better life without war. And I would think that at one point, people only followed him due to fear. Many people would admit that although he was heavily crude, he was efficient and accomp

    The British applied that nickname to Washington, at least early in the War for Independence. The Continental Army had performed so poorly in the New York campaign that the British musicians had started playing fox hunting calls whenever the inevitable retreat began. Thus they were saying that this

    Answer When the new Republic of Czechoslovakia was declared in 1918, it included an area shaped like a horseshoe around Bohemia and Moravia, with a large number of German speaking inhabitants. This area was known as Sudertenland. This German speaking Sudetenland minoirty was used as an excuse by

    Through the reforms; Charles and Philip were from the house of Bourbon. They installed the mercantile reforms in the 18 century in tropical America, to grow sugar for profit.

    It is very important to study and remember the past to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past. History is littered with politicians who have not studied the past and have fallen into the same trap as their predecessors. British, French and German Generals dismissed the lessons of the machine gun u

    Look up each individual nation. Try something like ” When did the United States become a full nation?”

    Hitler did not like democracy. He was born in 1889 in a time of European monarchies and that is the only form of government that he was familier with. He despised them too and thought that they had become corrupt and were responsible for the lack of hope in the lower classes of the people that he gr

    In the late 1930’s the US hero Charles Lindbergh joined with many other Americans to create an anti war atmosphere. Whatever the value of joining the war before 1941, it seemed correct as the US was not until late 1941 that the US faced the Pearl Harbor disaster.

    The states that played major roles in the US Civil War was the border states they were the states that bordered both the south and the north. Although most of the states favored the North.

    Japan withdrew from the League of Nations as a result of the Manchurian Railway Incident in northen China. When the League did not support them and under pressure from other nations Japan withdrew as it no longer supported the concepts of the League. New Answer Headline The Mukden Incident was the d

    The original answer here was not mine. I have no idea how it said it was. My answer is stated above.

    I agree that World War II could have been avoided if the League of Nations had been more assertive, but the other countries could not have just stand there and do nothing. If they had done that, Germany could have taken over the whole of Europe. All wars are preventable by negotiation beforehand,

    The border between Maryland and Virginia is the Potomac River. Washington D.C. is on the north bank of the Potomac, on land ceded to the federal government by the Maryland. Thus, if Maryland had seceeded and joined the Confederacy, the Capital of the United States would have been in the middle of th