On Mon, 23 Jan 2012 14:50:46 +0100, Bradipus wrote:
> bill, 10:24, lunedì 23 gennaio 2012:
>
>> On Mon, 23 Jan 2012 20:18:36 +1100, SolomonW wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>> Ooops everyone is correct, I should have said Sweden.
>>>>
>>>> The question's about as appropriate for Sweden too. Neutral
>>>> countries which were surrounded by Axis territory were pretty well
>>>> dominated without the trouble of an invasion.
>>>
>>> If the are well behaved, do not interfere and relatively small.
>>
>> The Germans would have been well advised to invade Sweden, the British
>> managed to run regular supply conveys and flights in and out of there
>> carrying parts, mainly specialised bearings, there were unavailable to
>> them anywhere else.
>
>
> On the other hand they had to place there some third rank infantry
> division.
Well given the choice between the UK not getting vital supplies and a
third rate infantry division I think I'd take the UK being inconvenienced.
>
>
>> Also they'd have got their hands on Niels Bohr...
>
>
> Was him important for Manhattan Project?
>
Horribly so.
--
William Black
Free men have open minds
If you want loyalty, buy a dog... |
