[adorno]

Ain't as simple as one example of neutrality gone wrong...

Some neutrals were forced to become belligerents by way of Nazi or Italian invasion. They had no choice. Others might have had sympathies that bent toward the Axis (Spain, Portugal) or Allies (Sweden). Still others became quite adroit at playing both sides (Switzerland, Ireland). Of all the neutral’s, Sweden’s situation was probably the most precarious. Vast resources of ore, timber, coal and so on were coveted by Allies and Axis alike. However, she was virtually encircled by the Germans after the invasion of Norway. And when Finland joined the Axis for Operation Barbarossa (German-Finnish invasion of the USSR), the Swedes were all alone. Germany never invaded, however. This is due in part to the fact that encirclement, and Sweden’s willingness to export ore to Germany, made such an invasion unnecessary. Too, after the Russo-Finnish war of 1940, Sweden quickly stepped up military conscription and arms manufacture.

In the modern world, neutrality doesn't really exist, and if a country declares being neutral, they're lying to themselves. Any 'neutral' country that doesn't bother with defense, is an easy and prime target for belligerent nations.

[mass55th]

"Ain't as simple as one example of neutrality gone wrong..."

Now you are saying that it's not that simple to provide an example for what you originally claimed. Please don't bother to send me any more of your comments. I'm not interested.