Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

Re: The need for the 2nd amendment

Author:Bob Davis
Posted:5/7/1999; 7:38:57 AM
Topic:scriptingNews outline for 5/4/99
Msg #:5782 (In response to 5775)
Prev/Next:5781 / 5783

fwiw, the same thing applies to Sweden (I'm a trained soldier, as are most others in my generation), but we seem to be slowly drifting away from that entire concept. to the extent we ever believed in it -- I don't think anyone ever thought that it was the Swedish army in itself that kept us outside the WW2, and during the cold war, the goal was pretty much to be strong enough to stay alive until NATO forces arrived...

There is a difference between Swedish neutrality and Swiss neutrality.

Austria and Switzerland are bound by law to neutrality.
Sweden folows neutrality as a policy.

It was a very nice ballancing act in Scandinavia - you had NATO Norway, neutral Sweden and very friendly with good cause with the USSR Finnland. Sweden was a nice buffer. Sweden kept things civil.

For Sweden neutrality is only a concept, they are free to take sides. Switzerland, Austria and the like don't have that freedom. Neutrality is part of their constitution and recognized by international law.

(for more info on Neutrality policy, look up Dr. Prof. Hanspeter Neuhold at the Universität Wien (Austria)....he taught me everything I know about it.)

Bob


There are responses to this message:

This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:49:52 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.