PDA

View Full Version : Some historical questions ...



XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 05:25 AM
How did Switzerland managed to stay neutral in World War 2, while her neighbours fell one by one?

Why didn't the Nazi attacked them?






<center>

'It is the Courage, not the score, that counts ...' - Mohd Naqiuddin

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 05:25 AM
How did Switzerland managed to stay neutral in World War 2, while her neighbours fell one by one?

Why didn't the Nazi attacked them?






<center>

'It is the Courage, not the score, that counts ...' - Mohd Naqiuddin

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 05:28 AM
warhawk_530 wrote:
- How did Switzerland managed to stay neutral in World
- War 2, while her neighbours fell one by one?
-
- Why didn't the Nazi attacked them?

But more important than that.. How many licks does it take to get to the center of a tootiepop?



<div style="background:blue;color:red;">
<font size= 4>TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 05:49 AM
Where would all the big dogs hide their money?

or

It would have cost too much.



JG14_Josf

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 05:51 AM
Wasn't the mountainous terrain considered a problem? I thought I read this somewhere.

47|FC
http://rangerring.com/wwii/p-47.jpg

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 05:53 AM
Switzerland wasn't exactly posing any problems towards Nazi Germany's plans for Europe.

--AKD

http://www.flyingpug.com/pugline2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 07:27 AM
-- Switzerland wasn't exactly posing any problems towards
-- Nazi Germany's plans for Europe.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif That kinda mush never stopped Hitler before. I'd rather think the terrain was the main obstacle, and the armed Swiss citizens who were all military trained--I believe. One thing the Nazis did fear was guerilla warfare, and the Germans never really could get a handle on it.

As far as I know, after USSR's Molotov, Spain's Franco was the only one to make Hitler back down, threatening Hitler with guerilla warfare if German troops invaded Spain. From what I heare, Hitler wanted Franco to join his silly WAR. Franco knew better. I dunno.

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 08:12 AM
I think the main reason can be described in one word:

Money

As far as I know Germany´s war funding was directed via switzerland. So without swiss banking system war was impossible or atleast very difficult to run.

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 10:32 AM
reallate wrote:

-
- As far as I know Germany´s war funding was directed
- via switzerland. So without swiss banking system war
- was impossible or atleast very difficult to run.
-

Why would a nation want to direct it's military funding through another nation? That doesn't really makes much sense ...

There are many myths about Swiss banking. But this must be one of the weirdest.

cheers/slush


http://dk.groups.yahoo.com/group/aktivitetsdage/files/Eurotrolls.gif

You can't handle the truth!
Col. Jessep

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 10:36 AM
One reason: There was no need.

The German high command did not consist of killer zombies that went "grrrrrrr!" and attacked anything in sight. Nor did they, or Hitler, harbour plans of world dominance. They had a perverted, but rational, idea of a Greater Germany. And they attacked anyone who stood in their way, but that's it.

The Nazi regime was evil enough as it was. There's really no reason to turn them into the cartoon characters of wartime propaganda and World History 101.

cheers/slush

http://dk.groups.yahoo.com/group/aktivitetsdage/files/Eurotrolls.gif

You can't handle the truth!
Col. Jessep

(edited typo)

Message Edited on 09/08/0311:37AM by Slush69

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 11:17 AM
It´s a common knowledge that banks in Switzerland still have funds from Nazi Germany. A few years ago swiss banks decided to give some of the funds to the organisations that aids those war time victims. So it´s not a myth. Atleast not all of it.

Funding a war is very complicated thing and it involves loans etc. Germany was quite isolated in the war years and their best channel to "outside" world was through Switzerland. And why not, banks in Switzerland were very famous. For example part of the Germanys national bank gold was deposited in Switzerland so Germany was able to buy some goods from the non-war countries.

US was pretty much only nation that could fund war efforts by it´s own. I dunno about USSR. But I do know that for instance Great Britain couldn´t.

fluke39
09-08-2003, 11:20 AM
Slush69 wrote:
-
- reallate wrote:
-
--
-- As far as I know Germany´s war funding was directed
-- via switzerland. So without swiss banking system war
-- was impossible or atleast very difficult to run.
--
-
- Why would a nation want to direct it's military
- funding through another nation? That doesn't really
- makes much sense ...
-
- There are many myths about Swiss banking. But this
- must be one of the weirdest.
-
-

this is what i have heard too (not saying it is the only reason they didn't get invaded) i'm pretty sure it is not a myth.

<center><img src=http://mysite.freeserve.com/Angel_one_five/flukelogo.jpg>

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 11:36 AM
Slush69 wrote:
- One reason: There was no need.

I agree! Both Hitler and the German High Command had a twisted kind of logic behind most things they did. They didn't attack Switzerland and Sweden simply because they had good relations with these countries and didn't need to invade them to get benefits from these countries. There was nothing the Germans could achieve by invading these countries, that they didn't allready have from these countries.
They invaded Norway and Denmark in order to get free access to the Atlantic, and thus ice-free shippinglanes to ore in Northern Sweden.
They invaded the lower countries in order to bypass the French Maginot-line.
They invaded Russia in order to get oil and 'Lebensraum'.
For most campaigns they had an in their opinion good reason. Wich were not present in the case of Switzerland and Sweden. If Sweden had not accepted that the germans sent warmaterial and soliders by train through Sweden to attack the Allies at Narvik, they would probably have been invaded too.


Skarphol



Message Edited on 09/08/03 11:39AM by Skarphol

Message Edited on 09/08/0312:08PM by Skarphol

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 12:21 PM
Skarphol wrote:
-
- If Sweden had not accepted
- that the germans sent warmaterial and soliders by
- train through Sweden to attack the Allies at Narvik,
- they would probably have been invaded too.
-
-
-

Include should be that high grade Swedish iron ore./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://a1276.g.akamai.net/7/1276/734/625ed428e022ef/www.harley-davidson.com/PR/MOT/2004/Softail/images/DOM/img_Softail_FXST.jpg

http://www.redneckengineering.com/photogallery/photo23581/curves-done-03.jpg


"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 12:44 PM
In addition to the other reasons mentioned here for the Swiss not being attacked was the diplomatic reasons. Hostile nations could communicate and negotiate through diplomatic channels in Switzerland. Indeed, Germany put forth efforts to negotiate pretty early in the war. When Hitler failed to conquer Russia He knew that the war had been lost in a tactical sense. When these overtures failed, the Madman decided to fight to the last The Military fought on, due in large part to an oath of allegiance to Hitler that they were manuvered into taking. Few realize the binding importance of an oath of allegiance to a German military man of that era. The German people also, had an inner Spirit that carried them on and on. The evil Madman and his Minions took full advantage of the German Spirit, and plunged the country into evil from which it is still trying to recover..

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 12:50 PM
German doctrine was expansion to the east. Germany attacked Poland. Poland was basically an attempt to kind of repeat the invasion of the Czech Republic. But France and UK declared war on Germany. If they hadn't there wouldn't have been attacks on Norway, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, France, England and so on. Germany attacked the smaller countries mainly to defeat the western opposition by France and England. Actually an armistice would have been enough for Hitler.

Since Switzerland did not have strong ties with or any strategic importance in regard to France or UK and did not declare war on Germany itself, it wasn't attacked.

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 12:52 PM
But what would he have done with all the gnomes, cookoo clocks and cow bells?

ok he could have got a cheap Rolex but if you apply that logic you would also invade Taiwan.

http://perso.club-internet.fr/ptthome/vulogo3.JPG

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 01:02 PM
reallate wrote:
- It´s a common knowledge that banks in Switzerland
- still have funds from Nazi Germany. A few years ago
- swiss banks decided to give some of the funds to the
- organisations that aids those war time victims. So
- it´s not a myth. Atleast not all of it.
-
- Funding a war is very complicated thing and it
- involves loans etc. Germany was quite isolated in
- the war years and their best channel to "outside"
- world was through Switzerland. And why not, banks in
- Switzerland were very famous. For example part of
- the Germanys national bank gold was deposited in
- Switzerland so Germany was able to buy some goods
- from the non-war countries.
-
- US was pretty much only nation that could fund war
- efforts by it´s own. I dunno about USSR. But I do
- know that for instance Great Britain couldn´t.


I do know that there are bank accounts in Switzerland that allegedly contain "Nazi gold" - most of it stolen from Jews. And I am aware of the recent action by the Swiss banks. That's not what I called a myth.

What I reacted against was the statement that the German war effort was funded through Swiss banks. That's an entirely different thing. Where was that money supposed to come from? And why was a Swiss bank necessary instead of a direct transfer to the Reichsbank?

cheers/slush

http://dk.groups.yahoo.com/group/aktivitetsdage/files/Eurotrolls.gif

You can't handle the truth!
Col. Jessep

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 01:11 PM
A VERY GOOD question, warhawk_530 . A rare one too. So far I`m not convinced by anyone`s answers much. Perhaps it`s a bit of everything. Why use unnecessary resources attacking a country that`s not a threat? Deal with it when the main threat (Britain and her Allies) are no more...





"Tis better to work towards an Impossible Good, rather than a Possible Evil."

SeaFireLIV.

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 01:50 PM
Just remembered: There's an old history book called "Aufmarch gegen die Schweiz", I think. That's "Deployment against Switzerland" for the language impaired /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

It describes the German contingency plans against Switzerland. It's hardly remarkable that they had that. Every general staff or admiralty around the globe was busy then, as now, in preparation for every eventuality.

Case in point: Way up until the Thirties the US Navy used the Royal British Navy as the opponent in their war games and war plans. I think they were called "Orange force", but I might be mistaken. Obviously the risk of war was farfetched, but it made sense to plan against the strongest opponent.

cheers/slush

http://dk.groups.yahoo.com/group/aktivitetsdage/files/Eurotrolls.gif

You can't handle the truth!
Col. Jessep

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 02:16 PM
There were some reasons to to invade Switzerland.

1. Secure depot of German money in a neutral coutry. That means due the neutral status no one - Allies - could touch that money or have access to, even not after the war.

2. Secure supply routes through Switzerland. From Basle to Chiasso (southern border city of Swiss) transports that were made by rail were absolutely secure for Allied air raids.

3. Schwitzerland was a isle of information (agents) and diplomacy in occupied Europe, an important role nobody wanted to touch.

4. The will of Swiss people to stay neutral, even if arms were needed to keep that status up. Switzerland had 800'000 men in arms, that's quite high at a total population 6'000'000 people.

There were some occassions the Swiss Flugwaffe teached the Germans to keep out their territory at least the ZG1 learnt that lesson in 2 occassions, as well as Allied a/c.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gifhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif



"Kimura, tu as une tªte carrée comme un sale boche!"

EJGr.Ost Kimura

http://www.jagdgruppe-ost.de/image/ejgrost.gif



Message Edited on 09/08/0302:22PM by KIMURA

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 02:25 PM
Slush69 wrote:

- I do know that there are bank accounts in
- Switzerland that allegedly contain "Nazi gold" -
- most of it stolen from Jews. And I am aware of the
- recent action by the Swiss banks. That's not what I
- called a myth.
-
- What I reacted against was the statement that the
- German war effort was funded through Swiss banks.
- That's an entirely different thing. Where was that
- money supposed to come from? And why was a Swiss
- bank necessary instead of a direct transfer to the
- Reichsbank?
-
- cheers/slush


For instance look here: /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://www.senate.gov/~banking/98_07hrg/072298/witness/ziegler.htm

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 02:27 PM
The Swiss were providing the Germans with vital aluminium. The Allies bombed these factories and a vital bridge to stop the Germans recieving these. The Swiss were not as neutral as they are made out to be.

To be able to fare well,
To avoid the frustration of misfortune,
That, in this world, is happiness.
-Euripides' Electra

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 02:31 PM
There's are 3 holy things you better don't touch in Switzerland. The banks, the army and the wish to be independed for other countries./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



"Kimura, tu as une tªte carrée comme un sale boche!"

EJGr.Ost Kimura

http://www.jagdgruppe-ost.de/image/ejgrost.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 02:32 PM
reallate wrote:

-
-
- For instance look here: /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
-
- <a
- href="http://www.senate.gov/~banking/98_07hrg/0722
- 98/witness/ziegler.htm"
- target=_blank>http://www.senate.gov/~banking/98_07
- hrg/072298/witness/ziegler.htm</a>
-

Hi Reallate,

Thanks for the interesting link. It doesn't really change much though. As I wrote: I am aware of the connection between Switzerland, Nazi gold and property stolen from Holocaust victims. But there's a long way from there and a funding of the German war effort through Swiss banks. The admittedly large sums mentioned in the link, are dwarfed by the enormous amount of money the war cost Germany, so I believe the claim of Swiss funding is somewhat out of proportion.

cheers/slush

http://dk.groups.yahoo.com/group/aktivitetsdage/files/Eurotrolls.gif

You can't handle the truth!
Col. Jessep

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 02:40 PM
Hi Kimura,

I don't wanna yank your chain, but those reasons you mention strike me as slightly odd. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif


KIMURA wrote:
- There were some reasons to to invade Switzerland.

- 1. Secure depot of German money in a neutral coutry.
- That means due the neutral status no one - Allies -
- could touch that money or have access to, even not
- after the war.

Had the Germans invaded, Switzerland would not have been neutral anymore. It would have been occupied and later liberated. Hopefully by the Western Allies. But any Allied nation would have installed a provisional government that would have seized any German money.


- 2. Secure supply routes through Switzerland. From
- Basle to Chiasso (southern border city of Swiss)
- transports that were made by rail were absolutely
- secure for Allied air raids.

Why should the supply routes be more secure than through Austria? An occupied Switzerland would have been bombed just as France, Belgium, the Netherland, Denmark and Norway - to mention a few.


- 3. Schwitzerland was a isle of information (agents)
- and diplomacy in occupied Europe, an important role
- nobody wanted to touch.

I thought these were your reasons to invade? But this seems a reason not to?


- 4. The will of Swiss people to stay neutral, even if
- arms were needed to keep that status up. Switzerland
- had 800'000 men in arms, that's quite high at a
- total population 6'000'000 people.

Again: Isn't that a good reason NOT to invade?

cheers/slush

http://dk.groups.yahoo.com/group/aktivitetsdage/files/Eurotrolls.gif

You can't handle the truth!
Col. Jessep

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 02:50 PM
He made a typo, one which you did not catch. The first to in his original sentence was suppose to be a 'not'.


Slush69 wrote:
- Hi Kimura,
-
- I don't wanna yank your chain, but those reasons you
- mention strike me as slightly odd. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
-
-
- KIMURA wrote:
-- There were some reasons to to invade Switzerland.
-
-- 1. Secure depot of German money in a neutral coutry.
-- That means due the neutral status no one - Allies -
-- could touch that money or have access to, even not
-- after the war.
-
- Had the Germans invaded, Switzerland would not have
- been neutral anymore. It would have been occupied
- and later liberated. Hopefully by the Western
- Allies. But any Allied nation would have installed a
- provisional government that would have seized any
- German money.
-
-
-- 2. Secure supply routes through Switzerland. From
-- Basle to Chiasso (southern border city of Swiss)
-- transports that were made by rail were absolutely
-- secure for Allied air raids.
-
- Why should the supply routes be more secure than
- through Austria? An occupied Switzerland would have
- been bombed just as France, Belgium, the Netherland,
- Denmark and Norway - to mention a few.
-
-
-- 3. Schwitzerland was a isle of information (agents)
-- and diplomacy in occupied Europe, an important role
-- nobody wanted to touch.
-
- I thought these were your reasons to invade? But
- this seems a reason not to?
-
-
-- 4. The will of Swiss people to stay neutral, even if
-- arms were needed to keep that status up. Switzerland
-- had 800'000 men in arms, that's quite high at a
-- total population 6'000'000 people.
-
- Again: Isn't that a good reason NOT to invade?
-
- cheers/slush
-
- <img
- src="http://dk.groups.yahoo.com/group/aktivitetsda
- ge/files/Eurotrolls.gif">
-
- You can't handle the truth!
- Col. Jessep



http://www.redspar.com/redrogue/CraggerUbisig.jpg

About after 30 minutes I puked all over my airplane. I said to myself "Man, you made a big mistake." -Charles 'Chuck' Yeager, regards his first flight

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 02:55 PM
You Slush69 wrote:
- Hi Kimura,
-
- I don't wanna yank your chain, but those reasons you
- mention strike me as slightly odd.


- Had the Germans invaded, Switzerland would not have
- been neutral anymore. It would have been occupied
- and later liberated. Hopefully by the Western
- Allies. But any Allied nation would have installed a
- provisional government that would have seized any
- German money.

Seems I misleaded you, Slush. An neutral, non-occupied Switzerland was a better tool to Germany's leadership than an occupied Switzerland. According to that you posted above. The German money would be more secure if Switzerland stayed neutral, than under German occupassion.


- Why should the supply routes be more secure than
- through Austria? An occupied Switzerland would have
- been bombed just as France, Belgium, the Netherland,
- Denmark and Norway - to mention a few.

Due the neutral status of Switzerland the German trains were in security during the way through Switzerland. The Swiss air territory was defended against any intruder, either LW or Allied ones.

- Again: Isn't that a good reason NOT to invade?

To invade a country you need superiority in numbers by at least 3-5:1, which the Germans didn't have anymore, especially after occupying whole Europe and with the plans to invade Russia.



"Kimura, tu as une tªte carrée comme un sale boche!"

EJGr.Ost Kimura

http://www.jagdgruppe-ost.de/image/ejgrost.gif







"Kimura, tu as une tªte carrée comme un sale boche!"

EJGr.Ost Kimura

http://www.jagdgruppe-ost.de/image/ejgrost.gif



Message Edited on 09/08/0302:56PM by KIMURA

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 03:02 PM
in ww1 the germans wanted the best cerment, which turned out tobe british, so it was bought via the swiss /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

the swiss also have all sorts of dodgy funds laying about
and most german money would be cyclical, ie, made in german, spent in germany
they probably made more money aswell without telling anyone/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 03:20 PM
Switzerland had mixed loyalties during WW2.

They bought German 109s to defend their airspace.
They also accepted bribes.When a German nightfighter lost its way and landed on a swiss airfield.The Germans wanted the plane to be destroyed and as a bargaining tool they offered new G6s to augment their airforce.The Germans didn't want the secrets of their radar falling into allied hands.The swiss broke the plane up but secretly gave the allies the radar equipment.Neutral???? Make your own mind up!

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 03:34 PM
wurger1984 wrote:
- Switzerland had mixed loyalties during WW2.
-
- They bought German 109s to defend their airspace.
- They also accepted bribes.When a German nightfighter
- lost its way and landed on a swiss airfield.The
- Germans wanted the plane to be destroyed and as a
- bargaining tool they offered new G6s to augment
- their airforce.The Germans didn't want the secrets
- of their radar falling into allied hands.The swiss
- broke the plane up but secretly gave the allies the
- radar equipment.Neutral???? Make your own mind up!

Würger, those 109 were in the most prewar 109E-3, which were bought before the war. That "bribes" was a simple trade, how you want to named that trade, depends on the eye of the beholder./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Switzerland as a very little country was isolated, surrounded by Axis countries or Axis occupied countries. Suppllies were very very rare and expensive. Food was rationed til 1953, 7 years after the war. So the path Switzerland walked on, between keep the neurality up, quarantee of supplying the population with food, keep the supplies up for the Army which is mostly equipped with foreign stuff, that path was very very narrow and difficult. The way you can walk such a narrw path depends on your possibilities you own./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

At least that difficult walk was brilliantly solved and managed by our leader General Guisan, who managed to bring Switzerland through that fire called WWII without dramatic losses on civilians and armed forces.




"Kimura, tu as une tªte carrée comme un sale boche!"

EJGr.Ost Kimura

http://www.jagdgruppe-ost.de/image/ejgrost.gif







"Kimura, tu as une tªte carrée comme un sale boche!"

EJGr.Ost Kimura

http://www.jagdgruppe-ost.de/image/ejgrost.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 03:45 PM
Ask the German jews that looked for a shelter there, carrying all their funds to Swiss banks. Most of them were repatriated to the Nazi Germany and killed. Their money remained in Swiss banks. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Only recently the survivors and their heirs are claiming their money back, but they don't know the account number, so... /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

There were many European countries that were not enemies nor allied to Germany, but the price of neutrality is sometimes too shameful to remember. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Nothing against the Swiss: every nation (including mine) has a dark story, specially on dark times... /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

- Dux Corvan -



http://www.theinformationminister.com/press.php?ID=612322300

</span></blockquote></font></td></tr>

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 04:03 PM
Hi Kimura,

Ah, a typo! That explains it all. You had me confused there for a sec. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

But hey, for arguments sake: I found a wee little thing, I could disagree with. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

The 3:1 superiourity you mention has been used, and misused, by many. In my humble, and respectful, opinion you're one of the bad guys /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

It's originally from statistical analysis of firefights and assault operations on a tactical (small) scale. Generally speaking an attacker needs 3 times as much firepower as an defender to have a reasonable probability of success in overwhelming a position.

But of course there are many caveats: Firepower can be measured in a lot of ways - not only by the headcount.

And most important of all: You can not just scale up a rule of thumb for small unit tactical operations and say that the same applies for an operational or strategic level situation - although many do so.

There are countless examples of successful invasions by armies that are NOT at least 3 times bigger than their opponents, so, again in my humble and respectful manner, I believe it's utter bilge. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

cheers/slush

http://dk.groups.yahoo.com/group/aktivitetsdage/files/Eurotrolls.gif

You can't handle the truth!
Col. Jessep

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 04:26 PM
Slush

Were U ever been in Switzerland? 70% is infantery country, there is very limited or tricky to access terrain if tried by tanks. Of course the big cities are all near the borders and the access to them seems easy. But the main land is relatively easy to defend, because of the terrain. The valley are so narrow that you can defend them with few forces. All streets here - really all - had/has fixed defending lines and equipment from their built on. Tank barriers, bunkers, firing positions are defined at the time a new road is in planning. That chanced 1st some years ago with the resolution of Warsaw pact.





"Kimura, tu as une tªte carrée comme un sale boche!"

EJGr.Ost Kimura

http://www.jagdgruppe-ost.de/image/ejgrost.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 04:56 PM
Slush69 wrote:
-
- Hi Reallate,
-
- Thanks for the interesting link. It doesn't really
- change much though. As I wrote: I am aware of the
- connection between Switzerland, Nazi gold and
- property stolen from Holocaust victims. But there's
- a long way from there and a funding of the German
- war effort through Swiss banks. The admittedly large
- sums mentioned in the link, are dwarfed by the
- enormous amount of money the war cost Germany, so I
- believe the claim of Swiss funding is somewhat out
- of proportion.
-
- cheers/slush

Ah, now I get it. You think I´m stating that all of Germany´s war funding was via Switzerland? Sorry my bad..

Let me refrase it:

In my opinion the most important reason for Germany not invading Switzerland was because there was a strong connection between Reichsbank and Swiss banks and Germany´s only reasonable way to get foreign currencies was via Switzerland. And this helped pretty much Germany´s war funding.

There /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 05:06 PM
KIMURA wrote:
- Slush
-
- Were U ever been in Switzerland? 70% is infantery
- country, there is very limited or tricky to access
- terrain if tried by tanks. Of course the big cities
- are all near the borders and the access to them
- seems easy. But the main land is relatively easy to
- defend, because of the terrain. The valley are so
- narrow that you can defend them with few forces. All
- streets here - really all - had/has fixed defending
- lines and equipment from their built on. Tank
- barriers, bunkers, firing positions are defined at
- the time a new road is in planning. That chanced 1st
- some years ago with the resolution of Warsaw pact.

Yeah, I've been there. It's definitely not the kind of country, I would like to invade. I'd rather settle for something easy. Like France. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Disclaimer: Sorry about the French joke. I couldn't resist it. I like France. I like the French. And I do not think they are less brave, nor less military capable than anyone else.

http://dk.groups.yahoo.com/group/aktivitetsdage/files/Eurotrolls.gif

You can't handle the truth!
Col. Jessep

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 05:08 PM
reallate wrote:

-
- Ah, now I get it. You think I´m stating that all of
- Germany´s war funding was via Switzerland? Sorry my
- bad..
-
- Let me refrase it:
-
- In my opinion the most important reason for Germany
- not invading Switzerland was because there was a
- strong connection between Reichsbank and Swiss banks
- and Germany´s only reasonable way to get foreign
- currencies was via Switzerland. And this helped
- pretty much Germany´s war funding.

Ah, and now I get it as well. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

I can't really say that I agree, I just stick to my original point: An invasion of Switzerland was simply pointless. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

cheers/slush

http://dk.groups.yahoo.com/group/aktivitetsdage/files/Eurotrolls.gif

You can't handle the truth!
Col. Jessep

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 05:50 PM
Slush69 wrote:

- I can't really say that I agree, I just stick to my
- original point: An invasion of Switzerland was
- simply pointless.


And I agree, of course /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
But remember the original question why. This is one of the reasons and I think it is most important one. Germany had nothing to gain but pretty much to loose.

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 06:25 PM
1. Lots of top Nazis had large amounts of money in Swiss banks.

2. Switzerland was neutral. Why create another another enemy if you don't need to? And,

3. Switzerland did not declare war on Germany. Hitler would have been perfectly happy to not attack France and England, but they declared war on HIM. Hitler had no beef with Switzerland, so why bother attacking?