Where is the better Statesman,
In may 1940 the german agressor did not succeed to conquer Holland with military means. Of that was not brought enough in the campaign and no success was obtained at the Afsluitdijk, not with parachuting near The Hague, not at the bridges in Rotterdam and still there was the Waterlinie, a major barrière. Then Berlin choose terror and bombed the inner city of Rotterdam. Threatening to do likewise at Utrecht. As it was a conflict between major powers and the french seemed to have a strong army soon the germans possibly would have to retreat and to avoid more damage (by that terror!) defending was stopped by dutch government. This pleased the nazis since the "vesting Holland" otherwise might have become an allied base quite near to the german border.
Will in future a comparable situation be possible in Sweden-Finland? Russia is mainly interested in the Atlantic Norwegian coast. The present military contribution of the smaller european countries to NATO is not really substantial. This renders the question whether these nations might become a neutral block, thus appeasing in some way the present Moscow "czaar". Most russians of course prefer to come as tourists to the West and NATO headquarters should consider that present problems are caused by one man only, a warmonger. United we should seek to promote peaceful relations and a shift in NATO territory, a reduction in the north may help. Note that norwegian fjords can have caves to store atomic weapons (to destroy incoming meteorites), guarded by neutrals and call for deposing the nasty things there.
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten