aimeeandbeatles
watermelon
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2007
- Messages
- 20,112
What do you think of countries that stay neutral during a war in their area? Is it good to have a place where there is no fighting or does it end up harm more people?
Neutrality in wars
- Thread starter aimeeandbeatles
- Start date
carmen510
Deity
Of course neutrality is good. Less conflict means more people stay alive, which is always good in my book. Neutrality also ensures that at least some nations in the area will keep their society, economy, and government intact. Neutral nations can end up as mediators of peace, as well as ensuring safe transport of civilians out of conflict zones (think of the Jews in Switzerland and Sweden during WW2).
Ingvina Freyr
wants a Steamfree option
I don't think there is an automatic need in getting involved in conflicts, it depends on its reasons. A country could always get involved in peace brokering as pointed out above.
Gogf
Indescribable
There is no such thing as neutrality.
Ingvina Freyr
wants a Steamfree option
They did, until Japan bombed the US into the war and Germany declared war upon them.Lillefix said:
Perfection
The Great Head.
Wusses
Verbose
Deity
Kind of pointless to join even a Good Fight if all it will do is get you creamed by the Bad Guys faster. So it depends on the war, and what the prospects of a war might be.
azzaman333
meh
Depends on the potential benefits and risks of joining the war compared to the potential benefits and risks of not joining.
Good joke
NedimNapoleon
Weird Little Human
Neutrality is always good, but its easy to go to war when the war isn't happening on your soil
Uncle Anton
Lighthorseman
Not so sure I'd agree with that.... Destroyers for Bases, Lend-Lease (Ooops, I mean Hereyago-Thanks LOL), Active escort duty of convoys to free up RN ships for other combat operations? The U.S. didn't exactly "do nothing" prior to Dec 41... hell even if they'd joined in earlier, the US Military back then was a basketcase... would've taken them a while to get swinging anyhow.
The words "Armed Neutrality" exist for a reason. And personally I'm grateful...
Roosevelt pulled every trick he could to assist the Allies without causing a political crapstorm at home...
Not so sure I'd agree with that.... Destroyers for Bases, Lend-Lease (Ooops, I mean Hereyago-Thanks LOL), Active escort duty of convoys to free up RN ships for other combat operations? The U.S. didn't exactly "do nothing" prior to Dec 41... hell even if they'd joined in earlier, the US Military back then was a basketcase... would've taken them a while to get swinging anyhow.
The words "Armed Neutrality" exist for a reason. And personally I'm grateful...
Roosevelt pulled every trick he could to assist the Allies without causing a political crapstorm at home...
a lot of neutrals do seem to really push the lines between neutrality and active involvement, obviously pretty glad in the case of the US in ww2, loads of leaning neutrals in that war, the portugese and the spanish basically picked sides as well
as for being neutral in times of war, well it depends doesnt it, if its a conflict were both parties are equally at fauult neutrality seems a good idea, but when theres a clear aggressor its probably best to join the fight against them
GhostWriter16
Deity
I'm very glad we didn't wait until December 41st, I'd rather not have sat forever while our allies got creamed.
aimeeandbeatles
watermelon
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2007
- Messages
- 20,112
I dont think there IS a December 41.
Verbose
Deity
And if there is no realistic way that will lead to anything other than a rather quick defeat for your individual nation?
GhostWriter16
Deity
Ingvina Freyr
wants a Steamfree option
Of course he did, and I applaud him. But I don't dance to the tune that the US immediately stood up for what is good and righteous and rode out on a white stallion for freedom everywhere. Fact is that the UK and France declared war on Germany september 1939 - three years after Hitler had begun moving his troops about central Europe, and they did so because it was in their national interest. The US government saw it in its interest to keep out much longer, wich they managed to do up until Japan bombed Pearl Harbour and Hitler declared war on the USA another +two years later.[...]The words "Armed Neutrality" exist for a reason. And personally I'm grateful...
Roosevelt pulled every trick he could to assist the Allies without causing a political crapstorm at home...
Another tune I don't dance to is that of all Swedish governments since WWII who have claimed to be neutral for moral reasons, for the opportunity to see the rights and wrongs on all sides of any conflict. Selfpreservation, that is what it is about. -If you are going to fight it out, don't do it here. But please buy our products, to fight with now and to rebuild your country with later.
Zack
99% hot gas
December 1941. Think before you make a "clever" comment.
Similar threads
