Sad day for swedes

[denoir 0]

You didn't conquer Norway - you were given Norway as compensation for Denmark supporting France during the napoleonic war.

LOL. Sorry mate, but if you are going to correct people, make sure you are right first. Sweden was not given Norway, we took it, first by kicking the Danish and then by kicking you.

1810-1812 we were on the side of France against Britain, but generally kept out of the conflict. In 1812, France puts troop in Swedish Pommern and Rügen (today Germany). After this betrayal Sweden switched sides and declared war with France and its allied Denmark. The dual purpose of the war was to 1) take down Napoleon 2) take Norway. The plan was initially for taking back Finland, but as Russia was an ally, we settled for less and aimed for Norway.

Anyhow, in 1813 Sweden prepared to invade Denmark. About 30,000 troops are in place, but the military situation is complicated. One of Napoleon's armies has gone under in Russia, but he recovered, made another grand army that was succesfully marching across Europe. July 9th the allied (agains Napopleon) leaders meet in Schleswig and make up the the battle plans. Three armies were to be deployed on the continent. The first one would be based in Bohemia and consist of 240,000 men under the Austrian field marshal Swartzenberg. The second one consisting of 90,000 men would be based in Schlesia, under the command of the prussian field marshal von Blücher. The third one, consisting by 155,000 men and led by the Swedish crown prince-regent Karl Johan. That army consisted mostly of Swedish troops, but also Hansan-mercinaries as well as Prussian and Russian troops. (Coallition of the willing )

On august 23 the Swedish-led army meets a French army of 70,000, on the way to Berlin. Thanks to some very nasty Swedish mobile artillery the French lose. On August 26 the French beat the largest allied army in the south and try for Berlin from a different direction. The 6th september Karl Johan's army meets the French (led by the famous marshal de Ney) at the village of Denneitz. Karl Johan wins and saves Berlin.

On 18th and 19th October the Battle of Germany is faught by Leipzig. Over half a million men on both sides clash. Napoleon loses and abandons hopes of taking Germany.

After Leibzig Karl Johan breaks up his army. Large portions are sent to Holland to fight there. To everybody's surprise Karl Johan himself, leading an army of Swedish troops marches towards Denmark. The allies were less than thrilled over this, but were in no position to say no to Sweden. November 6th Karl Johan takes Hanover and early december he takes Lübeck, moving west.

On december 7, the First battle with the Danish occurs at Bornhöft. Swedish victory. December 10th, Sweden takes Kiel. Denmark tries to negotiate a diplomatic settlement. It has beome painfully clear that they could not win this militarily. December 19th the Fredriksort stronghold falls. The entire Holstein is now under Swedish control. City after city falls and after the Swedish troops stand near Copenhagen, the Danish surrender. January the 15th a peace agreement, giving Norway to Sweden.

Norway however were not so thrilled about the prospect. On the contrary, they were hoping of getting indepence and instead now they were looking at a Swedish occupation. They declare a new constitution and elect a king of their own. The government in Stockholm does nothing as the prince-regent (who was the regent by all practical standards) was still roaming around Europe. British, French and Russian diplomats tried during that time to convince Norway to peacfully join Sweden, but they were unsuccessful.

When Karl Johan returned in may 1814, he immideately starts gathering troops agianst Norway. The objective was with a minimal use of force to secure Norway. Very clear instructions were given not to use excessive force as Sweden wanted the union to appear as something positive and not something forced onto the Norwegians.

In mid july a Swedish force of 45,000 men leaves for Norway, under the command of Karl Johan. The Norwegians have about 30,000 men on their side. After another round of negotiation attempts, Sweden invades. The Norwegian military capabilities could not be worse. The soldiers are ill-equipped and untrained, and what's worse they have no competent leadership. The new Norwegian king, Christian Fredrik himself has no military experience at all. Hostilities start on july 26 when the Swedish navy attacks parts of the Norwegian navy. The Norwegians manage to escape, but the islands around Fredrikstad are occupied. July 30th the Swedish army crosses the border and marches towards Frederikshald and the Frederiksten fortress. August 4th Fredriksten surrenders. In five days the entire Norwegian southern flank has collapsed. The Norwegians are suddenly much more interested in negotiations, the Swedish army however continues its advance. The Norwegians try to mount a counter-offensive, but fail badly. August the 14th, a final battle commences near Glommen. In the attack, Sweden has three dead and 15 wounded. The norwegians lose several hundred men. Norway surrenders and Sweden's last war is over.

November 4th the union between Norway and Sweden is declared.

Brgnorway, I understand that this is a not-so-proud moment in your history, but it was a long time ago. Try to get over it in a nice manner. Fabricating history won't change facts

The irony of it is that under Sweden, Norway was much better of than it was under Denmark. It was given partial independence and a government of its own. Norwegian was for the first time recognized as the official language and for the first time Norwegians were allowed to use their own national insignia. It was not a classic form of occupation. Overall the Norwegians had far more rights under Sweden than they ever had under Denmark. Before the union with Sweden, Norway was just a primitive backwards region in Denmark. Under Sweden it developed a social structure, an admirable culture and a national identity. And in the end, we decided to let them go. Yet the Norwegians have a big-brother complex against Sweden, not Denmark. And then they try to tell bed-time stories of how Sweden was "given" Norway and how in 1905 they could have put up a serious fight had they wanted to. Bottom line is that we took Norway fair and square, by first beating Denmark whose property it was and then by beating Norway, who didn't want to join. In 1905 a war would have taken place the same way as the one in 1814. Anything else is fantasy. The fact is however that we held a democratic referendum and chose to let Norway go.

[Tamme 0]

But seriously, Swedish army equipment is much more superior than the equipment used by the FDF, we just have some eastern bloc loot and finlandization-era relics while the swedes get to ride Leo2A6ses.

And they have missiles too. I don't understand why Finland refuses to purchase offensive weaponry. The idea isn't to invade, but to commit a counter-attack. Would Denoir assault if he knew we'd bomb Stockholm to pieces? (He would, he's insane)

[the_shadow 0]

and while still talking history, Finland wasnt independant anytime during history untill they beat the russians during WW1 (was it, or was it even WW2? i´m not soo good at finish history) ;)

so the major part (exept denmark) of scandinavia and parts of germany, hollan, poland and the entire Baltics where part of sweden...

but due to politics and bad leadeship we lost most parts of it.

hell, we where close to defeting russia a couple of times, we where even trying to beat Turky (The ottoman´s actually) once

but then we where as big as the german empire during ww2 if not bigger.... but now, due to bad politicians and leadership we are loosing what little military we have Swedis defence forces R.I.P

[brgnorway 0]

Quote[/b] ]Norway however were not so thrilled about the prospect. On the contrary, they were hoping of getting indepence and instead now they were looking at a Swedish occupation. They declare a new constitution and elect a king of their own. The government in Stockholm does nothing as the prince-regent (who was the regent by all practical standards) was still roaming around Europe. British, French and Russian diplomats tried during that time to convince Norway to peacfully join Sweden, but they were unsuccessful.

True!

Quote[/b] ]When Karl Johan returned in may 1814, he immideately starts gathering troops agianst Norway. The objective was with a minimal use of force to secure Norway. Very clear instructions were given not to use excessive force as Sweden wanted the union to appear as something positive and not something forced onto the Norwegians.

In mid july a Swedish force of 45,000 men leaves for Norway, under the command of Karl Johan. The Norwegians have about 30,000 men on their side. After another round of negotiation attempts, Sweden invades. The Norwegian military capabilities could not be worse. The soldiers are ill-equipped and untrained, and what's worse they have no competent leadership. The new Norwegian king, Christian Fredrik himself has no military experience at all.  Hostilities start on july 26 when the Swedish navy attacks parts of the Norwegian navy. The Norwegians manage to escape, but the islands around Fredrikstad are occupied. July 30th the Swedish army crosses the border and marches towards Frederikshald and the Frederiksten fortress. August 4th Fredriksten surrenders. In five days the entire Norwegian southern flank has collapsed. The Norwegians are suddenly much more interested in negotiations, the Swedish army however continues its advance. The Norwegians try to mount a counter-offensive, but fail badly. August the 14th, a final battle commences near Glommen. In the attack, Sweden has three dead and 15 wounded. The norwegians lose several hundred men. Norway surrenders and Sweden's last war is over.

November 4th the union between Norway and Sweden is declared.

Also true  

Quote[/b] ] In 1905 a war would have taken place the same way as the one in 1814. Anything else is fantasy. The fact is however that we held a democratic referendum and chose to let Norway go.

Sweden decided that Norway should have a referendum. The result was 368 208 against 184 for independence.

What's the referendum you'r talking about:

Quote[/b] ]Mens politikerne forhandlet i Karlstad, var situasjonen svćrt spent. Bĺde Norge og Sverige begynte med militćr mobilisering, selv om de forsřkte ĺ skjule det for hverandre. Bĺde forhandlere og andre var forberedt pĺ at det kunne bryte ut krig nĺr som helst. Men etter mye om og men endte forhandlingene med en avtale, det sĺkalte Karlstadforliket.

    Forliket var kontroversielt i Norge. Men det ble godkjent av Stortinget med 101 mot 16 stemmer. Den 16. oktober vedtok Riksdagen ĺ anerkjenne Norge som selvstendig stat, og den 27. oktober ble Karlstadforliket endelig undertegnet. Samtidig frasa Oscar II seg hřytidelig Norges trone. Med det var unionen formelt opplřst.

Denoirs referendum

About military buildups:

Quote[/b] ]Mens politikerne forhandlet i Karlstad, var situasjonen svćrt spent. Bĺde Norge og Sverige begynte med militćr mobilisering, selv om de forsřkte ĺ skjule det for hverandre..........

Kunne det likevel ha blitt krig? Hvis forhandlingene i Karlstad hadde brutt sammen, kunne det sĺ avgjort det. Og hvordan ville sĺ den krigen gĺtt?

    Norge hadde rustet opp fra 1895, med nybygde panserskip og grensefestninger. Men Sverige hadde ogsĺ rustet opp, og den svenske krigsmakten var overlegen den norske. Man kan tenke seg to sannsynlige scenarier.

    En mulighet er at de norske styrkene sĺnn noenlunde hadde greid ĺ stanse det svenske angrepet, og at stormaktene hadde grepet inn og diktert en fred. Det er den gunstigste muligheten.

     En annen mulighet er at svenske styrker hadde lykkes i en militćr invasjon. For eksempel kunne de ha gitt blaffen i de norske grensefestningene. De kunne ha angrepet fra sjřen og landsatt styrker et sted sřr for Drřbaksundet i Kristianiafjorden, rykket opp mot Kristiania og inntatt den norske hovedstaden. Deretter kunne de konsentrere seg om ĺ okkupere hele det sentrale řstlandsomrĺdet. Sĺpass overlegne var svenskene, at et slikt scenario er realistisk.

    Men spřrsmĺlet er: Hva skulle de gjřre videre? I Norge ville okkupantene i en slik situasjon neppe kunne finne sćrlig mange villige kollaboratřrer. Norske styrker - regulćre og gerilja - ville kunne fortsette ĺ kjempe med baser i uveisomme omrĺder. Norge ville kort sagt kunne blitt en hengemyr for svenskene.

    I det hele tatt er det vanskelig ĺ se hva Sverige skulle kunne vinne pĺ en krig. Det er ogsĺ en grunn til at utgangen i 1905 ble sĺ fredelig.

And finally the political reasons for avoiding war:

Quote[/b] ]Hvorfor ble skilsmissen mellom Sverige og Norge sĺ fredelig? Det er flere grunner til det. Hovedpoenget er at moderate, kompromissvennlige krefter pĺ begge sider vant frem. I Sverige var det en viktig del av opinionen som absolutt ikke ville ha noen krig med Norge - arbeiderbevegelsen, for eksempel. Andre viktige grunner er at selve unionen var sĺ lřs, at stormaktene ikke var interessert i noen krig, at det ikke var strid om territorier mellom de to landene, og at det ikke var noen store problemer med nasjonale minoriteter.

Ibid

The point is that Sweden didn't give Norway independence because you are so fucking nice to us - the point is that although there's a good chance you would easily have occupied the central areas of the east you would be looking at a very bloody experience and constant fighting.

(anyone mention Iraq    )

Oh, by the way - our then new and shiny Krupp cannons at Oscarsborg fort in the Oslo fjord are credited with the sinking of the german battleship "Blücher" .

Added:

Quote[/b] ]Den svenske historikern Göran B Nilsson har formulerat betydelsen av 1905 pĺ följande avdramatiserade sätt: "Vad som hände 1905 var att Norge valde en kung och fick ett eget utrikesdepartement. Mycket märkvärdigare var det inte."

Very interesting link to the time around 1905

[EiZei 0]

and while still talking history, Finland wasnt independant anytime during history untill they beat the russians during WW1 (was it, or was it even WW2? i´m not soo good at finish history) ;)

Finland became independent in 1917, even though we got an autonomy granted by the russians (own currency, language, some laws etc.) after they liberated us from sweden , we fought a civil war in 1918 (the russians supported the reds) and fought against the russians in the winter war, continuation war and against the germans in the lapland war.

So we didnt have to fight to russians initially for our independence, russians just gave it away but supported the communists.

[MacReady 0]

(quote from The Thing, 1982)

MacReady: Hey, Swedens!

Doc: They're not Swedish, Mac, they're Norwegian.