UK I get, but why Norway?

UK I get, but why Norway?

Attached: WWII Winner.png (1431x1095, 67K)

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_Independent_Company_1
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

today i am proud of my compatriots

We helped Norway when no one else would

this map has to be fake

the norwegians actually helped a lot in WW2, we sent a lot of troops to try and help them, more than we did in France

>France

Attached: 541677.jpg (768x547, 18K)

we are to smart too be on this brainlet continent

>France

Attached: Laughing crocodiles.jpg (193x182, 21K)

OP should really post the source if there's one.

>Unitedstatestugal

Because the UK and Norway are bros.

Attached: Merlins and personnel of 845 Naval Air Squadron, Bardufoss, Norway.jpg (2000x1600, 395K)

>France
this has to be a joke

Norwegian special forces destroyed Germany's heavy water producing plants. Without Norway Germany may have possibly had primitive nuclear devices.

The Germans barely invested in nuclear research because they knew the war would be over before any kind of device was ready. Norway's biggest contribution to the war effort was the merchant fleet that continued sailing throughout the war

France was by far the most resistant countries, literally every Frenchman resisted, the General De Gaulle said so.

Nothing like shitholes such as Poland who loved the nazi boot and actually killed more Jewish people than the nazis themselves, believe it or not.
France won WW2 all by itself basically and we liberated ourselves. End of story. Thank you for listening.

That's nice but what has it got to do with the UK?

>France

Attached: xd-14638.jpg (212x200, 6K)

On s'est libéré nous-mêmes et ceux qui disent le contraire sont des révisionnistes

The French view is without a doubt the most realistic.
Prove me wrong.

no shit, how do you know

Based Jupiter

Norwegian government in exile was based in London. Some Norwegian commandos trained in Scotland. The resistance movement worked together with the eternal anglo. Our merchant fleet had a lot of dealings with Britain during the war. British troops fought in Norway against ze germans.

Lol sure buddy whatever helps you sleep at night

Attached: 2000px-Flag_of_Philippe_Pétain,_Chief_of_State_of_Vichy_France.svg.png (2000x1333, 63K)

>Norwegian special forces

Calm down with your American hollywood style.
they were freedom fighters, and good ones too. But no, they were not special forces. that's why they're know in Scandinavian culture as the "Heroes of Telemark" and not White Mountain Ops unit 9. I have the utmost respect for them, and so much that i will refuse to let their legacy change by some mediocre Netflix adaptation.

unironically I think german's opinion is the most relevant

i can't

I think he was joking, y'know
Makes sense

Germany would have won easy without strong UK

Attached: 1520352484307.jpg (1080x1080, 286K)

Absolutement.

He's not completely wrong, they were basically the early version of what we call special forces today. They called them commandos instead.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_Independent_Company_1

So, why Norway didn't join the Eu. After the war, a lot of the freedom fighters turned to change the countries they fought in. So a lot of communist thought that the fighting they dit against fascism would lead to a communist revolution etc. After that settled down into the usual democratic ways, a movement across Scandinavia fought for a new strong union, for the common good, brotherhood, and to stand better against upcoming threads, such as the Soviet, who was quiet the aggressor. The Danish government wanted a localized union, the Swedes was more interested in neutrality and didn't speak much about it and the Norwegian was mostly interested in a military union, and more so in one with bigger powers. Later, nationalism rose amongst Norwegians, who had been under Swedish rule not that long ago, they even got so prevalent that they got a language scrambled together, ny-norsk (New-Norwegian) from rural areas and enclaved fishing tribes, which they promoted to replace the common Norwegian, which was mostly Danish, but with a Swedish way of pronunciation.

So when the EU was formed out of the Steel Union, Norway was not really in a position with an unified belief for a union of any sort. I can't tell how big support was for either side, but it is clear that the political environment was not habitable for such ideas. When they got it really going with the oil, there was little incentive for a market union. Common arguments was the classic "protect our farmers and our hard workers" Norway being literally ONLY mountains, have a hard time doing anything, so there must have been a big fear, that Danish farmers would out-compete their own, and Swedish primary resources closing Norwegian industries. I can't say how big that was, but in every western country we all have the same party, from a specific wing of the politics, always routing for that bullshit.

And there's never really been either the support or climate for them joining the union. But when oil is out they'll come.

Nothing wrong with this
Sound lads

I'll do a breivik in brussels before this country joins the e"""u"""

France is the hyper-realistic answer. Completely free of bias and propaganda. Just think what does France have to gain from saying they won WW2? Nothing. This isn't a dick measuring contest to them.

Commando's i can live with, that seems fair.

Do you see guys? DO YOU SEE?! but that's fair, we do have a shitty immigration problem. But all the other arguments you'll hear people tell about, is bullshit. But the migration is a severe problem.

And remember how i talked about Norwegian nationalism, and them basically inventing a language they argued was more pure?
>e"""u"""
He does a ""u"" because it's "EF" in Norwegian, they can't say "Union", EVERY foreign word is STRICTLY translated, or at the very least spelled, in Norwegian manner.

It's both fascinating and weird. A tablet in Norwegian is a word that sound in a way like this does in English: "chalkboard-computer". As i said, fascination, but weird.

Attached: 1520376222428.png (808x1300, 406K)

The real question is why France.
What the fuck is wrong with them?

Stay mad inbred boy

Sick comeback lad.
I wonder if when WW3 rolls around you'll try the Maginot Line again. Third times the charm, eh?

No, they'll just lube up and enjoy getting rough fucked while they wait for us to save them again.

France did more for the Axis than against them.

At least you don't have to worry about battle plans, you'll cower on your island waiting for real countries to defeat the ennemy :^)

Yeah, not like were fighting on the Western Front, North Africa, and the Pacific.
You fucks are an embarrassment. Hell, you were about to join the Nazis for a good while until we made it clear we'd turn France to ashes if you did.

>Yeah, not like were fighting on the Western Front, North Africa, and the Pacific.
Exactly, glad that you aknowledge it

norwegians are good lads

Fucking what?

Attached: 46643.gif (240x180, 1.28M)

They were in command during Market Garden, we all know how that ended.

> to smart too be
You're not taking my soul fucktard

kek, but you know it's true a weird. And you remember a couple of years ago when you lacked butter, and the Danish capitalist suddenly didn't have any to sell? In retaliation, most likely. And you know for sure, that when the oil runs out, you'll have to rely on the fund. But if somethings goes wrong or when that run out, you'll have to come beg to you the union or face the third world category. (and not the old school classification of allied status, but the African tier category.)

>real countries
>don't even have the largest empire in history
stay mad frog

Attached: Buonaparte,_48_hours_after_landing.jpg (729x947, 155K)

They initiated the union dumbass... Or at least, they formally initiated the real talk that let to the Treaty of Paris forming the "European Coal and Steel Community" which was the grandfather of the union.

what did he mean by this?

Attached: 14646536.gif (320x289, 1.12M)

UK was a lot more important to the war effort than most people give them credit. Without their intelligence, tying up german air and naval forces as well as acting as a staging point for the assault on the mainland taking Europe would have been much more difficult, maybe even enough for the use of atomic bombs.

The pact of steel, as it is also known, was the first steps that let to the union formed with the signing of the Treaty of Paris, 1952. The idea was if central European industries was tied heavily together it would drastically decrease the war industry capacity if conflict started internally, thus hinder it before it escalated. The benefit of this would be seen in everyday life, with free movement, custom free trade and closer bond.

And the six countries that formed this pact, quickly benefited significantly from this, so already in 1958, as several countries was eager to join this promising and now proven boom, the European Union was formed by the Treaty of Rome. The steel pact continued as a part of the operation until 1967 when everything was included into the Union. And as it was just a formality at that point, it expired in 2002.

They also made roughly half of the troops on the Western Front.
The USSR was still the biggest contributor to the war effort by far.

What do you think this thread is about?

In the terms of manpower as well as resources spent absolutely. However those contributions wouldn't have been enough without US supplies and British support.
In the end, the war was won by the combined efforts of the 3 nations, each offering more in certain aspects. I don't believe any one of them could have decisively won on their own except for the US thanks to their location and strategic air. Even then taking mainland europe without the eastern front tying up most of the German forces and having Britain as a staging point would have been extremely costly.

simply because we are patriotic ? our country is always more important, because we love our country

>France

Attached: 1508649536300.jpg (667x701, 50K)

kek how did we manage to convince literal eastern european countries that we did more work than the soviets

>He does a ""u"" because it's "EF" in Norwegian, they can't say "Union", EVERY foreign word is STRICTLY translated, or at the very least spelled, in Norwegian manner.
>It's both fascinating and weird. A tablet in Norwegian is a word that sound in a way like this does in English: "chalkboard-computer". As i said, fascination, but weird.
Have you been smoking Lego?

Based oil Vikings.

norway and us are besties xx

Attached: 1280px-Trafalgar_Square_Christmas_Carols_-_Dec_2006.jpg (1280x823, 207K)

>France

Attached: tumblr_o99th7O8241qauhyqo2_540.gif (540x399, 1.99M)

There's a difference between loving your country and just being straight up delusional, Pierre. All memes aside, do you UNIRONICALLY believe that France played a bigger role in the result of WWII, than Britain, the US, or Russia? Be honest.

Maybe not more than the Soviets, but more than the inbred Brits or stupid Americans, yes absolutely.

They lured Hitler into a false sense of security, prompting the doomed invasion of Soviet Russia.

Attached: 1517501292555.gif (356x300, 1023K)

Even while you were typing those words, I know for a fact that you didn't believe them.

It's really hard to say who did the most. Obviously, the Soviet Union did the most, in terms of man power, killing germans, and losing men. But they also helped the germans at the beginning, by letting them steamroll Poland. And they didn't join before getting steamrolled themselves.

The US did the most regarding industrial output, and bombing the German war industry. And giving the Jap the slap.

But Britain were in the fight from day one. And they kept on fighting until the Germans were defeated. They were under food rationing for a long time, went into total war production earlier than anyone else, including the Germans, and kept coming with innovative ideas for the entire war. I'd say it's reasonable to declare Britain as the country that did the most.

I still think the Soviet Union did the most, but it's not too far fetched to regard Britain as the country that did the most, if you just do some minor mental gymnastics.

France? Fuck no. They did do a lot in the first year, but then, nothing.

He's French they are really like that.

because england sent troops to us and aided us

coughcough IRONFIELDS coughcough

During the war, we sheltered their royal family in London. As a thanks, they give us a Christmas tree every year, which is nice of them.

This.
In a way, they're still stuck in 1812.

>We'll just come at the end and pretend we had an important role in this and that we gave a fuck all this time
guess the country

It's not even a joke, most USians unironically think they singlehandedly won WWII.

Turing cracked the enigma code. This contribution has been extremely underrated.

Plus all of this:
>But Britain were in the fight from day one. And they kept on fighting until the Germans were defeated. They were under food rationing for a long time, went into total war production earlier than anyone else, including the Germans, and kept coming with innovative ideas for the entire war. I'd say it's reasonable to declare Britain as the country that did the most.

But even after saying all of this, I can't begin to answer the question who did the most. I don't know, and I don't think any of you know either.

I just know it's not entirely unreasonable to claim UK to be the one.

Europeans don't even seem to remember he war in the Pacific.

Proud of your delusions?

hehehe, hopefully we were there to stop the germans

Attached: 1414664866389.jpg (225x225, 16K)

>Pacific.
Lmao
Not significantly relevant in Europe tho, or in besting Germany tho. It was very relevant in preventing a Japanese empire of course.

Can't speak for all of Europe, but we
definitely do in Britain. The Pacific theatre was a big deal for us. The Dutch too. On the other hand, Americans learn next to nothing about the Eastern Front. How many of your countrymen have even HEARD of Stalingrad?

Considering T*rkey is trying to get into it, you may awnt to """" """" that e as well.

>T*rkey is trying to get into it
That's not what Creepystache McWannabesultan is saying nowadays.

Don't thank us for protecting Europe, it's our job

Thank god if you're right.

this

Attached: Trafalgar Square Christmas Carols - Dec 2006 - Trafalgar Square Christmas tree - Wikipedia.png (1618x1040, 2.01M)

>France

Protecting from what? Because if it was from a soviet invasion and communism, you did a bang up job.

From the eternal kraut, and we did succeed in protecting the relevant parts of Europe (and Finland)

>1812
It wasn't the best year for the french tbqh

Dubs of Truth, you're welcome, rest of the world.

Attached: 1515510733200.png (492x326, 162K)

You and Britain set them up to be the leaders of Europe through EU (with them conveniently leaving after the job was done) despite losing two world wars. I'm sure they have the most to thank you for that.

Haha yeah, I get what you mean.
But I'm thinking about 1812 as in just before the invasion of Russia.

I don't understand this map at all...

looks more like a map asking which three countries relevant during world war 2 plus france helped your country the most

>Turing cracked the enigma code.
rrrrrrrRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEE!!!!
Polish mathematicians!
POLISH MATHEMATICIANS!!!!

>and we did succeed in protecting the relevant parts of Europe (and Finland)
You kind of were enemies of finland and it kind of was Germany helping them against USSR tho?