>>>>>>(Now, how long will it take until someone calls me a terrorist or a terrorist supporter?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So let me get this straight - you are saying that if some terrorist group started firing 200 rockets a day into Norway, you believe that the Norwegian government should just sit back, relax and do nothing. If this is not what you are saying, what do you think an appropriate reaction would be? Remember, in the case of Israel and Hamas, Israel agreed to the cease fire. It was Hamas that said no to it.
>>>>>
>>>>>I would find that difficult to believe given the Norwegian track record in WWII. Unlike the Dutch who basically accepted the Nazi occupation, the Norwegians had a huge resistance effort and did not go willingly into that good night...
>>>>
>>>>You'd better get your history straight. The Dutch did not accept the nazi occupation at all, like in France there was a substantial underground movement resisting the germans. The dutch army was overrun and the city of Rotterdam was bombed flat with thousands of causulties. We did not receive the germans with open arms, but our army was not properly equiped to have a chance. A part of the resistance was operating from London under the supervision of Prince Bernard.
>>>>
>>>>If you were saying that about the austrians, that would have been another matter.
>>>
>>>From Wikipedia on Dutch resistance:
>>>
>>>" Going into hiding, at which the Dutch appeared to excel, was generally not categorised by the Dutch as resistance because of the passive nature of such an act; helping these so-called onderduikers was, but more or less reluctantly so. Non-compliance with German rules, wishes or commands or German condoned Dutch rule, was also not considered resistance."
>>>
>>>So you're either passive or hide.... that's a great resistance.. Where do you get your facts. Out of thin air apparently.
>>
>>Selective selecting sentences from Wikipedia is something everone can do. There indeed was little violent resistance, but there was a wide network of the underground for helping jews out of the country, helping to hide people from being deported to nazi Germany for working in the industry and there Engeland vaarders. There was a remarkable lage underground press, smuggling etc. And then the Februari strike of tens of thousands of people participating in it.
>>
>>The Netherlands was the only country that organised non-violent strikes. Wikipedia:
>>The Dutch struck four more times against the Germans: the students' strike in November 1940, the doctors' strike in 1942, the April–May strike in 1943 and the railway strike in 1944. No other country showed such overt unarmed refusal to cooperate with the occupiers.
>>
>>So if there was no resistence why were there more than 2000 killed?
>>
>>No we did not have the most lethal resistance, but to say that we received the germans with open arms shows a total ignorance of what really happened.
>>Get your fact straight John.
>
>How can you even begin to call hiding and striking resistance? Resistance was what the French, Norwegians, and most of your other European allies did, anti-German terrorism.. But pacifism begets killing and 2000 people (your number) died because, to the Germans, you came to a gun fight unarmed. Quit using toilet paper for your fact source.. Don't bother responding because I'm done with your holiness.

Ahah.. I thought I saw you say a couple of times, that you don't care what another says or thinks. Changed your mind john?? What is it, that I write that irritates you john? Come on john, show your real nature... please.

Abviously you;re not interested in facts, backgrounds and the nature of our resistance. I can see from your violent minded nature you think there no such thing as non-violent resistance, even if there was a degree of violent resistance. You only come here to create pinch, with your bias against Dutch windmills.

You're motivies are clear, john.
Go on... it becomes comical to see one to dig his own grave.