In message , Alan Minyard
writes
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 21:20:51 +0000, "Paul J. Adam" news@jrwly
nch.demon.co.uk wrote:
Al, would you like me to make similar comments about (for example) the
wholly ineffective US defenders of Fort Drum, or Wake Island?

Those were indeed defeats. And you can throw in Battan, etc.

So the defenders were tremulous cowards who should be mocked? Don't
think so, from what I've read; seems like they fought as long as they
had any hope for.

What did the Norwegians fail to do?

The US had the liberty of fighting far from its shores, with outposts
being lost: others were less fortunate

True, but those folks should not claim to have had major successes against
either the Nazis or the Japanese.

Neither should they be accused of casual surrender. The truth lies
somewhere in between.

The Norwegians weren't a difficult conquest for Germany, but they did
put up a fight and managed to bite back hard a few times before being
overwhelmed (and kept an active resistance through the war)

What more should they have done?

Russia, the UK, and the US did the vast majority of the heavy lifting.

So long as by 'UK' you include the rest of the Commonwealth... but then
look at a map and see how much of a globe those three powers controlled,
and ask what you can expect from a small, sparsely-populated country on
the wrong end of mechanised warfare.

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk