I assume this thread has been started because of my statements in the "Not bf2s, not bf2"-Forum in a thread about
"Absolutely worthless geography skills".
My remark was:
On a sidenote: I have no choice in following the spirit of my country and being neutral about everything
It was a ironic/sarcastic remark and ment to end the post on a "funny" note. I thought it would be obvious if you read the rest of my posts in this thread that I for one believe that you can not afford the be a "neutral" country per se BUT I believe that you can be a neutral country when it comes to military action.
TehSeraphim wrote:
Neutrality is crap - in WWII we played "neutral" and still funneled weapons and support to the UK. I'm not sure what countries like Switzerland get from being neutral, but it has to be pretty good.
The neutrality of Switzerland during WWII has been thoroughly studied by the
Bergier commision which cleared up many myths about the dealings of this country with Nazi-Germany and of course also the Allied Forces. What we got out of this all was that Switzerland was not occupied by any of the participating forces during WWII but of course this came by a high price. Nevertheless did the "neutral" status help people escape from Germany to the west through Switzerland.
It is very important to note that Neutrality does not mean the country seals itself of the rest of the world and says:"Hey we don't want to get involved, this is not our problem". In fact it is for example a big contribution to the credibility of the Red Cross. The red cross was founded in Switzerland but has since then evlolved into an international organization that does not "belong" to one country. But since the red cross is based in Switzerland and can only operate in areas of conflict when it is in fact neutral and does not favor any side.
Maybe
this link to wikipedia will clear up some misconceptions. As you can see Switzerland has declared itself as an "armed neutrality" which basically means we take the right to defend ourselves if any of the involved parties would attack us on our soil.
Switzerland is taking an active role in many humanitarian projects throughout the world and is also very active in many UN organisations. Swiss authorities have been working closely with authorities from other countries concerning terrorism. All requests of freezing or seizing money belonging to known terrorists or terroristic groups have been fullfilled.
Another example would be that Switzerland is participating in the Peacekeeping mission in former Yugoslavia. Members of the swiss army are there ho help build up the country. Of course they are doing their duty unarmed, meaning they are NOT allowed to carry any weapons (not counting the swiss army knife of course
). As far as I know they are being protected by the austrian members of the
KFOR.
In then end it comes down to this that my remark in the other post was meant as an ironic sidenote to end my post on a "funny" note. I thought it was clear that if you analyze my point of view in my other posts you will see that I believe that every nation and it's citizens are in one or another way connected to eachother and can not seal them of from eachother. I hope the clarifications about the term "neutrality" helped to understand that it is a rather well defined term in the field of international politics and is applied when it comes to armed conflicts.
Last edited by AD_Kensan (2005-12-05 09:16:54)