Quote:Go look it up, the Swedish armed forces have 330,000 personnel, 10 million population, the UK has 465,000, 60 million population.
Don't know where get the numbers from. Our milityary, Försvarsmakten have 700 in deployed personal.
At present Sweden can mobilize a force consisting of 4,500 officers, 18,000 conscripts, 262,000 in the reserve and 37,000 Homeguards Home Guard. Full mobilisation is assumed to take one year (although no mobilisation readiness exists), and the formations assumed are of battalion or battle group level. Of these, 2,700 officers and 7,000.
262 000 in reserve do I not concider as armed forces since they will used if an invasion is happening.
As I said that's the only time the military is used besides foregin operation with the UN. Which the 700 is used for.
Quote:Regardless of whether you like it or not, restraining someone, locking them in a jail cell or whatever ... it is still the application of force.
May be, but its not used to scare it people in to obidience. Also everyoinbe is equal to the law, thjat include the govement that also can be punished by the legal system. They can't use tas a tool to control the country.
Quote:Every government has to protect its people ... it's part of what every electorate requires of them. Granted you lot may be a bit more independent that some but the basic requirements of an electorate are broadly speaking the same.
Yes of course they should protect their people. But not to that degree that the goverment is geting paranoid. But I get your point, what you mean. Although I think the goverment have more responisbilty then just primary protect it's people. Also what should they protect them from?
[quopte]Who cares, that isn't what happened. [/quote]
No, it didn't. But if the Hiroshima bomb where the other way around then those who justify the attack wouldn't justify it.
Also it's not the ultimate objective that's decide if something is terrorism. It's the acts objective that says if something is terrosim or some sort of terrorism, but most importenly it's the victims who decide whether or not it's terrorism.
The bjective of the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima was to kill people and create fair. That the ultimate goal was to make Japan surrender i irrelevent. It's the act and pupose of it that is relevent and it's was to kill and create fair.
Also nuclear weopen is an unethical weapon. THe damage it makes is horrible and have deadly affect over a long period of time.
