What are we debating? (if anything) That there are armies that integrate people of different sexualities more successfully than, for instance the US army: sure!
That the Swedish political stance was not very impressive during WWII: sure! (particularly measured against its Scandinavian neighbors) (although you're jumping between topics like a headless hen, since I responded to your cold war neutrality comment)
And yet still you avoided answering my question to you: is it just that you don't agree with particular NATO cases of complaint or is it that you'd rather see that no one complained about any military actions of the world's most powerful country? Do certain rights invalidate certain wrongs and make them unreachable to critics?
no subject
That there are armies that integrate people of different sexualities more successfully than, for instance the US army: sure!
That the Swedish political stance was not very impressive during WWII: sure! (particularly measured against its Scandinavian neighbors)
(although you're jumping between topics like a headless hen, since I responded to your cold war neutrality comment)
And yet still you avoided answering my question to you: is it just that you don't agree with particular NATO cases of complaint or is it that you'd rather see that no one complained about any military actions of the world's most powerful country? Do certain rights invalidate certain wrongs and make them unreachable to critics?