Which capital(s) did not get occupied in WWII?

[Gloer]

As Kipling well says, we must "…meet with Triumph and Disaster. And treat those two impostors just the same."

Never give in, never give in, never, never, never, never-in nothing, great or small, large or petty - never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy. We stood all alone a year ago, and to many countries it seemed that our account was closed, we were finished.


http://www.earthstation1.com/Churchillia/ChurchillOnFinnishResistanceToSovietInvasion.mp3

[Gloer]

Could a MODerATOR edit that poll so that a multiple choice is possible?

[Eledhwen]

Great Britain wasn't occupied, but part of the UK was - The Balliwicks of Jersey and Guernsey (and the smaller islands) suffered under the jackboot.

[FoolOfATook]

I don't understand why we are voting about historical facts. Even if everyone voted that London was conquered by the Axis and Hitler lived there for seventy years, it wouldn't make it true.

[Eledhwen]

It's a sales ploy which, in marketing, is called sugging (Selling under the guise of Market Research). The 'researchers' don't really want your opinion, they want to use your answers against you to influence your purchasing decisions. The British Market Research Society is dedicated to stamping out the practice.

I think Gloer is making a point about the upcoming Gulf War - that Britain was proactive in starting WWII, so didn't get overrun and occupied. Correct me, Gloer, if I'm wrong.

Personally, I think it helped to be surrounded by the sea. We had a half-decent navy in those days.

[FoolOfATook]

I wasn't aware that there were concerns about Washington or London falling to Hussein. Besides, Germany was proactive in starting WWII, and that didn't prevent their capital from being taken by the Soviets and the Americans. I don't doubt that you are right, Eledhwen, but I really don't get this particular analogy.

[Gloer]

Sorry, but this is not a poll - It's really a QUIZ as some of you noticed.

London is right.

Are there other right answers?

Tips can be found above!

PS. Nothing directly to do with Iraq. iraq is insignifficant place full of dirt and dust and poorly educated people anyhow. Iraq-thing is all about who decides what is done and especially how it is done.

It is not really about Iraq or Saddam that much. Saddam doesn't follow old rules (he follows older ones) and the problem is that USA (Bush) wants to set some new rules. It's about setting up rules and codes of behaviour.

[Ciryaher]

Moscow was never taken, either.

[Arvedui]

London, Moscow, Helsinki.

If my brain haven't grown old and numb.

[Rogue666666]

What about Athens? I seem to remember reading that the Greeks put up a big fight, but ended up losing. :(

[Arvedui]

That was in the later years of the war. I'll check up the exact year and date, and come back to you.
I believe it was the communists who staged the uprising.

[DGoeij]

Originally posted by Gloer
PS. Nothing directly to do with Iraq. iraq is insignifficant place full of dirt and dust and poorly educated people anyhow. Iraq-thing is all about who decides what is done and especially how it is done.

You forgot or never heard about the fairly fertile parts along the river beds of the Tigris and that other river, and a huge oil-field. It might surpise you, but there isn't that much desert in the whole of Iraq. The fact that most of the Gulf War was fougth there, doesn't mean you've seen the whole country. It would be like me saying the US is nothing but desert because I saw a documentary about Death Valley.
And, Iraq has a very well educated population, especially compared to the surrounding nations. There's a reason why some people suspect Iraq of having weapons of mass destruction. They have the skill to create the factories,the weapons themselves and the delivery systems.

And I don't get the meaning behind this poll, but it's London, Moscow, and I'm pretty sure about Helsinki, that never have been occupied during WWII.

[Eledhwen]

Originally posted by Rogue666666
What about Athens? I seem to remember reading that the Greeks put up a big fight, but ended up losing. :( Read Captain Corelli's Mandolin for a good Greek WWII storyline (not the film!).

[Gloer]

is to

promote the people who live here.


I was just so agitated to find that Churchill speech he gave 1940 in which he promotes "Finland as an example what free men can do" just three months before he offered " blood sweat tears and toil".

I was not aware that it was so well known that helsinki was not taken. Lucky that berlin was the main target for Stalin.
I thought I'd surprise you...


But let's jump to this Iraq thing: In 1991 war Bagdad was neer taken. I can understand that Saddam claims he won. After all that is the reasoning we use: Finland managed to block the occupation, hold the capital and keep sovereignity and the government was not changed. Against an overwhelming force this is a victory.

PS. I admit Iraq is more than dust and desert and people there are quite capable. I just was jealous to get the attention to FINLAND "as an example what free men can do".

[Arvedui]

Long live the Finnish "Motti"!

My guess is that the Soviets got quite a bloody nose, and decided that enough was enough.