Originally Posted by EagleHammer

I have already sayid i'd drop the issue, but sen's you people don't stop (Probably beacuse you don't have anything else to do in life, then write thing's here) her's another possibility, US are at war With EU for some reason who knows maybe to take over the world. After winning over France, the US, get'sheld up in Southern Germany and Northern Italy,They indvade Sweden to be able to strike at Germany from the north.

USA vs European Union. It's a possibility, but be prepared to write up some serious changes to the United States political system and diplomatic relations between the USA and EU would have to drop straight into the lowest pit of hell.

Here's what I think you would need:
1.) What you would need: A governmental takeover by a dictatorial leader who happens to be hugely popular in the USA. As the USA so incredibly satisfied with it's self-established role as "the World's Champion for Democracy" (to the point of being fairly self-righteous about it) this becomes a very difficult task. The problem is, a Democratic state will not allow for open and unprovoked hostility on the scale that you're scenario needs.
2.) To accomplish #1, what you need is a catastrophic distaster to strike the entire world community. A disaster so large in scale that it touches everyone on the planet. Ideally, it would need to somehow generate a nearly universal disillusionment in Democracy. The one biggest weakness of Democracies = They are sometimes slow to take action when action needs to be taken. So if you can come up with some unbelievably terrifying catastrophy in which the USA's democratic government fails to take action quickly enough and is thereby responsible for the needless deaths of millions of its citizens and people worldwide ... then you've got a good start on, "Why would the USA dump democracy in favor of a militaristic dictatorship?"
3.) The USA needs to blame the EU for something they intentionally did, failed to do, or that a charismatic dictator can conceivably blame on them. There should preferably be some slight reason. Think along the lines of why Hitler claimed that the invasions of Czechoslovakia and Poland were justified, but perhaps something of a LESS flimsy excuse would be best.
4.) EagleHammer at some point, the realization needs to hit you that Sweden would ABSOLUTELY NOT be an early target of any US invasion of Europe. It would be one of the last places to be attacked and one of the last to fall. a.) It's blessed with a location with a mass of complexities that make it one of the least attractive places to contemplate conquering in the entire world (very similar to the USA and Switzerland.) b.) Sweden does not present a very attractive target in terms of resources nor is it a likely to be a military powerhouse that the USA would have to "knock out early."

In this scenario, Sweden would be one of the very last places to fall. That, in itself, possibly makes for an interesting story: Sweden thwarts US invasion and/or is very successful at resisting and thereby inspires mass resistence throughout the conquered EU.

I do think that the more interesting tale to tell is the back story of how the USA metamorphoses into a nation with aspirations of world conquest.

Originally Posted by sunb!

An amphibious attack on Germany from Norway? Err...

The waters in the north is not suitable for launching amphibious attacks in such a scale, the straights are too narrow and does not provide any concealment for such a task force. Even if Denmark was invaded in the event of an invasion of Germany, the common Danish-German border is narrow and would be heavily defended.

My two cents are the BeNeLux countries and France.

I agree completely but if you are to attack Germany from the north Norway is the better option than Sweden and even then it is not a great option although I guess as a staging/supply point for an amphibious attack its a little better although you could just as easily use Britain.

Basically this is a scenario that is difficult to swallow and for some reason he wants to make it harder by dragging Sweden into it therefore I suspect it would make sense to have Norway as the attackers first port of call.

Sweden hasn't been at war in over a hundred years. There's a reason for this: There's no reason to attack Sweden.
Hey I think I have an idea.
To convince Tiger Woods to stop playing Golf, a secret society that has connections with the US government at all levels decides to turn Sweden into a "terror" state. It fabricates fake attacks by Swedish "leftist" and provide "irrefutable proof" that Sweden's government endorsed it fully.
The US takes action, Tiger Woods quits golf in protest and a few fat white guys are happy.
HOORAY!
Make it a story for Swedish children. Kind of like the USA is the new fire breathing dragon and your Bofors AK-5 toting hero in kevlar is the new knight in shining armor. Tiger Woods' wife can be the damsel in distress.
hahaha

Originally Posted by MontyB

Basically this is a scenario that is difficult to swallow and for some reason he wants to make it harder by dragging Sweden into it therefore I suspect it would make sense to have Norway as the attackers first port of call.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Weserübung

The other way around.

Originally Posted by the_13th_redneck

Sweden hasn't been at war in over a hundred years. There's a reason for this: There's no reason to attack Sweden.
Hey I think I have an idea.
To convince Tiger Woods to stop playing Golf, a secret society that has connections with the US government at all levels decides to turn Sweden into a "terror" state. It fabricates fake attacks by Swedish "leftist" and provide "irrefutable proof" that Sweden's government endorsed it fully.
The US takes action, Tiger Woods quits golf in protest and a few fat white guys are happy.
HOORAY!
Make it a story for Swedish children. Kind of like the USA is the new fire breathing dragon and your Bofors AK-5 toting hero in kevlar is the new knight in shining armor. Tiger Woods' wife can be the damsel in distress.
hahaha

Oddly enough your story triggered something.

During the 1970's there was a book written by a C. K. Stead called "Smiths Dream" (was made into a movie called "Sleeping Dogs") that would fit his scenario well.

It wasn't quite a post apocalyptic event story line but it was based around the oil shocks of the 1970s but it would get around the issues of thinking up a reason for the US to invade Sweden.

Originally Posted by sunb!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Weserübung

The other way around.

Huh, you have lost me on this one, I actually think we agree but I am not sure.

I'd rather we don't mess with the bloody Vikings... let them sleep. Now, San Marino, that's a country the US needs to attack.

Originally Posted by MontyB

Huh, you have lost me on this one, I actually think we agree but I am not sure.

We agree 100%, and honestly I can't remember my point with that post...

Originally Posted by bulldogg

I'd rather we don't mess with the bloody Vikings... let them sleep. Now, San Marino, that's a country the US needs to attack.

Liechtenstein!!
Business before pleasure.

LMAO... nice, especially since you already invaded Austria.

Any country with a river or coastline is my bitch.