sad thoughts on poly posters - Page 14

KrazyHorse · September 8, 2002, 05:01

Aren't the username and flag you've chosen redundant?

tinyp3nis · September 8, 2002, 05:08

I even had to get a dictionary for redundant, and i did and i still dont get it (the meaning of whole sentence)

. Enlingthen me please. Or if it is an insult, say it so a slow guy like me gets it, im a "big" man, i can take it... ..

Serb · September 8, 2002, 05:09

Quote:

Originally posted by tinyp3nis
Hey Serb, i would really much like to know your side of the story what happened in the winterwar of 39, i have heard the finnish side here way too often and i know all the facts allready, but i have allways wanted to hear the russian version of what really happened. I really havent got the chance to hear it earlier, but it has allways bugged me since i have been hearing the soviet version is way different what really happened(or finnish ppl say what happened)....
You dont have to reply, but im just too curious not to ask about it, just in case u have info.

Russo-Finnish frontier was only 32 km away from Leningrad- our Northern capital. Stalin beleived that in case of war with Germany, Hitler will use Finland as bridgehead to attack Soviet Union (which Hitler done in 1941). He offered to remove frontier a bit far away from Leningrad. He offered larger Soviet lands in exchange for Finnish lands near Leningrad. They refused. He ordered to took this land by force. The border scirmish was started. It was very cold winter, Fins had very tough fortifications known as Manergeim's line and they fought quite well. But after 100 days of campaign their fortifications were broken and in fear of total occupation Finland accepted terms of Stalin and frontier was removed from 32 km to 250 km away from Leningrad. This campaign showed what harm Stalin done during purges. He started to relise Soveit generals and oficiers who were still alive in jails.Aand also Stalin started the re-arming programm of Red army. Unfortunately he had no much time, 1.5 years later Hitler attacked SU and we re-armed our army when we already were in war with Germany.

Serb · September 8, 2002, 05:12

Damn,

you are Finn. I should have guessed that it was a trap.

tinyp3nis · September 8, 2002, 05:21

Quote:

Russo-Finnish frontier was only 32 km away from Leningrad- our Northern capital. Stalin beleived that in case of war with Germany, Hitler will use Finland as bridgehead to attack Soviet Union (which Hitler done in 1941). He offered to remove frontier a bit far away from Leningrad. He offered larger Soviet lands in exchange for Finnish lands near Leningrad. They refused. He ordered to took this land by force. .

The side of the story we hear is that finland was no real threat, and after seeing what happened to estonia and the other 2 baltic countries dealing with land would not be a smart idea... you know what happened to them

GeneralTacticus · September 8, 2002, 05:30

Quote:

Or if it is an insult, say it so a slow guy like me gets it, im a "big" man, i can take it... ..

He's saying that all Finns have small penises.

KrazyHorse · September 8, 2002, 05:34

Or that all men with small penises are Finns.

KrazyHorse · September 8, 2002, 05:35

I thought it was pretty good, actually...

tinyp3nis · September 8, 2002, 05:39

Ah ok i guessed its that but i wasnt sure

. We have an ecxuse, its so darn cold here! Wont work?

edited nard to darn omg... oh and i hope darn is a word...

JCG · September 14, 2002, 00:59

I'm not anti-USA, just anti-US government as world policeman if it's not going to travel the full mile, and/or doesn't solve it's own problems first.

Regarding WWII...

USSR would certainly have defeated Nazi Germany on its own with no US aid, just that the war may have dragged on to about 1946-47. Lend lease was important in making things easier, but it wasn't vital nor necessary to the success of the Russian war effort; it just positively contributed to the build up.

In any case, Germany could never have won the war outright against the Russians, not unless you introduce several massive changes...

1941: Only theoretical chance at a real "win" to the war, but would have required an earlier and faster Barbarossa concentrated not just on one objective, but without Hitler's interference, bad weather, much greater than expected quantity and quality of Russian tanks, general laziness of the German war economy, arrival of the Siberian reinforcements and the obstructions of several ancient-minded generals in the German Heer.

1942: important victories were possible in the Caucasus OR Stalingrad, that could have caused serious problems for the Russians, but from an overall economic and strategic perspective, it was too late to permanently defeat them. A long stalemate of several years could have resulted generally in Germany's favor, but Russian economic superiority and adaptability just couldn't be overturned decisively by then.

1943: the last chance Germany had to at least provoke anything like a stalemate (at most a temporary one) if Manstein's advice had been followed, but they also messed that up before-and-at Kursk, and had to resort to just delaying the Russians...

1944: a catastrophe, and 1945: a very tragic joke.

Capt Dizle · September 14, 2002, 01:03

Lazy German war economy? Huh?

JCG · September 14, 2002, 01:09

Yes. Lazy German War Economy for the first and most important years of the War.

Late 1943-45 improvements were too little, too late.

Serb · September 14, 2002, 01:09

In autmn of 1941 Hitler was so sure about his victory over Soviets, that he ordered to reduce production of weaponry.

Capt Dizle · September 14, 2002, 01:16

I wouldn't say lazy. My understanding is the Germany had limited industrial capability. Unlike in American where we could designate factories to build just one thing for the duration of the war, Germany had to run a bit of this and then a bit of that and switch again at a lot of their plants.

So, Hitler's overconfidence could have lead to bad planning but thats not laziness.

GeneralTacticus · September 14, 2002, 01:18

Quote:

In autmn of 1941 Hitler was so sure about his victory over Soviets, that he ordered to reduce production of weaponry.

He also refused to isue his troops with winter clothing right up until the end of '41. Guderain asked for it repeatedly and was rebuffed every time.

Edited to add quote.

JCG · September 14, 2002, 01:25

Exactly right on the Guderian count.

It's true that German capacity wasn't even close to matching Russian or American ones, but even then, Hitler did NO serious attempts in the early war years to give the needed priority to war production and armaments standards, short of loose rhetoric.

Capt Dizle · September 14, 2002, 01:29

Well, the way the Werhmacht ran amok he didn't think he needed to.

JCG · September 14, 2002, 01:32

Which was one of his mistakes.

Serb · September 14, 2002, 01:34

Quote:

Originally posted by tinyp3nis

The side of the story we hear is that finland was no real threat,

Oh really? It wasn't you who was allied with Hitler in 1941/ It wasn't your army who fought on Hitler's side? It wasn't you who was on of the AXIS countries?

Quote:

and after seeing what happened to estonia and the other 2 baltic countries dealing with land would not be a smart idea... you know what happened to them

You couldn't saw this. Sovet-Finnish war last 100 days of winter 1939-1940. At March 12 1940 you signed pact with Soviets, surrender territories Soviets wanted and the war was over. Baltic states were annexed by Soviet Union in August 2 1940- almost 6 months after Soviet-Finnish war was over. So, I don't see logic in your argument.

GeneralTacticus · September 14, 2002, 01:41

Quote:

Oh really? It wasn't you who was allied with Hitler in 1941/ It wasn't your army who fought on Hitler's side? It wasn't you who was on of the AXIS countries?

Ironic really. You make an enemy of finland and then complain when they try to get revenge.

JCG · September 14, 2002, 01:52

Sad thing that in the end, the Finns may have been slightly better off if they had agreed to the Russian demands however harsh they might have sounded, or if the Allies had landed troops there early, as was (more or less) considered for a while...

Serb · September 14, 2002, 01:52

Quote:

Ironic really. You make an enemy of finland and then complain when they try to get revenge.

Yep, exactly

Anyhow, beeing in AXIS is wrong
And btw, Poland made a SU an enemy in 1921 and then complained when Soviets get revenge in 1939 and returned all lands Poland took from Soviets.
*waiting for Heresson

*

GeneralTacticus · September 14, 2002, 02:00

Quote:

Anyhow, beeing in AXIS is wrong

Yes, but seeing as how it was probably as a result of Soviet actions that Finland allied with Germany in the first place, you can't use it to justify the Winter War.

Serb · September 14, 2002, 02:04

Quote:

Originally posted by JCG
Sad thing that in the end, the Finns may have been slightly better off if they had agreed to the Russian demands however harsh they might have sounded, or if the Allies had landed troops there early, as was (more or less) considered for a while...

At the beggining it weren't demands, but an offer. And a good offer for Finland. They could recieve larger territory in exchange for their lands near Leningrad. I guess they don't trust to Stalin, but Stalin don't trust to them too.
Honestly I don't know what could happen if they accepted this offer. More likely they would involved anyway. Finland was too good as bridgehead against SU and Hitler couldn't lost such opportunity. So I guess they would be invaded anyway, if not by Stalin, then by Hitler (if they would refused to give him right of passage).

GeneralTacticus · September 14, 2002, 02:10

I doubt it would have been worth it for Hitler to invade Finland as a bridgehead against the Soviets. It would have been as good as an announcement to Stalin that he was going to be invaded, and he would then probably have just moved in and taken what he wanted. There probably wouldn't have been much resistance.

Serb · September 14, 2002, 02:13

Quote:

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Yes, but seeing as how it was probably as a result of Soviet actions that Finland allied with Germany in the first place, you can't use it to justify the Winter War.

I'm not trying to justify Stalin, agression is agression. Stalin tried to solve this deal peacefully, they refused. It's their leagal right to refuse an offer, if they don't want to sign it. Stalin has no right to attack them, even consider that it saved Leningrad from occupation in future.

And btw, Stalin don't consider it as war, but only as border skirmish.

GeneralTacticus · September 14, 2002, 02:16

Strange sense of proprtion that man had...

Serb · September 14, 2002, 02:22

Quote:

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
I doubt it would have been worth it for Hitler to invade Finland as a bridgehead against the Soviets.

I said only if they would refuse to gave him right of passage.

Quote:

It would have been as good as an announcement to Stalin that he was going to be invaded, and he would then probably have just moved in and taken what he wanted. There probably wouldn't have been much resistance.

Why? Hitler already took almoust entire Europe, just another territory in Hitler's collection. And Stalin perfectly knew that Hitler will attack SU sooner or later. The whole Finnish issue was started by Stalin to protect Soviet Northern capital from German attack. If border wasn't removed from Leningrad in 1940, in 1941 Leningrad more probably felt, because in this case they attacked from 32km distance instead of 250km distance.
Resistance? Yes of course, but Germany could attack through Norway where Finns didn't have such strong fortifications as they had on Russian frontier.

GeneralTacticus · September 14, 2002, 02:28

Quote:

Stalin perfectly knew that Hitler will attack SU sooner or later.

Then why did he discount every piece of intelligence that was sent to him indicating that Hitler was going to attack?

Quote:

Resistance? Yes of course, but Germany could attack through Norway where Finns didn't have such strong fortifications as they had on Russian frontier.

I'm saying that if Stalin just moved in after the Germans to establish a buffer zone, the Finns would most likely have their hands full with Hitler.

Serb · September 14, 2002, 02:36

Quote:

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus
Strange sense of proprtion that man had...

No, it's not about his senses. Full-scale war vs. Finland could lead to war between GB and France against SU. French were ready to send 150 000 expedition forces to fight Soviets. Brits almost declared war on SU. If Soviets didn't stop and made an attempt to occupy all Finland, then we were enemies with GB and France in the WW2.

Sure Stalin predicted this. He ordered to made this "operation" as "silence" as possible. He ordered to use forces only of Leningrad's military district for this campaign, he gave all command to head of Leningrad's military district and send HQ staff of Red army to vacation on Black Sea. If he declared full-scale war against Finland and ordered to use all regiments of Red army, then GB and France declared war on SU at the same moment.