TrionDelta Posted July 30, 2002 Share Posted July 30, 2002 i thought that finland joined the Axis powers in '39 to prevent the russians from destroying them B/c of the Nap the germans had with russia. so shopuldnt Finland start as an axis Minor?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted July 30, 2002 Share Posted July 30, 2002 No. Finland signed a peace with Russia after the 39/40 Winterwar - properly it was not part of WW2 at teh time as neither combatant was allied with Germany or England/france. The Finns declared war again in 1941 (or was it early 42? - I'm sure our resident Finns will tell us! ) after Barbarossa, and it is THAT declaration which you see in SC - between the 2 wars they were at "peace" with hte USSR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ancient One Posted July 31, 2002 Share Posted July 31, 2002 Originally posted by Mike: The Finns declared war again in 1941Actually it was the Soviets that started the second war with Finland in 1941. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted July 31, 2002 Share Posted July 31, 2002 I've neveread anything about he USSR declaring war on Finland in 1941. I have read that Britain did so - having given the Finns an ultimatum to stop offensive operations against the USSR in November 1941 or face war with the allies. there are accounts of Russian a/c bombing Finnish towns on 25 June 1941, but as with many such "provocotive actions" of the time they seem shrouded in uncertainty and there are suggestions that the aircraft may even have been German if it happened at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl G. E. von Mannerheim Posted July 31, 2002 Share Posted July 31, 2002 Heh heh heh. Didnt think id be off this thread that long. The way the game is setup imho only partially displays the "Finnish factor" When the krauts invade russia, Finland follows suit, but the message says "Finland declares war on USSR. But it seems that the other allies can attack w/o declaring war on them. The one token air raid the RAF mounted doesnt fit into the scale of this game. Therefore Finland should be considered an "active, neutral/quasi-neutral. How about in a patch? "Damn disis geddin old!" Wish 'e'd keep off dem blasted finns"! CVM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl G. E. von Mannerheim Posted July 31, 2002 Share Posted July 31, 2002 Maybe some off u brits will know where im commin from, Finland finland finland, the country wherei want to be, eating breakfast or dinner or just watching tv. Finland Finland Finland, your so close to russia, but far from japan. Finland Finland Finland, lots of miles from vietnam. Finland Finland Finland, your so often ignored, your second to belgium, when traveling abroad. Finland Finland Finland, your mountains so lofty, your tree tops sp tall,Finland Finland Finland, finland has it all. ..................... Cant remeber the rest..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperTed Posted July 31, 2002 Share Posted July 31, 2002 Originally posted by Carl Von Mannerheim: Maybe some off u brits will know where im commin from, Finland finland finland, the country wherei want to be, eating breakfast or dinner or just watching tv. Finland Finland Finland, your so close to russia, but far from japan. Finland Finland Finland, lots of miles from vietnam. Finland Finland Finland, your so often ignored, your second to belgium, when traveling abroad. Finland Finland Finland, your mountains so lofty, your tree tops sp tall,Finland Finland Finland, finland has it all. ..................... Cant remeber the rest.....CvM, Actually, I like Chinese... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragoon19 Posted July 31, 2002 Share Posted July 31, 2002 Speaking of Finland I have a small question Would Finland have fought along side Germany against the USSR if Sweden had been invaded by Germany ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl G. E. von Mannerheim Posted July 31, 2002 Share Posted July 31, 2002 That depends, if the western allies offered them protection, maybe theywouldve join the allies. But i still think, since their primary enemy was the ussr, they still wouldve 'allied' with germany in the crusade against bolshevism. U have to remember, the entire continent of europe, minus the russians, admired the finns. But i still think they wouldve invaded russia. P.S. Maybe they wouldve joined the allies but still be at war with russia? Interestinf food for thought this morning. CVM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genghis Posted May 15, 2003 Share Posted May 15, 2003 Is there a remote chance of USSR in declaring war on Finland in 1939/40 as the AI? I've never seen it happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ham Posted May 15, 2003 Share Posted May 15, 2003 there are accounts of Russian a/c bombing Finnish towns on 25 June 1941, but as with many such "provocotive actions" of the time they seem shrouded in uncertainty and there are suggestions that the aircraft may even have been German if it happened at all. There is no uncertainty of those bombings. They were Russian bombers and several got shot down. It wasn't declaration of war as such, Finnish parlament noted that country was at war once Russian bombed several cities and civilian targets. Would Finland have fought along side Germany against the USSR if Sweden had been invaded by Germany ? That is very hard question. There was very widespread mistrust of USSR (no wonder, since they tried to conquer and annex the country just like Baltic states and poland) so atleast allying with Russia against Germany would have been right out. On the other hand, any power occupying Sweden would have been thought as hostile. Alliance with western powers against Germany that had occupied Sweden was certainly a plausible idea. But then again, the factors why western alliance didn't happen would have come to play. At that point German arms had defeated the western allies on the continent and Finns didn't see any chance of effective number of western troops making their way here. If west could have effectively guaranteered finnish sovereignty against Russia Finland most likely would have not fought the continuation war. Also after the winter 1940 Russia was prepared to finish the job they started but at this point German high command was against that move when Russian delegates discussed the issue with their German counterparts. I have read that Britain did so - having given the Finns an ultimatum to stop offensive operations against the USSR in November 1941 or face war with the allies That's true. During continuation war Finland was at war with Russia and UK, but not with USA. Anyway, here's an easy read summary of finnish participation in WWII for those interested: http://hkkk.fi/%7Eyrjola/war/finland/summary.html and timeline of highlights: http://www.lysator.liu.se/nordic/mirror/sa-int/hist.html [ May 15, 2003, 04:07 PM: Message edited by: ham ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santabear Posted May 16, 2003 Share Posted May 16, 2003 Ham: Thanks for the interesting links. Field-Marshal Mannerheim: You did a great job in 39, the Russians had too many men to hold them off forever, though... A few observations: 1. The Russians actually tried to play somewhat fair with the Finns--they made several offers to buy/lease/trade for land immediately north of Leningrad (breathing space in the north for Leningrad was one of the major concerns vis a vis Finland). 2. The Finns fought against Russia for territory (in the second phase of their war), but were also somewhat humane, I believe, particularly during the starvation siege of Leningrad. This conflict was one of the most civilized episodes of WWII (tough fighting among soldiers, no killing of civilians), which likely explains why Russia was relatively generous to Finland in 1944. 3. Russia declared war and attacked Finland in 1939. There was an armistice in 1940. In 1941, Finland attacked Russia. (I think I got it right this time, JJ ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ham Posted May 16, 2003 Share Posted May 16, 2003 1. The Russians actually tried to play somewhat fair with the Finns--they made several offers to buy/lease/trade for land immediately north of Leningrad (breathing space in the north for Leningrad was one of the major concerns vis a vis Finland). Actually the land immediatetly north of leningrad would have meant giving away the so called Mannerheim line without a fight. Also they demanded right for military bases, just like they did for Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia. See where that lead those countries. 2. The Finns fought against Russia for territory (in the second phase of their war), but were also somewhat humane, I believe, particularly during the starvation siege of Leningrad. Finnish forces didn't participate in the Siege. They didn't bomb the city and didn't make any effort to attack it. Also they didn't try to establish contact with German forces once they reached Tikhvin from the Svir positions (this would have meant cutting of Leningrad). Also finnish units didn't try to cut the Lend-Lease route from Murmansk since that would have meant USA declaring war for Finland. This conflict was one of the most civilized episodes of WWII (tough fighting among soldiers, no killing of civilians), which likely explains why Russia was relatively generous to Finland in 1944. Soviets blindly bombed finnish cities and civilians. Particularly during the 'peace bombings' they tried to level the city of Helsinki but failed. Also during the war Soviet 'Partisan' units (not really partisans since they were military units that came from the soviet side of the front) attacked several nonprotected villages, butchered all residents and reported these as destroyed 'military bases'. About Russia being generous in 1944. They tried to conquer the country for once and for all but in the battles of Tali-Ihantala and in Ilomantsi region the initial assault was stopped and some of the forces destroyed. At that point when the strategic offensive didn't lead to initial success Russians withdrew bulk of their forces which they needed for the drive to Berlin. At first Russians demanded unconditional surrender (in later in the war when it was evident that Germany will lose, in the early war they would have settled for negotiated peace but the terms where too harsh for finns to accept). Especially during the early stages of their strategic offensive in '44 which gained ground fast. But once the offensive was repulsed and the need to get Berlin before western allies (and conquer most of eastern Europe in the process) got more critical they settled for negoatiated peace. "Nobody respects a country with a poor army. I raise my toast to finnish army" - Josef Stalin 3. Russia declared war and attacked Finland in 1939. There was an armistice in 1940. In 1941, Finland attacked Russia. (I think I got it right this time, JJ ) The time of armestice was kind of 'silent war', both sides used military recon units on the enemy side of the border and military aircraft crossed the borders several times on reconnaisance missions. During the armestice Salpa line, a very strong defensive position was build on finnish side of the new border. Actually there are quite a lot of remains of that line still (in the Reserve Office School some excersises where in the immeadiate vicinity of those remains). There was general feeling of waiting new war and in November 1940 Molotov asked for Hitler's permission to finish the conquest of Finland they tried to achieve in 1939, but Hitler declined (since he was already planning Barbarossa). Your perception of 'general humanity' was correct in the sense that the fighting between finnish and russian units usually didn't involve shooting of pow's or other atrocities common between germans and russians. I guess that's the diffrence when democracy fights dictatorship compared to battle of armies of two brutal dictators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts