Ministeri Ernst von Bornin puhe rauhanteon johdosta

[Isanmaantoivo100]

Objection!

It was harvest of Stalin's systematic persecution.

By the way, we buried only corpses. It's normal procedure in Finland.

I think you have double standard in burial.

[MrDiokletian]

Перевод: русский > английскийПоказать латиницей

In Finland, had a chance to save the Karelian isthmus and part Kaeli.

That if the whole Finland, stalaby be part of the USSR.

Maybe when the USSR broke up, she would have left these lands. But the Finns are very eogo not like))) and choose your path.

[tupakki]

@MrDiokletian Please. Say one thing at the time. Now it's impossible to understand what you mean by this text. I pick one thing. Finnish people never buried any russian civilians alive into ground. If you ment that. It's just some kind of propaganda.

"2. You propose twice as much territory in Karelia - is a fact." It was just Stalin's plan as Yuri Kilin for example reveals. Just giving false hope for finns.

Are you also saying that Finland was a threat for Leningrad? That's not true at all.

[tupakki]

@MrDiokletian "In Finland, had a chance to save the Karelian isthmus and part Kaeli." What you mean by this?

"But the Finns are very eogo not like))) and choose your path. " What this means?

[MrDiokletian]

During the Second World War, also had a lot of crimes against humanity.Itreblenie prisoners in concentration camps. Then the known facts: the territory of Karelia Russian civilian, buried alive in the ground.

[MrDiokletian]

Yes. By the way, during the Zmne War, Finnish troops have committed crimes against gummanizma. In Karelia, in boilers, which were krasnoaremeytsy. When they came out hungry environments, jeered at them.

[MrDiokletian]

5. And when, by March 40. The Soviet Army reached the highway to Helsinki, Mannerheim asked the world, Stalin agreed, only because the victory was a "Pyrrhic victory".

[MrDiokletian]

4. Since the war, Stalin did not mean to add only a part of Karelia and the isthmus. It has already been established "people's government Kuusenena" and formed "people's Finnish army" from Karelia and finov. from all over the USSR.

[MrDiokletian]

2. You propose twice as much territory in Karelia - is a fact.

3. It's no secret that a secret agreement with Hitler, Finland was in the zone of Soviet interests.

[MrDiokletian]

As for the "Winter War"A Soviet government could not prevent the existence of the state, which occupies an anti-Soviet position, close to Leningrad - the second largest city of the USSR.

[MrDiokletian]

So, to say that Finland - originally your own land, too, is not quite true

[MrDiokletian]

Karel - your sister ethnicity. But they were part of Novgorod, through the Orthodox Christianity. And talk about whose native land - is a philosophical question. You also swam on the territory of Estonia, Finland, 5-7 somewhere century, and drove to the north loplandtsev. (SAAMI),.

[MrDiokletian]

1. Karel was not where any similarity statehood. First state in Karelia and Finland is a half of the state of Novgorod, with the 9-10 age .. In this respect - this ancient Russian lands.

[MrDiokletian]

So those boundaries in which Finland gained its independence from the Bolsheviks. This certificate is a very good attitude to Finam Russian emperor.

[tupakki]

@MrDiokletian I am not sure what you mean by this. Can you explain?

[MrDiokletian]

And also in 1811 in the Grand Duchy were transferred Viipari and Kekislm okruga.Finny were very happy, what proof is. that during the Crimean War of 1854-1856 year, the Allies could not hope for or as Finwë revolt against Russia.

[tupakki]

@MrDiokletian The year was actually 1812 not 1811. Finns really were happy you are right about that. Finns really loved those times. You are right about the Crimean War and brits attacked against finnish coast and some finnish prisoners were sent to England. Finns also participated 1877-1878 Russo-Turkish War. Everything changed when Soviet Union attacked against Finland and forced us to make a peace and hand those areas to Soviet Union. That trust were no more.

[MrDiokletian]

Peter 1 recaptured these ancient Russian lands from of Swedish, but not in of Swedish-Finnish. Since the early 18 century, the Finns - there was absolutely nothing any autonomy. Some semblance of autonomy was already in the early 19 th century, but only Russi Emperor had the greatest right Finam, the first of their history. Then they had a Senate, its own currency, and other attributes

[tupakki]

@MrDiokletian They are not ancient russian land. They are ancient karelian land. Russian people have nothing to do with karelians, karelians are finnich people, not russian. Nowadays history use termsn Sweden-Finland, so the term I used is correct. It's true that those times there was not such thing as Finland. The area was called Norrland, Österland. Finland got privileges as I told you earlier. They were very vital for the country.

[MrDiokletian]

Russian living in peace with Karelia who were baptized from the Russian.

In 1617 of Swedish county seized Kekisalmie.A-Rousseau, after the Swedish war in 1656 all of the local population - Karelians, went to the Russian. Gone all the age-old local population. And only then, after 1658, the Swedish government to fill the vacated territory Kexholmsky District, began ereselyat here Finnish peasants from inland areas of Finland.

[tupakki]

@MrDiokletian Hmm. I think you are mixing something here. Sweden got Käkisalmi at 1580 for 17 years and 1611 for one hundred years. At 1658 Sweden got Livonian and Ingrian in Russo-Swedish War but it had nothing to do with Käkisalmi. It's true that during these wars, people have moved because the borders have changed, for example because of the religion.

[MrDiokletian]

And who you were from the Swedes? Your state formed in the Russian empire, where you have very large Senate and the law. It was a great mercy of the Russian emperor. And your ancestors greatly appreciated it. .

[tupakki]

@MrDiokletian Yes you are right that Finland was a state under the state. That's why it's called Grand Duchy of Finland. Many other areas in Russia envy Finland and that all was going to end of the end of 1800 and beginning of 1900 when periods of oppression started. You might heard those famous words in Duma by Vladimir Puriškevitš: "Finis Finlandiae".

[MrDiokletian]

I'm not talking about the fact that Kekisalmi hundreds of years, belonging, and was founded by Russian, who took over the Swedes in the 17 century .. and was inhabited finnamitolko the arrival of the Swedes

[tupakki]

@MrDiokletian The history of Käkisalmi goes much further than 17th century. There can be find marks of ancient karelian culture. Like in Viipuri. What you mean that Käkisalmi was inhabited by finnamitolko? 

[MrDiokletian]

And do not forget that Viipori and Kekisalmi you gave themselves Russian after 1811?

[tupakki]

@MrDiokletian Your forgot that Sweden-Finland lost Karelia in 1721 - 1743. Karelia with Viipuri ja Käkisalmi returned to Finland 1812. Borders have been changed several times during the history.

[tarimdarya]

Moreover (finns may object this) - genetical analysis shows that people in the russian north (including Leningrad, Novgorod, Tver', Arkhangelsk oblast' , Perm, Komi and upper Volga region) have up to 50% of ugro-finnish (uralic) roots. So, assimilation took place in the last 1000 years but originally, all this area was populated by finns. It is an established fact that the name "Moskva" also has finnish origins !

[tarimdarya]

As for finns, they originated from territories west from Ural mountains. They migrated to Finland slowly from Karelia. So, finns lived in Eastern Karelia before they moved into Finland (where they mixed with swedes and others). From what I heard from the guide in the Turku castle, modern finns comprise 5 different ethnical groups !!! So, there is no surprise that Finns in Finlandia are different from ancient finnish-speaking tribes that populated the north of Russia.

[tupakki]

There are new theories than this Ural montain theory that makes much sense but i am not posting more about that because our ordinary subject wasn't about that. If you want to hear more send me a private message. Yeah i agree that russians have finnish blood in their veins (not in all areas thought). If you also want to talk more about genetical analysis of finnish people send me a message. This isn't right place for that now. This is about peace treaty.

[tarimdarya]

To continue my previous observation - of cause russians appeared in Eastern Karelia not 10,000, but also some time ago. The Russian state of Novgorod was founded 1000 years ago by swedes (vikings), and it has Ladoga,Neva as main transportation routes going through finnish land. On the river banks there were some settlements set by Novgorod. Finns and Russians lived side by side for long times quite peacefully.

[tupakki]

I won't say much to this subject, if you want to talk more about these times you can send me a private message. You know that they were called varangians and they were multicultural, not only swedes. Yeah finns and russians have lived side by side for long time, its true.

[tarimdarya]

That said, all finnish population of Inkeri / Leningrad Region (Karelia at large extent ) was deported by Stalin.

I believe, the vast majority of russians now regret this deportation. This region was a cradle of finnish folklore, where many Kalevala runes were found by Lennrot.

Very little can be done to correct these errors of the past. In Karelia, assimilation and emigration to Finland will complete what Stalin has not done.

[tupakki]

Thats true but it wasn't only Stalin who was doing this (i don't mean deportations). The living area of "finns" have been shrunk by russians so long time before that. If many russians regret that why they don't do anything else that destroy those areas that are so important for finns. The part of Karelia that we lost during those wars would be best if they would be in finnish hands. Don't you think? Like now Vyborg is a sad story, its just a ghost of its glory days.

[tarimdarya]

In 1944 USSR was in different position - Stalin hurried for peace with Finland to free up the troops for the European assault (operation Bagration). Also, Finland demonstrated its aversion to communist ideas while USSR needed support from its allies (which may halter if USSR tried to impose Communism on Finland). So, the peace was signed on mutual terms - and Finland and USSR decided to kept keep low profile on any controversial issues. This, I believe, is quite fair.

[tupakki]

Stalin didn't hurry peace with Finland. They made an counter assault against finnish troops and they plan was to defeat finnish troops. Peace terms were simply too high before the attack in summer 1944, Finland couln't accept those. When Finland got the defence victory terms were different. The peace was not mutual, Finland didn't have any other solution when Germany was falling. They had to leave the sinking ship. What you mean by controversial issues?

[tarimdarya]

Sorry, I did not want to say that Finland was a puppet of Hitler. Finland did not have German troops before the war of 1941and it did not form alliance with Germany. Although there was a secret agreement between Ryti and Hitler implemented in plan Barbarossa. base on the agreement Finland declared war with USSR just days after Hitler attacked USSR. You may define this as "co-belligerence". Finland was among very few countries eager to cooperate with Hitler.

[tupakki]

Soviet Union can thank itself that Finland had to co-operate with Hitler. USSR and Germany had a molotov-ribbentrop pact that Finland is a part of USSR influence. Thats the reason of Winter War. After the peace treaty USSR made new plans to start war against Finland and get the country (the next summer after that peace treaty was in USSR plans). Finland knew this moving. Germany was only help for finns when allied forces were in trouble and didn't care of Finland.

[tupakki]

USSR started the continuation war by bombing finnish cities. I can't deny that Finland wasn't ready for the war. They were because they knew it will happen sooner or later. USSR was a dangerous neighbout at those times.

[tarimdarya]

Well, Finland did not shell Leningrad, this is true. But as a matter of fact, finnish troops closed all escape roots from Leningrad and cut all supplies to the city. There were many children trapped in Leningrad who were not evacuated and eventually died from starvation. Finnland should honestly admit its role. Mannerheim is definitely not a "hero".

[tupakki]

Still I don't understand your saying about that Finland closed all escape roots from Leningrad. Please explain this. I already said to you that Finland has the chance to do so but they didn't. For example the supply line throught lake Ladoga was open by finns (in winter and summer time). They didn't cut it even it was an easy task for them (finns know those lines very well). People of Leningrad weren't evacuated because Stalin didn't let them to leave.

[tarimdarya]

... of cause, Stalin was a beast, but unlike Hitler he did not send the people to gas chambers, or made soap from them.

That does not mean that I approve mass deportations. In fact, after the deportation of karelia/Inkeri finnish population, the Leningrad region lost its spirit and charms. Old finnish villages become desolated and delapidated in Soviet time. The nature and forests badly suffered because of neglect. Even Vyborg itself is a shadow of its own past - sad to say.

[tupakki]

Yeah thats right what you are saying. The Karelia is a ghost from its glory days. If that would have been under finnish goverment, things would be different, much different. Vyborg is a sad story, it was so beautiful and full of life in finnish time, now its so bad. Like I have watched many documentaries about the city and people (russians) who came to the city after war said that everything was so beautiful (even after war) but we destroyed it and now everything is broken and dirty.

[tarimdarya]

Unfortunately, after the Finnish population was deported from Karelia and South Ladoga, the empty territories were repopulated by the wrong breed of people. Since most of the territory was in the infamous 101-km zone, the place attracted former kriminals who were prohibited to settle closer than 101 km to Leningrad in Soviet times. So, the newcomers were mostly drunkards, people without roots and without genuine interest to this area.

[tarimdarya]

The climate in the area is not very good for agriculture, it is a marginal zone where one needs a lot of hard work to succeed. Even apples don't grow well without toil. Not a single Russian in his sound mind would like to settle in Karelia. There are places with much better climate in Russia, which are also depopulated.

[tarimdarya]

On my conclusion, the decision to deportate native Finnish population was totally wrong. Only Finns had necessary knowledge and skills to live in this place and to be happy. Nowadays, Karelian Istmus gained popularity among Petersburg folks and land prices skyrocketed. But further away, the situation is still stagnant. Of cause, even if Russia may regret, there is no way to turn back the history.

[tarimdarya]

Since 1990 I was expecting some positive gestures from Russian side. For example, all geographic objects may be returned their Finnish names. Finns may be given preferential (as compared to other foreigners) rights to buy land, buildings, to build, and to organize business in the area, and they should be granted entry into Russia without Visas. I wonder why nothing of this has ever materialized. Russia has to make some steps.

[tarimdarya]

Well, again - about Continuation War and the Siege of Leningrad. I mostly read neutral sources - for example English Wikipedia. So i recommend to read this article. It is known that Finland actively participated in German attack on USSR on June 21 1941. On that day, German fleet stationed in Finland laid mines around Leningrad, while German planes, after bombing Leningrad, refueled in Uti, Finland.

[tarimdarya]

Another article, Siege of Leningrad, in Wikipedia also clarifies on the role of Finland in this deadly siege. Finland had to occupy the Karelian Istmus to lock Leningrad from North. President Ryti was informed about German plans to destroy Leningrad with its habitants, upon which he agreed. Civil population trapped in the city had nowhere to go, in winter 1941-1942 civil deaths exceeded 100,000 people per month. On my view, whoever did the siege (Hitler, Ryti etc), committed war crimes.

[tarimdarya]

And, statement that people in Leningrad were afraid of Stalin and thus did not move is a complete nonsense. I know the history from my mother, first-hand. She survived the 1941-42 winter and was evacuated in the spring via the "Route of Life". It was just not possible to flee the area in non-organized way. The place was total Apocalypse. With this knowledge, I stand only for peaceful solution af any political problem. Also prefer not to be nostalgic about the past.

[tarimdarya]

Say, after WWI Hungary lost its territories under Trianon treaty that was extremely unjust, and they were punished for other's (Habsburg's) mistakes. Also, Germany had 12 mln people deportated after WWII. So, it is very important to start living from the scratch and not follow stupid previous generations.

[tupakki]

Yeah I know that. Wouldn't it be easiest that Russia would give those finnish areas back? They have not much value for russians but for finns they are like gold. I bet you know very well that finnish people can't really trust to Russia because of those actions. Russia is now democratic country but it want to keep the sins of its past. Russia should think that before they say anything.

[tarimdarya]

Giving back some territories (e.g. Vyborg with western Karelian Istmus area, Petasmo) would be imaginable when Russia can speak from the position of strength. Myself, I would not mind if Vyborg and Uuras go to Finland. While Russia is weak, giving out territories would be suicidal. There are so many neighbor countries that could follow the suit - China, Poland, Germany... evantually, the whole Russia can break down! I think there is no way to redraw the border peacefully.

[tupakki]

You forgot Japan from that list. Yeah I have heard that way of thinking before as well. I think thats just so called "ghost in closet"-thinking, you scare anything that you don't know. If Russia would give areas back to Finland it doesn't mean Russia is weak. How on earth it means that? That's just nonsense. If Russia would do so everyone would know Russia is a civilized and they would trust them more, like now europeans don't trust to Russia.

[tupakki]

As I have talked with chinese through my work, some of them have said that in future China will need more fuel and resource like that and it can cause wars. I asked against who and they said Russia. It was just some small-talking but I know what China can be in future. Do you really think that they will care if Russia would give finnish areas back to their legal owners, no they would not. They wouldn't give rats ass.

[tarimdarya]

That's not about China, but about the whole international order. The same as Rumania will not give Transylvania to Hungary, and Poland will not return Ost Prussia and Silezia to Germany. There were many unfair borders, but no one is going to redraw them. Even talking this way may spoil country relations.

[tarimdarya]

Remember - Eltsyn wanted to give away some territories to avoid conflicts - "take as much independence as you can handle", he was willing to negotiate. As a result, the whole Caucasus blew out, everyone viewed Russia as underdog and the Western word pressed hard on Russia's sensitive issues. No one likes underdogs, in Asia, this behavior is called "to lose a face". You should take a broader view on this situation.

[tupakki]

This is different and no need to think it in big scale. Thos areas areas are finnish so that USSR steal, so it would just be a correction. If people know the history they would think that was finally a nice thing from Russia that they are trying to fix what they have done to finns. The more dangerous issue for Russia is those islands (Kuril) that Japan want to get back, those are in big scale because Japan is a strong country in every ways. Same with Germany for sure.

[tarimdarya]

I already mentioned that "steal" is not an appropriate expression. USSR just took these lands by aggression. Or that's how ordinary finns speak about "russian thiefs" :)

[tupakki]

Stealing is the right expression because Stalin and his red army started war against Finland as they were planned with Hitler in Molotov-Ribbentrop-pact. In that plan Finland belonged to Soviet Union and when they couldn't take whole Finland, they took areas which was important for us. The protecting Leningrad for the reason of Karelian handovering was just a joke. Stealing and taking by force is the same. Yes I call those people stealers and USSR was a occupier as Russia is nowadays.

[tarimdarya]

I think you are mixing different subjects. Russia is not USSR and it did not occupy anything. Actually, I am strongly against Communism and old-time USSR (I was born in late USSR but it was very different country). However, if to speak your language ('stealing') - we should also agree that Finland tried to steal bigger piece of Karelia (incl. Petroskoi) diring Continuation War. I think it was equally bad.

[tupakki]

I am not mixing anything. I just said that Russia is basically same as USSR when thinking about finnish territories. Russia still occupy finnish areas in Karelia and Lapland. You still can't understand what I was trying to tell you about whole Karelia and Continuation war before. Karelia has always been a finnish or finnish related area, not russian or slavic. Those people wanted to join to Finland before the Continuation War or become indepent. It was totally different that Soviet Union did.

[tarimdarya]

Oh, now I see the difference. On your view, an ethnic group has rights for self-determination (for example, Karelians have right to join Finland). My view is that there is no such right, and present borders are sacred, although an ethnic group has right to protect its minority status.

Probably, these 2 views are uncompatible. I think Russia (like USA and unlike Finland) as not a single ethnic state but multi - ethnic state, that's why Russians like me don't understand your view.

[tupakki]

You didn't get me at all. Karelian fought for that right to decide their own destiny. They fought well and asked help from Finland(even formal Finland didn't support them not until Continuation war). Karelian people wanted to be free from Soviet Union. That what I ment. They wanted to create own country or join to Finland. Read how strong that ideology was in Karelia and you will know finnish actions. Now if you watch their destiny, its sad that they didn't get what they wanted. Don't you think?

[tupakki]

I didn't mean anything about ethnic groups. Like Finland said that in Tarto treaty all russians who will be in that area will get a finnish nationality as they did. You can't say that Russia likes ethnic groups even nowadays, there is so much sad stories in Soviet/Russian history. Soviet Union tried to get rid off ethnic groups and russianize those areas, that also happened to Karelia. That would have also happened to Finland. I can also say more ethnic groups that Soviet "hunted" if you wish.

[tarimdarya]

Of cause, I forgot Japan but this is a different story. I worked in Japan for some period and I know the state of the problem. I also lived in Finland for few weeks, and I think this is very nice country. I like the most the green and healthy way of life - much better than what we have in the USA. My main idea is still that it is impossible now for Russia to turn Karelian Istmus back to Finland.

[tarimdarya]

(continued) Karelian Istmus is the most important recreation area around St-Petersburg - a city of 5mln inhabitants. As a kid, I spend all my summers in a country house in Terijoki - and this area is a part of my childhood. I may say "thank you" to Finns for leaving these forests in excellent conditions, but I don't think this area should be turned back. Of cause , they may be granted favorable conditions for doing business and buying property in this area.

[tupakki]

Yes we left all areas in good conditions as Viipuri was so beautiful at those times. I watched a document about Viipuri and surrounding. Old russians said that when they came, everything was so nice and were taken care of but we damaged all. I agree. In Finland, we don't have cities which is in that bad shape, never. Karelian villages are dying. All finnish areas should be handovering back to their legal owners. Putin is just a ghost of soviet times as you can see in his comments.

[tupakki]

As I see you that you are a smart russian, which is quite rare in youtube. I recommend that you should watch a movie called the Soviet Story. I have seen so much people who would want to see Russia as a Soviet Union again as Putin has said on tv. He said that it was the biggest tragedy that Soviet Union collapsed. Was it? Watch that document and it wasn't. As I said, Putin is just a ghost of Soviet times. Russians would need to have a new start and leave those dirty times back. Russia should.

[tarimdarya]

To be honest, I don't see many idiots in present day Russia who want to see Russia as Soviet Union again. That;'s why I think "Soviet Story" is just a low-level propaganda.

[tupakki]

You would be suprised if you would know. So whys the Soviet Story is low-level propaganda? They said everything well by argumentation in that movie. So please tell me what was propaganda in that movie? Have you seen it because I have? If you think that movie is trying to put Russia in Soviet's boots, its not true. 99,99% of the time it was only about Soviet Union and its terror. Only few secs about Russia. So I can't see why thats low-level propaganda.

[tarimdarya]

To be honest, I don't trust Latvian producer team for possible bias. In the past years, Latvian politics was all wrong, and probably the film crew got funding to serve a very specific propaganda purpose. I trust serious independent researchers, but I don't want to spend my time on propaganda - I have too little of it (time) because of tremendous pressures on my Hi-Tech job  :o)

[tupakki]

Then you are wrong, it's not a propaganda movie. You might be right that Latvian politics are like that, i can't say anything about that because i don't simply know. About that movie, I have been reading those happenings before so there wasn't much new for me. Based on that information that I have got from many sources, I can't say its not propaganda. It's just the sharp truth, you should see it, even you have lack of time. Soviet wasn't a boy scout, not even close.

[tupakki]

We are very nice country as we have always followed the rules and believed in laws. As be believed to non-aggression pact which was between Finland and USSR. We also believed in Tarto borders because that agreement said those borders will be like that forever. Russians also got much Karelian land in Tarto agreement, those areas wanted to be a part of Finland. You won those negotiations. Even Aleksander II promised Petsamo to Finland. We followed rules, russians didn't, thats the matter of fact.

[tarimdarya]

I would say that Tarto treaty was signed in 1920 when USSR was very weak and cannot negotiate - similar as Brest treaty. That's why USSR violated the Tarto treaty without reservations. For treaty to be effective, it should be valued by both sides.

[tupakki]

That's not a reason for doing that kind of things. If all would behave like that way, world wouldn't be anything else than a big anarchy. Tarto treaty was valued and it was signed by both sided. We lost much in that treaty as well, russians won.

[tarimdarya]

In 1920 Soviet Russia was fighting wars on all fronts, it was very weak, and bolsheviks wanted to get time. Remember that "Tarton rauha" was signed 14 October 1920, just 2 days after the peace treaty with Poland after humiliating defeat in Soviet-Polish war. Later Stalin got very angry with Tarto treaty as well as with Polish peace treaty so he waited for a good opportunity to punish both Finland and Poland, which occurred in 1939

[tupakki]

Yeah thats the way how Stalin thought, he was an idiotic monster. Wanted to get whole Europe in his hands and killing all who is against him. Russian people should have rise against him and kill him as german soldiers had plans to kill Hitler before war of Chechoslovakia. Finland and Russia should make decision which would satisfy both sides, not only russians. If you watch through neutral glasses, russians broke contracts and relocated the borders. Soviet Union started all, not Finland.

[tupakki]

I know that many of russian didn't like Stalin's plans as I guess you don't like either. Why you still share those same sins with Soviet Union? That what I have been wondering much. Russian should be a democratic country, it should negotiate as a democratic country do. I will explain myself. When Finland try to speak about those finnish areas with Putin and his gang, they always keep saying: do you want to risk our relations? WHAT? Not making any sense, or what you think? That's not nice at all.

[tarimdarya]

So, if Russia accepts the point of view that some past unfairness have to be corrected, Russia should also want back Crimea, north Kazakhstan, eastern Ukraine et cetera. Surely, these lands cannot be returned peacefully. That's the main reason why there should be no legal claims, or even requests, to correct the borders. Maybe, in very distant future, Russia may wish to give out part of karelia as present ?

[tupakki]

No you are wrong. Soviet Union gave Lüshun and Dalian's railroads back to China and cities after Stalin died in 1954. In the same year they gave Krim (Crimea as you call) naval base to Ukraine. Jeltsin also made an agreement of this area which was important because of Ukraine's nuclear weapons. Russian troops can still use it, if I am right. Those are just examples that Russia can give areas back to their owners if they just want. Finland always has requests to correct the borders.

[tarimdarya]

I also don't understand why you call Putin's team a gang? In fact, he was very popular President because he was able to stabilize Russia and initiate growth. I voted for Putin 2 times and then for Medvedev, while in USA, and I don't see alternative to them. For such sick country like Russia they are the right doctors.

[tupakki]

Yes I have reasons to call that Putin's gang. I will explain shortly. Putin said in Finland that he doesn't see any obstacles why Russia couldn't build a gas line through finnish territorial waters. He said that if it happens, Finland will be trouble to get timber from Russia (I bet you know those taxes already). He didn't say it this straight but the message was clear. He also said that what Finland will do if rest of Europe freeze if Finland won't give a permission. It was a economical threat

[tupakki]

In Putin's Russia human rights are not important at all as I have seen. There still happen political assassinations which is something that we can't see in western countries. I didn't also like how Russial handled the Georgia's crisis, Russia started provocation in South-Ossetia. Russia said that Georgia shooted to the other side of the border. At the same time EU's military "spectators" said that they haven't seen that kind of actions at South-Ossetia which could affirm russian accusations.

[tarimdarya]

The fact was - Communists hijacked Russia (like other republics) to pursue their paranoid ideas. Russia did not benefit from USSR times - all territories gained during WWII were given to Ukraine or Belarus, other lands with Russian population (Crimea, North Kazakhstan, North Chechnya, Abkhazia) we also given as present. As a result, Russia lost many lands, and it gained only Karelia and Kuril Islands.

[tupakki]

Very well said. You said all territories gained during WWII were give to Ukraine or Belarus. Why the same didn't happen to Finland? It wasn't only Karelia, there were also islands, big part of Lapland. I would want to see that you would give those areas back to Finland as a present as well. You know that in Paris treaty, there is much false statements of Finland which tells that Finland hadn't any chance to say anything about those cession of territory. I can explain this better if you want

[tarimdarya]

During Great Terror Stalin killed 1 mln of those russians who could potentially threaten him. NKVD has its ears everywhere. It was not possible to revolt against Stalin and his "falcons".

[tupakki]

Stalin's terror was wide. I agree with you. Still why present Russia can't say anything about soviet victims all around around the "world". Present Germany isn't nazi-Germany either and they have said things like that even they didn't have as much victims as Soviet Union did. It wouldn't be much but it would mean that Russia isn't sharing the sins of Soviet Union. If Russia has said this directly and widely, I haven't seen it. I am pretty sure they haven't. There was some talking in year 1988

[tupakki]

Yeah I am very sorry for the suffer of your family but you are really sparking under the wrong tree. As I told that Finnish military knew the exist of the roate of life but they didn't cut it as would have been "smart" to defeat the city. Finland simply didn't do that as they didn't cut important railway communications to the city. Finland has strength to do so. Think why they didn't. You really should.

[tarimdarya]

Yes Finland did not bomb Leningrad, but it closed the northern road to Olonetz and Petrozavodsk anyway. In 1941 Finland behaved like USSR in 1939 when it attacked Poland after Germany troops did. This is predator behavior, imho.

[tupakki]

Please tell what was the finnish role in that siege? You just keep telling that text from wikipedia. Finland didn't had any real actions against the city as I have been telling whole the time but at the same time you keep telling that Finland was so evil. HOW? Civil population had much time to go before the city was surrounded but they stayed. Stalin didn't give order to evacuate the city, it has nothing to do with scare. I guess people trust to their decision makers. Ryti did not.

[tarimdarya]

Finland attacked the USSR together with Germany so it was responsible for civil deaths. May be not so evil but anyway ... From history books we know that it was not possible to evacuate Leningrad because no one expected that German Army Group North advanced so quickly. In just several weeks German panzer army pushed Soviet Army from Pskov and cut the escape routes to Moskow and Vologda. Voroshilov commanded Soviet troops- the same idiot general who commanded in Talvisota.

[tupakki]

Finland has its own war against USSR as historian books now it. For example british politicians said that during the war as I have said it earlier, Finland wasn't an ally of Germany. That's the fact, not just my point of view. Yeah I know how fast and well german troops pushed into Russia but still can't believe that there wasn't no time to evacuate the city, if not totally but still partly. I know that little more than 3 million people isn't easy to move fast from place A to place B.

[tupakki]

Yeah I have been reading same subject about many different sources even in russia point of view which has been biased (not all, so many thought). I am well aware of content of english wikipedia about this subject. As Finland said at those times that Finland is having its own war against USSR, that what people should remember. You know very well that people can add information to wikipedia so they can add biased text from biased material.

[tarimdarya]

I believe Finnish Wikipedia also has propaganda (I translated some articles and think they are biased). Don't forget that Finland attacked USSR in 1920-21  "heimosodat" and it was Mannerheim who promised to return Eastern Karelia in the first place. So, Stalin just returned the favor.

[tupakki]

You know that finnish education isn't biaded to anything, its neutral and many times its even underestimate finnish role (I don't mean WW2). Finnish history has been long biased by russians or swedish, so that what you are saying are not true at all.

At Uhtua in year 27.1.1918, karelians were having a big meeting and they decided to split from Russia (they decided to create karelian-vepsian republic). That's very interesting, you should read. If you read a little more then you know back story.

[tupakki]

You just see that Finland attacked but have you ever read anything which is about those people who lived in those areas that Finland was helping to liberate. I guess not because what you said. There lived russians, karelians etc. and they wanted to join Finland as an autonomic province. They knew what russians will to do them and they were right. That should have been a part of Finland in every ways. I really recommend that you learn more about that. I can also tell you more if you want.

[tarimdarya]

Although in 1917 many Russians, Karelians wanted to get out of Communism, Mannerheim should not send troops to Aunus/Viena expeditions. Finnish people wanted to help Karelian and Ingrian brothers, which is a noble thinking. But since Finnland intruded into USSR, so  "Heimosodat" ideology was dangerous. For example, Germany "helped" Sudeten Deutschen in 1938, and then "helped" Dantziger Deutschen in 1939 - and then ..... WWII broke out.

[tupakki]

Even 85% of bolshevik in Petroskoi at July 1920 recommend (there was a karelian conference) that whole Karelia should be a part of Finland. Later in Russian Kemi there was the same kind of voting and result was still the same. Karelians fought to get what they wanted but formal Finland DID NOT help them, for example in 1921-1922, there was only 500 finns, half of them were real fighting troops, 27 officers. In 1918-1920, there wasn't more finns either. Your comparing to Germany isn't relevant.

[silentk1ll]

@tarimdarya Even this is old comment but I still reply. Finland di not NOT attack USSR. The Finnish Karelians got mad because the oppression of USSR. Finnish soldiers volunteered to fight beside them and that why that war was called "heimosodat" (tribe wars). And the Karelia has always belonged to us. Just because you were the one ruling our area because Finland was part of Russia it doesn't mean it's yours. Just sayin´

[tupakki]

Yes I agree with that but Russia are not making any steps. If you know Putins and his policy, you can't even wait anything like that. Russia should try to turn an another leaf and have a clear future, not going back to those dark times as Putin is doing nowadays. Yesterday I read that Russia made a law that they can attack to other country to protect their own interests like russian citizen. Is that what civilized nations do? I don't think so.

[tarimdarya]

Many countries have such provisions. In fact, US also reserves right to protect its citizens abroad by any means, including military. Russia was very sick, recovery is slow but they build a solid law foundation .

[tupakki]

Yeah I knew you will say same about US, are they doing right so you can follow them? No they are not, so if your neighbour steal a car, it means you can do so as well. That's just stupid way of thinking.

[tarimdarya]

In 1941 Finnish army advanced according to the Hitler's plan Barbarossa. In Karelian Istmus Mannerheim stopped at the old Finnish border along the Sestra river and north to Kirjasalo (now a ghost-town in Lembolovo region) - just because Hitler was supposed to do the hangman job. In fact, in 1941 Finland may keep neutrality but they were eager for revenge and they were brooding over their own plans of "Great Finland". So they have nobody to bleme

[tupakki]

Thats not true what you are saying. Finland wasn't a pupper of Hitler and waited that Hitler do the dirty work. If Finland would have been more active, they would have let Germans to use their bases to attack against Leningrad, they would have cut the supply lines that Leningrad wouldn't get any help from anywhere etc. Finland thought its own future.

[tarimdarya]

I don't know the details, but my dad told me that finnish raids were quite a nuisance (he served in communications so he was not really an active combatant). Of cause, I agree that USSR was a rogue empire, and Stalin was a typical Middle-Eastern despot (not Russian but Georgian by the way) .

But I highly appreciate the Soviet victory over fascists - which were all the creatures of Satan. I am actually very proud of it. In this conflict, Finland was on the wrong side. Nothing to be proud of.

[tupakki]

I don't know what you mean by nuisance? Yes they were nuisance for military targets because it was their jobs and they were skillful soldiers. Not against civilians which is great but russian partisans were different. They didn't pick out civilian or military targets, they destroyed both.

Do you know how badly USSR handled finns or finnish related people in Soviet Karelia at those time? So badly. Would it had been better if that would have been a part of Finland? Yes.

[tupakki]

Finland tried to liberate the Karelia which was populated by finnish people because USSR treated them badly and killed them. That was very brave action from Finland. Be honest and answer me what happened to those finnish related people in Karelia? Is their culture respected in Russia nowadays? Not even close. If that would have been a part of Finland everything would be different. It would be a rich place now, culturally and in many other ways as well.

[tupakki]

You didn't answer be how Finland could be a part the siege of Leningrand when finnish main line was far away from Leningrad. Please go on and answer: How? Have you been watching any maps from those time? If you have, please go on and watch finnish lines. How far away it was from Leningrad? Then you will know what I mean. Its very naive and even biased to claim that Finland has something to do with the siege of Leningrad. Finland was victim, not USSR (I mean wars against Finland and USSR).

[tarimdarya]

OK, let me provide this passage from Encyclopaedia Britannica ("Siege of Leningrad") ..

" .... After Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union in June 1941, German armies by early September had approached Leningrad from the west and south while their Finnish allies approached to the north down the Karelian Isthmus. .... The ensuing German blockade and siege claimed 650,000 Leningrader lives in 1942 alone, mostly from starvation, exposure, disease, and shelling from distant German artillery..."

[tupakki]

Yeah I know that some people state that what you are saying. Let me say how things really were because it seems many people forget it nowadays. In September at 1941 finnish forces got their lines at Karelian Isthmus. After that they went so called "passive state". Foreign minister of USA Clark Hull said several times that Finland is having "isolated" war from Germany against USSR and thats true. Finland didn't try to cut Leningrad's supply lines even Germany asked so.

[tupakki]

They even said that if Finland won't participate more actively to conquering of Leningrad they won't give any more supplies for finnish forces. Finland didn't accept that and thats why the supply lines to Leningrad were working, it was called the road of life. In winter that supply line was on ice of Lake Ladoga, in summer it was working by boats. You forgot to mention that.

[tupakki]

The one reason why Germany couldn't conquer the Leningrad was that they couln't centralize effective gunfire by artillery to the city. There was good shooting ground on finnish positions and german forces knew that and asked that they could locate german artillery to finnish lined. What finnish forces said? They said NO! Finnish forces didn't shoot Leningrad by artillery, not even single shell. Russian army noticed how passive finnish force was and they relocated their 2 divisions -

[tupakki]

at september against german troops. Finland has the knowledge and skill to cut russian supply lines as historians know. You can ask from yourself why Finland didn't do so. Even in peace negotiations at 1944 USSR said that Finland helped Leningrad to survive. Still some people are saying that Finland killed the people of Leningrad. Just nonsense. Many sources claim that if Finland would have been more active, Leningrad would have surrendered at the beginning of 1944.

[tupakki]

You know that Stalin could have saved most of the civilian people from Leningrad if he would have ordered to evacuate the city. There was railroad traffic to the city and they came back empty. Stalin didn't let people to leave from the city so Stalin was a guilty as Hitler was. Stalin has killed much more people that Hitler even thought he didn't use gas chamber and you know that germans didn't make soap from people. Its just a myth which has proven wrong but still people say so.

[tarimdarya]

In 1941 Finland was aware of (and enthusiastic about) the German plans to annihilate Leningrad. Finnish president Ruti unveiled the coordinated Finnish plan to annex Soviet Karelia and Northern Inkeri with the new border along the river Neva.

Later, in the summer of 1942, a Naval Detachment K was formed from Finnish, German and Italian naval units under Finnish operational command, with aim to patrol the waters of Lake Ladoga, and disrupt the Leningrad supply route on southern Ladoga.

[tupakki]

So you got the information of a Naval Detachment K from some source. Do you know at all how "active" they were? I guess you don't. Let me say. The unit participate to one small battle to get Suhosaari in operation Brazil. They made their normal patrolling in Lake Ladoga which was their job, they sunk warships and only ONE supply canal boat. They mined Lake Ladoga which was normal task for navy.

[tupakki]

Can you really blame finns that they wanted to liberate its people and those areas what was in Soviet Karelia. They have been finnish living ground for so long. Finland got letters from those people and they described how bad the life was in there. That why the upprising of Karelia happened before those wars.

[tarimdarya]

I emphasized that Finland collaborated with German nazis during World War II. In 1941-1944 Finland participated in the Siege of Leningrad, in which more than 1 million Russian civilians were killed. So, this is one of explanations why the territories should never be returned. That's what I am always explain here in USA. If you think this is a stupid point, then also erase the stupidities below, brave!

[tupakki]

Ok for start. Soviet Union started the war at winter 1939, they stolen finnish areas. They tried to steal whole Finland during that war. The time of Continuation War russians started it again by bombing finnish cities as Helsinki. Sure Finland was ready to take its areas back as they did but the thing that you are falsely spreading is that finnish militarty force has something to do with the siege of Leningrad. Thats just nonsense. Please explain your statements a little bit better.

[tupakki]

I want to know how finnish forces partipated in the siege of Leningrad. If you know that the railroad of Murmansk aka Кировская железная дорога, Kirovskaja železnaja doroga was vitally important for Lenigrad and russian armed force. German forces asked Finland to cut that railroad that supplies from allied to Soviet Union couldn't be sent anymore. Did Finland cut that railroad even they could have done that? No they didn't. Why Finland stopped its attack?.

[tupakki]

Your explanations are just nonsense and can be easily proved. And you are spreading false information in USA. Yes I think yous statement is stupid because its not true at all. Finnish territories need to be returned because russians stoled them by false accusations as most of us know today, as history books. So what right russians have that they can keep our land that they stole from us? I really want to know, the siege of Leningrad is not a reason because its nonsense.

[tarimdarya]

This is my personal point of view and I know enough to justify it. Of cause, I know and respect the fact that Karelia and Inkeri "Ingermanlandia" were populated by finnish people a long time ago befor russians came to their land. I also think that Stalin was a brutal beast. Anyway, in 1941 Finland closed Leningrad from the north, playing in-hand with Hitler to cause mass starvation and death of 1 million civilians. They did not have any pity for russian women and children!

[tarimdarya]

My mother as a girl was lucky to escape from death in 1942 but her stepmother died in process, same as my grandfather. In my opinion, 1941-1945 was the darkest period in the history of Finland. For humanitarian reasons, Finland had to provide access to food supplies. Afterwards Russia gained moral right to keep these territories.

BTW, my father fought with finns in Kemi-joki area. Agree, there was no fight but finnish subversion groups were very active.

[tupakki]

Finland and its soldiers had nothing to do with the siege of Leningrad. By the way have you ever been watching any maps of Karelian front? Just ask and I will show. Main line was Rajajoki, Valkeasaari, Lernpaala, Tappari (I don't know russian names for those). It wasn't even near of Lenigrad. How on earth that was a part of siege? What help Leningrad would have got from Finland anyhow or through it?

[tupakki]

The big difference is that finnish troops didn't continue its attack and they tried to stabilize their fronts. Germans asked finnish troops to take part of the siege of Leningrad but they refused. Finland and USSR were enemies on war so Finland couln't help Leningrad for giving access to food supplies.

Still Russia don't have any right to have finnish territories. I am sorry for your losses, same happened here when russians bombed finnish civilians and pertisans killed them too.

[tupakki]

What you mean by finnish subversion groups? You mean normal reconnaissance troops? Yes finnish have their famous troops called Kaukopartio units; they were against military targets but russian troops who were called partisans killed finnish civilians as well. If you try to show that finns were bad in those wars, try harder because they weren't. Finns didn't want any war, they were forced to join the war. We suffered badly because of USSR and they stole our areas etc. USSR was evil.

[tarimdarya]

At first, USSR did not stole the finnish territory - it just grabbed it in a war. As brutal as it was, such behavior was not uncommon in 1939. (Similarly, USA got Texas from Mexico after the US-Mexican war some years earlier. )

But Finland itself became an aggressor just 2 years later. It cooperated with Hitler and invaded into the territory of Soviet Karelia as far as to Svir river.

And, finally, I count Finnland culpable for Leningrad blockade and deaths of 1mln civilians.

[tupakki]

Yes they did steal. How else you can call that neighbour come to your house and take what ever they want? How you can call that? Just grabbed as you said, its called imperialism and that state that Soviet Union were not better than Germany, many times worse in many case. So you can be a proud the legacy of USSR. I couldn't.

Finland didn't became aggressor it behaved as it had to. If you have been reading history books you know very well that Stalin and -

[tupakki]

his puppets had an attack plan after they failed in Winter War. They wanted to have Finland by force which is known fact. I can again show you show source if you won't believe that. What else could Finland do that be an "ally" with Germany? There wasn't any other options. If finnish goverment wouldn't have done anything USSR would have got Finland easily as they planned. Finland and Germany run into cooperation because that was only solution. USSR forced Finland to that direction.

[tupakki]

You don't know anything what you are talking about. If you don't have anything smart to say, I will delete your messages as I delete this one.

[ellandelachapelle]

You mean this is Ernst von Born speaking? Do you have anything where he speaks Swedish? Do you have an FILMS with him? (he was my mother´s uncle.)

[pomozok]

Dont forget that Russian Empire saved Finnish nation. If not Russian there were no such country as Finland, we would have Sweden on this land now.

[Kuhlfurst]

Se taisi olla aika perseestä joutua radioon kertomaan kotimaansa häviöstä kansalle, joka luuli sodan menevän vallan mainiosti.

[ArabiApina]

Siis Suomen armeijahan oli Tali-Ihantalan jälkeen vahvempi kuin koskaan. Ei Suomen armeija hävinnyt, Saksa hävisi ja Suomi siinä mukana! Poliittinen tilanne pakotti rauhaan... Oli enemmän miehiä aseissa kuin ikinä, enemmän aseita ja ammuksia kuin ikinä... Mutta minkäs voit :S

[Blue3289]

Erittäin kiinnostava video,5/5

[granskare]

the USSR attacks, twice, and when it's over, gets paid in gold for their deeds and also gets 10% of the land. Russia also took East Prussia; Kaliningrad; pushed the borders of Poland westward,etc. They ought to really depart from so-called "Kaliningrad" and Karelia though they dumped a lot of toxic junk there so might not be worth having anymore.

[ArabiApina]

Jaa-a, mielenkiintoinen äänitys, video sopii siihen hyvin.

[soulcollector66666]

Very interesting vid.sad that i don´t understand much. ;-)

[antisankari15]

I believe u :D even i think that he speak maybe little bit worst finnish.