Comments by "Quizmaster China" (@QuizmasterLaw) on "Was Finland's "Continuation War" Pre-Planned? Eastern Front #WW2" video.

  1. The Finnish army definitely reached a "stop line" and did not go further. That stop line was farther east but encompassed ethnic Finns in the USSR. Pan Finnic nationalism could have argued for setting up a pan-Finnic state which would be huge in area and include the Mari people as well as the Estonians. Hitler probably wouldn't have had it. btw... ALL of Russia's neighbors HATE Russia. Fact. ...I wonder why?
    8
  2. Sweden sent a regiment of volunteers to fight in Finland in 1940 btw. though that was never official you don't just have an entire regiment of volunbeers show up with guns and uniforms and a command structure without shall we say some ACTIVE MEASURES
    5
  3. Finland was a co-belligerent, not an ally. The difference is that allies are bound to fight for each other if either is attacked. This is a very fine distinction perhaps but it is the case. Finland did not have to attack the USSR in 1941 as an ally would. Finland was not obligated to keep fighting in 1944 when it switched sides because it was only a co-belligerent not an ally. NATO is an alliance. The USA in 1812-1814 was a French co-belligerent, not an ally. Co-belligerents are likelier to be able to negotiate their way out of the ass kicking that allies to a losing power get. See USA 1814, Finland 1944. See also Japan 1945 (being a German ally got it two atomic black eyes).
    3
  4. Ah, Russia, Hitler's co-belligerent, which invaded Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Finland all of this well before Barbarossa ever happened. So yeah, sow the wind, reap the whirlwind.
    3
  5. Have you ever thought of yourself, perhaps, as that which the Russians call a "useful idiot"? Someone who say buys into conspiracy theories or regards Russian attacks against a formally neutral small country as - justified? Because WOW YOUR READING OF FINNISH HISTORY IS HORRIBLE. Lavrov is proud of you!
    3
  6. The USSR became Hitler's co-belligerent in 1940 when they jointly invaded Poland: See, Molotov-Ribbentorp pact. USSR-Nazi co-belligerency, ended on the 21st of June, 1941. Did I mention the Katyn massacre? That's when Stalin took all the captured Polish officers captured out onto a field and shot them. By the way Auschwitz methods were taken up from the Cheka. Hitler simply did to the Jews what the Soviets did to priests and dissidents.
    2
  7. The details of how two dictatorships cooperated to dismember a neighboring independent country don't matter; they were co-belligerents (and brutal murder regimes). You might not like that fact, but facts are facts.
    2
  8. Yes, co-belligerents fight the same enemy. USSR was a co-belligerent with the USA against Germany, but was not in an alliance and was not formally obligated to attack Japan for example. The USSR and USA did however conclude a treaty regarding Japanese entry into combat against Japan. That wasn't a treaty of alliance. Alliances are more durable and tend to be set up prior to hostilities. This may explain why, if you lose a war, it is better to be a co-belligerent than an ally. Dragged along into others' shit-storm is different from setting up a shit-storm.  @ВячеславСкопюк 
    1
  9. Someone tell Taphos about the Finnish snipers and how bad a General Molotov was.
    1
  10. For DECADES Kremlin LIARS repeated the LIE that they did not perpetrate the mass murder of Polish prisoners at Katyn. They finally admitted the truth after the deadly dishonest USSR died. So by all means, lie lie lie. Where did that lead you the last time? )
    1
  11. Yes, clearly, thousands of dead polish prisoners shot dead by stalin, gulags, mass imprisonment of dissidents, summary executions by the NKVD, i make it all up none of it is true Or, you are from a very fucked up country. Good luck!
    1
  12. Please learn Russian quickly, so you will be stripped of your illusions quickly.
    1