Comments by "Вячеслав Скопюк" (@user-yj8vj3sq6j) on "TIKhistory" channel.

  1.  @desmondanderson665  >The Russians did not take all of Petsano they took parts that matter >As a matter of race they were contemplating a second war on the Finns second war nobody knew about
    1
  2.  @arvopohja7693  poor, poor finns. They had no free will, unlike they sweden neighbors
    1
  3. > which was fine, except that its a bullet magnet infantrymen in the open field weren't an bullet magnet?
    1
  4. >No petrol, no winter clothes, not (enough) bullets really? How then they kept feeding those 1200rpm MG42?
    1
  5. > Finland knew they would face another Soviet Invasion sooner or later Finland knew? >What do you do? stay neutral and wait while big guys fight their war. Like Sweden did
    1
  6.  @spookyshadowhawk6776  Sweden was captured between Germany and Germany ally and didn't choose a side, Portugal and Spain were captured between Germany and Mediterranean sea and didn't choose a side, Switzerland was captured between Germany and Germany allies and didn't choose a side. And they weren't crushed
    1
  7.  @spookyshadowhawk6776  >With Finland, Sweden was totally surrounded, neutral in name only they didn't send their troops to fight Germany war, didn't they? >Spain still flew Me-109s into the early 1960s Israel flew Me-109's, so what?
    1
  8. >it is their only option because Soviet will attack again... as a matter of fact, Finland >And again why not take some more if it is better to defend with a new natural borderline... so, USSR aggression against the Finland in 1939 wasn't an aggression? With a new borderline, it was better to defend, after all
    1
  9. ​ @Hasse.Andersson  >It seems clear to me, that Soviet attacked first and was planning to occupy all of Finland... attacked first - yes, planned to occupy all of Finland -that's doubtful But I was talking about "if someone has taken your property or land, then ofcourse if the opportunity arises to take it back, why not? how could that be aggressive? And again why not take some more if it is better to defend with a new natural borderline..." part. In that case, USSR can't be counted as aggressor towards Finland
    1
  10. Mainila wasn't used as a pretext for war. Just so you to know
    1
  11.  @bige1106  > Stalin refused to allow their evacuation ROFL. What an stupid idiot you are. People of Leningrad were evacuated. Some of them were evacuated right in the hands of advancing Germans
    1
  12. >We had to fight to survive. nope. And continuation war didn't provide nothing for survivability of Finland
    1
  13.  @BimBam69526  Finland's goal was to occupy territories of Soviet Union
    1
  14.  @BimBam69526  >just like with the Baltics right? '' Remind me, please, what happened with Finland between 1940 and June 1941? Soviet military presence were established, Mannerheim line was destroyed aaaaand.. What happened then?
    1
  15. > Finland would not have invaded Soviet Union, if Soviet Union would not have attaked Finland. does it somehow make it right thing to do?
    1
  16.  @w.1.-du9gs  don't remember Petrozavodsk ever belonging to Finland
    1
  17. >rebuilt its armed forces after Winter War in a slower pace is 'rebuilding of army forces' a good thing?
    1
  18.  @rappakalja5295  does it help?
    1
  19.  @rappakalja5295  with defending against imperial superpower
    1
  20. >They just wanted to be left alone! so Finlands elites decided to assist Germany only to be left alone? That's peculiar logic
    1
  21.  @patricklundh4738  good points
    1
  22.  Jesus él McNuggetCunt  the former is a legend. But anyways, it contradicts with 'they wanted to be left alone'
    1
  23.  Jesus él McNuggetCunt  > And it's hardly a legend It's a legend indeed. It's a frivolous interpretation of Molotov's words
    1
  24.  Jesus él McNuggetCunt  as a matter of fact - no.
    1
  25.  Jesus él McNuggetCunt  Finns had advantage of intelligence. And Germany promised them return of all lost territories
    1
  26.  @MRtapio5  again - Finland wanted to be left alone and because of that planned to attack USSR together with Germany?
    1
  27.  @MRtapio5  yeah. Continuation War. 1939.
    1
  28.  @MRtapio5  we were discussing continuation war. Is your vision impaired?
    1
  29.  @MRtapio5  > When he said "they just wanted to be left alone" he was implying 1939 don't be ridiculous. He said that after saying 'Mannerheim knew Russia and knew it was just too big to be conquered and OCCUPIED.'
    1
  30.  @MRtapio5  >He brought up winter war at the beginning. and after that he brought up impossibility of occupation of Russia by FInland
    1
  31.  @MRtapio5  'my' English skills. And you ignoring the part about occupation of Russia. Again - is your vision impaired or what?
    1
  32. >Stalin was likely extraordinarily paranoid that the Finnish's agreements with Germany would allow the Germans to easily take Leningrad by the sea Germany specifically has nothing to do with 'Stalin's paranoia'. It could be any major power, that could use Finland (and Mannerheim line) as foothold to attack Soviet Union and Leningrad specifically
    1
  33.  @The_Original_Default_Username  > it was specifically Finland's cozy relationship with Germany there was nothing especially cozy between Germany and Finland until 1939-940 >The Mannerheim Line wasn't even a thing it was a thing during negotiations in Moscow in 1939
    1
  34.  @The_Original_Default_Username  >The Mannerheim Line wasn't deployed until it was certain without a doubt the Soviets were going to invade. sorry, you are delusional
    1
  35.  @The_Original_Default_Username  I recommend you to read more. Some modern research by credible authors, not 40 year old processed propaganda products
    1
  36.  @JackKrei  Do Beevor, Hanson, Stepman etc work with soviet archives? If not - how are they relevant to the Eastern front? >I'm right about it all nope, you are clueless little man, too incompetent to even realize that
    1
  37.  @JackKrei  >I did provide proof! nope. The proof would be citing the sources used by Beevor, Hanson, Stepman etc. >Oh never said you were a soviet period folk " you, like all the soviet period folks". In proper english language "like all" means inclusion
    1
  38.  @Jokakutihut1  I'm sure they signed some agreement.
    1
  39.  @okphalmer6596  >Attack against it would inevitably spill to other Finnish territory as well. I don't see how > if Fnns would have just the let the Red Army to supplied it by land through Finnish railway lines as it was done in reality. it' not how neutrality are done during wartime.
    1
  40. Did he?
    1
  41. as the matter of fact, 316th rifle division consisted mostly of russians.
    1
  42. >Guns are one of the few things communists make that are actually of good quality nah
    1
  43. >Germany sold us artillery, ammunition and some weapons, 1942 aircraft and few bombers + anti tank weapons what about mixed finnish-german units? Joint tactical plans? >Our army was strong enough to fight without germans. why germans lend you a tank regiment then? >Finland took one more time a great defence victory wat?
    1
  44. :D
    1
  45. >The reason ehy we took over so much of Russian Karelia was to establish a buffer. oh, stop it, you >The finnish high command knew that the germans would lose as early as 1941 but they go to war nonetheless. Are you really believe in that? >so they made a buffer so the war will not be fought on finnish soil exactly, why? Did they thought that Finland was strong enough to stop Red Army in "buffer zone"?
    1
  46.  @vilzupuupaa4680  >Obviously you don't want to fight on your own land. obviously you can get as much land in the future reich as you occupied before the end of war >This assumption was made in late 1941 and then Finland stopped advances in Karelia. So, no "buffers", just trying to hold on to what they've won >You were the ones to start it. Really? So, no German troops in Finland in 18th June, no minelaying of soviet coast in the morning of 22nd June, no refueling of german bombers?
    1
  47.  @vilzupuupaa4680  if we look deep enough, we can remember what heimosodat was
    1
  48.  @vilzupuupaa4680  how it is related to USSR?
    1
  49. As a matter of fact, there is a site, called "Память народа", where Russian Ministry of Defense publishes documents from soviet archives
    1
  50.  @moisuomi  and they lost territory + tens thousands of lives.
    1