Comments by "Вячеслав Скопюк" (@user-yj8vj3sq6j) on "The Battle of Tali-Ihantala 1944 | WW2 Battlestorm Documentary" video.

  1. >Soviet Union considered Finland as a problem of former Tsardom and wanted it back ROFL. No. >Therefore they put unreasonable demands on Finns which cannot be fulfilled As far as I remember, Mannerheim urged Finland government to fulfill those demands. At least he says so in his memoirs
    2
  2. >Soviet Russia, firstly tried to "annex" Finland "peacefully" through communist victory in finnish parliament resulting in Soviet-Finnish war (1918-1920). facepalm. The purpose of the Soviet Russia at the time was to export the revolution, not to acquire a new territories. They wanted to 'annex' Finland no more than 'annex' Hungary or Germany(they also had socialist republics at the time) >Similar situation occured in Latvia (1940) where communists voted for entry to Soviet Union. double facepalm. Soviet Union in 1940 was a different country, with much more pragmatic and imperialistic goals. >Teritorial exchange was unfair as Finland had to sacrifice Hanko naval base and Karelia which was basically na industrial heart of Finland for wastelands in the North. Soviet Union din't demanded all Karelian Isthmus, only to move border. And Finland had fought against Soviet Union for those exact "wastelands in the North" several times >Furthermore, Soviet Union planned the offensive to last for five days ending with conquering of Helsinki as a birthday gift for Stalin. that's quite interesting story they teach you in schools. Because if you read the real plan, you'll find that terms for the defeat of enemy units on the Karelian Isthmus were set to 8-10 days
    2
  3.    > All of this was about teritorial demands they were quite moderate. Lot less than USSR got in the aftermath. Btw, USSR didn't just demanded territories from Finland, it proposed some territories that Finland wanted in exchange.So, no ''considered Finland as a problem of former Tsardom and wanted it back" >Mannerheim urged the government as finnish army was in desperate condition. and because those demands could be fulfilled. The only point of contention was the lease of territory for military base. That could have been negotiated, but I guess that people in power thought at the time that USSR wouldn't go to a war
    1
  4.  @coloradoing9172  first one - nobody asked Finland to give up the all Mannerheim line. Second one - I don't remember soviet troops invading Finland from Hanko during 1941. I wonder why
    1
  5.  @coloradoing9172  so, you ignored that part where I talked that there were NO advances from Hanko during 1941. Despite it's presumed 'danger to Helsinki' As for "portion that would have been rendered the entire line useless" - that's some first class conspiracy theory, I presume taken straight outta Finland. Any sane man, familiar with the USSR's plans for the Winter War knows that Soviet military commanders did not consider the Mannerheim Line an obstacle
    1
  6.  @coloradoing9172  >The red army in 1941 was in a state of complete collapse and had no capacity to commit offensive operations in Finland. well, It's called pulling the facts to fit your point of view. >The sad thing is that you're falling for Soviet propaganda from the late 30s LOL. Man with conspiracy theories about 'rendering Mannerheim Line useless' tells me that I fall for propaganda. What words in the sentence "Soviet military leaders did not view the Mannerheim Line as an obstacle" you didn't understand?
    1
  7. >An assault meant to break the enemy can not be conducted by a 1:1 ratio. as a matter of fact it can
    1
  8. Ha!
    1