Mainila shots II soviets

[Baltas]

Hello all

I was looking for confirmation of soviets propaganda statements for great skill of Finns for butchering red aggressors in the source( http://artofwar.ru/r/razzhiwin_a_e/text_0060.shtml provide by BIGpanzer )but did not find
But found that!!!
In that spot I will say big sorry in advance for same oponents,because some of them are big fans of nowadays Moscow officiall position and my question can be cause to feel uncose(don't read " Time - blood " and life is too short)but I really don't know Moscow position

So source state: soviets at Manila was killed by soviets for the sake incriminating Finns of assaulting frendly peacefuly very big and strong neighbour (even was found soviets НКВД alive eye-witnesses )

My question:Maybe now both sides agree at Mamila Finns are not guilty but soviets.

Regard Baltas



---------------------------------------------------------------------------


Several off-topics and unpolitenesses deleted

Stay on topic

/Juha

[Art]

In that spot I will say big sorry in advance for same oponents,because some of them are big fans of nowadays Moscow officiall position and my question can be cause to feel uncose(don't read " Time - blood " and life is too short)but I really don't know Moscow position

And what is nowadays Moscow official position? I simply don't know.

So source state: soviets at Manila was killed

It is very doubtful that any men were killed at Manila.

[Baltas]

Art wrote:

It is very doubtful that any men were killed at Manila.

I think word doubtful it is not source motivate by sources like I am doing.


Regard Baltas

[Alex Yeliseenko]

Baltas, you ask questions which were many times discussed. Possibly and at this forum. Look archives.
I think, you should spend 40-50 euros for books. Both on Russian, and on Finnish. It will help you to understand better is Russian-Finland attitude.
And it is some help.

[Alex Yeliseenko]

[janner]

Baltas,

As the poster of “life is too short” then it is clear that you are classifying me as a supporter of the “Moscow position.”

This is both insulting and ignorant.

As a Western European who has fought to defend those ideals, I have very clear views on the rights and wrongs of the Soviet Regime. As someone who is conducting research into the Winter War I must try to keep an open mind and seek to establish opinions based on evidence – wherever that may be found.

Last time I felt that you had breached the forum rules and offended me I pm’d you and you kindly apologised. This time your offensive remarks require a public response and cannot be put down to linguistic/cultural misunderstandings. My partner is a Finn so I do have some small insight into your culture and don’t recall being an offensive bore as being a national characteristic – if such a thing exists.

You seem to only wish to score points and insult others.

On the shelling of Mainila, in 1998, President of Russia Boris Yeltsin denounced Soviet's aggression towards Finland, agreeing that the Winter War was a war of aggression.

That is one Moscow position I do support – how about you?

Aye,

[Alex Yeliseenko]

[Art]

I think word doubtful it is not source motivate by sources like I am doing.

Want information - ask for it in a civil manner and without clownery. Otherwise, any normal dsicussion is exluded.

[Juha Tompuri]

Some more cleaning was done

/ Juha

[BIGpanzer]

Baltas wrote:
I was looking for confirmation of soviets propaganda statements for great skill of Finns for butchering red aggressors in the source( http://artofwar.ru/r/razzhiwin_a_e/text_0060.shtml provide by BIGpanzer )but did not find
But found that!!!
In that spot I will say big sorry in advance for same oponents,because some of them are big fans of nowadays Moscow officiall position and my question can be cause to feel uncose(don't read " Time - blood " and life is too short)but I really don't know Moscow position

If you mention in your usual hmm..."objective" manner the report of Soviet commission about found dead bodies of 18th division and Finnish actions on them - I recommend you to search better, I translated this info directly from the source above [see corresponding thread about Lemetti casualties]. The info about amount of bodies, naked woman, etc is close to the end of the page. About does this report have some element of war propaganda [the time was March 1940] or not - exactly nobody knows but I am thinking why Finns didn't remove or bury the bodies of Soviet soldiers to avoid any possible war crimes problems. About nowadays Moscow official position - I don't know and never interested in it, I am interested in historical facts. But no...one time I was interested and hoped to Moscow official position when they started last official investigation of massacre of Polish officers [I have strong assumptions that my grandfather, artillery porucznik from Białystok, was among them] in Katyn forest, but...the official conclusion was the following: "That was not a war crime or genocide but just exceeding of authority of some NKVD officers, so this is the final conclusion of the problem", and after that the positions of such government became completelly indifferent for my mind.

If I understood correct - this article was written by A. Razhivin - grandson of senior lieutenant Razhivin, who was killed in Lemetti by Finnish sniper 05 February [and he provide us with several letters of his grandfather to home before tragedy at Lemetti took place]. And A. Razhivin doesn't write anything bad about Finns just as his personal opinion [to say more, there are several positive opinions in this article], but he analyzed documents.
Among usual kind words to the relatives I found one interesting info from those private letters - s. lieutenant Razhivin mentioned use of explosive bullets by Finns and large wounds because of them. I was interested in this theoretical subject many years ago as army doctor during my study - and I remember that Hague convention prohibited to use such kind of bullets, Finnish sources [which I tried to translate that time] denied any use of such bullets during the Winter war, but there were such mentions in Soviet sources . Interesting to know the opinion of JT, he should know as me seems.


Well, about Manila - I don't see abything new in this article because the article is not about Manilla, so only short well-known mention how the war started.

Íóæåí áûë ôîðìàëüíûé ïîâîä ê âîéíå, è îí íàø¸ëñÿ. 26 íîÿáðÿ íà Êàðåëüñêîì ïåðåøåéêå â ðàéîíå ïîãðàíè÷íîãî ïóíêòà Ìàéíèëà ïðîèçîø¸ë èíöèäåíò, ïîñëóæèâøèé ïîâîäîì ê âîéíå. Ïî çàÿâëåíèþ ñîâåòñêîé ñòîðîíû, ôèíñêàÿ àðòèëëåðèÿ îáñòðåëÿëà íàøè ïîçèöèè.  ðåçóëüòàòå îáñòðåëà ïîãèáëè ÷åòâåðî è áûëè ðàíåíû äåâÿòü ñîâåòñêèõ âîåííîñëóæàùèõ. Ôèííû îáâèíèëè ÑÑÑÐ â òîì, ÷òî îí ñàì èíèöèèðîâàë îãîíü ïî ñâîèì æå áîéöàì â ïðîâîêàöèîííûõ öåëÿõ. (Ïîçæå íàøëèñü äàæå ó÷àñòíèêè ýòîé, ðàçðàáîòàííîé ÍÊÂÄ îïåðàöèè. Îäèí èç íèõ ïðîæèâàë äî ïîñëåäíåãî âðåìåíè â Ïîäïîðîæñêîì ðàéîíå Ëåíèíãðàäñêîé îáëàñòè). Ôèíëÿíäèÿ ïðåäëîæèëà ïðîâåñòè ñîâìåñòíîå ðàññëåäîâàíèå èíöèäåíòà. Íî ñîâåòñêàÿ ñòîðîíà êàòåãîðè÷åñêè îòêàçàëàñü îò ýòîãî ïðåäëîæåíèÿ è ïîñïåøíî çàÿâèëî î ðàñòîðæåíèè ñîâåòñêî-ôèíñêîãî ïàêòà î íåíàïàäåíèè.

And this is correct info according to all modern sources I know. Well, translation this paragraph from Razhivin's article:

The formal reason to start the war was needed, and it was found. 26.11. the incident happened near border post Manilla at Karelian Isthmus. According to claim of Soviet side, Finnish artillery shelled our positions. Four Soviet armymen were killed and nine were wounded. Finns accused USSR that Soviets initiated the artillery fire themselves in provocation aims {later the participants, of that, developed by NKVD operation, was found. One of them lived till now in Podporozhsky(? - BP) district of Leningrad region}. Finland offered to make joint investigations of the incident, but Soviet side rejected this idea and claimed the cancellation of Soviet-Finnish non-aggression pact immediately....

Best regards, BP

[Yuri]

And this is correct info according to all modern sources I know.

If to You were not known sources with the alternative version of events on November, 26, 1939 near Manila, you can read (if know Russian) that above in posts Alex Yeliseenko
Sources of knowledge should be documents and dry calculations.

[Yuri]

For search of true originators of provocation on November, 26, 1926 near Manila it is necessary, as a minimum, to answer two questions:

I. Who did not want in the autumn of 1939 of the beginning Soviet – Finnish war («Winter war») or on another - to whom was not favourable during that moment of the beginning of this war?

II. Who wanted in the autumn of 1939 of the beginning the Soviet – Finnish war («Winter war») or on another - to whom the beginning of this war was favourable during that moment?

The analysis of documents gives such answers:

I. War did not want:
a/ the Government of the USSR and the General Secretary of Central Committee VKP/b/ I. Stalin;
b/ two members of the Government of Finland, one of which marshal Mannerheim;
c/ fuhrer III Reich Adolf Hitler

II. War wanted it:
a/ the Finnish supporters of idea about construction «Great Finland from Baltic up to Ural»;
b/ the Governments British (Chamberlen and Churchill) and French (Reino, Laval, Lebren, Peten) colonial empires;
c/ the so-called, Polish government in emigration (for example, on November, 30, 1939 this, so-called, the government has declared war of the USSR).


In view of all aforesaid the following conclusion is inevitable.
It is the most probable, that provocation on November, 26, 1939 near Manila - a handwork of officers of the Finnish Army which were supporters of idea «Great Finland from Baltic up to Ural» and/or the English agents. Thus marshal Mannerheim did not know about this provocation of the own officers

[janner]

I. War did not want:
a/ the Government of the USSR and the General Secretary of Central Committee VKP/b/ I. Stalin;

Yuri,

Wow, I thought we’d moved beyond this one and that official Soviet documents as quoted by Van Dyke in “The Soviet Invasion of Finland” showed that whilst initially keen to obtain a diplomatic solution, Stalin authorised executive action after Finnish delegates failed to provide a suitable solution to his security concerns over the course of seven (?) meetings.

II. War wanted it:
a/ the Finnish supporters of idea about construction «Great Finland from Baltic up to Ural»;
b/ the Governments British (Chamberlen and Churchill) and French (Reino, Laval, Lebren, Peten) colonial empires;
c/ the so-called, Polish government in emigration (for example, on November, 30, 1939 this, so-called, the government has declared war of the USSR).

UK wanted to initiate a war in Finland – where is the evidence for this – after all our official records are also open now after the 50 year rule expired and someone would have mentioned it to Ironside in advance so he could have done a little planning. Besides it would have been one hell of a shot from our artillery ranges in Larkhill.

There is absolutely no evidence to support this point. In addition, the Polish Government in exile was in disarray at this time and hardly in a position to coordinate such a strike.

All the evidence that I have seen published in reputable, internationally available works using Soviet and Finnish documents, points towards it being a Soviet action to allow Stalin to break off the non-aggression pact and initiate the invasion.

Whilst the present Russian leadership may not support this position it has already been acknowledged by a previous President.

Thanks for brightening my morning with such a delightfully eccentric post

[Juha Tompuri]

I'm a bit busy at the moment, more later.

t is very doubtful that any men were killed at Manila.

Interesting.
I've allways thought that there were casualties.

Among usual kind words to the relatives I found one interesting info from those private letters - s. lieutenant Razhivin mentioned use of explosive bullets by Finns and large wounds because of them. I was interested in this theoretical subject many years ago as army doctor during my study - and I remember that Hague convention prohibited to use such kind of bullets, Finnish sources [which I tried to translate that time] denied any use of such bullets during the Winter war, but there were such mentions in Soviet sources . Interesting to know the opinion of JT, he should know as me seems.

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... &highlight
and from there:

7.62 mm Soviet-Russian ZR (later abbreviation ZP) explosive/incendiary bullet, pet-name "ZARA" (derivation from words "Zazhigano-Razrivnaya" - later "Zazhiganiya Pulya" = "Incendiary Bullet"). It was designed in 1933. It has a very clever striker mechanism with a brass split "safety sleeve", covering a sharp point of the striker and keeping it away from bottom of the priming cap.

SOVIET 7.62 MM "ZR" BULLET

Color codes: Tip lacquered red. Width of tip-code 5 - 6 millimeters. Primer annulus of 1st class ShKAS cartridges was lacquered red. In 2nd class cartridges were annulus coded with colorless lacquer (if any). Annulus (a ring around the primer) of 3rd class cartridges was black. ShKAS cartridges were loaded into "bimetallic" cases with an exclusive headstamp resembling capital letter "E" or figure "3" on nine-a-clock position of the case head. (It is a Russian letter "Sha" from designer's name Shpitalniy. Looks like capital "E" upset points upwards, or a "Devil's Poker without a barb"). Bullets of them had no crimp grooves, but they were crimped very tightly into case mouths by "YELISAROV's Method", making the case mouth slightly thicker than is the wall of case neck.

First class cartridges were fit for use in synchronized ShKAS machine guns shooting between the blades of rotating air-screw of single engine fighter aeroplanes. Use of 2nd class was allowed in the observer's machine guns or the ShKAS guns mounted to the wings of ILYUSHIN I-16 fighters or to the nose of twin-engine bombers. Use of 3rd class cartridges was prohibited in ShKAS machine guns at all. They were issued to the infantry.

Millions of ShKAS cartridges were shot towards Finns during our Winter War from the infantry firearms of Soviet-Russian attackers and their aircrafts. Presumably a million or more of them were loaded with ZR bullets. (Including those, shot against Finnish civilians during the bombings of our towns and cities!) ALL of them were 1st class cartridges! It was a common delusion in Finland that the red primer annulus is a standard color code of all the "Sha"-stamped cartridges. There were presumably produced them much more than was actually needed. Over-production (but also a lack of many other products) was a curse of Socialistic Systematical Economy

http://guns.connect.fi/gow/QA15.html

So it's theoretically possible that Finns used some ammo of this type captured from the enemy.

And this is correct info according to all modern sources I know. Well, translation this paragraph from Razhivin's article:

The formal reason to start the war was needed, and it was found. 26.11. the incident happened near border post Manilla at Karelian Isthmus. According to claim of Soviet side, Finnish artillery shelled our positions. Four Soviet armymen were killed and nine were wounded. Finns accused USSR that Soviets initiated the artillery fire themselves in provocation aims {later the participants, of that, developed by NKVD operation, was found. One of them lived till now in Podporozhsky(? - BP) district of Leningrad region}. Finland offered to make joint investigations of the incident, but Soviet side rejected this idea and claimed the cancellation of Soviet-Finnish non-aggression pact immediately....

Don't have time to check the details, but seems OK by me.

Thanks for brightening my morning with such a delightfully eccentric post

Agree

Regards, Juha

P.S. It's Mainila (as janner has correctly posted ), not the capital of the Philippines nor (hemp)rope

[Anne G,]

I'm a bit busy at the moment, more later.

t is very doubtful that any men were killed at Manila.

Interesting.
I've allways thought that there were casualties.

I remember Max Jakobson said that no information about military funerals of "Mainila victims" has been found in Soviet sources though it was a custom to arrange them.