Mainila shots II soviets

Discussions on the Winter War and Continuation War, the wars between Finland and the USSR.
Hosted by Juha Tompuri
Post Reply
User avatar
Alex Yeliseenko
Member
Posts: 1119
Joined: 25 Jan 2006, 16:40
Location: RUSSIA

#46

Post by Alex Yeliseenko » 26 Jun 2007, 09:56

Alex Yeliseenko wrote: Whether then there was an idea of " Independent state Komi "?
When on yours there was an idea of " independent Komi "?
There is no mention of such idea.
[/quote][/quote]

You show ignorance of sources of the information. Read, for example, Eskola K.Toim. Itaan: Elsa Enajarvi-Haavion ja Martii Haavion kirijeet 1941-1942, Helsinki, 2002.

User avatar
Alex Yeliseenko
Member
Posts: 1119
Joined: 25 Jan 2006, 16:40
Location: RUSSIA

#47

Post by Alex Yeliseenko » 26 Jun 2007, 10:09

Anne G, wrote:
Alex Yeliseenko wrote:
Alex Yeliseenko wrote: According to its conclusions, no shots in Mainila at all existing. Finns have answered the Soviet provocation by the provocation.
That makes no sense.

There are only two alternatives:
a) the SU fired the shots themselves
b) there were no shots, but the the SU claimed there were

Either way, there was only Soviet provocation.
At least one shot was. It was fixed by the Finnish frontier guards in Sommerikko at 11-50. During too time no Finnish messages on seven shots at 16-00 existing. They have appeared only in November, 00-27 27. Instead of declaring absence of shots, the Finnish command has informed, that " Russian shot at themselves ". Thus, this was reciprocal provocation.
No, there were two versions.

BTV, a provocation is *deliberate* effort to provocate - in politics, to get a *formal* casus belli. It is never a cause for a war.

There had been many incidents during twenty years and they had not started a war. But now Stalin wanted it.
It is possible to assume, that the revanchist of the application of the Finnish politicians and their refusal to go on the compromise have bothered Stalin. However, Stalin operated as in interests of the state. It has achieved objects in view. That you will not tell about the Finnish politicians.

Besides do not forget, who became "father" of the Finnish economic magic. :)


Anne G,
Member
Posts: 710
Joined: 02 Jan 2007, 16:02
Location: Espoo, Finland

#48

Post by Anne G, » 26 Jun 2007, 10:30

Alex Yeliseenko wrote:
Alex Yeliseenko wrote: Whether then there was an idea of " Independent state Komi "?
When on yours there was an idea of " independent Komi "?
There is no mention of such idea.
You show ignorance of sources of the information. Read, for example, Eskola K.Toim. Itaan: Elsa Enajarvi-Haavion ja Martii Haavion kirijeet 1941-1942, Helsinki, 2002.
These are private letters and especially Elsa presented views even about the frontier question that were *not* accepted by the government, so her views were many times cencored in the radio.

Anne G,
Member
Posts: 710
Joined: 02 Jan 2007, 16:02
Location: Espoo, Finland

#49

Post by Anne G, » 26 Jun 2007, 10:42

Alex Yeliseenko wrote: Stalin operated as in interests of the state. It has achieved objects in view.
Viktor Vladimirov said in Kohti talvisotaa that Stalin, because his old-fashioned view of strategy, overvalued the value of Hango base. Hangö became useless to the SU when Germany had Estonia. The "price" Stalin paid was to get the "recanschist basillus" on Finland, ie. make her an enemy.

In Vladimirov's view, a neutral Finland without Hangö would have been a better aim for Stalin.

User avatar
Alex Yeliseenko
Member
Posts: 1119
Joined: 25 Jan 2006, 16:40
Location: RUSSIA

#50

Post by Alex Yeliseenko » 26 Jun 2007, 11:04

Anne G, wrote:
Alex Yeliseenko wrote:
Alex Yeliseenko wrote: Whether then there was an idea of " Independent state Komi "?
When on yours there was an idea of " independent Komi "?
There is no mention of such idea.
You show ignorance of sources of the information. Read, for example, Eskola K.Toim. Itaan: Elsa Enajarvi-Haavion ja Martii Haavion kirijeet 1941-1942, Helsinki, 2002.
These are private letters and especially Elsa presented views even about the frontier question that were *not* accepted by the government, so her views were many times cencored in the radio.
In Finland still there is a censorship? :) You have again mixed. The letter wrote not Elsa, and Martti. on November, 24th 1941.

User avatar
Alex Yeliseenko
Member
Posts: 1119
Joined: 25 Jan 2006, 16:40
Location: RUSSIA

#51

Post by Alex Yeliseenko » 26 Jun 2007, 11:14

Anne G, wrote:
Alex Yeliseenko wrote: Stalin operated as in interests of the state. It has achieved objects in view.
Viktor Vladimirov said in Kohti talvisotaa that Stalin, because his old-fashioned view of strategy, overvalued the value of Hango base. Hangö became useless to the SU when Germany had Estonia. The "price" Stalin paid was to get the "recanschist basillus" on Finland, ie. make her an enemy.

In Vladimirov's view, a neutral Finland without Hangö would have been a better aim for Stalin.
Victor Vladimirov is not the expert under the soviet-finnish attitudes 1930-1940- years. Attitudes between Finland and the USSR were not friendly. Finland was considered by the General Staff of RKKA as possible jumping-off place for an attack of the third party. You similar are not so well familiar with features of the Soviet operative military planning in 1930. In 1939 and 1941 the Finnish politicians had a choice twice. In second time they have sided with nazism. And both of time have lost. And simple people have suffered from it.

User avatar
Yuri
Member
Posts: 1969
Joined: 01 Jun 2006, 12:24
Location: Russia

#52

Post by Yuri » 26 Jun 2007, 12:23

janner wrote: They did, perhaps have too much confidence in the International Community
It is very abstract and difficult for understanding.
Actually life is arranged easier.
Great Finland from Baltic up to Ural in the beginning it was planned to construct, basing on power of the British and French colonial empires. When the first attempt has failed, Finns to replace broken by then the British and gauls on got aura invincible the Adolf Hitlera's Third Reich.
To a great regret (for Finns certainly), and the second attempt has ended with full breakdown and as a result «the International Community» has lost an opportunity to find out that it for a bird such – Great Finland from Baltic up to Ural.
By the way, Saint Petersburg it was planned to include in structure Great Finland from Baltic up to Ural.
janner wrote: Thank you for the compliment but can you confirm which documents aren’t accessible or is this conjecture? I live les than one mile from the Public Records Office in Kew so checking isn’t difficult…
I do not want you to burden as the government of her Majesty has declared, that Privacy of materials on Gess is prolonged till 2035.
The correspondence issued on today's day between Churchill and Roosevelt contains less than thousand letters from more 1700 which these two respectable gentlemen have exchanged.
The others continue to remain confidential.

janner wrote: Handy way of discounted official statements you don’t agree with. Can we ignore the present President due to his links with the KGB?
Frankly speaking, I about this day did not know, that in KGB accepted only alcoholics. Thank for super interesting information. Yes, certainly, in that case we should urgently re-elect the present president. Thinking, that within one year it will be made!


However, to affair.
The Russian person ignores anyone, - not looking on titles, - speaking a lie. In this affair the Russian will not make exception even for the English queen.

Not in force the god, and in the truth.
With us the god and with us the truth.

Pay attention, in the conclusions I did not use Russian-Soviet sources.
I based only on the data of the Finnish side.

Try to answer itself such question:
What for Finns gave a false picture of events in Mainila?
And, by the way, would not prevent to clear destiny of those three Finns which gave a testimony on affair in Mainila.

User avatar
Alex Yeliseenko
Member
Posts: 1119
Joined: 25 Jan 2006, 16:40
Location: RUSSIA

#53

Post by Alex Yeliseenko » 26 Jun 2007, 12:35

How much I remember, Petersburg it was planned to declare " free city "

Anne G,
Member
Posts: 710
Joined: 02 Jan 2007, 16:02
Location: Espoo, Finland

#54

Post by Anne G, » 26 Jun 2007, 13:39

Alex Yeliseenko wrote:
Anne G, wrote:
Alex Yeliseenko wrote:
When on yours there was an idea of " independent Komi "?
There is no mention of such idea.
You show ignorance of sources of the information. Read, for example, Eskola K.Toim. Itaan: Elsa Enajarvi-Haavion ja Martii Haavion kirijeet 1941-1942, Helsinki, 2002.
These are private letters and especially Elsa presented views even about the frontier question that were *not* accepted by the government, so her views were many times cencored in the radio.
In Finland still there is a censorship? .
It was war.
Alex Yeliseenko wrote: The letter wrote not Elsa, and Martti. on November, 24th 1941.
Martti tells here about the *German* plans. Unfortunely, there is no details, not even who the German was.

In any case, this has nothing to do with Finland in the fall 1939.

Anne G,
Member
Posts: 710
Joined: 02 Jan 2007, 16:02
Location: Espoo, Finland

#55

Post by Anne G, » 26 Jun 2007, 13:55

Yuri wrote: Great Finland from Baltic up to Ural in the beginning it was planned to construct, basing on power of the British and French colonial empires. When the first attempt has failed,
One can't talk about "Finland" but "some Finns", as these pursuits were made of private Activists. Even Mannerheim didn't support to the plan of the Russian Whites to attack Petrograd, as he noticed that the Finnish general opinion was against it.

Most of all, from 1937 onwards, there were none among the Finnish government or prominent men, to support such a policy.
Yuri wrote: What for Finns gave a false picture of events in Mainila?
You must at first prove that it was false.

User avatar
Alex Yeliseenko
Member
Posts: 1119
Joined: 25 Jan 2006, 16:40
Location: RUSSIA

#56

Post by Alex Yeliseenko » 26 Jun 2007, 14:11

Anne G,
Alex Yeliseenko wrote: The letter wrote not Elsa, and Martti. on November, 24th 1941.
Martti tells here about the *German* plans. Unfortunely, there is no details, not even who the German was.

In any case, this has nothing to do with Finland in the fall 1939.
[/quote]

You again hurry up and are inattentive! " The unknown German " was well-known Alfred Rosenberg. To you to tell about it?

Yes, in Finland I know about censorship. About it wrote Paavo Alkio, you know about it?

Certainly the end of 1930th years magik time! You have huge advantage before me - Finnish your native language (I only understand it). Before you the Finnish archives and the newest researches are opened.

In 1920-1930-е years of Finland planned expansion on the East. And in Moscow about it should know. A policy of Finns directed on confrontation, in hope to the aid from the West, together with plans of the USSR on restoration of the international influence, also have led to " Winter war ".

Anne G,
Member
Posts: 710
Joined: 02 Jan 2007, 16:02
Location: Espoo, Finland

#57

Post by Anne G, » 26 Jun 2007, 14:56

Alex Yeliseenko wrote:
Anne G,
Alex Yeliseenko wrote: The letter wrote not Elsa, and Martti. on November, 24th 1941.
Martti tells here about the *German* plans. Unfortunely, there is no details, not even who the German was.

In any case, this has nothing to do with Finland in the fall 1939.
You again hurry up and are inattentive! " The unknown German " was well-known Alfred Rosenberg. [/quote]

No, he was *not*. In the next letter, on the 25th of November 1941, Martti tells that he was trhe chief of the staff of Rosenberg.

So these were the German plans and people like Martti were enthusiatic to hear them. But this has nothing to do with Finland in the fall 1939.

Anne G,
Member
Posts: 710
Joined: 02 Jan 2007, 16:02
Location: Espoo, Finland

#58

Post by Anne G, » 26 Jun 2007, 14:59

Alex Yeliseenko wrote: In 1920-1930-е years of Finland planned expansion on the East. And in Moscow about it should know. A policy of Finns directed on confrontation, in hope to the aid from the West, together with plans of the USSR on restoration of the international influence, also have led to " Winter war ".
This is complete nonsense which can only have believed by a paranoid person like Stalin.

User avatar
Alex Yeliseenko
Member
Posts: 1119
Joined: 25 Jan 2006, 16:40
Location: RUSSIA

#59

Post by Alex Yeliseenko » 26 Jun 2007, 15:26

Anne G,No, he was *not*. In the next letter, on the 25th of November 1941, Martti tells that he was trhe chief of the staff of Rosenberg.

So these were the German plans and people like Martti were enthusiatic to hear them. But this has nothing to do with Finland in the fall 1939.
[/quote]

At last that I have achieved from you the close attitude to sources of the information. Where you studied?

User avatar
Yuri
Member
Posts: 1969
Joined: 01 Jun 2006, 12:24
Location: Russia

#60

Post by Yuri » 26 Jun 2007, 15:50

Anne G, wrote: One can't talk about "Finland" but "some Finns", as these pursuits were made of private Activists. Even Mannerheim didn't support to the plan of the Russian Whites to attack Petrograd, as he noticed that the Finnish general opinion was against it.

Most of all, from 1937 onwards, there were none among the Finnish government or prominent men, to support such a policy.
Presence of supporters of idea «Great Finland from Baltic up to Ural» among members of the government of Finland is not an obligatory condition of fulfilment of provocation on the part of Finns.
On the Finnish side wishing to make provocation was enough.
The idea «Great Finland from Baltic up to Ural» had the supporters among officers of the Finnish army.
In October, 1939 Finland has has carried out the latent mobilization. In result the Finnish army has replenished with new supporters of this idea
Supporters of idea «Great Finland from Baltic up to Ural» understood, that Finland cannot be indefinitely for a long time in a condition – no the war no the world. If military actions will not be started the nearest one - two month the army will be necessary for demobilizing.
They knew as, that marshal Mannerheim supported the peace agreement with Russian.
The peace decision of a territorial problem for ever buried plans of supporters of idea «Great Finland from Baltic up to Ural».
Deficiency of time and eventual the peace agreement with Russian pushed supporters of idea «Great Finland from Baltic up to Ural» on fulfilment of provocation.
Add to this active influence of Englishmen and the Frenchmen and a gas mixture for fulfilment of provocation in Mainila it is ready.

At the government of the USSR (if it will be necessary at Stalin) was more opportunities for maneuver, than at supporters of idea «Great Finland from Baltic up to Ural».
In 1939 supporters of the world revolution had no any influence on a policy of the USSR as the part from them has gone in other the world, and friend a part mastered infinite open spaces of Siberia and Far North.
Soviet Union did not carry out general mobilization and has not been rigidly connected by time frameworks.
Not poorly important and that Stalin, as is known, was the supporter of the peace decision of a question at issue with Finland.
Anne G, wrote:
Yuri wrote: What for Finns gave a false picture of events in Mainila?
You must at first prove that it was false.
I should nothing – as Finns it have proved (see the circuit earlier).

Post Reply

Return to “Winter War & Continuation War”