Two new movies being made about the finnish wars (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message

Nemesis -> Two new movies being made about the finnish wars (12/13/2002 2:52:32 PM)

I read it in the newspaper this morning that two new movies are being made about the Continuation War. First one is "Etulinjojen edessä" ("Front of the front-lines") that tells a story of the actions of a swedish-speaking unit. The other movie (the ALOT more interesting movie IMO!) continues where the first one ends (so it's a kinda of sequel, but both moves are indenepended from each ohter, so you don't have to see the other movie to understand the other) is called "Tali-Ihantala 1944" that tells the story of (yep, you guessed it right) Battle of Tali-Ihantala, where the finns stopped the massive Soviet attack that began at the same time as Overlord was taking place.

Woohoo!



rbrunsman -> (12/13/2002 10:53:08 PM)

Nemesis, I'm going to reveal my ignorance here, but could you give a brief account of Finland's role in WWII? I know Finland battled the Russians but AFAIK Finland wasn't Axis. Was Finland just repelling a land grab by Russia, but was otherwise neutral? Sorry for not knowing about your country's role.

Oh, and good news about the movies. I hope they are dubbed/subtitled into English.



Twotribes -> (12/13/2002 10:58:37 PM)

Winter 39/40 Soviet Union went to war with Finland in an attempt to grab land. By sheer numbers they got some but it was a bad showing for the Soviet army.

Finland joined Germany when she invaded the Soviet Union, as I understand it mostly to reclaim the land they lost and get some revenge.



Culiacan Mexico -> (12/14/2002 12:04:23 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by rbrunsman
[B]Nemesis, I'm going to reveal my ignorance here, but could you give a brief account of Finland's role in WWII? I know Finland battled the Russians but AFAIK Finland wasn't Axis. Was Finland just repelling a land grab by Russia, but was otherwise neutral? Sorry for not knowing about your country's role.

Oh, and good news about the movies. I hope they are dubbed/subtitled into English. [/B][/QUOTE]There was great concern in the Soviet Union that if they were attacked by the Germans, Leningrad would be difficult to defend. These concerns were take to the government and people of Finland and it was hoped that as small amount of Finnish territory north of Leningrad would be exchange a much larger chunk of Soviet territory; this would allow the Leningrad to be supplied by rail if the Nazis attacked. The Finnish Cabinet was afraid to step out in front of its own Parliament. Instead, Prime Minister Cajander willingly wrecked the negotiations and his response was:

At 14.45 on November 26, 1939, artillery shells began to fall on Mainila, near the border on the Karelian isthmus. At 19.30 the Finnish representative in Moscow was confronted with Finland attacks and the Soviets demanded a halt to all aggression, which was quickly met with a Finnish denial of any involvement.

On November 27, 1939, the Soviet Foreign Minister (Molotov), announced to the Finnish Ambassador that the Soviet Union no longer considered itself bound by the non-aggression pact, and that due to the continuing hostile actions of Finland it was unable to maintain diplomatic ties.

Nemesis, isn’t this how it all got started? ;)



dpstafford -> (12/14/2002 12:16:48 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Twotribes
[B]Finland joined Germany when she invaded the Soviet Union, as I understand it mostly to reclaim the land they lost and get some revenge. [/B][/QUOTE]
I have been wondering for awhile now, how did Finland manage to avoid allied or Soviet occupation at the end of the war? Anybody know??



Nemesis -> (12/14/2002 12:20:12 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Culiacan Mexico
[B]Nemesis, isn’t this how it all got started? ;) [/B][/QUOTE]

Sounds about right :). In shorter sentences:

The Winter War: Soviets wanted land. Finland didn't want to give any land. Soviets faked a finnish attack against Soviet forces (They finally admiited in 1990s that Soviet Union really started the war), Finland denied everything. Soviets attacked without declaration of war. 105 days and 200.000 dead russians later Finland had to give up fighting.

The Continuation War: In exchange of aid (both civilian and military) Finland agrees to let german troops in to the country (they really didn't have any choice. Soviets to the east, Germans everywhere else.). As the Barbadossa began, the german troops in Finland attacked SU, finnish forces did not attack. SU protested, and then proceeded to bomb finnish cities (again without declaration of war). Finland considered that a war has broken out between Finland and SU, and proceeded to attack SU, conquering the land lost during the Winter War + additional areas in eastern Karelia. The lines then stabilized for several years. In 1994 (simultaneously with Overlord) SU attacked Finland with 40 divisions (if I remember correctly). They pushed the finns back, but they were stopped in the battle of Tali-Ihantala.

The Lapland War: As part of the peace between SU and Finland, finns had to drive the german troops in norhern Finland (Lapland) out of the country. At first, it was peaceful with finns advancing and germans withdrawing in front of them. But SU demanded it to be faster, so finns had to attack. THey drove the german troops out of the country. Germans used scorched-earth tactic as they withdrew, destroying large areas of Lapland in the process.

That's about it :)



Nemesis -> (12/14/2002 12:21:55 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by dpstafford
[B]I have been wondering for awhile now, how did Finland manage to avoid allied or Soviet occupation at the end of the war? Anybody know?? [/B][/QUOTE]

SU tried to occupy entire Finland with their massive attack. But that attack was stopped in Tali-Ihantala. It's not like they didn't try to invade Finland, they simply failed at it :)



dpstafford -> (12/14/2002 12:28:56 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Nemesis
[B]SU tried to occupy entire Finland with their massive attack. But that attack was stopped in Tali-Ihantala. It's not like they didn't try to invade Finland, they simply failed at it :) [/B][/QUOTE]
This really doesn't answer the question, but your other post may have. So, the Soviets and Finns signed an armistice or seperate peace before the final German surrender?



Nemesis -> (12/14/2002 12:36:25 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by dpstafford
[B]This really doesn't answer the question, but your other post may have. So, the Soviets and Finns signed an armistice or seperate peace before the final German surrender? [/B][/QUOTE]

Yep. SU did plan to occupy entire Finland. And to do that, they attacked with 40 divisions (not 100% sure about tne number of divisions). But that attack was stopped. Finland wanted to exit the war and SU needed the troops to fight Germany, so they made armistice. But the original plan of SU was to invade entire Finland. They failed at it, so they took the next best option: separate peace with Finland, no occupation.

EDIT: as it happens, Finland is the only country who was allied with Germany and was NOT occupied after the war. But we payed heavy price for that.



rbrunsman -> (12/14/2002 6:59:40 AM)

That discussion was very enlightening. Thanks for the history lesson guys.



msaario -> (12/15/2002 4:30:45 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Nemesis
[B]

Yep. SU did plan to occupy entire Finland. And to do that, they attacked with 40 divisions (not 100% sure about tne number of divisions). But that attack was stopped. Finland wanted to exit the war and SU needed the troops to fight Germany, so they made armistice. But the original plan of SU was to invade entire Finland. They failed at it, so they took the next best option: separate peace with Finland, no occupation.

EDIT: as it happens, Finland is the only country who was allied with Germany and was NOT occupied after the war. But we payed heavy price for that. [/B][/QUOTE]

We had a lenghty discussion about this during last summer in that Maus thread (with mr Suvorov, if someone remembers). I tried to tell people (among other things) that the russians were aiming at taking all of Finland and ***failed***, but was - well - rejected from that viewpoint... All this stuff about losing or not losing the war if someone remembers? I am not going to dig up the thread, as it was like 15 pages long and really could care less what people think about it. BTW, there is a two-part interactive DVD production under development about the Winter (39-40) and Continuation (41-44) War.

Nice to see someone agrees with me.

--Mikko



Belaja smert -> (12/15/2002 4:35:37 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by msaario
[B]

We had a lenghty discussion about this during last summer in that Maus thread (with mr Suvorov, if someone remembers). I tried to tell people (among other things) that the russians were aiming at taking all of Finland and ***failed***, but was - well - rejected from that viewpoint... All this stuff about losing or not losing the war if someone remembers? I am not going to dig up the thread, as it was like 15 pages long and really could care less what people think about it. BTW, there is a two-part interactive DVD production under development about the Winter (39-40) and Continuation (41-44) War.

Nice to see someone agrees with me.

--Mikko [/B][/QUOTE]

Now that was some thread :D And the arguing :p

On topic: Is there some kind of publicly presented schedule for the release of these two movies? 2003? 2004?



Nemesis -> (12/15/2002 5:58:14 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by msaario [B] We had a lenghty discussion about this during last summer in that Maus thread (with mr Suvorov, if someone remembers). I tried to tell people (among other things) that the russians were aiming at taking all of Finland and ***failed***, but was - well - rejected from that viewpoint...[/B][/QUOTE] Suvorov? Russian? That would explain his "viewpoint" (which is incorrect. Soviet attack was stopped fair and square). I wasn't here then, there has been longish pauses in my presence to these forums.



Nemesis -> (12/15/2002 5:59:27 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Belaja smert [B]Now that was some thread :D And the arguing :p On topic: Is there some kind of publicly presented schedule for the release of these two movies? 2003? 2004? [/B][/QUOTE] If I remember correctly, first movie is released Q1 2004, the second movie one year later.



msaario -> (12/15/2002 7:37:14 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Nemesis
[B]

Suvorov? Russian? That would explain his "viewpoint" (which is incorrect. Soviet attack was stopped fair and square). I wasn't here then, there has been longish pauses in my presence to these forums. [/B][/QUOTE]

Actually, Suv was arguing with (and insulting) just about every forum member :) about the armor thickness of Russian tanks etc. He - luckily - did not fulfil his promise of starting a thread about the Finnish wars. Phew!

Who remembers the RADIOS!?

--Mikko



Nemesis -> (12/15/2002 8:07:58 AM)

I just read that entire thread... Jesus Christ :eek:! As to the Finland losing-argument... I think this explains it pretty well: http://www.kaiku.com/notcapitulate.html "Finland was on the losing side of the war, but won the peace."



ananias -> (12/15/2002 7:43:44 PM)

I'm practically wetting my pants here. I hope they make them a little bit more realistic than "Rukajärven Tie" was.



Culiacan Mexico -> (12/15/2002 9:26:08 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Nemesis
[B]I just read that entire thread... Jesus Christ :eek:!
As to the Finland losing-argument... I think this explains it pretty well:

http://www.kaiku.com/notcapitulate.html

"Finland was on the losing side of the war, but won the peace." [/B][/QUOTE]It is hard to argue that Finland wasn't on the losing side of the war, but winning the peace...:) Finland failed to achieve any of their goals, while the Soviets achieved some/many. I would call it a draw to minor Finnish loss, which isn't that bad considering the odds and circumstances.



Nemesis -> (12/15/2002 9:46:37 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Culiacan Mexico [B]It is hard to argue that Finland wasn't on the losing side of the war, but winning the peace...:) Finland failed to achieve any of their goals, while the Soviets achieved some/many. I would call it a draw to minor Finnish loss, which isn't that bad considering the odds and circumstances. [/B][/QUOTE]

Looking at history, I'd say that Finland did achieve it's promary goals (safety of the nation). After all, of all the countries that were allied with Germany, Finland was the only one not to be occupied. And we did not suffer the same fate as the Baltic-countries did. Baltics were part of "Soviet sphere of influence", just like Finland was. Baltics were annexed, Finland was not.

Of course, Finland did not achieve it's goal of recapturing the land lost in Winter War, but the nation endured, attacking army was stopped fair and square. The Finnish army was undefeated. Pushed back? Yes. Defeated? No. And besides, SU didn't achieve it's goals either.

Of Finland vs. SU, who came first? SU of course. Anyone who says otherwise is fooling himself. That said, I wouldn't say that Finland was defeated. Finland wanted to end the war, SU wanted to end the war. Of course, when two countries are at war, one of them will have the upper hand when the war ends. In this case, SU had the upper hand. But that does not mean that Finland was defeated. I think it was best said in "The Unknown Solider":

"The Union of Soviet Socialistic Republics came in first, but small Finland came in as a good #2".



Culiacan Mexico -> (12/15/2002 11:57:12 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Nemesis
[B]...but small Finland came in as a good #2". [/B][/QUOTE]Absolutely.



Bernard -> (12/22/2002 6:11:59 AM)

bout Finland, what ws exactly the link between Narvik and Finland ?
I think there was a general plan of sending troops to Finland via Norway, or am i totally out of my mind ?
of course lots of problems (like : how to send the troops, hwo many, how to deal wit russians etc).



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.265625