No, they got back what they lost because they stopped at the original border. They agreed to Soviet terms.
They lost. They just made the Soviets bleed so much that they stopped because Stalin was already thinking of attacking the west in 1942.
Which army was proportionally the most lethal in World War II?
- Thread starter Litwin
- Start date
They lost. They just made the Soviets bleed so much that they stopped because Stalin was already thinking of attacking the west in 1942.
Mushroom
Gold Member
"Soviet Terms"? Really? "Soviet Terms", when in the hell was that? They regained their old border in freaking 1941, then sat there until 1944. As usual, you are once again completely ignoring real history and trying to create your own fantasy history.
And Stalin was not intending on attacking the West in 1942. Their military was still in shambles from the Great Purge, and most of the Generals that would win the war were still sitting in Siberia in gulags.
Are you honestly attempting to re-write Soviet History by inserting NSDAP propaganda? You really do have no idea what you are talking about, that is painfully obvious.
I'm not ignoring anything. They lost territory in the Soviet invasion.
They LOST. They agreed to the Soviet terms.
In the continuation war, they regained their lost territory. Because they didn't advance beyond their original border, and agreed to new Soviet terms, they were allowed to remain free.
This is well known.
Deadstick
Platinum Member
SO whativan? , your communist empire was the N1 HITLER´S ALLY FOR AGES !
View attachment 1148495
they wanted to do it again , in 1943.
Nazi-Soviet pact sealed the fate of several countries
The new allies agreed to carve up Europe, splitting Poland down the middle.www.fraserinstitute.org
Nothing surprising, han-China will eventually go with force against Moscow empire in Far East (Outer Manchuria). Aim would be primarily lake Baikal, as drinkable water sources are one of biggest things that Han-China seeks.
ALWAYS Remember , commie Han-China’s claims to Moscow’s Far East (Outer Manchuria) are fact-based and indisputable.
Research conducted by Dzhakhangir Nadzhafov, a scholar at the Moscow Institute of General History, clearly shows that Stalin’s critics have the better argument, given that documents he published in Moscow’s “Voprosy...
So what? so the Finns were Nazis and the Stalin Ribbentrop pact was just that a non aggression pact, the Soviets were buying time before Barbarossa after Western Countries had refused to sign a dfence pact with the Soviets against the Nazis, but don't let facts get in the way Obergruppenfuehrer.
Litwin
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #85
No, Finns have never been “Nazis.” European, The Novgorod Republic, a beacon of early European republicanism, was genocided by Muscovite–Mongol oriental despot Ivan the Terrible. The Mongol - Moscow
Empire (ulus) —never "Russian", always imperial—has been the true fascist IMPERIALISTIC predator since its Mongol birth (read K. Marx). Pogroms. The Circassian Genocide. Stalin–Hitler’s pact. Kurapaty. GULAG. Bucha. Ivan Ilyin—the fascist prophet of Moscow imperialism. This is not a modern -state—it is a Mongol Jihadist IMPERIALISTIC machine. It lives by conquest, perishes by peace. Its history is not liberation, but colonization. Its ideology is not defense, but NON-STOP expansion . The real anti-fascists , ANTI-IMPERIALISTS resist the Moscow Empire. Always.
Litwin
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #86
The Bolshevik–Moscow Empire lost to the Finns. Fact. Its imperial strategy against Finland has been occupation and genocide of democratic Finnish nation . That’s why the Bolsheviks fabricated the so-called “Finnish–Karelian Soviet Republic”—a fake entity meant to erase Finnish sovereignty and justify annexation. But they failed. The Winter War exposed the myth of the Bolshevik Empire’s invincibility. The democratic Finnish state, rooted in national self-determination and European republicanism, survived and thrived. It is the clear winner. The Bolshevik genocidal, imperial project collapsed in the 1980s, and Finland today—NATO and EU member—is stronger than ever.
Karelo-Finnish Soviet Socialist Republic - Wikipedia
show ? highly recommended
Deadstick
Platinum Member
yes, we do , your communist stalin and your national - socialist hitler started WW2 as the allies , we all know it
You were saying.
mikegriffith1
Mike Griffith
Proportionally, I'd say the Finnish army was the most lethal, technically speaking, but that's partly because the Soviets chose to make frontal attacks on the Mannerheim Line and the Salpa Line, and because Soviet officers didn't care much about casualty rates.
Buckner repeated that folly when he chose to launch frontal attacks on the Shuri Line on Okinawa, instead of bypassing and surrounding it.
Buckner repeated that folly when he chose to launch frontal attacks on the Shuri Line on Okinawa, instead of bypassing and surrounding it.
Litwin
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #93
BS , COMMIE & MOSCOW PROPAGANDA.Chebrelien wanted to save peace in Europe; meanwhile, you commies & Bolsheviks wanted to conquer and colonize the world—together with your ally, National Socialist Hitler.
World revolution - Wikipedia
cartoon from 1939 :
Deadstick
Platinum Member
Did he? there is a theory he was not so much a appeaser as much as a collaborator, at that time there were some in Britain who wanted Hitler to attack the Soviet Union before he did they sold the Czechoslovaks down the river and allowed Hitler take take the Rhineland back it was only after Hitler invaded Poland they came to their senses, stick that in your pipe and smoke it Obergruppenfuehrer.
Chebrelien wanted to save peace in Europe; meanwhile, you commies & Bolsheviks wanted to conquer and colonize the world—together with your ally, National Socialist Hitler.
View attachment 1148731World revolution - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
cartoon from 1939 :
View attachment 1148727
Mushroom
Gold Member
Finlandization.
Failzero
Diamond Member
Finlandia ?
Mushroom
Gold Member
Finlandization. It is a real geopolitical term. The other was largely a fictional micro-nation.
Litwin
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #99
When have the Moscow
Khans (Tsars) ever cared about their slaves' casualty rates? You know that Moscow Khan Peter I built Moscow No. 2 deep inside the Finnish swamps. Do you know how many Moscow natural slaves, as well as Belarusian, Polish, and Ukrainian POWs, he killed in the process?St Petersburg: Paris of the North or City of Bones?
St Petersburg was built as monument to the might of Imperial Russia - and the glory of the Tsar whose name it bears. Now Peter the Great's 'Window on the West' plays host to this week's G8 summit - and his vision is complete at last
www.independent.co.uk
Similar threads
New Topics
-
Keeping ICE away from polling places a top priority for Democrats- Started by LeftofLeft
- Replies: 6
-
Trump's New Nuclear Nightmare in Iran - "This may be the worst planned war in history."- Started by C_Clayton_Jones
- Replies: 14
-
-
Make no mistake about it - the democrat party absolutely hates America.- Started by Locke11_21
- Replies: 14
-
