Military Review

Soviet-Finnish war: what historians do not notice

70
Soviet-Finnish war: what historians do not notice

Finnish skiers in position. Photo from wikimedia.org


It’s better to start right away with the outcome of the war - what did the USSR get and what did Finland get? The Soviet Union received everything that the Finnish government asked before the war - the state border and the Hanko peninsula, which later became a symbol of Russian military prowess, was removed from Leningrad. And the Finns got a military catastrophe and almost entered the USSR as a union republic. But not logged. That once again refutes the liberal-paranoid theory that Stalin wanted to take over the whole world.

If you would, then why not join Finland, which in March 1940, was on the verge of defeat? Even in a half-step, since by that time the number of the Red Army involved in the war against the Finns had grown from 425 000 people to 760 000, and the Finns, with a broken Mannerheim line, could barely scrape 250 000 people. At the same time, Stalin could increase the size of the army to infinity, and Mannerheim rushed about like a hyena in a cage, not knowing how to close the collapsed front.


Dot Ink5 on the line Mannerheim. Photo One half 3544 from wikimedia.org

Stalin simply had to let the war go on for at least another month, and Helsinki would become the capital of the union republic. But 12 March 1940 was put an end to the war. The USSR received all that it wanted, but Finland remained stupid. Before the war, she was offered compensation in the form of 5529 square meters. kilometers of Karelia, but the hot Finnish negotiators obstinate and received in March 1940 of a five-minute defeat.

By the way, is it even possible to consider the Soviet-Finnish war as a war? In the USSR, mobilization was not announced, the war was only 105 days, the Leningrad Military District was deployed to the North-Western Front only in January 1940, and the initial people who participated in the 425 battles 000 were not even the entire Leningrad Military District.

For comparison: the Northern Front, which entered the war on June 24, 1941, already had three armies and six corps in its composition, including one aviation. And during the war years, Leningrad alone gave the front more than 100 militias, not counting the assigned reserve.

Against this backdrop, a three-month Soviet-Finnish war looks like not the largest military operation. Again, for comparison, the Stalingrad battle involved half a million people, Operation Bagration - 1,7 million, and more than 2,3 million people were involved in finishing the Nazi reptile in Berlin.

So in Finland, the Soviet Union fought, figuratively speaking, with the left heel. Even a part of it. All this once again proves that the USSR was not originally intended to occupy Finland and turn it into a Union Republic.

At the talks, Stalin made it very clear what he wants: “We cannot move Leningrad, so we will have to move the border.” If the Finns had agreed, they would have received twice the territory and, which is very likely, in World War II they would have remained a neutral country.

But they decided to fight. Sincerely hoping for the help of the Anglo-French "partners" who traditionally threw the Finns. As the Poles, the Belgians, the Dutch, the Norwegians, the Greeks, and all the others threw.

The British, at the end, even threw the French (Operation Catapult, July 1940 of the year), once again giving Hitler a reason to laugh at transcendent Anglo-Saxon cunning. By the way, during the Second World War, the British were thrown twice by the French; let us remember, on whose money French Syria “rose up” in 1945.

Is it any wonder that the British fighters "Hurricane" with the Finnish swastikas eventually ended up not in Finland, but in the USSR? What our pilots were very indignant about, scolding and coloring the fighters, and the unfinished British plane itself. And the Finns and in December 1939, and in January, and in February, 1940, everyone was waiting and waiting for the promised help.

Similarly, Polish fools were waiting for her in September, 1939, before the Wehrmacht came out to Brest-Litovsk. Likewise, the French were waiting for her from 1940 to 1944, looking into the empty Atlantic, where the Anglo-American fleet could not be seen. Still, it is not for nothing that it is said that it is very bad to have an Anglo-Saxon enemy, but even worse, a friend. Itself is more expensive and will take on a triple price.

And while Mannerheim was asking the "partners" where the promised expeditionary corps was, the Red Army, albeit hard, cut through the defensive line named after this man to whom the liberals tried to hang a memorial plaque in St. Petersburg.

Yes, the losses were great, at the initial stage the command was ugly, which is only the death of the 54 and 163 of the Soviet divisions. But the bitter lessons were quickly taken into account, and in February the Finnish troops themselves almost did not get surrounded. And on March 7, subdued Finnish greyhound diplomats came running to Moscow humbly asking for peace.

Liberal historians still consider the victory of the Red Army in the Pyrrhic war, citing as an example the number of losses of the parties. Very touching care for people, but it would be better if they took care of all those who were killed, died of hopelessness, despair, poverty, or were not born during the social experiment on the country that we have seen since the accession of the “best German” M. Gorbachev and the end and the edge of which is not yet visible.


The group of Red Army with the captured flag of Finland. Photo Heikin from wikimedia.org

Unlike the fighters of the Red Army who died in Finland, all these people could not defend themselves, could not fight back the “reformers”, but they don’t remember anything about them. Instead, citing the following figures: 126 thousand killed by the USSR and 26 thousand from Finland.

True, one Russian “expert” with a non-Russian surname added up to 400 000 only those killed on our side, but after the revelations of a Vermont prophet about the loss of the army during the years of the Great Patriotic War, there’s nothing to be surprised at. All these pseudo-hacks just want to give a calculator, so that they calculate daily losses and at least try to understand how well their numbers are justified.

Perhaps someone will disagree, but the outcome of the Soviet-Finnish war was for the USSR that it was a strategic plus. Of course, this conflict was closely watched. Especially in Germany, where the Fuhrer, with the cretinism characteristic of his donkey, made no less a donkey's conclusion: the USSR is a colossus with feet of clay. Aloizych didn’t even know that in his phrase he denied himself, but from a cretin what is the demand?

For the idiocy of the Fuhrer, wehrmacht soldiers, who did not want to fight, had to pay - according to one young "historian" - in the snow-white fields near Moscow, then "in the so-called" Stalingrad cauldron, and then in Berlin, where the millionth group "did not want to fight" in the shortest possible time, the "colossus on clay feet" turned into fertilizer and put an end to the war. But it was all clear in March 1940 of the year.

The Red Army has shown that it can solve the most serious tasks, that it learns quickly and that it is headed by an anecdotal and dry-breathing field marshal from Autumn Street, and a man who could not have liked the Liberals favorite Mannerheim, Roosevelt, or Churchill , neither Hitler, and indeed no one on that historical segment.

That was what was to be seen on the basis of the Soviet-Finnish war. Can, история human civilization would have gone a completely different way. Unfortunately, she does not know the subjunctive mood ...
Author:
Originator:
http://www.km.ru/science-tech/2017/11/30/istoriya-sssr/815337-sovetsko-finskaya-voina-chto-ne-zamechayut-istoriki
70 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. The comment was deleted.
    1. xetai9977
      xetai9977 2 December 2017 09: 55 New
      +6
      What does “true patriot” mean? A claimant such as "Tear NATO." “Drive the USA” “America is falling apart” and other nonsense that has nothing to do with reality? The Soviets lost more than 100 thousand only killed, about 6 times more Finns, with overwhelming superiority in people and technology. Showing complete lack of talent. “Victory” turned out to be quite pyrrhic, clearly demonstrating the flagrant mediocrity of the Soviet command. The Finns were in fact overwhelmed with corpses, and even the occupation of Helsinki did not guarantee the capitulation of the Finns. Essentially "victory" tortured. These shots are unlikely to be in textbooks in the USSR. The defeated Soviet column. January 1940
      1. Pereira
        Pereira 2 December 2017 10: 37 New
        18
        Regarding the Pyrrhic victory. King Pierre won the battle, but lost the war. And we won the war. So the comparison is incorrect, as it implies a substitution of concepts ..
        As for the phrase "Filled with corpses," this is one of the markers. Man pronouncing the phrase clearly positions himself as two percent.
        But, of course, all of the above applies only to those who have the Soviet flag. So do not take it personally.
        1. BecmepH
          BecmepH 5 December 2017 13: 32 New
          0
          Quote: Pereira
          But, of course, all of the above applies only to those who have the Soviet flag.

          I completely agree with you, even though I have the USSR flag. And if this is my homeland! Abdicate? I am for the USSR and for Russia! Unfortunately, this happens.
          Concerning
          Quote: Pereira
          The Soviets lost more than 100 thousand only killed, about 6 times more Finns,

          it’s the basics of military art in terms of “defensive” and “offensive” battles. Check out the cutest xetai9977
          Of course, advancing losses amounted to 4,8 (and not 6) times. But, we must take into account and pay tribute to the Finnish defenses.
          1. long in stock.
            long in stock. 5 December 2017 17: 24 New
            0
            listen to them more ... they will tell you something different. Engle, E. Paanenen L. in the book "Soviet-Finnish War. Breakthrough of the Mannerheim Line 1939 - 1940". with reference to Nikita Khrushchev give the following data:

            "Of the total number of 1,5 million people sent to fight in Finland, the USSR lost 1 million people (according to Khrushchev). The Russians lost about 1000 aircraft, 2300 tanks and armored vehicles, as well as a huge amount of various military equipment ... "a million Karl !!! and now let's see what foreign publications write in the book" Results of the Second World War. Conclusions of the vanquished ”Professor Helmut Aritz calculates the population of Finland in 1938 as 3 million 697 thousand people. The irretrievable loss of 25 thousand people does not constitute a threat to the nation’s gene pool. with the armed forces numbering at that time about 300 people, losses of less than 000 percent are not critical at all .. but what’s interesting, according to Finnish casualties from 10 - 1941 are designated as 1945 thousand 58 people. Losses in the war of 715 - 1939 - 1940 thousand 25 people. In total 904 thousand 84 people. But the Finnish website http://kronos.narc.fi/menehtyneet/ collected data on 619 thousand Finns who died during the period 95 - 1939 years ... that the algebra does not converge ... someone here is lying and cool .... and only the army losses were counted, the losses of militarized organizations are not included there .. I will quote the Finnish commander in chief Mannerheim:
            “It happened that the Russians in dense battles in early December fought with songs - and even holding hands - into the Finnish minefields, ignoring the explosions and the precise fire of the defenders.” well ... with such statements, you can write a million, she’ll endure the paper .. and even more so, it’s not for an citizen of Iserbadzhan to make such a fuss ... they’re also those fighters ... 10 million against 3 ... as a result, shameful losing ... karabakh clearly showed ...
          2. Alexander Lashkul
            Alexander Lashkul 8 December 2017 19: 12 New
            0
            Do you recall the loss ratio under Verdun? Or in other World War I breakthrough operations? You can recall the ratio of losses during the Brusilovsky breakthrough. So your basics are extremely controversial. Maybe you just mixed up that the striker should create a three-fold advantage in the breakout area?
      2. The comment was deleted.
        1. Maki Avellevich
          Maki Avellevich 6 December 2017 20: 38 New
          0
          Quote: Hunter
          Quote: xetai9977
          What does “true patriot” mean?
          This is a topic for a long conversation.


          the conversation is quite short

          a patriot can be called a person who is and feels himself a member of a tribe / society / people. sees this as a benefit to himself and has the following individual goals from it.
      3. BecmepH
        BecmepH 5 December 2017 13: 36 New
        0
        xetai9977 learn math and learn the basics of martial art, as noted below
      4. horhe48
        horhe48 6 December 2017 14: 15 New
        0
        Write nonsense. The losers fill the enemy with corpses., But not the winners. The only thing that causes annoyance is that the matter was not brought to an end. If the fighting continued for another month, then the Chukhons lost an order of magnitude more. Oborona relying on concrete pillboxes was broken through, the troops entered the operational space. Then there would be a "beating of infants."
    2. Pereira
      Pereira 2 December 2017 10: 31 New
      +2
      all the time,


      I agree, absolutely groundless liberal cry. Do not die. When I see another double, I always ask myself, is the original alive? After all, we lived 5 years under the double of Yeltsin and nothing survived.
    3. Usher
      Usher 5 December 2017 20: 02 New
      0
      And what about Putin?
  2. tasha
    tasha 2 December 2017 07: 29 New
    +5
    The article did not like.
    Well, at least not in the History category.
    1. Reserve officer
      Reserve officer 2 December 2017 14: 32 New
      +5
      Some kind of too full article. There are many epithets, for a serious analysis this is unacceptable.
      What is written correctly - the USSR received what it wanted. What did Finland propose to do peacefully, and even as an exchange of territories.
      There is one more important point - the experience of large-scale military operations. Which showed what urgent measures needed to be taken before the impending war.
      But there is a very big minus. The victory was militarily far from brilliant and dealt a blow to the authority of the Red Army. Analyzing the course of the Soviet-Finnish war, the German General Staff in a report to Hitler made the following conclusion: "In Finland, the Russians did not advance at all. The troops are poorly guided and even worse armed. The Soviet masses can not resist a professional army with skillful command."
      The conclusion of the German command was unequivocal - the Red Army was not ready for war, the USSR - a colossus with feet of clay. The author of the article drew attention to this absolutely correctly. This was already a strategic mistake of Germany. Later, at the Wolfschants headquarters on 12 on April 1942, Hitler declared:
      - "The Russians ... thoroughly hid everything that was somehow connected with their military power. The whole war with Finland in the 1940 year ... is nothing more than a grand disinformation campaign, because Russia had at one time weapons that made it, along with Germany and Japan, a world power. "
      He admitted that analyzing the results of the "winter war", he was mistaken in assessing the potential and strength of the Red Army. Nevertheless, this "winter war", in fact, prompted Germany to attack the USSR in 1941.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. The comment was deleted.
  3. Per se.
    Per se. 2 December 2017 10: 38 New
    +5
    Perhaps the history of human civilization would have gone a completely different way. Unfortunately, she does not know the subjunctive mood ...
    Any analysis of events can not do without this very "subjunctive mood", and without the correct conclusions, without analysis, and this very "history will not teach anything." Personally, I did not like the article, if you think about it, rather, another hurray-patriotic chatter. Why didn't they include Finland in the USSR, why at least they did not achieve such conditions as the winners, that Finland would remain neutral to the USSR, and not fight on Hitler's side? What prevented? Why was it necessary to flirt with Hitler, who was brought to power with only one purpose, to create an anti-USSR, to start a war that allowed the Anglo-Saxons to earn extra money, get out of depression and crisis ... Hitler had a master, and this master did not allow Adik to finish off British under Dunkirk, seize Britain. It may well be that the Führer lived out his life safely somewhere in South America, having fulfilled his mission to the world master of capitalism. To realize that the perception of the German workers' national-socialist party by a certain “brother” with whom it was possible to be friends against England, France and the USA, “hat Europe”, the bourgeoisie, was a global mistake, that's what needs to be done, without any reverence about " subjunctive moods. " Nazi Germany, the antipode of the USSR, this led to the natural attack of Hitler. Hoping that the enemy is deaf, blind and bad, that Hitler will wait for our rearmament, will not respect himself, especially when orders are “not to give in to provocations” and stupid tricks about the falsehood of rumors about the German attack ... As for the war with By Finland, it was wiser to completely capture Finland, returning the territories belonging to the Russian Empire, or impose conditions on the Finns under which they would become a protectorate or would not be able to fight against the USSR in the future.
  4. faiver
    faiver 2 December 2017 11: 34 New
    +3
    I read the article, but still could not find the answer to the question - so what do historians not notice?
    1. Usher
      Usher 5 December 2017 20: 04 New
      0
      The fact that the USSR won the war.
  5. Cartalon
    Cartalon 2 December 2017 13: 09 New
    +1
    Helsinki in a month, spring - thaw - thaw, did not hear.
    1. Anyone
      Anyone 2 December 2017 14: 45 New
      +1
      Are you kidding? This is too complicated for the author of the article.
  6. DrVintorez
    DrVintorez 2 December 2017 14: 13 New
    +1
    Personally, I consider the Finnish war a very serious victory of the Red Army, but the author contradicts himself: he calls the war only a “military operation”, but he says that Hitler should have drawn conclusions from this. Well, what are the strategic conclusions from the "military operation"? you need to be more consistent.
    By the way, the same rezun / suvorov is very well described about the Finnish war. his opinion is certainly controversial, but there is something to think about in any case.
    1. sxfRipper
      sxfRipper 5 December 2017 18: 32 New
      0
      Even better - at Mark Solonin. I recommend it - June 25th. Stupidity or aggression.
    2. serge siberian
      serge siberian 5 December 2017 19: 11 New
      0
      Rezuna / Suvorova Authority is not! Choose shoes, the owner. But never, homeland.
      He worked for the owner. He worked out money. And point.
    3. Usher
      Usher 5 December 2017 20: 04 New
      0
      burn the cutter.
  7. Cop
    Cop 2 December 2017 14: 32 New
    +5
    In the USSR, mobilization was not announced.

    Not true, a partial mobilization was carried out in the LVO.
    ...... the Soviet Union did not initially set a goal to occupy Finland and turn it into a union republic.

    And why then created the government of Kuusinen and created the so-called. Suomen kansanvaltainen tasavalta?
    And while Mannerheim asked the "partners" where is the promised expeditionary force ......

    And that it can be so easily and quickly formed and transferred to the place of hostilities?
    The Red Army has shown that it can solve the most serious tasks, that it learns quickly and that it is headed by an anecdotal and dry-breathing field marshal from Autumn Street, and a man who could not have liked the Liberals favorite Mannerheim, Roosevelt, or Churchill , neither Hitler, and indeed no one on that historical segment.

    This war just showed that the Red Army can not solve the most serious tasks, otherwise there would be no such losses .... And the man who no one was good at at that stretch of time is the main culprit of the disasters of 1941-42. The utter stupidity of the command of the Red Army lies in a frontal strike along the Mannerheim line. Hitler’s generals turned out to be much smarter in such matters ....
    Perhaps the history of human civilization would have gone a completely different way. Unfortunately, she does not know the subjunctive mood ...

    Why doesn't he know? He knows. In 1917, the “reds” turned white and our parents told us how they lived with them. And in 1993 the “whites” won and now we already know how we lived with them. You author do not want to compare that life and this?
    1. DrVintorez
      DrVintorez 2 December 2017 20: 42 New
      +2
      Quote: Cop
      And that it can be so easily and quickly formed and transferred to the place of hostilities?

      Those. Do you agree that Mannerheim requested an expeditionary military?
      Quote: Cop
      This war just showed that the Red Army cannot solve the most serious tasks, otherwise there would be no such losses ...

      How so? The Red Army solved the tasks, but was not able to solve them? I can’t understand how the head is square after such statements do not become.
      1. Cop
        Cop 3 December 2017 09: 46 New
        +2
        Those. Do you agree that Mannerheim requested an expeditionary military?

        When Comrade Koba swung an armchair under the pop-seat in the fall of 41, he did not request a lease from the Allies - he demanded.
        How so? The Red Army solved the tasks, but was not able to solve them? I can not understand......

        Remember the song that "us Suomi-beauty" .....? The strategic goal of the "winter war" for the USSR was the "Sovietization" of all of Finland. But this problem has not been solved. And the growth of territories is a tactical success. You should at least read smart books or something. The book "Winter War" describes how the Red Army was to fight. But Soviet generals preferred the charter of the party, rather than the works of Clausewitz .......
        1. long in stock.
          long in stock. 3 December 2017 23: 50 New
          +3
          nonsense would have wanted-did. like by the way and at 44. who would have stopped and would have been against? but it didn’t happen. because he probably learned the lessons of the Versailles world and made Finland a friendly country and not an embittered vanquished. And the Finns understood this and got considerable profit from it. so read smart books ..
          1. Cop
            Cop 4 December 2017 09: 22 New
            +1
            Quote: long in stock.
            nonsense would have wanted-did. like by the way and at 44. who would have stopped and would have been against? but it didn’t happen. because he probably learned the lessons of the Versailles world and made Finland a friendly country and not an embittered vanquished. And the Finns understood this and got considerable profit from it. so read smart books ..

            I can agree with this, probably in the end I could. And then what, guerrilla warfare? And the millionth occupation corps? So in this case, the new Entente might not have developed ... Unlike you, Comrade Koba understood this? And about friendliness ...... I once was at a creative evening of one of our emigrant artist. On it, he talked about life in the country. In particular, he said that in the 50s on the streets of Helsinki for Russian speech could be received in the face. These are the friendly feelings the Finnish proletariat had towards the Soviet workers and peasants. What kind of "smart" books do you read, what do you draw such conclusions? Watch documentaries, the Soviet "Winter War" and the Finnish "Talvi sota" and compare.
            1. long in stock.
              long in stock. 4 December 2017 09: 34 New
              0
              I watched all this. and read. and even read their winter war-the truth in a lousy translation ... you tell yourself, in 50 g could you hear Russian speech in Helsinki? it's a duck .. don’t believe the fools. I think for Finnish speech in the area formerly occupied by these Finns during the war could also have cleared a mug ... like for German or Romanian .. now about the guerrilla war. Could it be? but a successful guerrilla war is not possible without state support, see examples all over the world .. Antanta has developed with the recognition of the Soviet sphere of influence. I don’t think that Finland was more valuable than Poland, for example .. 44 Koba understood a lot of things and could ...
              1. Cop
                Cop 4 December 2017 11: 52 New
                +1
                Yes, you didn’t come to work ..... So, why then so hack it?
                Quote: long in stock.
                I watched all this. and read. and even read their winter war, the truth is in a lousy translation ...

                Those. you want to say that their multi-volume entitled "Talvi Sota" is translated into Russian? Give a link, I will check how lousy the copy is.
                you tell yourself, in 50 g could you hear Russian speech in Helsinki?

                And what do you think, how many Russians are left in Finland after October 17th. And where did the Kronstatters go after the well-known events? And the army of Yudenich, where did it end up?
                з
                .a Finnish speech in the area formerly occupied by these Finns during the war could also have cleared a mug ... like for German or Romanian.

                Of course they could. Only it was not I who spoke of the "friendship" of the Soviet workers and peasants and the "punasuomalaiset".
                successful guerrilla warfare is not possible without state support - see examples around the world.

                Partisan war is possible only with the support of the people. Most of the partisan detachments in the same Belarus fought without any connection with the mainland. But in the neighboring Baltic states there was no guerrilla war, because the people did not support it there and so on. Comrade Kovpak spoke well of this in his book From Putivl to the Carpathians. Read it for yourself.
                Finland was more valuable than Poland, for example ..

                Poland was more valuable. For this reason, Comrade Koba did not hang Marshal Mannerheim, but reconciled with him, because he well understood that there were four fronts deployed against the Finns and the present. "Lapland", and having about one and a half million people in its composition, he needs him once in Poland.
                to 44 Koba understood a lot of things and could ..
                .

                Maybe he understood, but he couldn’t, the USSR had too many casualties at that time.
                1. long in stock.
                  long in stock. 4 December 2017 16: 20 New
                  +1
                  there is no multivolume. from purely Finnish books, lauri paananen, the Soviet-Finnish war. the translator would have pulled out a tongue ... how many Russians remained after 1917? I think a little ... because the Finns did a good job killing precisely the Russians. Not the Reds, but in general the Russians. Yudenich planned to collect 10-15 thousand maximum. And he couldn’t. In Belarus, while the partisans had no connection with the big land, it’s not too shaky things went, read memoirs. but when radio communications and airfields began to operate, then they turned around. The support of the people would not be able to provide weapons and ammunition. No way and if there would be support or not, my grandmother said in two. Did you hear about the deserters from the Finnish army? after all, there were a lot of them .. the truth is the Finns keep silent about this, the topic is too inconvenient ... and yes, there were even more of them in the same Baltic. especially in Lithuania. well, where did you get about 1.5 million from? from Finnish sources? in vain do you believe ... 450 are the Karelian and Leningrad fronts combined — where is at least a million more? There were no more fronts against the Finns. Where else 000? Finns and Germans, about 2 thousand. And yes, big losses of the USSR prevented Stalin's son-in-law for himself from all of eastern Europe and the balkans .. in the case of the Finns, banal pragmatism. Finnish territory could not serve as a springboard for large-scale invasion. The terrain is too inconvenient for large masses of troops. Therefore, it is more profitable to have it neutral than occupy.
                2. long in stock.
                  long in stock. 4 December 2017 16: 24 New
                  0
                  Yes, you didn’t come to work ..... So, why then so hack it? and this is what you are doing? you set out to pay me a salary? in vain .. is this you can tell your husband but not a stranger.
          2. Alexander Lashkul
            Alexander Lashkul 8 December 2017 19: 16 New
            0
            In the 44th Karelian offensive stalled a lot. And troops were required in other directions. So, most likely they decided, and to hell with her.
      2. Cop
        Cop 3 December 2017 10: 07 New
        +1
        Those. do you agree that mannerheim requested expeditionary military

        When Comrade Koba swung an armchair under the pop-seat in the fall of 41, he did not request a lease from the Allies - he demanded.
        How so? The Red Army solved the tasks, but was not able to solve them? I can’t understand how the head is square after such statements do not become.

        Remember the song "Take Us Suomi - Beauty" ..... The strategic goal of the "winter war" was the Sovietization of all of Finland. But she was not resolved. And the growth of territories is such a tactical success .....
    2. papas-57
      papas-57 3 December 2017 01: 26 New
      0
      “And while Mannerheim asked the“ partners ”where is the promised expeditionary force ......
      And that it can be so easily and quickly formed and transferred to the place of hostilities? ''
      Some who needed to shake their tongues less and not make impossible promises. You need to answer for the bazaar.
      1. Cop
        Cop 3 December 2017 09: 53 New
        +1
        Some who needed to shake their tongues less and not make impossible promises. You need to answer for the bazaar.

        Well, yes, well, yes, I remember the idle talk about "little blood and foreign territory" ...... And for the bazaar in the "Uman pit" and the "Kiev boiler" the boiler was answered, it’s a pity that they are not ......
        1. papas-57
          papas-57 4 December 2017 04: 12 New
          0
          '' Well, yes, yes, I remember the idle talk about "little blood and foreign territory" ...... '' For very smart and poorly reading people, I’ll explain that it was about the expeditionary force that England and France promised to send, ardent defenders all unjustly offended.
          1. Cop
            Cop 4 December 2017 09: 30 New
            +1
            Quote: papas-57
            '“Well, yes, yes, I remember the chatter about“ little blood and foreign territory ”......” “For very smart and poorly reading people, I’ll explain that it was about the expeditionary force that England and France promised to send, ardent defenders of all unjustly offended.

            So this is an example for you, so that you understand whose chatter of yoggling turned out to be ...... And the corps, it’s also voluntary. It cannot be formed so quickly. Unlike you, Comrade Koba understood this well. It is not possible to attack in Finland in the spring. Well, and there it is quite possible and the corps would begin to arrive. The Swedes and Norwegians sent their volunteers.
            1. your1970
              your1970 5 December 2017 19: 49 New
              0
              Quote: Cop
              It is not possible to attack in Finland in the spring.
              - Along the coast in Helsinki? that is, in winter it is possible in the snow to the waist, and in spring everything is a pipe ??
              If you proceed from your logic, Hitler would not have advanced a kilometer in the USSR, then there are no roads at all .. and there is a muddy season 5 months a year ... and winter 5
              1. Alexander Lashkul
                Alexander Lashkul 8 December 2017 19: 17 New
                0
                I confirm the pipe. Rasputitsa, in the conditions of rivers, swamps and lakes is MUCH more terrible than winter hostilities. Especially, given the small number of roads and bridges.
      2. Ivan Tartugai
        Ivan Tartugai 3 December 2017 17: 22 New
        0
        Quote: papas-57
        Someone had to shake their tongue less make impossible promises.

        Yes, and they were not going to, bobby, to fulfill promises and send the corps to help the Finns were not going to. And what is the answer to them to keep, that they have signed an agreement or something to help the corps. No, they didn’t sign it, and what claims can there be towards England? And the fact that the Finnish elite believed in oral promises is its problems, well, what to do, since they are so gullible.
        The British elite, if only to make the problems of Russia and preferably with the wrong hands. What they did with success, but they themselves remained aloof, white and fluffy. But the Finns paid for everything, since such fools.
        Would agree with the Soviet Union, with Stalin immediately, without being stiffened, they would have remained even in profit.
        1. Cop
          Cop 3 December 2017 23: 45 New
          +1
          Quote: Ivan Tartugay
          And what is the answer to them to keep, that they have signed an agreement or something to help the corps.

          Van, well, the building was voluntary .... For its formation, the contract is not needed, you only need desire ......
          The British elite, if only to make the problems of Russia and preferably with the wrong hands.

          Van, and why did the Soviet elite organize the Comintern?
          Would agree with the Soviet Union, with Stalin immediately, without being stiffened, they would have remained even in profit.

          Then Wan, I think that the "white finns" would not attack the "peacefully plowing" Soviet tractor, but on a radio station, for example in Vyborg .........
  8. Anyone
    Anyone 2 December 2017 14: 38 New
    +4
    Sincerely hoping for the help of the Anglo-French "partners", which the Finns have traditionally thrown. How they threw Poles, Belgians, Dutch, Norwegians, Greeks, and all the rest.

    They say it right: the devil is in the details. First of all, I don’t really understand what the term “thrown” means. Not, in everyday speech, the etymology and semantic component of this vulgarism, as a rule, are clear to me. But in an article that claims to be historiography and analytics, not very much. But since the author has imposed on us his own, let's say, a kind of historical thesaurus, I have to use them ... France couldn’t “throw” me, as I quote, “Belgians, Dutch, Norwegians, Greeks, and everyone else,” since the German conquests in Europe they had the following chronological sequence: Norway (April 1940), Belgium (May 1940), the Netherlands (May 1940), Greece - (April 1941). The German invasion of France began on May 10, 1940. And she could no longer help anyone, even if she was very eager. By the beginning of the Soviet-Finnish war, Great Britain was already almost 3 months at war with Germany. It was hard to expect from the British that they would be so stupid and get involved in the war between the Finns and us on the side of Finland, thereby finding themselves in a situation where they are simultaneously fighting against Germany and the USSR. The author was simply unaware that Stalin had chosen the very right moment of the attack on Finland. He believed that Britain, which had just declared war on Germany over Poland, would probably not even declare war on the USSR. And so it happened. All that this company turned into politically for the USSR is an exception to the League of Nations. But this war, indeed, was most likely needed by the USSR, since Finland’s position after September 1, 1939 was such that the USSR could not consider Finland as a neutral country.
    Unfortunately, Stalin could not calculate the erroneous conclusions drawn by the German General Staff and Hitler from the results of this war. The German General Staff, on the basis of the great losses of the USSR, the ineffective leadership of the troops, and so on of our misses of the Winter War, concluded that the USSR is a "colossus with feet of clay" and it would not be difficult for Germany to defeat its army. This erroneous assessment by the Germans of the results of the Soviet-Finnish War cost both us and them.
    1. Fitter65
      Fitter65 3 December 2017 03: 01 New
      0
      Quote: Anyone
      By the beginning of the Soviet-Finnish war, Great Britain was already almost 3 months at war with Germany.

      Moreover, it should be taken into account with a crunch of the spine that the tank armies and motorized divisions of the Wehrmacht kept tearing toward London. Blenheim bombers and Hurricane fighters that had come into service with the Finns? By the way, like the French MS-406 ...
      1. Anyone
        Anyone 4 December 2017 17: 04 New
        0
        I appreciated your ability to cut quotes out of context. Continue in the same way ... The meaning of the phrase you pulled out was that the British were not idiots to simultaneously declare war on Germany and the USSR. That's all I wanted to say. Any other meaning that you decided to find in these my words is inspired exclusively by your cockroaches, and has nothing to do with my post above.
        1. Fitter65
          Fitter65 5 December 2017 03: 26 New
          +1
          Quote: Anyone
          The meaning of the phrase you pulled out was that the British were not idiots to simultaneously declare war on Germany and the USSR.

          But somehow they, not being idiots, began planning an attack, together with the French, on the Soviet Transcaucasia, bombing oil producing areas in Baku and others. The truth Hitler somehow quickly captured France, and the British did not have time to bomb Baku. that the Finns, that the French were needed only when they benefited, but when the question of help arises, they immediately appear and don’t know anyone, and they didn’t have anything like that ...
    2. long in stock.
      long in stock. 3 December 2017 23: 56 New
      +1
      Well, take an interest in what expeditionary force was in Norway and where it was originally collected .. the data is not secret, everything is there .. and the list of parts and even who should be loaded onto which ships ... and the Angles just threw the Norwegians .... they didn’t even say that run away ...
  9. utyutkin
    utyutkin 2 December 2017 17: 28 New
    +1
    Quote: Anyone
    They say it right: the devil is in the details. First of all, I don’t really understand what the term “thrown” means.

    Now I will try to explain. and so at first about chronology.
    September 1 - German attack on Poland. and then about the "kidok" - March 31, the United Kingdom unilaterally offered Poland military assistance in the event of an attack and acted as a guarantor of its independence.
    promised to promise and even made a speech, but thanks to this, firstly, Poland didn’t :) secondly, the Red Army wasn’t able to pass through the territory of Poland. Moreover, she also promised finals with the same result :)))). who were essentially lucky only in that they were attacked not by Germany but by the Soviet Union. what do we have as a result of big words and promises and a few signed pieces of paper? but we have a second world war. - this is called the kidok. if you really want it, you can continue :)
    1. Fitter65
      Fitter65 5 December 2017 03: 39 New
      +1
      Quote: ututyulkin
      Now I will try to explain. and so at first about chronology.
      September 1 - German attack on Poland. and then about the "kidok" - March 31, the United Kingdom unilaterally offered Poland military assistance in the event of an attack and acted as a guarantor of its independence.

      A strange chronology, on the first of SEPTEMBER 1, and then on MARCH 31, maybe it was like a turnaround. Maybe you need to first learn how to express your thoughts correctly, linking them to a chronology? Well, for example, the phrase quoted above could be constructed in this way: "On March 31, the United Kingdom unilaterally offered Poland military assistance in the event of an attack and acted as a guarantor of its independence, BUT after September 1, the German attack on Poland was a" kid ". Approximately so, and then reading the phrase quoted above, one gets the impression that on September 1, 1939, after the German attack on Poland, Great Britain thought for almost 7 months and on March 31, 1940, it offered Poland different kinds of help there and others, and others ...
  10. Wolka
    Wolka 2 December 2017 18: 48 New
    +1
    I would not be in a hurry with the author’s conclusions, although the war went on for 3.5 months, but the Red Army washed its blood in achieving strategic goals, tactically the victory was too expensive, the Red Army was actually not ready for large-scale military operations, the next hat-assassination only won number, but not skill, especially nothing to boast about, only memory remains ...
  11. DesToeR
    DesToeR 2 December 2017 20: 14 New
    +2
    Eco we are in one fell swoop seven beating! Was washed by the Red Army blood in the war in that war. There is nothing to dissemble. But do not be the Winter War in 1940. It is not known how the fighting would have developed in the “snow-white fields” near Moscow in 1941. and in the "so-called" battle of Stalingrad. The Finnish war was a good vaccine against hat-making. The uniform of the soldiers of the Red Army, arms, logistics, time standards, etc. were completely revised. Unique experience was gained in conducting an offensive operation in the harsh winter conditions in the north. Maybe that's why General Frost was on the side of the Russian battalions in the Second World War?
    1. S-400
      S-400 7 December 2019 19: 33 New
      0
      Aren't you ashamed to write such bullshit? Why did the Finnish war become a "vaccine"? From the total defeat of the "invincible and legendary" in 1941, which, as it turns out, had a multiple (multiple, Karl !!) advantage in manpower and equipment over the Wehrmacht and the Luftwaffe on many fronts? What specific lessons have been learned, apart from minor details, such as the fact that soldiers need white camouflage coats like they do in winter? So these "lessons" were understood even before the start of the "winter" war. And camouflage coats, skis and other things were organized already in December 1939. And what helped a lot? Remind me how the Finns crumbled Soviet ski teams in the northern Ladoga area in February 1940? And these squads were made up of athletes-skiers, by the way!

      You cannot understand a simple truth: in a totalitarian state, nothing can teach anyone anything, because it is impossible to do a real "debriefing", for this analysis would lead to Himself. And he is infallible, he does not answer to anyone !! So the maximum is insignificant body movements and the memoirs of court warriors, sucked out of the finger, where the author is white and fluffy, and aliens are to blame for the devastation and encirclement: ((
      1. DesToeR
        DesToeR 8 December 2019 23: 08 New
        +1
        Quote: S-400
        Aren't you ashamed to write such bullshit?

        The publication date does not bother? Or are you from the Baltic states?
        Quote: S-400
        From the total defeat of the "invincible and legendary" in 1941, which, as it turns out, had a multiple (multiple, Karl !!) advantage in manpower and equipment over the Wehrmacht and the Luftwaffe on many fronts?

        It is customary for the military to compare the numbers located at this moment and in this place, rather than the gross 1000 km from the front line. Try it - you will discover many interesting things for yourself. And if you guess how to compare the Soviet division with the actual set of weapons and people with the Wehrmacht division, you can catch Zen.
        Quote: S-400
        So these "lessons" were understood even before the start of the "winter" war. And camouflage coats, skis and other things were organized already in December 1939. And what helped a lot?

        Yeah. It helped, especially in matters of logistics, manning, time standards and the organization of command in general. But the Wehrmacht did not know such a vaccination ... sadness.
        Quote: S-400
        You cannot understand a simple truth: in a totalitarian state, nothing can teach anyone anything, because it is impossible to do a real "debriefing", for this analysis would lead to Himself.

        Fuuu, how incredible it was now! Well, you chose the wrong site. Here, the majority of men over 30 have seen some even "Himself".
        Quote: S-400
        So the maximum is minor gestures and memoirs of court warriors sucked from a finger, where the author is white and fluffy, and aliens are to blame for the routs and environments: ((

        And how did we take Berlin for the third time in the last 1000 years? I don’t understand ... Maybe you’ll explain it to me?
        1. S-400
          S-400 9 December 2019 19: 38 New
          0
          Quote: DesToeR
          And how is this the third time in the last 1000 years we took Berlin?

          Who are we"?! You took it or something, keyboard warrior. I like it so much: "we took Berlin", "we launched Gagarin" ... Who are we? Are you lying with a mosin in the Rzhev mud? Are you burning in a tank near Kursk? You froze to death near Suommusalmi? I found a devan hero too: ((
  12. Ivan Tartugai
    Ivan Tartugai 2 December 2017 21: 04 New
    +4
    Quote from the article:
    This is what should have been seen following the results of the Soviet-Finnish war.

    The positive results of the Soviet-Finnish war are illuminated by more or less historians. However, everything, i.e. Both professional historians and amateur historians note the great losses of Soviet troops in this conflict. This negative result is not considered by our professional historians, not investigated, not analyzed, namely, how it happened that the troops of the Soviet Union, having multiple advantages in military-technical and material equipment over the Finnish troops, suffered disproportionately large losses in this war.
    Heroism, courage, self-sacrifice of fighters and commanders of junior and middle management, participants in the Soviet-Finnish war is not in doubt and described in many studies, memoirs. But the proper performance of their duties by senior military commanders, the generals, the General Staff of the Red Army, the central departments of NPOs are still outside the research.
    This is what our historians do not notice.
  13. Fitter65
    Fitter65 3 December 2017 02: 48 New
    0
    Is it any wonder that the English Hurricane fighters with Finnish swastikas did not end up in Finland, but in the USSR?

    The first Hurricanes came to the USSR at the end of 1941, when Finland was an ally of Nazi Germany. They were delivered in English camouflage, and with English identification marks. They scolded the plane for a bit more.
    Like England Russia
    Gave the plane.
    Clumsy like a cow
    and terribly quiet move.
    Although with skillful use, this pterodactyl (another of Khariton’s nicknames in our Air Force) was a formidable weapon. Just read the memoirs of G.V. Zimin, commander of the 485th IAP.
    Of course, the author’s desire to poke the British into the oats that passed through the horse’s digestive tract is understandable, but with such mistakes, he dives his nose into this “production”
  14. Ratmir_Ryazan
    Ratmir_Ryazan 3 December 2017 18: 12 New
    +1
    Great article !!!
  15. xomaNN
    xomaNN 3 December 2017 23: 55 New
    0
    My relative, already a deep grandfather when talking about his participation as an infantry soldier in the Finnish war, gritted his teeth interspersed with swear words with the same swear words .... These were terrible memories from the point of view of the trench warrior in that village of Kamenka, Leningrad Region. From that war he had already returned semi-disabled, but he also fought in the Patriotic War.
  16. long in stock.
    long in stock. 4 December 2017 00: 03 New
    +1
    all lovers to talk about blocking the corpses of anyone and anytime ... if you pronounce such nonsense, be so kind as to tell me a historical example of who where when and whom they fill up with corpses ... at least 1 ... otherwise tryndet enough individuals and prove their words like that and there is nobody ...
    1. sxfRipper
      sxfRipper 5 December 2017 18: 35 New
      0
      Google to the rescue. Keywords - Zhukovsky three-row. This is not about the accordion.
      1. long in stock.
        long in stock. 5 December 2017 23: 20 New
        0
        Google to help you. It is very suitable for victims of ehe. Facts, let's.
  17. Anyone
    Anyone 4 December 2017 17: 09 New
    0
    Quote: ututyulkin
    Great Britain unilaterally offered Poland military assistance in the event of an attack and acted as a guarantor of its independence. She promised to promise and even spoke, but thanks to this, Poland didn’t

    That is, you say that “Poland didn’t” because of the fact that “Great Britain acted as a guarantor of its independence”, and not because Germany attacked Poland? )) The original interpretation of history))
    1. Alexander Lashkul
      Alexander Lashkul 8 December 2017 19: 05 New
      0
      There is a version that Poland was impudently impudent in Danzig’s question EXCLUSIVELY because she felt the good-natured breath of England and France behind her.
  18. Siberian1965
    Siberian1965 4 December 2017 18: 00 New
    0
    About the same thing Rezun writes in his books. I read everything and not a word that belittled OUR army and, all the more, Rezun did not see the soldiers of this army.
  19. shuravi
    shuravi 4 December 2017 21: 43 New
    +1
    Firstly, the author of the article forgot that in 1918 Finland attacked the Soviet state and even conquered some territories (Tartu Peace Treaty between the RSFSR and Finland). So the USSR was fully entitled to answer the same.
    Secondly, despite all the mistakes and losses, the winter war was very useful for the Red Army. Learned to fight and provide troops in the winter. Therefore, in 1941, "General Frost" was our ally.
  20. geologist
    geologist 5 December 2017 20: 11 New
    +3
    Manerheim relied on proven but outdated World War I technologies. Positional war - a kind of Finnish Verdun. Several brilliant operations on the environment, which led to the death, capture of several Soviet divisions, were also carried out without modern technology. Well, the Finns did not have motorized armored forces and serious aviation. Nevertheless, several stunts using blockages and skiers yielded a stunning result. It turned out that the Red Army and the command could easily panic, and the supply of large groups that had fallen into the traffic jam was not predicted by anyone.
    The Red Army, transferred to modern rails, did not know at all how to use this advantage, and even vice versa — all this aviation, motorization were a burden, and it prevented commanders from fighting the experience of the past war. From the first days, monstrous traffic jams arose when two divisions were sent to the same point at the same time, moving in intersecting directions. High-powered artillery stuck in traffic jams and could not help the advancing troops. Aviation bombed empty forests. Tanks easily, like a knife through oil passed the Finnish line and returned without infantry support. The infantry died under the flanking machine-gun fire from closed positions, completely not understanding where they were shooting from. This nightmare was exacerbated by the mass shootings of a completely bewildered, lost faith in the victory of command personnel. Finally, the chief prosecutor banned the mass executions of officers without trial. Beria rushed to Stalin with a complaint - they interfere with putting things in order. Stalin remembered Trotsky with his "decimations" in the Volga region and ordered to stop lawlessness.
    The fighting stopped. They began to sew fur coats and felts in bulk. They pulled Fedorov's assault rifles out of the dust. They regrouped the troops, shuffled the command staff, worked on the mistakes. It turned out that we also have plans for Finnish bunkers, but for some reason they were in safes and were not handed out to the younger commanders because of secrecy, or rather not to give out agents. In general, they prepared well and broke the Finnish war machine with all its secrets from the 1st World War. Diseases of growth cost us a great price, but they missed a lot or did not understand. As a result, in the year 41 they received the same traffic jams, the collapse of command and heavy losses to the dead and prisoners.
    1. looker-on
      looker-on 7 December 2017 18: 14 New
      0
      Bravo Thank you very much
  21. geologist
    geologist 5 December 2017 20: 30 New
    +1
    Sorry, wrong. Stalin complained to the chief prosecutor of the Red Army not Beria, but Mehlis.
  22. looker-on
    looker-on 7 December 2017 17: 51 New
    0
    Quote: Ivan Tartugay
    This negative result is not considered by our professional historians, not investigated, not analyzed, namely, how it happened that the troops of the Soviet Union, having multiple advantages in military-technical and material equipment over the Finnish troops, suffered disproportionately large losses in this war.


    Ivan with you! As in most wars in which Russia took part. The soldier is nothing. Zero. And the author writes:
    Liberal historians still consider the victory of the Red Army in the Pyrrhic war, citing as an example the number of losses of the parties. Very touching care for people, but it would be better if they took care of all those who were killed, died of hopelessness, despair, poverty, or were not born during the social experiment on the country that we have seen since the accession of the “best German” M. Gorbachev and the end and the edge of which is not yet visible.


    In the Finnish type of people do not mind, let's better Gorbachev on the count. He is still alive. The article is terrible and has nothing to do with history and any kind of analysis.
  23. DesToeR
    DesToeR 7 December 2017 20: 37 New
    0
    Quote: looker-on
    As in most wars in which Russia took part. The soldier is nothing. Zero.

    Do you know a country in which in the war they regretted the survival of soldiers? Great Britain, the USA, and Germany in special humanism to their soldiers were not noticed.
  24. Alexander Lashkul
    Alexander Lashkul 8 December 2017 19: 03 New
    0
    Hmm ... Not an article but pure propaganda. 1. Of course, the USSR could occupy Finland at 40m. What's next? I dare to recall how the Baltic countries, which easily entered the USSR, shot Soviet soldiers in the back. Here, guerrilla warfare would be much worse, from the moment of occupation. The author believes that Stalin could afford zerg rush, but did Stalin himself think so? On the contrary, the winter war revealed a lot of problems in the Red Army, in addition, by the end of the 39th the army was just beginning to grow sharply and there was no coherence at all. 760 fighters, this is 000/1 of the whole red army, so the author got a little excited about the left heel.

    And in general, to compare the winter war with the domestic one or with Gorbachev's reforms, this must be an extremely "gifted" and unbiased researcher.
  25. S-400
    S-400 7 December 2019 19: 42 New
    -1
    Not an article, but a stream of megawatt delirium, which even remotely does not lie in any correlation with real facts. Of course, I understand everything, but in vain topwar allows such publications.