View Full Version : Day of memory Leningrad.
Many thanks to all Allies who helped meal and the weapon to my city.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad
I can only say the same - wouldn't be alive today if it weren't for those efforts!
I'm proud we (finns) had the nuggets to say 'no' and didn't bend over to Hitler's
plans in this operation.
Jimbuna
01-27-12, 12:12 PM
My father was on the Murmansk convoy run and was a part of the only convoy to sail without an escort.
I at all don't understand, how it was possible to be at war and do the weapon when of meal only 125 grams of bread (components: a flour, garbage, a rye waste) in day. And after all in a blockade city have created submachine gun PPS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PPS_submachine_gun).
nikimcbee
01-27-12, 01:20 PM
Many thanks to all Allies who helped meal and the weapon to my city.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad
:salute: I've been to the Memorial there.
http://sarafletcher.com/Petrograd/P8280010-SeigeOfLeningradMemorial.jpg
I at all don't understand, how it was possible to be at war and do the weapon when of meal only 125 grams of bread (components: a flour, garbage, a rye waste) in day. And after all in a blockade city have created submachine gun PPS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PPS_submachine_gun).
Yup. :yep:
Tho, one must remember that the siege wasn't complete. The north-east area
was in Soviet hands throughtout the siege so supplies got into the city.
That was the plan Hitler had for Finns, to advance enough to cut the northern
side of the city and block supply routes. As I said, glad we didn't do that. :salute:
:salute: I've been to the Memorial there.
http://sarafletcher.com/Petrograd/P8280010-SeigeOfLeningradMemorial.jpg
The good fellow. I respect.
nikimcbee
01-27-12, 01:37 PM
My father was on the Murmansk convoy run and was a part of the only convoy to sail without an escort.
Did he ever record any of his stories? I'd love to hear about them if he did and you're willing to share.:D:salute:
Yup. :yep:
Tho, one must remember that the siege wasn't complete. The north-east area
was in Soviet hands throughtout the siege so supplies got into the city.
That was the plan Hitler had for Finns, to advance enough to cut the northern
side of the city and block supply routes. As I said, glad we didn't do that. :salute:
Yes there was "a life Road", but these deliveries were minimum. My grandmother told that in the first months have eaten all cats, birds, dogs and rats... Then there were cannibalism cases.
nikimcbee
01-27-12, 01:44 PM
The good fellow. I respect.
I was there in 94. So I found my photos from the trip and I only have one picture:shifty: of the Memorial. I was there at the very end of my study abroad time, and I was almost out of film. My picture is of the break in the ring and you can see the "900 days and 900 nights."
I wish I had the money to go back, but I think it's out of my price range. I'd love to back with a digital camera.
That was the plan Hitler had for Finns, to advance enough to cut the northern
side of the city and block supply routes. As I said, glad we didn't do that. :salute:
I don't get it.
So, were the Finns the good guys when they fought against the Soviets during the Winter War?
Or, were they the good guys when they refused to help Hitler and to help the Soviets?
soopaman2
01-27-12, 02:13 PM
Many thanks to the Russians who held the line against all odds, out-maneuvered a superior enemy, and outlasted an enemy with superior morale.
Leningrad was a huge turning point in the war not appreciated.
[devils advocate]
Regardless that Stalin was as bad as Hitler, as far as murdering people he was fighting for the right side...Therefore he is a hero, and not the maker of a holocaust.
[end smartassery]
War is gross, the only thing that can possibly validate Stalin is the fact he was betrayed.
No excuse for the purges....
I don't get it.
So, were the Finns the good guys when they fought against the Soviets during the Winter War?
Or, were they the good guys when they refused to help Hitler and to help the Soviets?
Of course, my view will be somewhat biased, but here's how I see it:
Winter War: We were the good guys, Soviet Union attacked because we didn't
give them the territory they wanted. It was purely an defensive war from our POV.
Continuation War: Here things get more complex. Finland has always tried to
stay out of offensive war and just defend itself. But, during the CW, Finland
did indeed attack, first to take back the territory we had lost in the peace treaty
after Winter War and then the order was to go a bit further, into Soviet territory
to do what Soviet Union did in WW; establish a buffer zone.
The offensive beyond the territory lost after WW was seen by many as war
of aggression even then and it has been talked a lot in our history ever since.
As for Leningrad, IIRC, the plan was for Germany to secure the southern
area and Finns to secure the northern area, thus making the siege complete.
But Finland refused to continue the offensive war and so the siege was never
complete.
Were we the good guys in CW? Guess that depends on who you ask. If you ask
me, I say yes. We were, like in WW, drawn into the conflict and had no choice,
but to defend ourselves. Keep in mind, Stalin was seeking after conquering
whole of Finland and our fate would have been the same as the Baltian countries.
Anywho, like I said, this might be a biased view point, but that's how I see it. :yep:
This isn't even about Stalin, or the Soviet authority. Soviet authorities let the city down, they did very little in its defense and corruption, misappropriation of resources, and political repression was rife even at the height of the starvation. The only people that deserve credit for holding the line are the brave soldiers and civilians on the front line. This was their victory, not Stalin's, and the prize was not conquest but the life of the whole city, and that's that.
The Finns' role is something that even I continue to be conflicted about. I think there's no question that if they didn't stop on the Svir, the siege would have ended badly. It was a choice, and they certainly did make a bold one. At the same time, they were no angels - and who could blame them? They were attacked rather viciously by Stalin just a year and a half earlier. But I think the Finnish military does need to own up to having some role in maintaining this siege, which by all accounts was a horrible war atrocity, perhaps the biggest ever committed on a single location (we're talking up to 2 million dead, most by starvation). Of course this wasn't their goal and I can hardly see Finnish military leaders wanting to kill every Russian in Leningrad, but those deaths are, in part, a consequence of their choices. As is the fact that the siege was never complete.
Fighting was not nice on the Finnish side of the line, either. Even if they stopped their advance, it was by no means a ceasefire, but a brutal war. My family got a taste of that - my great-grandfather (a Leningrad native, mostly of German heritage, and an engineering officer) fought on the northern side of the blockade. Didn't participate in the Winter War nor anything to do with occupation of Finnish territory. Sniper shot him in the leg out in the open, specifically to attract other 'targets' to his aid. It was many hours before he was rescued, losing his leg as a result. Yet another reason that Finnish snipers are not something to mess with. So, not a nice war on a personal level - but that's the reality of war for you. In the end, I think all sides need to forgive and learn their lessons.
Speaking of which, let's not forget today is also Auschwitz day.
Hottentot
01-27-12, 02:30 PM
We were, like in WW, drawn into the conflict and had no choice,
but to defend ourselves.
I agree with the rest of your post, but here I must point out that from purely academic point of view the "Driftwood Theory" has been shot down years ago.
@CCIP
Good post and I agree. :up:
I agree with the rest of your post, but here I must point out that from purely academic point of view the "Driftwood Theory" has been shot down years ago.
AFAIK, it is still debated. How I've learned to see it (and again, just my opinion)
is that germans attacked SU from Finland, Finland told SU that we are to
remain neutral and take no part in any offensive actions. SU, instead of targeting
airfields etc. bombed population centers and we went to war yet again.
Note: this is from pure memory and I'm a bit drunk, so there might be some errors.
But I still see as Finland being dragged into it.
soopaman2
01-27-12, 02:47 PM
This isn't even about Stalin, or the Soviet authority. Soviet authorities let the city down, they did very little in its defense and corruption, misappropriation of resources, and political repression was rife even at the height of the starvation. The only people that deserve credit for holding the line are the brave soldiers and civilians on the front line. This was their victory, not Stalin's, and the prize was not conquest but the life of the whole city, and that's that.
The Finns' role is something that even I continue to be conflicted about. I think there's no question that if they didn't stop on the Svir, the siege would have ended badly. It was a choice, and they certainly did make a bold one. At the same time, they were no angels - and who could blame them? They were attacked rather viciously by Stalin just a year and a half earlier. But I think the Finnish military does need to own up to having some role in maintaining this siege, which by all accounts was a horrible war atrocity, perhaps the biggest ever committed on a single location (we're talking up to 2 million dead, most by starvation). Of course this wasn't their goal and I can hardly see Finnish military leaders wanting to kill every Russian in Leningrad, but those deaths are, in part, a consequence of their choices. As is the fact that the siege was never complete.
Fighting was not nice on the Finnish side of the line, either. Even if they stopped their advance, it was by no means a ceasefire, but a brutal war. My family got a taste of that - my great-grandfather (a Leningrad native, mostly of German heritage, and an engineering officer) fought on the northern side of the blockade. Didn't participate in the Winter War nor anything to do with occupation of Finnish territory. Sniper shot him in the leg out in the open, specifically to attract other 'targets' to his aid. It was many hours before he was rescued, losing his leg as a result. Yet another reason that Finnish snipers are not something to mess with. So, not a nice war on a personal level - but that's the reality of war for you. In the end, I think all sides need to forgive and learn their lessons.
Speaking of which, let's not forget today is also Auschwitz day.
I kinda trashed Stalin, and meant not to take away from the brave Russians who resisted.
I think it was my way of saying history is written by the victor, and all of us have blood on our hands, and none of us are "noble" (countrywise)
Hats off to the induviduals who fought on both sides, who had little to gain either way from this conflict.
I am sorry CCIP if it seemed I was bashing the brave men on their tribute thread. I was simply showing how the victors mandate can be a heroic stand or a massacre, the difference between a purge and a holocaust.
Jimbuna
01-27-12, 04:12 PM
Did he ever record any of his stories? I'd love to hear about them if he did and you're willing to share.:D:salute:
He never actually recorded them or wrote them down but he did speak of his personal experiences and left me his wartime papers (which I have discussed, shared and copied to Sailor Steve).
Hottentot
01-28-12, 01:30 AM
AFAIK, it is still debated. How I've learned to see it (and again, just my opinion)
is that germans attacked SU from Finland, Finland told SU that we are to
remain neutral and take no part in any offensive actions. SU, instead of targeting
airfields etc. bombed population centers and we went to war yet again
I am not specialized in war history, but I am majoring in history for fourth year, so I'm speaking from that basis. As far as I know, the fatalistic "not our fault, we were forced" Driftwood Theory was first questioned by the foreign researchers and later by the Finns too. These days the topic is not so much about if there was to be a war or not, but if we were willing participants with Germany or not.
There are those who say that we tried everything before accepting to side with Germany, for example looking for help from Sweden. When nothing else worked, we took the lesser evil. Then there are those who say that we were happy to side with Germany and it was our first choice.
While it's not black and white anymore than anything else in history, I'm still more inclined to believe in the latter for various reasons.
First of all there is no questioning that we were bitter after the Winter War (and who wouldn't have been?) Even the contemporary people called its peace a temporary one. Germany in 1941 seemed like a powerful ally and offered us a chance for retribution we couldn't have had on our own.
Second, we weren't there just for the old lands. Already after 1917 there had been the ideal of "Greater Finland", and it wasn't just some extremist loonies who supported it. It never came to be in the end, but remembering its existense merits a question: what would have Finland done / tried to do if Germany had won in the East?
Third, ever since its independence Finland had roots with Germany (even if Germany didn't necessarily think the same). The whites had been victorious in the Civil War largely because of the military training the Jägers had received in Germany. After the Civil War some had wanted to turn Finland into monarchy with a German king. While the fervor may have toned down a little in the 1920s and 1930s, it was still just two decades from those years. That's a very short time for any ideals to die.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.