Ju87D, Ju87G for the Rudel wannabe's soon i hope

[Staga]

Lynx couple good sites.
First is Finnish so it may be pure propaganda or then not.: http://www.winterwar.com/Mainpage.htm  http://home.interserv.com/~tazio/7dSuomu.htm

I would like to see some facts about this sentence: atrocities committed by Finnish troops against Russian civilians.
Most of the battles were fighted in Finnish territory so guess Finns killed their own people?.
Anyway I have photos about what Russian Desants did in border villages. Dead women, old men, childs etc.

Some statistic from winterwar
Finns:22 800 dead and 43 600 wounded.
Russians: at least 90 000 dead and 200 000 wounded.
Thought Khrushchev said Soviet Union lost over one million ppl in winterwar.

"We tried to put our own troops on skis, too,
but it wasn't easy for ordinary, untrained Red
Army soldiers to fight on skis. We started
intensively to recruit professional sportsmen.
There aren't many around. We had to bring them
from Moscow and the Ukraine as well as
Leningrad. We gave them a splendid send off...
Poor fellows, they were ripped to shreds. I don't
know how many came back alive."

Nikita Khrushchev

[Staga]

 http://www.ssn.flinders.edu.au/scanlink/nornotes/vol3/articles/provis.htm

[Glasses]

I guess no one here really reads the point people are trying to make .Almost every time you bring something like this guy was a Nazi, a Communist, an Allied mass murderer it just doesn't make a point everyone made horrendous crimes against humanity during that war EVERYONE! There's no black and white , more like grey. If we would all just go ooh you fly the Nazi planes ooh you fly the communist planes then we wouldn't have  sim to play with would we?
almost every post I've seen puts all the blame on the Nazis yeah they we're bad but so was everyone else because we admire someone's ability as a warrior doesn't necessarily mean we love what that person stood for so you see how this discussion about Rudel the warrior is compared to Rudel the person or his beliefs that's just something people here can't do . Heck maybe they haven't reached the maturity of mind to separate the two jeez!

------------------
Glasses---I may have 4 eyes ,but you only have one wing.
9./Jg54
 
Besser tot als rot!

[This message has been edited by Glasses (edited 05-11-2001).]

[Dowding]

Lynx - Stalin and Lenin were chalk and cheese - that might be why the foreign policy changed.

There is some evidence to suggest Lenin was killed by Stalin, and his illness was definitely held against him and used to isolate him from speaking out about Stalin and his 'tactics'.

The time from the Russian Revolution to WW2 is very interesting - especially how Stalin rose from 'just another revolutionary' to become the General Secretary of the Communist Party. Unlike Hitler, he never had a close cabal of advisors - those that he did have would only last a few years before being chopped by the new generation; a few years later, that generation would be 'chopped' by a newer breed.

[Staga]

Russia was first country who recognized Finland as a free country 4.1.1918 (by Lenin) and at same days countries like France (Didn't wait what Lenin decide) and Sweden (Did wait what was Lenin's opinion). GB and USA wanted to see what happens in Russia before they recognized Finland as a free country.

So Lenin was a guy who gaved us our freedom thought in those times he did have his hands full of work already. Guess he was happy when he get rid of us   .
Anyway in that time there were already a ships carrying guns and ammunities to Finland to help in fight against occupier. A small draw-back was when S.S Grafton went to the rocks and sunk with load of rifles and ammunition. Part of its cargo were saved thought most of those supplies still lie in bottom of the sea.

Another part of useless history  

[This message has been edited by Staga (edited 05-11-2001).]

[BlauK]

Originally posted by -lynx-:
... Had Stalin wanted Finland back under the Soviet rule - they would have marched all the way to Swedish border.

LOL   Your comment is as intelligent as saying: "Had Hitler wanted England - they would have marched all the way to Scotish border."  

That is exactly what Satlin wanted. He had an agreement with Hitler to divide the Eastern Europe. Finland and Baltic countries belonged to him.

One of the reasons Stalin agreed to end the war was the scare of Brits and other Allies coming to help Finland. That would not have happened though. It would have taken months for any help to arrive and Sweden did not give them a permission to pass through. In any case this "Help Finland" plan was mostly fake. Most troops would have stayed in Sweden and occupied the Iron mines which provided Iron for Germany.

Another reason is that they had got their butts kicked quite hard already for what they gained.

It may hurt your national pride and everything but you stood no better chance to fight off that offensive than Poland vs German army - in fact Polish odds were better.

Please share your secret knowledge of the chances. Finland remained, Poland was occupied. Poland had no chances, it is true. Soviets were attacking Poland at the same time from east. And dont you dare say that Soviets went in there only to help  



------------------
BlauKreuz
Lentolaivue 34

[Staga]

 

Had Stalin wanted Finland back under the Soviet rule - they would have marched all the way to Swedish border

Of course you did know Stalin already tryed to do that didn't you?
Sorry but it seems like your knowledge about history has some holes in it.

26.11.1939 15:00 village of Mainila in Russia was shelled by few artillery granades and grenade launchers. That gave Russia a reason to attack to Finland 30.11.1939. So it took four days from Red Army to attack agains us.
Funniest thing was that nearest Finnish artilleries were 50km from border.
I wonder what kind of cannons those were with 50km trajectory?

44. and 163. Divisions of 9:th Army tryed to run thru Finland to Oulu thus cutting the land in halfs. They found small difficulties to continue when both those divisions were sweeped away.

Here are some pics from Raatteen tie where those Divisions found their destiny (About 22000-23000 Red Army soldiers died there when Finnish losses were less than 1000. Pics are taken couple days after battle and some of them are quite unpleasant to look.

[Staga]

Just few links
 http://www.raatteenportti.fi/english/history1.htm  http://www-cgsc.army.mil/carl/CSIPUBS/Chew/CHEW.htm  http://www.feldgrau.com/wwar.html  http://www.lysator.liu.se/nordic/mirror/sa-int/tstkentat.html  http://www.suomussalmi.fi/en/info/sights/talvisot/taistelu.htm

[This message has been edited by Staga (edited 05-11-2001).]

[-lynx-]

Let's discuss it in OT, OK?
****

A few years ago Barneys were attacking remote Green field with Ju87s escorted by 109s - in early days of RPS it was a blast with SpitIs vs Stuka's/109s. One of my best memories of 5 years in WB that fight is. Bring on the early war planeset!

[aircav]

Staga,

My point, if it was lost, was that the Finnish AF during the winter war was composed almost solely of Allied types, contradicting your assertion that no one but Germany sent aid to the Finnish.

My second point was that the Allied nations sent supplies to Finland even though they were at war themselves, with Germany. They presumably sent what could be spared, and from your stance I am sure you would concede that the national defense of their own countries had to come first in their considerations.

Thirdly, some of the more advanced aircraft you mention, such as the P-51, were not available in 1940. Spitfires for export would not have been conceivable in 1939/40, for the reasons I mention above. Worth noting that the first German aircraft supplied to Finland was the Bf-109G, not the E, not the F. The 109G was the first variant that Germany thought that it had enough of to consider sending to Finland.

After Barbarossa, Finland had decided to ally itself with Germany to regain its lost territory. In view of this alliance, the possibility of further Allied aid to Finland was clearly remote.

In summary, I would contend that the relative paucity of Allied aid to Finland was likely a direct result of every available aircraft being needed for the war with Germany. It was a problem that was both caused by Germany, and to which Germany offered the only solution for Finland.

regards,

aircav

[This message has been edited by aircav (edited 05-11-2001).]

[BlauK]

Originally posted by aircav:
...Finnish AF during the winter war was composed almost solely of Allied types, contradicting your assertion that no one but Germany sent aid to the Finnish.

Germany actually didn't help Finland at all in the Winter War. Germany was allied with Russia   Also unlike the western world their press used the info from Soviet papers when telling about Winter War.

My second point was that the Allied nations sent supplies to Finland even though they were at war themselves, with Germany. They presumably sent what could be spared, and from your stance I am sure you would concede that the national defense of their own countries had to come first in their considerations.

Uhhmmm.. What did they actually send? I know of 13 British volunteers who were learning to ski in Finland, but never got close to the front   Western countries sent a lot of sympathy and promises of troops and military aid. They DID send humanitarian aid though. This sympathy was one of the main reasons why USA (unlike England) never declared war to Finland later (1941-44) when Finland and Germany were allied even though Russia demanded it.

Well, to be honest, they did give some planes to FAF. Brits sold Finland 20 Gloster Gladiators and gave 10 more free. France gave 30 Morane Saulnier 406s and Brits sold 12 Hurricanes but both these late in the war. Hurricanes did not make it to the front in time. France also gave 6 Caudrons and Brits sold 23 Blendheims.

France and England were in war with Germany at that time, yes, but only on the paper. Germany attacked France only months after Winter War had already ended.

Practically the only fighter type in FAF was Fokker D XXI (Holland)... they were bought before the war like some 10 or so Bristol Bulldogs.

After Barbarossa, Finland had decided to ally itself with Germany to regain its lost territory. In view of this alliance, the possibility of further Allied aid to Finland was clearly remote.

True about the aid. Actually they allied already several months before Barbarossa. Finland joined the fight 4 days after it began, after Soviets bombed Finnish cities. Finish forces had been mobilized earlier though, so that was just a technicality  

In summary, I would contend that the relative paucity of Allied aid to Finland was likely a direct result of every available aircraft being needed for the war with Germany. It was a problem that was both caused by Germany, and to which Germany offered the only solution for Finland.

Their planes were not YET needed, but they wanted to spare them. Luckily USA agreed to sell Finland Brewsters which arrived only after the war. They became the spine of FAF in 1941-1943.... "Pearls of the Sky". Germany did not sell Me109s to Finland until 1943.

---------------

Sorry for replying these things in a Stuka thread...    YES, give us Stuka for AH!!!!... tired of having to use alied planes for tank busting.



------------------
BlauKreuz
Lentolaivue 34

[Dowding]

 

almost every post I've seen puts all the blame on the Nazis yeah they we're bad but so was everyone else...

Glasses, this is exactly the kind of post that I find so annoying. You're basically saying that the Allies were as bad as the Nazis.

I just don't understand how you can come to this conclusion, considering how the Allied atrocities pale into insignificance beside those of the Nazis.

The Allies didn't start want a war - there was so much to lose. They didn't engineer the extinction of a race of people or enslave half of Europe. They didn't want any of that, and you can see this in how Chamberlain desperately wanted to avoid war. He was a mere relfection of the mood of the British people at the time.

Moreover, the Allies saved Germany from Nazism.

Yet you still maintain that the Nazi's actions were mirrored by the Allies exactly. This is not only an apologist argument (not a personal attack, but a statement of fact) but is disproven by even the most cursory look into WW2 atrocities.

BTW, long before Germany was crippled and on the verge of losing the war, LW planes were routinely over England hitting both military and civilian targets. And I'm not talking about mixed civilian/strategic targets like the RAF over Dresden. Here's an example (from 'Hawker Typhoon: The Combat History') and is a direct translation:

Fighter-Bomber Report No.1 - 26.1.43
8 Focke-Wulf 190 (start 1515 hours)

Harrasment attack on Kingsbridge. Principal target not attacked due to change in wind direction. Alternative target 1600 hrs low-level attack on Loddiswell. Bombing concentrated on local dwellings. The local church almost completely destroyed. Also cannon attack on Loddiswell.

On leaving area, more buildings north-east of Start Point were bombarded with cannon fire.

This was routine enough to be put in the mission de-brief, unlike some inpromptu hush-hush strafing of German civilians by a bored (and slightly unhinged) P-51 pilot.

No side is innocent; but some were a damned sight more innocent than others.

[Fishu]

Dowding,

IMO, hes saying that others were also bad, not "as bad".
Theres a slight difference in saying it, but whole different meaning.

So I just must wonder your way of translating this saying as if they were as bad as nazis, when I don't see such thing said.
It is not even basically so, what you're saying.

If you try to claim allies as a honest side, then I would say you're wrong. (BUT, see that im nowhere saying that they'd been as bad)

This was routine enough to be put in the mission de-brief, unlike some inpromptu hush-hush strafing of German civilians by a bored (and slightly unhinged) P-51 pilot.

[/b]

..and the bombers bombing cities? (as I recall, bombs are a bit different threat than a P-51)

Now I were following your way of talking.. and I could already guess what you would be saying to this.

No side is innocent; but some were a damned sight more innocent than others.

[/b]

..and yet you can't just admit that they did some bad as well, but instead try to presume everything that others say, as if they would be in worst meaning?
Try to think as you read, please.. nobody is saying here that allies and nazis were equally bad nor that allies would been worse.

[Toad]

Gosh, I do so love seeing the particular personalities in this thread going for each other's throats, so to speak. Amusing to see who's taking which position.

I do think it should be in the O-Club, however.

 

[Staga]

Naah, I quit street-fights at summer -87 when my bones started brokeing.
I know I should wait my friends to came before starting to fight against 2 fellows alone but it seemed fun then. Not so fun anymore when I walked back from hospital with paper which said "Clavicula crushed from distal end".

btw it looks funny in rontgen pic