Press J to jump to the feed. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts
4.3k
Posted by
www.marinamaral.com
7 days ago

Lt. Hans Wind and his Brewster B-239 Buffalo, Finland 1943.

129 comments
96% Upvoted
What are your thoughts? Log in or Sign uplog insign up
www.marinamaral.com
Original Poster257 points · 7 days ago

More from me || Facebook || Instagram


PRINTS || MY BOOK || SIGNED COPIES


Hans Henrik "Hasse" Wind was a Finnish fighter pilot and flying ace in World War II, with 75 confirmed air combat victories. Wind started his pilot career in 1938 by volunteering to join a pilot training course. He was a reserve officer in the Winter War (1939-1940), but did not fly due to a lack of available planes. Wind had now decided to embark on a military career, and he finished training as a lieutenant on 17 June 1941.

Transferring to LeLv24 in August 1941, he fought in the Continuation War. He flew a Brewster B239 (the export version of the Brewster Buffalo) from 1941–1943, claiming 39 of his victories in the type. On 22 September 1941, Wind was credited his first kill, a I-15. In August 1942, the squadron was transferred to Römpötti to operate over the eastern Gulf of Finland. On 14 August 1942, Wind shot down two Hurricanes, and four days later a Hurricane and two I-16s. At the end of 1942, his score stood at 14.5 claims. On 5 April 1943, Wind shot down three Il-2s. On 14 April, Wind claimed two Spitfires, and on 21 April two Yak-1s and shared one with fellow ace Sgt Kinnunen. In August 1943, the unit converted to the Messerschmitt Bf 109G.

Wind was awarded his first Mannerheim Cross on 31 July 1943 and his second on 28 June 1944.

He was promoted to captain on 19 October 1943 when he was 24 years old and was removed from front-line duty in order to instruct new fighter pilots. Wind was considered one of the most skillful aerial tacticians in the Finnish Air Force, and Wind's 'Lectures on Fighter Tactics' were written in 1943 and used in the training of new pilots for decades to come.

He returned to the front in February 1944. On 27 May 1944, he scored his first victory with the Bf 109, shooting down two La-5s. A Soviet offensive in the Karelian Isthmus started on 9 June 1944. On 13 June 1944, Capt. Wind led six 109s against a formation of Pe-2 bombers, shooting down four of them. Wind's streak continued in the days that followed; with a P-39 and an IL-2M on 15 June, two Pe-2s and a La-5 the next day, and on 19 June two P-39s (both of the 196 IAP; one flown by Hero of Soviet Union and eventual 29-kill ace Major A. V. Chirkov, who bailed out) and a La-5. On 20 June 1944, Wind added two La-5s, two Yak-9s and a Pe-2. On 22 June, he claimed two Spitfires and a La-5, with two La-5s and two DB-3Fs the next day. On 25 June, he downed three Yak-9s and two Yak-7s.

He was seriously wounded in an aerial battle against some thirty Yak-9s and P-39s on 28 July 1944. Wind shot down one Yak-9 before a 37 mm shell fired by a P-39 exploded against his seat armor. Another shell pierced the armor glass behind his left shoulder, exploding on the instrument panel. Wind was badly wounded in his left arm. He still managed to fly and land at an airfield, even though his plane had been seriously damaged during the attack.

Wind recovered from his wounds but never flew a combat mission again. He finished the war with a total of 302 combat sorties, scoring 75 kills, and is ranked second on the Finnish aces list.

He was married on 26 August 1945, then began his studies at the Helsinki School of Business, having resigned from the Air Force on 10 May 1945.

Wind died on 24 July 1995 and was survived by his wife and five children.


BLUE SWASTIKA: A blue swastika, the ancient symbol of the sun and good luck – was adopted as the insignia of the Finnish Air Force. The white circular background was created when the Finns tried to paint over the advertisement from the Thulin air academy. The swastika was officially taken into use after an order by Commander-in-Chief C. G. E. Mannerheim on 18 March 1918. The FAF changed its aircraft insignia after 1944, due to an Allied Control Commission decree prohibiting Fascist organizations and it resembling the Third Reich's swastika.


Forgive my absolute ignorance— due to his flying a Messerschmidt and fighting Soviets I would have thought he was flying for the Axis, but the explanation of the blue swastika makes it seem otherwise. Which side was he on?

Great pic either way.

www.marinamaral.com
Original Poster211 points · 7 days ago

Finland participated in the Second World War, twice battling the Soviet Union, and then against Nazi Germany. As relations with the Soviet Union changed during the war, Finland was placed in the unusual situation of being for, then against, then for, the overall interests of the Allied powers.

Huh! TIL. Thanks!

84 points · 7 days ago · edited 6 days ago

Finland itself declared neutrality in the beginning of WW2. One can debate on Finland's alignment, Finland wanted to see itself "in the camp of western powers". Allies and Axis usually saw it as an Axis power as it was in conflict with the USSR (due to disagreements on Finland's position with/in the USSR). Finland maintained relations with such as Nazi Germany and the USA.

The swastika has been used in Finland since at least the iron age.

Most commonly known are the Air Force Command flags among others.

14 points · 7 days ago

It can also be found on the Mannerheim cross

The Nazis really ruined it for everyone, man. Now I can't wear my Swastika pants.

Yeah they ruined a lot for a lot of people.

57 points · 7 days ago · edited 6 days ago

The finnish history in the world wars are quite unique. To understand the finnish WW2 history we have to get back to WW1.

In WW1 were Finland in a civil war, the reds versus the Whites. The reds fought for communism and were supported by the soviets and the whites were more western and wanted independence. The whites won the war and thus claimed independence from the soviet union. EDIT: read /u/Tech_Itch's comment below for correction and clarification.

In WW2 the soviets invaded Finland and tried to reclaim the land. Finland were able to fight them off more or less alone during the winter war 1939-1940. But in the continuation war 1941-1944 they had to get backup. They tried to call for help from other western countries, but partly due to their geographical position it was very hard for western countries to send help since in the west were nazy occupied territory, Norway. So Finland was between a rock and a hard place, in the West was nazi germany and in the east was the USSR, the very same enemy that Finland had fought their freedom from just two decades ago.

Finland were forced to choose sides and chose to cooperate with the germans so that they wouldn't have the same fate as the Baltic States and lose their independence. (This cooperation was not liked by the western countries and thus brittain declared war against Finland, although this declaration did not cause any further action.) Finland were more or less successful to fight off the soviets once again, some land was lost but their independence remained and that's what mattered most.

Technically Finland lost the war and agreed to sign a peace treaty on soviet demands. This treaty demanded among other things that the remaining german soldiers were to get out of Finland. However the germans still had plans to retake russian territories in the north so they did not leave voluntarily. This led to the Lapland wars 1944-1945, which ended in finnish victory.

So I guess you could say that in the beginning of the war they tried to be neutral, then wanted to join the allies but were forced to join the axis, but by the end they fought against the axis due to allied demands.

Edit: cleared up the Lapland war segment.

Fascinating! Thanks so much for the thorough explanation.

15 points · 6 days ago · edited 6 days ago

In WW1 were Finland in a civil war, the reds versus the Whites. The reds fought for communism and were supported by the soviets and the whites were more western and wanted independence. The whites won the war and thus claimed independence from the soviet union.

Corrections:

  • Both sides wanted an independent Finland. In fact, the future Reds were the ones to make the first major attempt to seize power from the Imperial Russian senate. The attempt failed, which they saw as partly the fault of the future White side. That would contribute to the civil war breaking out later. Just slightly over 20 years after the civil war, both the Reds and the Whites would be fighting the invading Soviets, with just as much motivation.

  • The Red side weren't communists. They were primarily social democrat. Some of the major motivations for the Reds were terrible labor conditions, and the perception that the conservatives were trying to keep them out of the democratic process. SDP had just won a landslide victory in the last election, but conservative meddling resulted in them having only half of the seats in the resulting government.

  • The Red side's proposed constitution was majorly influenced by the US and Swiss constitutions.

The view that the Reds were communists who wanted to join Soviet Russia is a bit of White war propaganda that stuck around after their victory. It of course didn't help the international perception that Russia also had a Red side and a White side, and their Reds actually were communists.

There were many democracy-minded people on the Finnish White side, but they were majorly propped up by Imperial Germany, and many of their decision makers were earlier trying to slow down Finnish independence from Imperial Russia. So as a faction, they weren't exactly some defenders of freedom. There was significant support among them for installing a German-born king, but that idea was dropped after the German Empire fell in WW1.

Both sides ended up doing terrible shit in the war, with the Red government losing control of a large chunk of their army, who then went on to commit attrocities, and the Whites commiting their own in the good old Finnish spirit of competition.

The Whites probably take the 1st prize in shittiness though by being completely terrible winners. After they won, they went on to shoot or starve to death thousands of innocent civilians, and political repression of leftists kept going on until their goon squads made the mistake of kidnapping and threatening a former Finnish president, and the public finally had enough.

Thank you for clearing it up, apparently my history knowledge is a bit rusty after all.

No problem. Your writeup was otherwise really good, so seeing some well-preserved 100 year old propaganda kind of stuck out.

One minor other thing I also noticed is that while Finland was mostly on its own in the Winter War, we received major material support from Sweden. They were officially neutral, but somehow kept losing their guns and ammo in the forests bordering Finland. Their forgetfulness got so bad that eventually a full third of the Swedish airforce's combat airplane pool was flown in Finland, in Finnish colors and by Finnish pilots.

Sadly, the Finnish public largely seemed to pay in kind by forgetting that the Swedes ever did that for us, but it's luckily gotten more attention recently.

Non-Mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_People%27s_Delegation


HelperBot v1.1 /r/HelperBot_ I am a bot. Please message /u/swim1929 with any feedback and/or hate. Counter: 199997

good bot

1 point · 6 days ago

If the reds had won we probably would have joined the USSR eventually like Lenin had anticipated.

2 points · 6 days ago · edited 6 days ago

Lenin anticipated a lot of things that never happened.

Social democrats didn't exactly love the Bolsheviks. Bolshevik supporters were seriously outnumbered, and the Finnish red troops outnumbered the Soviet troops still stuck in the country by almost 10 to 1.

SDP supporters suddenly starting to love Russian communists seems unlikely as hell too.

So basically, in the early days of the USSR there was no political will to join, and it would become apparent later that they were keen to repress anyone with their own ideas about anything, so joining them became even less likely with each passing day.

The days of shouty communists trying to order people around with varying success happened AFTER we lost the Continuation War. They weren't that prominent before WW2.

The view that the Reds were communists who wanted to join Soviet Russia is a bit of White war propaganda that stuck around after their victory. It of course didn't help the international perception that Russia also had a Red side and a White side, and their Reds actually were communists.

Seeing as how they were so tightly intertwined with the bolsheviks, no wonder. They even had Russians leading them.

  • The Red Guard attempted a coup d'etat in a red revolution against the legal government.

  • They also fought together with the Russian troops in Finland. Some of the highest leaders in the Red Guard were, in fact, Russians loyal to the bolsheviks.

  • They named their HQ after the bolshevik HQ in St. Petersburg.

  • They executed civilian "bourgeois" in class warfare.

  • The named the red part of the country the Finnish Socialist Workers' Republic. The Red Guard leadership (and the Helsinki Guard) was much, much more radicalized than the SDP majority.

  • In their constitution, private property rights were excluded and given to state and local administration.

Remember also that there's a big gap between what they said and what they did. Social democracy and civil rights sound all fine and dandy, but what we got was class warfare, militant political terror, and mass murder.

That would contribute to the civil war breaking out later.

What a strange way to put it. The civil war didn't "break out" - the Red Guards executed civilians and started a revolution to seize power from the elected government of independent Finland.

Seeing as how they were so tightly intertwined with the bolsheviks, no wonder. They even had Russians leading them.

There were only around 4000 Russians in the Red Guard that was almost a hundred thousand people strong. The most high profile Russian was a military advisor. The chief of staff was an American, on the other hand.

Besides, individual Russians being involved is not an indictment of any kind. The Russian Whites had Russians leading them, after all...

  • The Red Guard attempted a coup d'etat in a red revolution against the legal government.

The Red side had just won a democratic election, but they were prevented from using the power the citizenry wanted them to have. Personally, I'm not convinced that armed insurrection was the only and best course of action, but I can understand why they did it.

  • They named their HQ after the bolshevik HQ in St. Petersburg.

It was a tongue-in-cheek name that stuck. The building's still called Smolna.

  • They executed civilian "bourgeois" in class warfare.

Yes. Those were the attrocities I was talking about earlier. There were varying levels of "kill the rich"-mentality among the Red side.

  • The named the red part of the country the Finnish Socialist Workers' Republic.

It's not like they had marketing specialists on call... Seriously speaking though, back then, those words didn't have the bitter tinge they have now. Worker's revolutions were a relatively new thing.

The Red Guard leadership (and the Helsinki Guard) was much, much more radicalized than the SDP majority.

Yep. The Helsinki Guard were specifically the ones who renamed Smolna.

  • In their constitution, private property rights were excluded and given to state and local administration.

Socialism makes a distinction between private property and private possessions. Property is things like business assets and means of production. Possessions are your clothes, furniture, books and other everyday items you might need. Nobody was going to take away the latter.

Remember also that there's a big gap between what they said and what they did. Social democracy and civil rights sound all fine and dandy, but what we got was class warfare, militant political terror, and mass murder.

Controlling masses of people is horrifically difficult, and the Finnish People's Delegation lost control of large chunks of the Red Guards pretty quickly. That's always a risk with armed uprisings, which makes them generally a questionable idea. It really didn't help either that the Whites decided to respond with more of the same, but twice as hard for good measure.

That would contribute to the civil war breaking out later.

What a strange way to put it.

The neutral way to put it. You just might be one of those people who think that trying to keep some distance when looking at things you yourself weren't part of, and don't necessarily undestand the full motivations of, is "strange".

The civil war didn't "break out"

Of the fucking course it broke out. That's how civil wars start: some party picks up weapons and does what they think the other side deserves. Rightly or wrongly.

Besides, individual Russians being involved is not an indictment of any kind. The Russian Whites had Russians leading them, after all...

Of course Russians had Russians leading them, but this is Finland. Russia is the country that occupied Finland and still had troops all around the country so working with the enemy is a crystal clear indictment. Nowadays we have a fuller picture than we had now - but back then the Reds were fighting with the Reds of the country that had put Finland through 100 years of hell.

The Red side had just won a democratic election, but they were prevented from using the power the citizenry wanted them to have.

The Social Democrats lost their majority from the previous election, but is regardless not the same as the Red Guard. The Red Guard were militant fanatics and coup makers, many of whom were SDP members, but SDP isn't at fault for those crimes.

Besides, how did so many social democratic laws come to pass without SDP in power?

Seriously speaking though, back then, those words didn't have the bitter tinge they have now. Worker's revolutions were a relatively new thing.

Uh, not exactly bitter - people were scared as hell. This was spreading like fire through Europe. People were more informed than one would initially think. Newspapers and letters spread the news of bloodbaths and the western governments were ready to act. On the Swedish side, for example, they wanted to intervene and help the legal government, but were afraid this would spark a red revolution in their own country. There's a certain political tension in the air even today that was probably many times stronger back then.

In their constitution, private property rights were excluded and given to state and local administration.

Socialism makes a distinction between private property and private possessions. Property is things like business assets and means of production. Possessions are your clothes, furniture, books and other everyday items you might need. Nobody was going to take away the latter.

And the problem was that they were taking the business assets and means of production and giving it to e.g. the state i.e. the party. This is communism, which was the point.

It really didn't help either that the Whites decided to respond with more of the same, but twice as hard for good measure.

Initial White executions were of those active in implementing the Red Terror. Most White executions during the entire war were done after the war due to trials where coup makers were sentenced to death for treason (~5,700 killed in action vs. ~10,000 executed). Had Mannerheim had it his way, the Reds would have been released much earlier from prison camps so fewer would have died from disease and malnourishment also and the mental scars of the Finnish people could have started healing earlier.

The neutral way to put it.

Or a deliberately attempt to conceal unpleasant or incriminating facts.

Very cool. I had a clue about the winter war but didn't know about the bigger picture.

The Finnish air force's logo is actually still the swastika :) Just not on planes, but officially it is.

How did the Finns corroborate kill claims?

He shot down Spitfires in a Buffalo? How humiliating for them!

www.marinamaral.com
Original Poster68 points · 7 days ago

My book in collaboration with historian Dan Jones will be out in just a few weeks, so please consider pre-ordering it if you can. That's the best way to support my work. Thank you!

5 points · 7 days ago

Is it good? And is it going to be available in ebook and audio formats?

www.marinamaral.com
Original Poster14 points · 7 days ago

It’s a fantastic book. :)

48 points · 7 days ago

Is that the normal finnish airforce uniform? Must be the most casual looking wartime garb ive ever laid eyes on.

-153 points · 7 days ago(43 children)
84 points · 7 days ago

Absolutely trashed? Least disciplined force of WW2?

The Soviets had some 350.000 casualties and the Finnish some 70.000 during the 105 days of the Winter War. The Soviet casualties and the Finns withstanding the much larger Soviet forces are largely described as due to the Soviets' confused leadership, lack of discipline, supplies and clothes for cold-weather-warfare.

Finnish and German casualties in the Continuation War amount to about 310.000, while the Soviet casualties reach amounts of about 900.000. That much is true, that the Finns would not have lasted as long as they did without aid from the Germans, and even then, resisting the Soviet offensives in 1944 had ran the Finnish resources all but dry.

I'm curious, though, about how you've come to the conclusion that the Lapland War was somehow lost. The Germans were ran out of the country, albeit leaving destruction in their wake, and total casualties were about as big on both sides.

Therefore, I'd make a case against both the absolute trashing that you claim took place, and the lack of discipline in the Finnish armed forces at the time.

-83 points · 7 days ago(0 children)

I'm not sure you understand satire, it's supposed to be amusing. What you're doing is called trolling.

-58 points · 7 days ago(0 children)

Hey, theFakeNoid, just a quick heads-up:
goverment is actually spelled government. You can remember it by n before the m.
Have a nice day!

The parent commenter can reply with 'delete' to delete this comment.

Damn even the bots taking digs at the guy who doesn't understand satire now

11 points · 6 days ago · edited 6 days ago

Merriam-Webster Logo SINCE 1828 MENU JOIN MWU

satire noun sat·ire \ ˈsa-ˌtī(-ə)r
Popularity: Top 20% of words |Updated on: 11 Jul 2018 SEE WHAT'S TRENDING NOW

Definition of satire

1 : a literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn 2 : trenchant wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly See satire defined for English-language learners See satire defined for kids Examples of satire in a Sentence

By contrast, Martial's friend, Juvenal, learned to transmute Martial's epigrammatic wit into savage satire. Juvenal's fierce, if occasionally obscene, tirades against immorality fit easily into the propaganda of the new era. —G. W. Bowersock, New York Review of Books, 26 Feb. 2009 Unlike late-night talk shows that traffic in Hollywood interviews and stupid pet tricks, "The Daily Show" is a fearless social satire. Not many comedy shows would dare do five minutes on the intricacies of medicare or a relentlessly cheeky piece on President George W. Bush's Thanksgiving trip to Iraq … —Marc Peyser, Newsweek, 29 Dec. 2003 - 5 Jan. 2004 Saturday Night Live alum Bill Murray stars in this film about Army basic training, and it features Second City TV veterans John Candy and Harold Ramis. Director Ivan Reitman co-produced Animal House. Do not, however, expect a devastating satire on the military; this film is so innocuous that the Defense Department let Reitman use Fort Knox, Ky. to make it. —People, 27 July 1981 His movies are known for their use of satire. The movie is a political satire. Recent Examples of satire from the Web

RoboCop In 1987, director Paul Verhoeven and screenwriters Edward Neumeier and Michael Miner delivered a shotgun blast of dark comedy, social satire, and mind-numbing violence with RoboCop. — Tasha Robinson, The Verge, "10 subversive, dark American futures to stream on July 4th," 4 July 2018 His performance constitutes an astute satire on orchestra leaders in general. — Johnny Miller, SFChronicle.com, "Beatty booed at Candlestick Park," 28 June 2018 In simple frontier language, the budding but unpolished genius quickly demonstrated a unique ability to use embellishment, hyperbole, satire, caricature, parody, mock-flattery, and ridicule to flay bare essential truth. — Gregory Crouch, Time, "Mark Twain Claimed He Got His Pen Name From a Riverboat Captain. He May Have Actually Gotten It in a Saloon," 19 June 2018 These example sentences are selected automatically from various online news sources to reflect current usage of the word 'satire.' Views expressed in the examples do not represent the opinion of Merriam-Webster or its editors. Send us feedback. The culinary roots of satire

Satire came into English at the beginning of the 16th century, and the meaning of the word has not strayed very far from its original sense. The initial uses were primarily applied to poems, and the term now has a broader applicability. Satire has a semantic and etymological overlap with both farce and lampoon. Farce ("a light dramatic composition marked by broadly satirical comedy and improbable plot") came into English as a synonym for forcemeat, meaning "finely chopped and highly seasoned meat or fish that is either served alone or used as a stuffing." Lampoon ("a harsh satire usually directed against an individual") is thought to come from the French lampons!, meaning "let us guzzle!" And satire is believed to trace back to the Latin satur, meaning "well-fed."

Origin and Etymology of satire

Middle French or Latin; Middle French, from Latin satura, satira, perhaps from (lanx) satura dish of mixed ingredients, from feminine of satur well-fed; akin to Latin satis enough — more at sad NEW! Time Traveler First Known Use: 1501 in the meaning defined at sense 1

See Words from the same year satire Synonyms

Synonyms lampoon Related Words burlesque, caricature, parody, spoof, takeoff; comedy, farce, sketch, skit, slapstick, squib; derision, ridicule; cartoon, mockery, travesty Synonym Discussion of satire

wit, humor, irony, sarcasm, satire, repartee mean a mode of expression intended to arouse amusement. wit suggests the power to evoke laughter by remarks showing verbal felicity or ingenuity and swift perception especially of the incongruous. ⟨a playful wit⟩ humor implies an ability to perceive the ludicrous, the comical, and the absurd in human life and to express these usually without bitterness. ⟨a sense of humor⟩ irony applies to a manner of expression in which the intended meaning is the opposite of what is seemingly expressed. ⟨the irony of the title⟩ sarcasm applies to expression frequently in the form of irony that is intended to cut or wound. ⟨given to heartless sarcasm⟩ satire applies to writing that exposes or ridicules conduct, doctrines, or institutions either by direct criticism or more often through irony, parody, or caricature. ⟨a satire on the Congress⟩ repartee implies the power of answering quickly, pointedly, or wittily. ⟨a dinner guest noted for repartee⟩ Other Literature Terms

apophasis, bathos, bildungsroman, bowdlerize, caesura, coda, doggerel, euphemism, poesy, prosody SATIRE Defined for English Language Learners

satire noun Definition of satire for English Language Learners

: a way of using humor to show that someone or something is foolish, weak, bad, etc. : humor that shows the weaknesses or bad qualities of a person, government, society, etc. : a book, movie, etc., that uses satire SATIRE Defined for Kids

satire noun sat·ire \ ˈsa-ˌtīr
Definition of satire for Students

1 : humor that is used to make fun of and often show the weaknesses of someone or something 2 : something (as a book or movie) that uses satire.

I'm not invested ebough in this argument to read all of that, so i'll agree that i didn't fully understand the meaning of satire. Thanks to you that has changed and i'll make sure to remember this next time im trolling someone.

You're welcome!

Comment deleted7 days ago

Sinäkö sait vai

Sina ei oli hassuu, vaan variin.

Jokes on you! I was only pretending to be retarded!

Exactly! Finally someone gets me.

No that was actually was being satire, the thing you failed to be.

Wait, really? How come i didn't catch up on that.

6 hours later you're using sarcasm correctly, congrats

Thanks, i can't really reply to these things that fast since i've got that ten minute timer between my comments due to my negative karma in this sub.

6 points · 7 days ago

Huh, I really ate the bait then I guess. Oh well, hopefully someone learns something from my reply.

trashed

laughs in Simo Häyhä

31 points · 7 days ago

lol....

They were heavily out-gunned and out-manned, yet managed to hold the Soviets at bay for longer than expected in both conflicts. I think most Finns might take exception to your commentary. Good luck!

I think it was easier for them in the Continuation War since the Soviets were busy trying to not get murdered by the Axis.

8 points · 7 days ago

Go home mate.

6 points · 7 days ago

Aika kova rölli kyl.

Karmani katoaa kuin tuhka tuuleen.

History from an alternate universe? Cool! Tell me about the Boer wars and how they lost despite their overwhelming imperial might, superior numbers and technological advantage.

-5 points · 7 days ago(0 children)

Sadly my expertise in history only covers the finnish frontier of WW2,

Well at least you got the participants correct, so good on your expertise.

/s

11 points · 7 days ago

Every single thing here is wrong, except that the Soviets did indeed win the wars.

-2 points · 7 days ago

Actually, the Soviet union did not win the winter war, they proposed a peace treaty. So it was a tie.

4 points · 6 days ago

In that treaty Finland lost a lot of land, how that is not a Soviet victory is beyond me.

2 points · 6 days ago · edited 6 days ago

No, they got most of their initial demands except the military base and the islands in the Moscow peace treaty.

I don’t understand why everyone thinks it was a tie. It was not. Period.

Edit: The gains actually exceeded the demands.

3 points · 6 days ago

The demands were nothing but the first step toward further demands/annexation. If the USSR had their way Finland would have had a similar fate to the Baltic states. Molotov-Ribbentrop pact and USSR's established Finnish puppet government at the start of the winter war really shows their true plans.

This war was about Finnish independence, thinking it was about anything else is being way too generous to the USSR. By this metric, it was a defensive victory, albeit a costly one, but the USSR wouldn't have offered to make that peace treaty otherwise. We have a saying in Finland: "The Soviets gained just enough land to bury their dead."

Non-Mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Background_of_the_Winter_War


HelperBot v1.1 /r/HelperBot_ I am a bot. Please message /u/swim1929 with any feedback and/or hate. Counter: 199916

No, it was a sound defeat on the finnish side. Sure the damage done to the soviets was greater than the damage done to the finns was but Finland still gained nothing in the war, while the soviets got more than they initially demanded.

least disciplined

Ever heard of Simo Häyhä?

Why does everyone keep bringing that guy up. I mean what does he even have to do with discipline.

He alone killed over 500 men (edit: Soviets) in the Winter War. Not just any undisciplined dipwad can do that

Doeant beat the american sniper tho.

This is just conplete bullshit, starting from not having official uniforms.

Let me get home and I'll educate you.

1 point · 6 days ago · edited 6 days ago

Oon nyt 17h oottanu eikä mitään oo kuulunu nii tässää ois ny muistutus että oot mulle opetuksen auki.

Ai, sori, luin pitemmälle sun.juttuja eikä kyl kiinnostanu osallistua trollailuun sen kummemmin. Sori jos menetit unesi tämän takia.

I'll be all ears.

This is probably the best sub Reddit I joined. Thank you

r/finlandconspiracy Isnt funny anymore, go home

6 points · 6 days ago

No vittu asiaa saatana

Also impressive he had 39 victories in a Brewster Buffalo.

Even more impressive that he shot down Spitfires with a Brewster Buffalo.

[deleted]
11 points · 6 days ago

Well, in fairness the export Buffalo was better than what the US Navy had. Even though it had a weaker engine the lack of naval gear (arresting hook, lifeboat etc) made it considerably lighter. Plus the Finnish climate was far kinder to it than the Pacific.

Marginally better sure - but Brewster was out of their league as a designer and builder before the war even began (their only other adopted design, the Buccaneer was also terrible).

I think it’s a testament to the Finns making what little they had work - not any virtue of their aircraft.

[deleted]
6 points · 6 days ago · edited 6 days ago

My apologies if the post came across as dismissive of the Finns. Certainly a large part of their success was due to their skill, after all they developed tactics that the Soviets were unable to counter. I was only saying that the aircraft was better than what the Americans recieved; it was more of a match for the Lavochkins and Yaks than it's performance in the Pacific would suggest.

No apologies needed! Sorry if my response came across as combative.

11 points · 7 days ago

The fins were competent pilots and the russians were conscripts with just basic flight training.

Source?

-11 points · 7 days ago(5 children)
4 points · 6 days ago

Source please ?

4 points · 6 days ago · edited 6 days ago

You can see the statistics of the Aces. You will need quite a bit of time to scroll through the list before meet first pilot from the Allied countries.

In addition, this question was asked dozens of times.

The Germans had a “one pilot, one kill” system. This meant that only one pilot could claim the victory even if more than one pilot contributed to the kill. For various reasons, the more experienced pilot may be given credit for the kill. British and American pilots used a fractional system, wherein credit could be shared among pilots but the total would still equal one (so two pilots shooting down one aircraft would be awarded 0.5 of a kill, four pilots taking down an aircraft would each achieve 0.25 of a kill, etc)

And this applies not only to aircraft. For example, tanks - Nazis have a crazy KDA in relation to Soviet tanks. And in many - due to the fact that Nazis counted tank as "destroyed" only when it could not be restored or repaired. At that time, Soviets counted tank as "destroyed", when it received damages that put tank out of action - getting shot into grouser, breaking transmissions from the projectile and etc.

2 points · 6 days ago

Thanks.

Nazis have a crazy KDA in relation to Soviet tanks. And in many - due to the fact that Nazis counted tank as "destroyed" only when it could not be restored or repaired. At that time, Soviets counted tank as "destroyed", when it received damages that put tank out of action - getting shot into grouser, breaking transmissions from the projectile and etc.

Wouldn't that mean that Soviet counted more kills than Nazis ?

2 points · 6 days ago

I mean their own tanks, not enemies. Like, let's say: There is a battle between 100 Nazi tanks and 150 Soviet tanks. When the battle was over, the Nazis wrote down in their documents: irrecoverable losses - 3 tanks. Because only 3 tanks were destroyed to state of the pile of iron. Although 15 or 20 were withdrawn from the fight by direct hits, and they need major repairs.

While the Soviets will record in the "losses" 50 tanks. Although in battle completely destroyed 7. 23 received minor damage, which can be repaired in field. And the remaining 20 are generally stuck in the mud before the battle and in soviet papers count as technical losses.

More details can be read here.

You really shouldn't try to be clever about things you really know nothing about. Trying to generalize things by equalizing German methods with those of the Finns already leads you to a totally wrong track. For example the Finnish Air Force used fractional accounting. And additionally Finns did not have such 'chosen' structure as what you describe. It would be wise for you to keep in mind that Finns had relatively few anything remotely resembling front-line aircraft to begin with. For example most of the war (1941-44) Brewsters were primarily the equipment of the 24th Squadron and all the best pilots were in there too. There was even a full flight in that squadron where all the members had the Mannerheim Cross (Finnish equivalent to the Victoria Cross or the Medal of Honor). It was really 'all the eggs in a single basket' method but it worked.

Fly, Hans...fly like the Wind. Or, just a Wind.

What’s up with the blue swastika?

81 points · 7 days ago · edited 7 days ago

From /u/marinamaral's comment:

BLUE SWASTIKA: A blue swastika, the ancient symbol of the sun and good luck – was adopted as the insignia of the Finnish Air Force. The white circular background was created when the Finns tried to paint over the advertisement from the Thulin air academy. The swastika was officially taken into use after an order by Commander-in-Chief C. G. E. Mannerheim on 18 March 1918. The FAF changed its aircraft insignia after 1944, due to an Allied Control Commission decree prohibiting Fascist organizations and it resembling the Third Reich's swastika.


One of he Finnish Air Force's first airplanes was gifted by the Swedish count Eric von Rosén, whose personal lucky charm, the swastika, was painted on the aircraft, hence the decision by Mannerheim.

Also notable is that the Finnish Air Force's use of the symbol predated not just Nazi Germany using it, but the existence of Nazi Germany and even the Nazi party, as Hitler didn't found it immediately in 1918 after WWI...

27 points · 6 days ago

The symbol was used all over europe for centuries, real shame that it's now assosciated with nazism because it's a p nice shape.

Comment deleted6 days ago(1 child)

Saatanan tunari

6 points · 6 days ago · edited 6 days ago

To expand on /u/nygrd's and /u/marinamaral's comments, the blue swastika was originally the family crest of the guy who donated the first airplane for the Finnish airforce. That was long before the Nazis were a major thing, and swastika were everywhere as symbols of good luck, so the airforce saw nothing strange in adopting it as their symbol.

Ironically, the guy who donated the plane apparently DID become a Nazi later in his life, but nobody could have known at that point.

Oleg Maddox the flight simulator guru made a great sim called "il-2" which has an expansion where you fly a buffalo - which is just a stripped down obsolete model of the us pacific war carrier aircraft.

The Sim is super detailed - you control pitch and fuel mix and even keep positive g bc it lacks fuel injection.

Buffalo is a fun little plane

4 points · 6 days ago

Color on the B-239 is perfect. Excellent job.

6 points · 7 days ago

the secret is knowing when to retire

I've always wanted to fly like the Wind.

2 points · 7 days ago

Man. The Buffalo was NOT the most nimble fighter either Old school design against the newer ones that came out of war

Props to a brother

Great photo!

His name fits him perfectly.

The Nazis stole his eyebrows.

What’s the insignia on the front of the plane? I’ve seen it on so many different Finnish aircraft.

That's a black lynx, the emblem of his unit, Lentolaivue 24 (LeLv24).

Did the brits gift aircraft to the USSR? I don’t recall us ever being hostile with them.

2 points · 6 days ago

Britain sent airplanes to the USSR via the lend lease program. Britain also declared war on Finland in the continuation war.

Can you colour a picture of Franz Stigler next? He had a book written about him called A Higher Call.

Amazint

Brianne of Tarth?

Hans wind? *giggles in danish"

Comment deleted7 days ago(More than 19 children)
12 points · 7 days ago

Bad joke.

Comment deleted7 days ago(0 children)
9 points · 7 days ago

Nobody seriously believes Finland doesn't exist.

Comment deleted7 days ago(0 children)
10 points · 7 days ago

I live in Finland. I'm Finnish.

Comment deleted7 days ago
8 points · 6 days ago

I have to admire your commitment.

Do YOU feel left out, bullied, or unattractive? Don't shoot up your school - join us FUNNY MEMERS over at r/finlandcontroveracy instead! xDD WE HAVE THE NEWEST FUNNIEST MEMES YOU GUYS xD

We have the BEST of r/atheism, r/incels, AND r/vapenation!!

Comment deleted7 days ago
4 points · 6 days ago

Nah, that just doesn't make sense. How am I able to drive 1000km north amd still be within Finland's borders? That wouldn't be a possibility if Finland was a sea.

Comment deleted6 days ago

My sides! This FUNNY NEW MEME was exactly what this thread needed! I CAN'T EVEN xD

Remember when Joey said "How YOU doin'?" LOL I DO TOO

More BRAND NEW MEMES over at r/finglandbonspiragy xD

Comment deleted6 days ago
1 point · 6 days ago

That's too small, and too far north.. If I lived there, I wouldn't be able to get to Estonia in a few hours on a ferry.

LoL (laugh out loud) fellow CONSPIRA-MEMER (name of our clanmembers)!

For more FRESH NEW MEMES and FUNNY MEMERS like us, visit r/9gag, r/memes, r/funny, and r/jokes and OF COURSE r/finelandeconspiuracy!

ROFLCOPTER xD

EVERYONE'S WELCOME YOU GUYS xD LEARN THE MEMERIFIC TRUTH NOW AND BE MEMERS LIKE US xD

https://9gag.com/gag/aAdXd59/finland-is-fake

LoL (laugh out loud) fellow CONSPIRA-MEMER (name of our clanmembers)!

For more FRESH NEW MEMES and FUNNY MEMERS like us, visit r/9gag, r/memes, r/funny, and r/teenagers and OF COURSE r/finelandeconspiuracy!

Saatana hupiukko hihhuli ketään ei kiinnosta sun paskat vitsit hyppää sillalta alas juntti paska

Comment deleted7 days ago(0 children)
9 points · 7 days ago

God, why are there such stupid people on Earth...

There's always gotta be stupid people

-5 points · 6 days ago(0 children)
2 points · 6 days ago

Now i want to know what he said

Defending his country and way of life. There was a time when that wasn't the wrong thing to do.

Thank god WW2 wasnt faught by people like you or we would all be speaking German.

Community Details

385k

Subscribers

574

Online

/r/ColorizedHistory is dedicated to high quality colorizations of historical black and white images, and discussions of a historical nature. We're currently not seeking new contributors, but if you have any specific subjects or commissions, please message the mods.

Create Post
Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.