Press J to jump to the feed. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts
View
Sort
Coming soon

Mannerheim was not a strategist, he was a public figure representing a leader because all cool nations had one.

29 points · 1 month ago

Yeah, well the other western European countries got Marshall aid as a stimulus, but Soviet Union blocked that for Finland. Also we had to pay really heavy reparations, so at 70s we were still catching up as there was only 20 years from last reparation payment.

So considering that it was a miracle that we were doing as well in 70s as we did, as Soviet plan earlier was to crush Finland economically, as they could not do it by force of arms.

see more

For example, the Czechoslovakian and Polish delegations were prevented from attending the Paris meeting. Finland simply refused as USSR would have otherwise dumped its whole nuclear arsenal on Finland.

2 points · 4 days ago

The instruments are not local or traditional of course.

-54 points · 5 days ago

Esbo, not "Espoo". It should really be spelled Äspå though since it comes from the Swedish words äspe 'aspen forest' and å 'river'.

see more
6 points · 5 days ago

Espoo and Äspå are pronounced the same.

Land (Finland)

see more
18 points · 5 days ago · edited 5 days ago

The most popular suggestions for "Suomi" (Finland) are land/ground/earth, human and swamp.

Original Poster1 point · 5 days ago

Are you saying that the northern border was undefined between Sweden and Russia? In that case it's very likely that they would've agreed upon it eventually just like Finland and Russia did.

see more

Before the 19th century you could travel between whereabouts of Russia and Sweden (Finland) unopposed. Once Russia annexed Finland you could no longer travel unopposed. People living closeby were taxed by both Sweden and Russia.

On Swedish cartography the northern border was most often featured as almost a straight line as indicated.

Original Poster1 point · 5 days ago

Yes.

Load more comments

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.

see more
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.

Plus it was the king(?) of Sweden's lucky charm in 1918, around the time the Finnish Civil War started. The Swedes sent the Fins some aircraft which had the lucky charm painted on the side, it also kickstarted the Finnish Air Force I believe.

A reluctance exist in Finland to remove the symbol as that would mean the swastika loses it's more peaceful meaning and would be regarded as a hate symbol, and only that.

see more
8 points · 13 days ago

It was count Von Rosen. He donated the Finnish Air Force (White Guard) its second plane (first one broke).

Aww we had better time under Russia's control

Aww? Bold of you to start a message like that with such a condescending tone.

Which one of the "better times under Russia's control" you're referring here? You mean just the blast we had in 1809-1917 or the other great times we had under Russia's control? Because there are plenty to choose from. Just want to make sure if you have a specific one in mind.

Maybe you mean the great wrath (isoviha), the Russian occupation in 1713-1721? That was absolutely fantastic period of time all over the country, all the raping, torturing, senseless stealing, destroying, taking women and children to be sold as slaves (over 30 000 people from a country of 400 000 people. And that wasn't the only time Finns were taken as slaves by Russians) but especially the murdering. Ah, the murdering, they did such a creative, careful work that even in 2018 our historians consider it to be one of the cruelest, horrifying times for Finland. Russians wiped out 1/4 of Northern Ostrobothnia, and that part wasn't even occupied ffs. You really have to appreciate the effort, I mean let's take 29.9.1714 as a shining example, 400 Cossaks murdering 800 people in one night, using just axes. That's dedication right there. Not to mention those who starved to death after the Russians made sure not to leave absolutely nothing behind as a war tactic.

But yes, if you don't mean the numerous times of occupations, the time under Russian's control as the Grand Dutchy was one big tea party too. Such a lovely times that people started wanting independence, organized resistance and military movements (jääkärit) and were consciously building a national identity that had nothing to do with Russia. Speaking of that national identity, you see the quote "Svenskar är vi inte längre, ryssar vilja vi inte bli, låt oss alltså bli finnar" all the time in r/Europe, funnily enough it seems to always lack a pretty important word (längre). "Swedes we are no longer, Russian we do not want to become, let us therefore be Finns". But back to the GDOF, yes it was such a blast, the first and second period of Russian oppression, all the terror and forced Russification. But can you blame them? No one spoke or wanted even to learn Russian and the stupid uncultured peasants still wore Swedish flags on their Christmas trees. That's why they had much more crushing methods in mind, but unfortunately WW1 messed up their plans and Finland never got to enjoy it.

But please do cherry pick and make a generalization how wonderful the times were under Russia compared to Sweden. After all, its much harder to actually pick up a book and learn about your country's own history, so please continue relying on reddit's view on these things.

see more
1 point · 15 days ago · edited 14 days ago

Neutraliteetin/puolueettomuuden vuoksi mainittakoon että ei se ruotsinvallan aikakaan suhteessa Ruotsiin ruusuilla tanssimista ollut. Suomen väestön oli lapsipuolen asemassa, mutta pidetään syynä pikemminkin haluttomuutta kustantaa puolustusta ja palveluksia kuin tahallista sortoa. Suomea ei kunnollisesti puolustettu eivätkä asukkaat voineet kommunikoida virkamiesten kanssa ja valtiopäivillä omalla kielellään. Ruotsalaiset olivat olevinaan huomaamatta epäkohtia paitsi eräinä kriittisinä aikoina, jolloin yritettiin korjata laiminlyötyä puolustusta. Suomella olisi ollut samat oikeudet vain jos suomenkieliset olisivat opetelleet puhumaan ruotsia. Koska he eivät voineet valtiopäivillä eivätkä oikeusistuimissa ja muissa virastoissa käyttää suomea, ei heillä ollut samoja oikeuksiakaan. Ruotsalaiset näyttivät joskus miltei hämmästyneinä huomaavan, miten lojaalisia suomalaiset kaikesta huolimatta olivat. Ajoittainen tyytymättömyys ilmaistiin valtiopäivävalituksissa eikä kapinoina. Suomalaisia pidettiin alkukantaisina ja sivistymättöminä (mikä oli totta), tähän puututtiin kunnolla vasta 1800-luvulla.

Nykyisen Ruotsin alueella vuonna 1646 annettiin julistus, että jokaiselta suomalaiselta, joka ei halunnut oppia ruotsia, on talot poltettava, ja hän on henkipatto jokaisen ruotsalaisen edessä. Suomen kieli oli täydellisesti kielletty ja suomenkielisten kirjojen lukeminen johti joissakin tapauksissa vangitsemiseen vielä 1700-luvulla.

Mutta tämä oli tavallista ja ymmärrettävää ja sitä harrastettiin muuallakin maailmassa. Suomalaiset eivät olleet räikeä poikkeus.

Sitaattiin liittyen, kyseisen identiteettikriisin kävi läpi vain sivistyneistö. Suomalaisille oli selvää ketkä olivat ruotseja, venäläisiä, ja niin edelleen jos tunnisti puhetta. Suomalaisille eli siis hämäläisille, savolaisille ja muille alettiin valistamaan kansallisvaltioista ja kansallisuudesta eli suomalaisuudesta koulun myötä.

Syy miksi Venäjä "vapautti" suomalaisia oli hajota ja hallitse, ei omaa hyvyyttä.

Tällä ei varmaan ole yhteyttä, mutta vuosina 1696–1697 Suomessa oli kato samalla kun Ruotsi kielsi viljan maahantuonnin ja väestöstä 1/3 kuukahti. Valtiomiehet alkoivat epäillä että porukka tekee itsemurhia välttääkseen veroja :DDD. Irlannissa tämmöisestä noisi hirmu haloo mutta ei Suomessa koska tätä tapahtui vähän väliä.

🤯😮😮6 to 12 euros a day!!! For 6 months to 12 that's crazyyy I'm shock how people don't get extremely outraged with that Thanks for the response I had no idea it was like that in Finland

see more
3 points · 22 days ago

One might think of it as continuum to school.

That makes sence Did you ever do it? Did you like it? Or do you think it was a waste of time

see more
2 points · 22 days ago

Yes. I went for the 6 months but later would have wanted to be longer.

One's experience follows this formula, external and internal factors:

Location, task and mates X you and your attitude = result

Load more comments

6 points · 23 days ago

No, only between 1952 (Stalin's death) and 1991. Before 1944 there were close to none weapons trade between Finland and USSR (even though Finland attempted to sell weapons to the USSR in early to mid 1930's), Stalin didn't want to sell advanced weapons to Finland between 1944 and his death in 1952, and after 1991 the only Russian weapons bought have been machine guns (PKM and Kord) and the Buk M1 AA system, which was given for free as compensation for the post-USSR state debt (funnily enough it was the exact Russian military version, not the export variant)- as FDF command doesn't want to buy any sophisticated Russian systems, because spare parts would be impossible to source in a war.

see more
Original Poster5 points · 23 days ago · edited 23 days ago

Yes. Great portions of Finnish armor, ammunition and weaponry consisted of captured ones. USSR even supplied bombers to Finland, though by first landing them to forests which was not very convenient as it required repair afterwards.

The 1st Finnish Airforce plane (thulin typ D) came with swastika painted on it. Swedish baron called Rosen donated the plane.

Here is the original in 1918

wing broke off mid flight

Replica in Tikkakoski Air museum

see more

The first plane of the Finnish Air Force was actually N.A.B. Albatros (White forces that is, reds had already multiple planes).

https://ilmavoimat.fi/en/history

-6 points · 1 month ago

Wait, the Finns have an air force? I'd been surprised if you told me they had an air port.

see more
3 points · 1 month ago · edited 1 month ago

I'd say it would be a default thought to have some military potent when located next to an unpredictable unstable state. And at least in the last conflict the air force was pretty crucial. Say, the average allied ace shot down a couple planes, and the Finnish counterpart some 30 planes.

Edit: Also, during wartime Finnish air force operates from road bases, so airports are less relevant.

Well the beautiful written language of Finland was created by Sweden. And most of the old cities where funded by Sweden. And so was the universities and libraries.

see more
1 point · 1 month ago · edited 1 month ago

A nation state doesn't create a written language, it is obviously an individual. If you somehow mean Agricola by Sweden, Agricola did create a written language but made it significantly more consistent, he is the the de facto founder of Finnish literacy, but not Finnish written language. Cities are locations on map to collect goods from peasants. The Finns tended to hide from this and hence the late and low urbanization in Finland. Due to language there was a sharp class divide in Finland where majority of the population was almost completely outside of the few institutions and infrastructure, the fewest in Europe. Things took a change in the early 19th century due to some changes in the structure of power.

11 points · 1 month ago · edited 1 month ago

English is a Germanic language.

Their version just evolved into the word 'Ale' while in Scandinavia it evolved into 'Øl/Öl'. Not a Scandinavian loan word.

It is believed to stem from Proto-Indo-European root *alu-, through Proto-Germanic *aluth-.

This is a cognate of Old Saxon alo, Danish, Norwegian, Swedish, Icelandic and Old Norse öl/øl, Finnish olut, Estonian õlu, Old Bulgarian olu cider, Slovenian ol, Old Prussian alu, Lithuanian alus, Latvian alus.

Cool huh? Its about to get even cooler;

The word ale comes from Old English ealu (plural ealoþ), in turn from Proto-Germanic *alu (plural *aluþ), ultimately from the Proto-Indo-European base *h₂elut-, which holds connotations of "sorcery, magic, possession, intoxication''

And no, Pivo never made it into Scandinavia because there never was a big Slavic influence in Scandinavia, only in Finland. But even Finland took to using some version of 'Øl/Ale' because Swedish influence was bigger than any other influence on Finland.

see more
2 points · 1 month ago

In Finland Beer is most of the time (colloquially) "Kalja". Olut considered to be from a Baltic language, and alternatively from Proto-Germanic *alu (stem *aluþ-). By comparison there is no "big Slavic influence" in Finland neither. Other influences altogether such as Indo-European and its descendants in Finnish language are vastly greater than Swedish.

But I thought Inherent Resolve only covered Syria and Iraq?

see more
Original Poster2 points · 1 month ago

That is right, my mistake, it is actually Resolute Support.

Finland was allied with Germany during that time (1943) ... Why would Americans have military attaches to a German Ally ? They would be considered spies and shot on sight .. just saying ...

see more
Original Poster2 points · 1 month ago

Not everything is that black and white. Not everything one reads is true. What Germany and Finland had in common was the enemy.

Nice to see someone to still hold the silly claim Finland was merely fighting for themselfs and not anyone else. Im Finnish and i think its a public fact that we were on Axis side throughout the continuation war and had to flip sides when the tides turned. It cost us alot but atleast we did preserve our independence.

see more
Original Poster1 point · 1 month ago

Finland was not fighting for the cause of neither side. You to claim otherwise is factually false.

Load more comments

What is Meankieli?

And before someone comes in here to yell at me about the accent mark: I'm American. We don't use those. My keyboard doesn't have the keys for that, and I'm not going to waste my time trying to dig one up to post it.

see more

A dialect of Finnish which was considered a different language in Sweden due to political reasons. Much like in Balkans and Scandinavia with Norwegian, Danish and Swedish.

18 points · 1 month ago

Apparently the Swedish name for it is Pungaåsen, but yes, that's the one.

I had to look that up - I actually didn't realise Punkaharju had become part of Savonlinna (Nyslott), but apparently that happened in 2013.

see more
7 points · 1 month ago · edited 1 month ago

Current Swedish name for it is Punkaharju, former were Pungaharju and Punkaåsen.

So both are wrong. What's the matter with this silliness?

You gotta admit Pungåsen ("Scrotum Ridge") sounds hilariously funny, though?

see more
1 point · 1 month ago · edited 1 month ago

Nothing out of ordinary, but it's actually Pimpernel Esker.

Original Poster9 points · 1 month ago

Though, these are absolute first tier gear. For example, at the beginning of the war, the average gear issued was a rifle and a cocarde.

That is diplomatic language. It means “if NATO forces enter territory of Finland, USSR forces are allowed to enter Finland and occupy it”.

see more
1 point · 1 month ago · edited 1 month ago

Of course if Finland allows NATO occupation and joins the war against USSR instead of being neutral.

And almost anything can be treated as NATO occupation :D

see more

Under the pact, Finland was obliged to resist armed attacks by "Germany or its allies" (in reality interpreted as the United States and allies) against Finland, or against the Soviet Union through Finland. If necessary, Finland was to ask for Soviet military aid to do so. However the pact in itself did not provide any provisions for the Soviet military to enter Finland and stipulated that all such actions would have to be agreed separately should Finland choose to request aid. Furthermore, the pact did not place any requirements for Finland to act should the Soviet Union be attacked (if the attack would not take place through Finland). The agreement also recognized Finland's desire to remain outside great-power conflicts, allowing the country to adopt a policy of neutrality in the Cold War.

Load more comments

u/Gentsus
Karma
9,738
Cake day
March 12, 2018
Trophy Case (1)
Verified Email

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