The Best War Movie

[MrFun]

Gods and Generals

[Serb]

Ok Pekka, now when hangover is almost over I'm ready to bring some numbers here.


First of all, data I post below is from book of satatistic research "Russia and USSR in wars of 20 century" done by Russian military historian general-colonel G.F. Krivosheev. The book was printed in Moscow in 2001.

His book contains two different numbers for Red Army casualities in Winter war.
First based on Red Army HQ archives. In accordance with documents dated March 15 1940, within 105 days of war Red Army's total casualties were 333 084.
KIA and died on way to hospitals: 65 384
MIA: 19 610
Injured: 186 584
Frozen: 1 892

The second number for casualties is a bit different from first. It's based on name's list of soldiers who died in this war. Such list was created after several years of reasearch and it contains names and family names of all dead soldiers.
In accordance with name's list Red army lost:
KIA or died on way to hospitals: 71 214
Died in hospitals: 16 292
MIA: 39 369

So, first number says that 95 348 Red Army personel died during Winter war and second number says that 126 875 Red Army personel died during Winter war.
The difference is because of several reasons. The second number (name's list) include people who died in hospitals after March 15 1940. It also include airforce pilots and personel that didn't belonged to Red Amry (like personel of frontier guard who participated in war). Also it includes people who considered as MIA but never returned from war (who was in army in 1939-1940 and who were considered as MIa and with whom relatives lost any contact after the war.

Red Army couldn't lost about 1 million in Winter war simply because there was no 1 million red Army troops in Finland during this period. Soviet armies that particpated in this war never had so many personel.

G. Krivosheev is well-knownin Russia (and not only in Russia) military scientist, general-colonel and doctor of military science. If you consider that I'm brainwashed, you should prove that Krivosheev is wrong, because I based my statements on his book. His book also contains two different numbers for Finnish casualties. In accordance with first number Finland lost 48 243 KIA and 43 000 were injured. In accordance with second number Finland lost 95 000 KIA and 45 000 were injured.

So, kill/loss ratio is 1:3 in faivor of Finland. Which is extremly good result for such operation.
Yes.
Because this war was unique, none army in the world never before 1939 have broken enemy's frontal defensive positions during winter. In WW1 was only a single case when enemy's frontal positions were broken. It was Russian summer offensive of 1916 also known as Brusilov's breakthrough. Before 1939 military thory said that frontal breakthrough through heavily fortified f defensive positions is impossible. Red Army made it during the most cold winter in 20 century when day's temperatures were below -40C and night tempeartures sometimes were below -50C.


An intersting info about Winter war contains book of Viktor Suvorov "The last republic".
First of all I must say that I consider him as traitor and have no respect for him as man. He betrayed his country and his brothers in arms- KGB oficers that were cought thanks to his betrayal. He is former KGB officer who escape USSR and who lives and works in Great Britain now. His book 'Ledokol' (Icebreaker) is well known for west public.
So in chapter 11 of his 'the last republic' book he says about interesting experiment he done in British military academy where he is working currently. He simulated winter war on military super computer. (there are only two such computers in GB. One for work, another one installed in this academy is for training of future operators).
First of all he input weather conditions, temerature -41C.
Computer replied: offensive operation is impossible.
Then he removed temprature as one of the main parameters. (no temperature at all) And then input a depth of snow- 1.5 meters.
Computer replied again that offensive operation is impossible. He removed snow factor and input data about terrain, forests and about day longitude (at 16:00 there was already night). Computer replied again that offense is not possible. He removed those parameters. Finnaly he removed all those factors and left only data about Mannergeim line itself. Info about bunkers, minefeild, barbed wire, etc.
Computer replied: offensive is possible. The direction of main strike is Lintulla-Viipuri (sp?). Before attack bombardments: first strike- air 50 kilo tonns, epicenter in Kannelyarvi (sp?) hight 300 meters. Second strike- air epicenter Lounatyoki, third strike...fourth strike...
After he removed use of nuclear weapons computer replied- offensive operation is not possible.

Breakthrough of Mannergeim line was not simply impossible task, it was four times impossible task, but Red Army accomplished this task within 105 days.
You may continue to laughting about Russian army now.
Hitler laughted too and attacked SU. In October 3 of 1941 he said- 'we greatly understimated Red Army". In April of 1945 when Russian were in Berlin he paid with his life for this mistake and his arrogance.
Baltic states and Romania didn't laugh about Red army and surrendered without a single shot. Baltic states completely, while Romania give up Bessorabia to SU. It was few months after the Winter war.

If anyone reads Russian he can find this chapter from Suvorov's book 'The last republic' here. (on Russian of course)

http://www.chelny.ru/city/books/suvorov/suvorice/lastrep/lastrep112.htm

As for Karelia, Finland was on Hitler's side in WW2. Allies, including Soviet Union were victorious in WW2. The winner takes it all, like ABBA sing. Simple as that. Sorry, but Karelia is part of Russia. To give it up means to reconsider results of WW2 and it will never happen.

[Pekka]

Serb, to be honest, I'm not in the mood of talking about numbers and casualties, it leads nowhere and is not important. This doesn't mean I give up though! Also I made a mistake of not pointing out I took second war numbers in consideration too.

You know why Finland was sided with Germany? Because SU attacked! We couldn't defend with spoons and spears you know . The point is, SU attacked, and it resulted stealing of our lands.

Basically you're saying might makes it right. That if you have army big enough, you can take the lands you want wheather it belongs to you or not? That is still stealing.

[VetLegion]

Stalin was no soft harted guy, the only reason Finland did not become a Soviet Republic is because Finns fought like men and showed him the cost

[Pekka]

But let's not focus on the fighting and combat that was on then..

.. more about there still are no reasons of keeping it.
Of course if you want to be imperialist, then the logic would hold, but if not.. then it won't hold.

[Serb]

First Stalin offered to exchange this Finnish land on twice as large Soviet land. Even Mannergeim was for compromise with the Soviets, but you government refused. I do not justify agression of Soviet Union vs Finland, it was an agression. But I guess Stalin had his reason to fear that Finland will be used by Germans as bridgehead for attack vs. Soviet Union. You country was preparing itself for war. On your territory your and foreign experts build military airfields that total capacity were 10 times greater than total number of planes in Finnish airforce. What's the reason to build let's say 100 military airfeilds if you have only ten planes?
Stalin believed that Finland was a threat to SU in its future war vs. Germans. And there is no way that Finland would remain neutral in this future war. Your relationships with Germans were quite well. But I guess if you refused to give Germans the right of passage, they would give it via force and used Finland as bridgehead for attack vs. SU anyway. Finland was perfect place for attack vs. SU, especially if frontier was not moved. (32km between Leningrad and frontier before the Winter war and 250 km after Winter war.)

Still it was an agression anyway, like American invasion in Iraq for example. This pre-emptive aproach sucks.

Serb, to be honest, I'm not in the mood of talking about numbers and casualties, it leads nowhere and is not important.

Me too. Let's stop it, it really leads to nowhere.

[child of Thor]

The Vikings (old one with kirk douglas).
Any of the japanese classic ones by the guy who did the 'seven samuri', i've seen a few and they are all excellent.
the film adaption of 'Henry V' with kenneth branagh in it.
Conan the barbarian(it dealt with a small personal war).

[Pekka]

Yeah, I said earlier that Stalin being paranoid had some legit points in it, but that it wasn't enough for the action.
Also, it's not really fair to offer lands in trade, the other part really doesn't have to give them you know .
We built stuff and started looking for partners who would support us because we knew what was going to happen. Or at least suspected. But that's hardly an aggression.

I'm just tired ok. I have being arguing about this same issue with my whole life, and I'm just too tired now. I see how this is going, and that I will not accept your logic or explanations, and you won't do the same for me.
Normally, I'd still argue it, but I'm just not in the mood now. I have a b-day tomorrow and all, so maybe next time, ok? Don't take this as me giving up, because then I'd have to defend and continue arguing and I really don't want to do it now . We can always discuss about it later.

Besides, we'd make lot better than our countries. You see, we are discussing about this issue.

AND this is really off topic, so let's continue with the movies..

I just saw Tears of the Sun. Bruce Willis in Africa.. saving some westerners because rebels where closing in. Average action, entertaining, but not good.