News like this, shows what?
(www.nbcnews.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (53)
sorted by:
Look it up. 1956 part of the Karelia region was given to the Finnish. There was a dispute on if Finland gives it back today. Or something? Parts taken in the wars. Some shit.
No, it wasn't a hard border. It has been an open border for a long time in many places, other parts less so. They had agreements I've commented on previously. Wildlife crossings, trains, etc. Particularly Laplanders herding reindeer. Now it's getting barbwire fences, pillboxes, patrols, and installations again. It had some of this in the war. The Northern parts are less populated. The South had more density. Russian north is Murmansk.
It is boring because it happened, I like to joke anyway, there you are selling, no it's not a reason to fear the gulags, because, no, not all went to the gulags, I mean some became Russians. Hahaha.
No wonder they bought Nato agreements.
If you for whatever reason need to believe in some border changes in USSR, it is completely up to you. I could not force you to find out all that stuff by yourself.
The only thing happened around 1956 is Karelo-Finn Soviet Socialist Republic was renamed into Karelian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic. No any borders with Finland was changed, it was just nice gesture of USSR to please Finland and show that USSR do not have any desires or clains on the Finland even in naming.
USSR had a naval base somewhere on the territory of Finland, on Baltic shore since 1944. Base was rented from Finland. Somewhere in mid 1950s, due to positive evolution of USSR-Finland relations, USSR naval base on the territory of Finland lost any sense, was closed and rent deal discontinued.
That's all possible events I'm aware about, that somehow could be perverted in the insane minds of so-called western "historians" as "USSR surrender territory to Finland after WWII".
Porkkala was returned to Finland in 1956. Meh.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karelia
https://www.rferl.org/a/1103688.html
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_of_the_Ingrian_Finns
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evacuation_of_Finnish_Karelia
The question is always the why, why the conflict. The why they sided with Germany. Why Nato. The propaganda has a basis.
I am sure more can be confirmed with census records. But there were purges and communism. In fact the region changed flags repeatedly under communism. It is still a hot topic, obviously. Many Russians settled into Finland, prior to communism, and many Fins were annexed by the Soviets. It is what it is. Exploited perhaps in conflict.
That was that rented naval base far from any USSR borders. It was rented in 1944, when Finland turn his back on Germany in WWII. It was never seized by USSR in the first place, and obviously it is absolutely impossible to return what was never taken. It was rented, then, when there was no need for naval base, rent deal was discontinued. Do you return rented apartment to the owner on the rent term end?
Hillarious. Rented land was "returned" and that is somehow USSR land loss toward Finland.
And this rented naval base was not in Karelia. It was in the Baltic Sea, deep in the territory of Finland. For the God sake, take a map and look, it's not that hard if you know exact name.
No. Karelia region was lost shortly after Bolshevik Revolution and was taken back in 1940. After WWII rest of Karelia lands was returned. So, no, Karelia changed hands once, by Jewish Bolshevik fault, for a ~20 years period is not "repeatedly".
Why return area. Area. War kinda breaks rent, yes, army fighting army. It's because of a truce. Also because they stopped sending the Fins to the gulag. They made border agreements etc.
No, Finland has joined Nato is the point. Not speculation.
Karelia hasn't been returned. It's a bigger area going down to the baltics.
Svestapol isn't rented somebody else said the Crimea was?
We're done joking. There are different perspectives and propaganda.