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:
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.
That naval base was rented after Finland exit WWII and made a peace deal with USSR in 1944. This base was necessary at the time, because WWII was going. It was not necessary when war ended, so the base was removed, so there was no any sense in rent deal, so it was discontinued. What is so hard to understand here? Why you need to believe in fucking gulags bullshit and in some non-existent border tensions?
That's good. Sweden have to join too as soon as possible. You might be aware that on most decisions NATO need unanimous vote. So more members with tensions, higher probability of stalling NATO. Sweden and Finland are old enemies, Swedes opressed Finns for millenia. They hate each other and more than suspicious to each other. It will be fun. Like Turkey-Greece discord in NATO was not enough. :)
Crimea is Russia. Sevastopol is a town in Crimea. Why would Russia rent anything on Russian territory from Russia?
Crimea was never rented to anybody.
On the USSR fall, Crimea declared independence before Ukraine. At the time Ukraine declared exit from USSR Crimea already was an independent state with own authorities, president and so on. Being water/energy/transport/everything tied to ex-Ukrainian SSR, Crimea agreed to federate with Ukraine in exchange to full autonomy and independence from Ukrainian authorities. But very soon, Ukrainian authorities overthrow Crimea government and install occupation administration. Sevastopol, being an important naval base had a special status in USSR and Crimea, and was part of Russian Federative Republic in USSR and so left part of Russian Federation after USSR fall. Something like Kaliningrad/Koenigsberg region in the Baltic. Ukrainian authorities who seized Crimea, with push from Britain (who have absolutely no any fucking business in that region at all, but for whatever reason still trying to squeeze here getting its ass kicked again and again since Crimean war in 1850s) right after the 2014 coup began to plan to seize Sevastopol from Russian Federation. However, on the top of protests against 2014 coup, Crimeans fuck new Ukrainian authorities out, declared independence, as independent state called for help to Russia and voted to join Russia back. The question of Sevastopol was completely resolved along with question of Crimea. With full support of Crimea population and without a single shot.