Hitler attacked the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941, Finland knew the
Soviet Union would strike because Soviet diplomats had said on several
occasions that in the event of war with Germany, the Soviet Union would
immediately launch an offensive against Finland. After the unprovoked
attack and seizure of Karelia by the Soviets, Finland had no illusions about
the future aims of Stalin. For this reason, Finland allowed German troops
on its soil, which made it difficult to claim neutrality. The Finnish government
prepared a declaration of neutrality, but on June 22 and June 25, 1941
the Soviet Air Force dropped bombs on a number of towns in Southern Finland.
On June 25, the Finnish parliament declared that a state of
war existed between Finland and the Soviet Union. The new war was called
"Continuation War" by the Finns because Soviet Union broke the treaty
of March, 1940, and continued the Winter War. Finland found herself
alone again, and on the wrong side of the war. Hitler offered supplies,
which Finland found hard to refuse under the circumstances. But the
alliance was informal and Finland did not cooperate any more than necessary,
and certainly not in turning over Jews to him as requested. The Finns
knew what genocide was from experience, and wanted no part of it. In 1941 the Russians had the advantage of territorial gains of 1940. Now they wanted it back. The Finns were not Nazis contrary to Churchill's accusations in which he called Finland "Nazi ridden." Yes, volunteers joined Hitler SS to the great shame of the Finnish people, but Finland itself was not under any Nazi government.
Finns had enough on their plate just staying free.
Russians love to legitimize their war booty of Karelia by claiming they "liberated" it from "Nazis." If this is true, why did they keep Karelia and not turn it over back to the karelian people? Russians never cease to amaze this writer, as one Pole said "Russians can deny the nose on their face." Finns try not to hold any grudges, but we tend to be cautious when dealing with our neighbor. The Finnish Movie "Unknown Soldier" is about the Finns taking back what is theirs. The writer's father, had been a radio operator in the Winter War, was now on Lake Ladoga mopping up Russian held islands, and rose to the rank of sergeant. Antti was familiar with his Karelia province and was a good fisherman, but refused to hunt animals. The movie is about his Winter War regiment.
Finland did what it could to let food supplies through to Leningrad, refusing German requests to do otherwise.
Most of the nuisance was caused by Hitler's submarines in the North Sea.
Field Marshal Mannerheim himself said he did not want the blood of the Leningrad
people on his hands.
Unlike Russia, Finland would not sign a formal alliance with Hitler,
but was only a co-belligerent fighting to regain Karelia, which has special
significance to the Finnish people, their identity. By attacking Finland,
Stalin gave Hitler the confidence he needed to bring Barbarossa onto the
Russian people, and forced Finland and any other country fighting Communism
to fight with the Germans.
Finland had a Social Democratic government since just after WW1 with
no interest in fascism whatsoever. Of course there were fascists in Finland
as in other countries, but the Finns themselves and their leaders were not.
If Finland was a fascist sympathizer, (as were the Soviets in 1939) then
Churchill and Roosevelt, who began a campaign of demonizing the Finns, must have been Communist sympathizers. It was a totally false accusation. After Poland was betrayed by Britain,
every meeting by the Allies with Stalin produced yet another betrayal of
Eastern Europe and Finland. Many troubling questions about the Allies'
assumptions and motivations remain. Both Hitler and Stalin being just as bad, can
Churchill claim to be more holy than Mannerheim? Did Churchill say Finland
was fighting for freedom and justice? Absolutely not! Were not both men fighting evil regimes? Was Churchill
himself helping Stalin with his evil deeds? Did Churchill's support of
forced return of citizens of Soviet Union actually condemn them to death?
There is a lot of evidence to implicate the Allies in joint collaboration in
these activities and many excuses have been offered to justify them, or they
were unmentionable events. Investigative journalism by the press largely
ignored these evils, to their shame, as they did Stalin's murdering purges,
but there are a few journalists/writers like this one, who will not let
these facts die. So perhaps Stalin had converted his two friends to his way
of thinking. Perhaps they thought that some form of Socialism was a good thing, and Stalin was on the right track. Obviously they thought that these concepts were opposite of what Finland stood for. Who was in the right? Who had the moral high ground?"Finland, Rumania, Hungary and others of the Nazi ridden or
Fascist ridden States."
In 1944, Finland made peace with the Soviet Union and the Allies, and chased German troops, that burned and destroyed Finnish property in their retreat, to their bases in Norway. This was called the Lapland War. The tragedy of this whole thing is that if the Allies had forced Russia to reinstate the borders of 1939, Finland might have fought with the Allies. Instead they forced Finland to accept aid from Germany, and allowed Russia to retain its gains of 1939. 1944 and 1945 were the years of betrayal of Finland and Eastern Europe. The writer's parents, a newly wed couple, had to abandon their homes and run for their lives in 1944. Now Russians are living in what were Finnish homes, and working in what were Finnish factories, and owning what were lovely and prosperous Finnish farms thanks to the massive aid provided by the allies. This must be reversed if the west claims to be for justice. Today the Russian government vehemently opposes Jewish occupation of Arab lands. Would these justice loving people like to return the land they took from the Finns? Absolutely not because they were conquering while pretending to defend themselves.
The demands Russia made on Finland after the war
were outrageous - and they had to be paid in eight years. Here are two of the
589 narrow gauge
locomotives manufactured by Tampella (of Tampere) and Locomo, bound for the Soviet Union. (What, they
want payment and Karelia too?) This payment was just a slap, the real
loss was Karelia itself, the price of which would be astronomical, in fact
priceless. The Russians may have been given as many as 60 000
saunas. Finland is exploring peaceful solutions to repatriation of
Karelia. There would be benefits to both sides.
Here is a partial list of manufactured goods (US$300,000,000 -
actual value was close to US$570,000,0000 - discrepancy due to pricing basis
used) sent to the Soviet Union:
Narrow gauge locomotives by Tampella and Locomo
300 ton schooners with 225 hp diesels by Valmet -
800 hp deep sea trollers -
3200 ton freighters -
2000 ton steel barges or tankers -
1000 ton barges -
150 hp river tug boats -
Tampella TS 7 metal lathes -
Paper machinery -
Cardboard machines -
Miscellaneous industrial electric motors -
Modular houses (USD) -
Lumber handling vehicles -
Wire Cable (Tons) -
Miscellaneous e.g.. Cranes by Kone oy
The rich and beautiful province of Karelia
The Karelian Culture
7 000 000
By 18.9.1952 Finland had paid the Soviet Union its harsh demands and in
the process, created industries that made it one of the most prosperous
countries in the world. Antti was assigned to the Valmet factories to fulfill
the terms. He said that the deliveries had to be made on time, which meant
long days. Often the crews worked around the clock to get the materials on the
train. In recognition of Antti's contribution for performance excellence, he
was given an award of merit, a copy of Kalevala, and the Three
Brothers. Inside the book: "Thank you for your valuable start." He had
invented several devices to improve company efficiency, one for straightening
steel bars and another for handling the same. The straightening happened by
spinning the bars and allowing the bar's own forces to do the work. Every Finn
did his or her part in paying the ransom for freedom.
In hindsight, the Finns could have done better to fortify the Karelian
Isthmus during the years 1941 - 44. Almost three years were wasted, in which
time Finland would have had impenetrable fortifications in place. Also
problematic was that the 8th Division was pulled back from the Karelian
Isthmus a week before June 9, 1944 when the Russians attacked. The 10th
Division that came to replace them were not familiar with the terrain.
Roosevelt wanted to keep Stalin on his side to help defeat Hitler, but
also to finish off Japan in Manchuria because the atomic bomb could not be
relied upon. In order to sway public opinion to support his friend Stalin, it
was necessary for Roosevelt to convince the American public that Stalin was no
longer the Communist bogey-man he used to be. He was good now, and he should
get aid. All Stalin wanted was to "defend the fatherland," that was it.
However, this delusion was to be Roosevelt's undoing, for Stalin did not
separate the military from the political. Stalin's defense policy was two
sided: one defense, the other aggression - just another round in the battle
between Communism and "Imperialism."
The agreement that the Grand Alliance signed did not allow for a
separate peace with any country, which was perfect for Stalin. When
Churchill made overtures to Stalin about the possibility of Finland being
pulled out of the war in 1943, Stalin just reminded him of their deal that
they must all agree to such a move. The wording of the alliance sealed
Finland's fate. A separate peace may have saved Karelia, but Stalin's plan was
to deal with Hitler, then attack the Finns with overwhelming strength of arms
acquired in the Lend Lease deal on D-Day. Stalin promised to attack from the East on D-Day to crush German resistance, but instead, attacked Finland. A Defensive Victory.
In any war where Britain and United States sides with Russia, the
countries Russia preys upon become enemies by default.
writes in his book The Hinge of Fate, page 751that Premier
Stalin turned down Roosevelt's offer to take Finland out of the
United States: Arsenal of
for "...peoples of the world who are determined to remain
The Lend Lease Bill was introduced into Congress in January 1941
after Roosevelt's December 30 1940 speech calling for all out aid to Great
Britain and her allies, becoming law in March 1941. This was to empower the
president to sell, transfer, exchange, lease, or lend war supplies to any
nation whose defense was deemed by the President to be 'vital to the defense
of the United States.' "Rapid and united effort by all of the peoples of the
world who are determined to remain free will insure a world victory of the
forces of justice and of righteousness over the forces of savagery and of
barbarism." He was a brilliant persuader of the American people to get them
to agree to this plan. Initially the mandate was to supply Britain, but when
Hitler attacked the USSR, Roosevelt could freely give aid to that country
too. Many Americans did not agree with this policy because they did not
trust Stalin like their president did. The agreement that the Soviets signed
said that payment for the equipment would be made at mutually agreed terms
at the end of the war. Another bad deal, for no final agreement was ever
reached with the Soviet Union.
Roosevelt, loved by millions
of Americans for his achievements at home, was actually a communist sympathizer, and campaigned the American people to
trust Stalin. Dispite his glowing legecy at home, he left a shadow over
Europe, one which contained the evil shape of a hammer and sickle. The truth
must come out no matter who it is; the world cannot tolerate glossing over
facts when those facts implicate people in genocide.
The American people had supported little
Finland since Russia attacked in 1939, and most were not convinced by the
propaganda film. Every country in Europe now became a victim of Stalin and
Hitler, the evildoers, regardless of side, a fact that escaped both
Roosevelt's and Churchill's understanding. Certainly, Finland can be accused
of collaboration with Hitler, but the same applies to Stalin. Can anyone
blame Finland for not wanting to end up like the rest of eastern Europe, a
satellite of Russia? If not, then why did Finland deserve the harsh terms
and the loss of Karelia? Finland was sold out to Stalin in a cascade of post war mistakes in favor of the beast called Stalin.
Well, so much for Roosevelt as a good judge of character, for one
of the most savage and barbaric of all was his friend and confidante Joseph
Stalin. Roosevelt was the worst president in history of the United States if we
consider the results of his leftist policies during the war. His
contribution to Stalin's success is incalculable, and he contributed to the loss of Karelia and Finland's position after the war. By so doing he revealed his ignorance of what Communism and Stalin stood for; despite all the evidence at his disposal, this man refused to believe communism or Stalin was any kind of threat to freedom and justice.
Apparently Roosevelt also ignored Finland's position with respect to preserving Soviet Union's security, and in particular, Leningrad. Mannerheim was
against attacking Leningrad; nor did he allow Finnish troops to cut off food
supplies bound for the besieged city. Finland was not interested in Hitler's
plan of world domination, nor in any theories of a master race, or any such
fascist nonsense. Her goals were, self preservation and the return of
Karelia. It was useless to become Stalin's ally, he would just send his army
in and that would be the end of Finland. She chose instead the "lesser" of
the two evils, Adolf Hitler.
And the Lord commanded all people to love their neighbors: "You
shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's
wife, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs
to your neighbor." - Holy Bible
Premier Stalin to Premier Churchill: Mar 15,
On March 12 the American Ambassador, Admiral Standley,
on behalf of the U.S.A. Government, conveyed to Mr. Molotov the following
"The Government of the U.S.A. offers its good offices as intermediary
between the U.S.S.R. and Finland in order to explore the possibility of a
separate peace." On Mr. Molotov's question whether the American
Government has information that Finland desires peace and what is her real
position, Admiral Standley replied that he cannot say anything on the matter.
As is well known, the Anglo-Soviet Treaty of May 26, 1942, stipulates that our
countries cannot negotiate on the conclusion of a separate peace with Germany
or her Allies otherwise than by mutual agreement. I consider this a
fundamental and unalterable principle. In view of this I felt it is my duty
first to inform you about the American proposal and second to ask your opinion
on the matter. I have no reasons to believe that Finland really desires peace,
that she has decided already to part with Germany and to offer acceptable
conditions. It seems to me that Finland has not yet escaped from Hitler's
claws, if she has this intention at all. The present Finnish Government, which
concluded a peace treaty with the Soviet Union and then violated it and
attacked the Soviet Union in alliance with Germany, is hardly able to break
Notwithstanding all that, in view of the proposal made by the
Government of the U.S.A., I deemed it my duty to inform you of the above."
To which the Prime Minister replied:
"You can best judge of how much military value it would be in the
struggle against the Germans on your front to get Finland out of the war. I
should suppose that it would have the effect of releasing more Soviet
divisions than German divisions for use elsewhere. Further, the defection of
Finland from the Axis might have considerable effect on Hitler's other
Generally speaking, I should have thought that the Finns would be
anxious to withdraw from the war as soon as they are convinced that Germany
must be defeated. If so, it seems to me that it might not be altogether
premature for you to ask the United States Government whether they know or
could find out, without disclosing your interest, what terms the Finns would
be prepared to accept. But you will be the best judge of the right
Roosevelt believed that Americans and Russians both stood for
"democratic" government, and that Finland stood for Fascism! It was only
towards the end of his life, when Russian intentions in Poland could no longer
be overlooked, that Roosevelt came to understand the interpretation that
Stalin put on democracy. He trusted Stalin so much, and believed he would not
betray him. But Roosevelt's naive, wishful thinking was dead wrong. There
would be so much suffering and injustice from trusting this man, who had
demonstrated time after time, what and who he really was. Accusations about
Stalin's murderous conduct poured in from such countries as Poland, but Stalin
denied them all (eg. Katyn massacre).
Churchill's position was that he
could not begin to deal with them and Hitler too. Churchill was afraid to hurt
Stalin's feelings; Stalin might be sad and he wouldn't want that. Stalin
wanted Karelia; he would get it, and everything else. His attitude cost
millions of lives and untold suffering.
When finally in 1944, the Soviet Union began its move West, an attempt
was made to annex Finland a second time, which had nothing to do with beating
Hitler who was already beaten. The Americans and British would have allowed
the war was over, the allies agreed that all Soviet citizens should be sent
back to the Soviet Union to labor camps to their deaths, at the point
of a gun if necessary. Stalin did not want any news about his paradise
to be spread around. Thousands were sent back between Finland and the Croatia.
This was a great crime against humanity rivalling Stalin's genocide. Read
this. In 1945
Roosevelt proudly boasted: "the flag of freedom flies over all of Europe."
May 9, 2005: Marked the 60th anniversary of the defeat of Hitler.
Putin described May 9, 1945 as "a day of victory of good over evil, freedom
over tyranny." The problem with Russians is they only see the war from their
own perspective. If they want to think that this war made their people free,
that's fine. But it did not. There was no freedom for their own people, nor
the countries they enslaved in Eastern Europe. There was no freedom for the
420,000 Karelians kicked out of their homes as the request of Stalin, and
the approval of his Allies.
of Poland, by Patrick J. Buchanan Roosevelt and Churchill give
away Eastern Europe and Karelia to pal Stalin in deals gone wrong. Stalin,
who started the war, ends up dictating terms to his victims.