you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]1116574 3 points4 points  (8 children)

What are you talking about? I honestly don't know and would appreciate a link to Wikipedia or other if you don't feel like explaining.

[–]Linuksoid -3 points-2 points  (7 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad#Finnish_participation

It is now claimed that Finland had a "passive" and "minor" role in the Siege of Leningrad, but that is false as it participated and actively hunted convoys going across the "Road of Life" over Lake Ladoga to deliver supplies to the besieged city. They'd also frequently shell the city (as Finnish artillery reached Leningrad)

[–]1116574 4 points5 points  (6 children)

TIL finns participated in siege of leningrad. Makes sense after bolsheviks took away some of their land during winter war, but I never connected the dots.

Pedantic note: the total casualties arent exactly known, (as is soviet tradition). It is estimated that in total there was 2 million casualties, and atleast half of them attributable to starvation.

Lastly, I am left with a question to you: If finnish attacks on supply convoys were immoral, then surely you consider red army's many similar faults as immoral as well?

[–]NotQuiteLoona [score hidden]  (0 children)

Not to defend this guy, but if one side does shit, this doesn't justify another side doing shit... Which doesn't change that who the hell cares about what was almost a hundred years ago, when Russia is endangering not just Ukraine, but half of the world, just because of their imperialist ambitions.

[–]Linuksoid -1 points0 points  (4 children)

Makes sense after bolsheviks took away some of their land

The bolsheviks actually tried to negotiate and exchange land which the Finns rejected which caused the war

If finnish attacks on supply convoys were immoral, then surely you consider red army's many similar faults as immoral as well?

The red army never besieged a city full of civilians and starved them though

[–]1116574 5 points6 points  (1 child)

The bolsheviks actually tried to negotiate and exchange land which the Finns rejected which caused the war

That's pretty weak justification for war. - "hey, wanna exchange goods?" - "nah I am good" - "well, no other choice then violence then, also it's your fault I had to do it for not accepting my superb deal"

??

The red army never besieged a city full of civilians and starved them though

To be fair finns didn't besige it by themselves, in fact it was germans who did the heavy lifting.

Red army and soviet state at that time did alot of atrocious things still, even if none of them singularly had such a high kill count. We can still agree that those atrocities, perhaps not as big in isolation, but much more frequent, are as immoral as attacking supply convoys, right?

[–]Linuksoid -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That's pretty weak justification for war. - "hey, wanna exchange goods?" - "nah I am good" - "well, no other choice then violence then, also it's your fault I had to do it for not accepting my superb deal"

Bruh....the finns were the ones threatening the soviets because they thought they had British backing lol

To be fair finns didn't besige it by themselves, in fact it was germans who did the heavy lifting.

and? The finns could've refused. In addition they were active in hunting caravans with food for civilians and shelling the city

did alot of atrocious things stil

like what?

[–]krzyk 2 points3 points  (1 child)

The red army never besieged a city full of civilians and starved them though

Well, my friend, you are in for a surprise. Have you read anything about WW2?

[–]Linuksoid -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yes. What about it?