Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What if there is no Winter War

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What if there is no Winter War

    We all know the humilation that Finland gave the Soviet Union. But what if Finland just gives in to the Soviet demands. STAVAKA will not know about the deficinicies in the Red Army. Hitler however wont know that the Red Army was in such a horrible state. Does he go ahead with Barbarossa. Does Finland join the Axis. Does Hitler even consider going East.

    Thoughts?

  • #2
    Finland is not going to give small part of Karelian Isthmus. Finnish policy was simple: neutrality. Soviet demand were part of "strengthening" the defenses of Leningrad. That small slice in isthmus is not going to help SU in any way. Even if Finland cedes the land I would say that SU invades Finland next summer, as it was the idea originally.
    Lenin gave Finland independence, because he thought that in a few years Finland would join to SU. If Reds would have won Finnish Civil war that could have been possibility.

    In nutshell: Even if Finland cedes land, SU invades. Hitler goes east. Depending on when SU invades and how successful SU is Finland could find itself in either western allies or in axis.
    From Devastation - Knights Twilight Warhammer 40,000 Quest
    Rear Admiral Sander Van der Zee, Commander of Dutch Far East Theatre
    "There is never enough firepower!"

    Comment


    • #3
      The long-term plan for Nazi Germany had always been to gain fertile land in the East. The reputation of the Red Army after the Winter War may have helped Hitler in gaining more support from his generals in the spring of 1941, but Barbarossa was going to happen as long as Hitler was in power, sooner or later.

      The STAVKA may not understand that a shake up and shape up are needed. That isn't going to be very important; in actual history, they only had a few months.

      And Finland likely joins the attack on the USSR. Romania had followed the line you describe, giving up huge slices of territory without a fight (not just to the USSR but to all comers!), when a fight seemed a losing proposition. Once they thought they could win, they went to take back what they could.
      Michele

      Comment


      • #4
        Biggest change would have been no Continuation war, no northern fron for SU and no effective blockade against Leningrad. Without Winter War, it would have been highly unprobable that Finland would join in operation Barbarossa. Warmongers were very vocal but small minority before Winter War, and there would not had been compelling reasons to start armaments buildup for army in scale of original timeline.

        Only way for SU to prevent Winter War would have been not issuing area demands at all. It was very unprobable that any Finnish government would have been willing to cede main fortified zone to SU.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Lionhearti View Post
          ... STAVAKA will not know about the deficinicies in the Red Army. Hitler however wont know that the Red Army was in such a horrible state.
          Both these items are greatly exagerated in the pop view of history. Changes had been ongoing in the Red Army and there were multiple reasons for the further changes post March 1940. There is a school which thinks the Winter War had little real positive effect on the Red Army.

          The German view of the Red Army went far beyond the information of the Finnish war. The German army had some insight into the Red Army from the secret Reichwehr training establishment in the USSR, other impressions were derived from observation of Red Army military advisors in China & Spain. Then there was information from fighting the Japanese in the latter 1930s A close look was had at the end of the Polish campaign and afterwards. Spies, deserters. & other intellegence was a large source of information as well.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Tiberius Duval View Post
            Biggest change would have been no Continuation war, no northern fron for SU and no effective blockade against Leningrad. Without Winter War, it would have been highly unprobable that Finland would join in operation Barbarossa. Warmongers were very vocal but small minority before Winter War, and there would not had been compelling reasons to start armaments buildup for army in scale of original timeline.

            Only way for SU to prevent Winter War would have been not issuing area demands at all. It was very unprobable that any Finnish government would have been willing to cede main fortified zone to SU.
            As I understand it, Mannerheim advocated ceding the Islands in the Gulf of Finland required by the Soviet Union (they were indefensible anyway) and was certainly prepared to give ground on the Karelian Isthmus - but not as far North as Viipuri (Vyborg).

            Had these concessions been accepted, I am sure that Finland would have remained neutral throughout. (although I am prepared to be corrected by Finnish posters on this point).
            "I dogmatise and am contradicted, and in this conflict of opinions and sentiments I find delight".
            Samuel Johnson.

            Comment


            • #7
              Mannerheim though influential could not dictate policy of government that time, also Mannerheim's concessions would still had been fallen short of Soviet demands, like for example military base in Hanko.

              Also Isthmus concessions were very problematic due to existence of main defence line there, ceding it to Soviets would have been national suicide. Generally fortified lines were not very usefull in WW2, but Mannerheim line was an exception, it did what it was designed to do, delayed Soviet advance for a long time and costed much blood for them. Without it Winter War would have had very different outcome.

              Generally your viewpoints are true, Winter War and Soviet blatant provocations after it turned wary neutrality to outright hostility, and made Finland ready to accept any kind of ally against Soviet Union, especially after Soviets thrashed defensive pact with Sweden, after that only possible ally and protector was Germany, and idea of revanche got quite much popularity in many circles, even in some leftist circles, like social democratic ones...

              Comment


              • #8
                I think it is more important to ask why the hell Stalin waited for the worst possible time to invade Finland, with the worst preparation (clothing, etc,) and put the most incompentent Voroshilov and Buddyony in charge? He was either retarded or he wanted the Germans to think that he was weaker than he really was. He certainly sent the worst tanks and troops to invade Poland.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Draco View Post
                  I think it is more important to ask why the hell Stalin waited for the worst possible time to invade Finland, with the worst preparation (clothing, etc,) and put the most incompentent Voroshilov and Buddyony in charge? He was either retarded or he wanted the Germans to think that he was weaker than he really was. He certainly sent the worst tanks and troops to invade Poland.
                  Are you forced to hack other people's threads now ?
                  There are no Nazis in Ukraine. Idiots

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    You see Finland was the Soviet Union as was Poland to Germany, even if both Finland and Poland conceded territorial claim by the Soviet Union and Germany, invasion would only be delayed, Stalin was determined to invade Finland and defeat Finland and bring it back into the Mother Russia fold, Stalin had the same position towards Poland, well Eastern Poland at least.

                    But had there not been a Winter War, i still believe that Germany would have gone in 1941 and did exactly what eventually happened, would Finland have joined the Axis probably?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Roddoss72 View Post
                      But had there not been a Winter War, i still believe that Germany would have gone in 1941 and did exactly what eventually happened, would Finland have joined the Axis probably?
                      I don't think Finland would have joined the Axis, very likely we would have sat out of the war like Sweden did. Finland was democratic country and majority of people did not have either Nazi or Communist sympathies. (in fact much greater part of population had communist sympathies, than nazi sympathies). If there had been German invasion (unlikely event though at least full invasion) very likely we would have sided with Allies.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Roddoss72 View Post
                        You see Finland was the Soviet Union as was Poland to Germany, even if both Finland and Poland conceded territorial claim by the Soviet Union and Germany, invasion would only be delayed, Stalin was determined to invade Finland and defeat Finland and bring it back into the Mother Russia fold, Stalin had the same position towards Poland, well Eastern Poland at least.

                        But had there not been a Winter War, i still believe that Germany would have gone in 1941 and did exactly what eventually happened, would Finland have joined the Axis probably?
                        Is that after Finland has yielded important territory to the USSR without a fight? Then yes.

                        Is that after no such a gunpoint deal has been reached? Then no.
                        Michele

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Michele View Post
                          Is that after Finland has yielded important territory to the USSR without a fight? Then yes.

                          Is that after no such a gunpoint deal has been reached? Then no.
                          Mm, yes, that one condition, gunpoint deal and there would have been enough hostility against SU, no gunpoint deal and no war, then probability of Finland joining axis would have been practically nil.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            So in the end the Finns either show cowardice in allowing Stalin to dictate terms, or to show Finlands has a set of balls and tells Stalin to shove it.

                            Either way Finland ends up Occupied or War, pure gunpoint diplomacy on the USSR's and Stalin.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Roddoss72 View Post
                              So in the end the Finns either show cowardice in allowing Stalin to dictate terms, or to show Finlands has a set of balls and tells Stalin to shove it.

                              Either way Finland ends up Occupied or War, pure gunpoint diplomacy on the USSR's and Stalin.
                              Indeed, you have to say that Finland did very well to retain her independence and avoid Soviet occupation :despite having to follow a post-war policy of so-called "Finlandisation "

                              Thankfully, she did not give active assistance to the German attack upon Leningrad.
                              "I dogmatise and am contradicted, and in this conflict of opinions and sentiments I find delight".
                              Samuel Johnson.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X