What if Finland Won the Winter War? 

can you do what if the sino-soviet split never happened?

Where do you have the statement from that the Germans thought the Soviets could be defeated in two weeks?

"The Soviets would probably loose either Leningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad [...] would that make a difference? Probably not with all the American lend-lease" I let it slide that you proposed the Russians would give up Murmansk without Finland capturing it, the base of their white sea fleet, but saying a scenario without Murmansk nor Stalingrad wouldn't change much is just talking out of your a**. Where do you think the American lend-lease would go to? Vladivostok right next to Japan? lmao What a waste of time. You must learn more about history, economy and geography before you make a channel like this.

Правиш страхотни видеа, продължавай все така! ❤

@@user-mt6qi4gp2b Много благодаря! Оценявам го страшно много!

Thank you for sharing this interesting information! I appreciate it!

kunniaa hälle kovista taisteluista

We shall not fail

I mean the climate and terrain did help them not lose for a while. With some soviet incompetence, it's fair that Finland would hold out longer

Not a miracle, its called incompetence in Soviet high command mixed with relentless aid from western powers, their enemy also foolishly decided to invade during deep snow without any camoflage or coordinated plan, but longer as the war went on the worse Finland began to do, as both factors started being less prominent, they eventually had to concede

Finn here. There are few reasons we ended up losing the winter war. One being that we simply ran out of supplies when Soviets began to throw more and more men at us. Second is that Soviets changed their overall attack plan to be smarter when compared to the start of the war. So that plus just throwing in more numbers and we simply lost supplies.

@@Mysterythehedgehogi wouldnt even count that as a loss, the casualities speak for themselfs, also, the incredible static defence in the beginning pushed the finnish high command to do stupid things like the vilinus offensive, in the end still, you managed to repel the russians and even recover so much that you started a round 2 called the continuation war

​@@TemonixsAnother finn here, we certainly did lose and our performance in the winter war led us to over believe in ourselves and fight the continuation war which led to even more unnecessary loss of life on our part and more territory lost, as well as giving ourselves the unsavoury look of nominally siding with the Nazis

Exactly!

invaded all the nordic nations with finland once

I've spoken with other Finns and they have told me the same too!

I thought you may have been estonian because you pronounced Tartu with that "R".

I am gonna crank that hard R, Batman.

@@TheMaltesefalcon204 Estonian here. He didnt sound Estonian at all. I mean where was the bad accent that makes you sound like you got a potatoe in your mouth? I thought he was Finnish though.

Im Hungarian and here we also use the hard R 🇭🇺❤️🇧🇬🇫🇮

Yeah not the initial party they fought, but later they became the actual communists. I just wanted to save time and not confuse the casual viewer

​​​@@rewriting-historySDP is not a communist party. There is a communist party in Finland, but it is very irrelevant. SDP in Finland like in every Nordic country, basically wants the country to be capitalist and it strongly emphasizes the freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of living etc. It just wants ppl to be equal and poor ppl get support. For instance free healthcare and free education. If these matters are free it doesn't mean the country is a communist or socialist country.

Appreciate it very much! Cheers!

It is incorrect though. The Soviets wanted to annex the entire country

@@otherhouse Yeah sure dude I'm sure they wanted to annex the entire Milky Way Galaxy just like any other country... The documents show they only wanted some lands around Leningrad in exchange for some more soviet land further north.

I agree with you, but as soon as possible taking a month geopolitically is very good. When politicians say they are going to so something, it usually takes them a decade. In the grand scope of things, the USSR acted quickly

Ah yes, unhistorical! :D

So, Fuherreich?

bro's literally a hardcore hoi4 player@@theeternalsuperstar3773

could you imagine if that happened

​@@theeternalsuperstar3773one of best mods BTW. Italy was done here better than in By Blood alone

Yes I will do this video very soon! Stay tuned!

Better and more plausible: What if Germany united under Austrian supervision? ( leaving Prussia aside)

Thank you! I appreciate it

Lovely idea! I have wanted to do something about Venice, so this is amazing!

Venice's position across the eastern Mediterranean is not really conducive for new world colonialism. If any of the Italies would have reached America, I reckon it'd be Genoa.

​@@gengarzilla1685fun fact: Columbus was born in Genoa

Благодаря много! Оценявам подкрепата!

I could do that, but not a lot would change, since Finland could win like they did in this scenario.

@@rewriting-history yeah but to be realistic, finland never had a chance to win, sweden joining would probably just be a boost

Didn't think people would like it, but here we are! Appreciate it very much!

@@rewriting-history there’s something about eastern european, balkan and slavic men speaking english with their strong, thick accents that’s hot 😫😫

I have a list and when I want to make a new video, i just go through it and start working

​@@rewriting-historyCan you do what if Frisia became a major power?

Thank you! I saved it for later!

@@rewriting-historyThank you so much! XD 😊😊😊

Thank you very much! Really appreciate it!

Already have it! Will do it soon! According to the likes this got, the idea is popular!

Oh my this is cursed! I will attempt something similar and see if it works out. My audience isn't really into cursed scenarios sadly.

@@rewriting-history something funny about This is that the Volga German did get their own autonomous status in Soviet Russia but got it revoked after ww2

Wow that’s a really good idea! 👍

They already did!

@@rewriting-history Oh really? Nice! I’ll look it up then :)

Thank you! I really appreciate it!

One of your best videos if not the best

I don't get it either. They had their own motivation I guess

Russians are known to be extremely stupid. That's why 😂

I agree with you. Just think about what I have to say right now. If I am realistic, the video is boring. This is due to absolutely nothing changing. Need to sacrifice some realism, to achieve a good video.

@@rewriting-history Fair

Nice! I will save this idea for later!

Now that's very interesting. I imagine that the independent Aragon would focus on influencing Mediterranean affairs while this Castilian-Portuguese Union does Spain's usual new world colonial stuff.

@@gengarzilla1685 basically the Divergences of Darkness mod in Victoria 2.

I'm glad you were able to learn something new! They weren't the same party they fought against, but were under the same branch of communism

​@@CycnusInfernusOh they only banned the _anti-parlamentrarian_ fascists and not the ones like the austrian painter? Oh then it's all good lmao they were increasingly anti-communist in the 1930s and in the Continuation War there were publications about "Finnish Lebensraum". Moderate my...

@@CycnusInfernus ok let's dive deeper, shall we? Finland was a province of Sweden for 600 years, then în 1808 it was ceded to Russian Empire as a Grand Duchy. During the Russian Civil War Finland declared independence and Soviet Russia recognised their independence on 2 January 1918. Finland turned to fight a civil war itself and and the "white" army won with the help of German forces, after which the new right-wing government actively supported anti-bolshevik forces, even allowing such armies to be formed on their territory. Finland's hostility towards USSR was unchanged throught the whole time until after WW2. Mannerheim told the London ‘Times’ in 1919 that Finland’s historic mission was to drive Bolshevism from Leningrad: “I strove deliberately and wittingly to create the foundations for our relations with Russia of the future by military action having for its objects the liberation of the capital of former Russia, together with a territory large enough to permit of the establishment of a stable and healthy minded Russian government, and thus to remove from our frontiers the peril of Bolshevism” . (C. Mannerheim, in: ‘Times’, 7 October 1919; p. 9). On 14 October 1920 the Soviet government signed with Finland the Treaty of Tartu, having, because of its weakness, to accept terms which made its security even worse than before: “The Treaty of Tartu was most unsatisfactory from the Soviets’ point of view, but they were in no position to resist Finnish demands. Two of its most signifciant provisions were the legalising of the Finnish seizure of the town and district of Petsamo, with its valuable nickel deposits, . . . and the redrawing of the Russo-Finnish border further down the Karelian Isthmus to a mere 18 miles from Petrograd”. (A. Read & D. Fisher: ibid,; p. 374). In 1939, having become a Great Power and with the threat of German intervention temporarily removed by the Soviet-German Non-Aggression Pact, the Soviet government sought to rectify the dangerous situation to its security resulting from the Treaty of Tartu. Many prominent Westerners who were not international lawyers agreed that the Soviet war with Finland was a just war. For example, the writer George Bernard Shaw* wrote in the ‘Daily Mail’ in December 1939, while the Soviet-Finnish War was still in progress: “Finland has been misled by a very foolish Government. She should have accepted Russia’s offer for a readjustment of territory. She should have been a sensible neighbour. Finland would probably not have refused the Russian offer had she been acting on her own. . No Power could tolerate a frontier from which a town such as Leningrad could be shelled, when she knows that the Power on the other side of the frontier . . . is being made by a foolish Government to act in the interests of other and greater powers menacing her security. In Russia’s view, Finland can have no defensible objection to carrying out the exchange of territories which Russia had asked of her unless she is allowing herself to be used by America or the Western Powers”. (G. B. Shaw, in: ‘Daily Mail’, 2 December 1939; p. 6). Even Winston Churchill, who had savagely condemned Soviet ‘aggression’ against Finland at the time, changed his view after 1941: “In the days of the Russo-Finnish war I had been sympathetic to Finland, but I had turned against her since she came into the war against the Soviets. Russia must have security for Leningrad and its approaches. The position of the Soviet Union as a permanent naval and air power in the Baltic must be assured”. (W. S. Churchill: ‘The Second World War’, Volume 6: Triumph And Tragedy’; London; 1954; p. 318). Do I need to detail and give quotes for the League of Nations (pre-UN basically) lack of actions against Germany, Italy and Japan but steadfast response against the USSR in this defensive war? Western sources portray the Finnish Democratic Republic as a puppet government, without any popular support. In fact, as we have seen, Finland had already had a socialist revolution and this had been crushed only with massive foreign help. But socialist feelings, and feelings of sympathy for the Socialist Soviet Union, among the Finnish working people was still significant even after the Soviet-Finnish War of 1939-40: “On 22 May (1940- Ed.) a formal meeting . . launched the ‘Finland-Soviet Union Peace and Friendship Society’ - generally known as SNS. . . . . It met a genuine public demand; meetings in Helsinki and the provinces were packed out, and in only five months SNS had recruited some 35,000 paying members in 115 local branches, in the face of every kind of official obstruction. . . SKP (the Communist Party of Finland - Ed.) rightly claims that this shows the existence in Finland of a substantial body of opinion which welcomed friendly relations with the Soviet Union. On 23 December the courts declared that SNS was an illegal organisation”. (A. F. Upton: ‘The Communist Parties of Scandinavia and Finland’; London; 1973; p. 225-26, 229-30). Many Western military experts insisted that the Mannerheim Line was ‘almost impregnable’: “It is quite probable that the Red Army will never breach the Mannerheim Line in the Karelian Isthmus”. (‘Times’, 19 December 1939; p. 8). “As an old campaigner in Finland, I can state that it will be almost impossible for the Russians to break through the Mannerheim defences by a frontal attack”. (‘Daily Telegraph’, 27 January 1940; p. 1) “Even in the unlikely case that the Russians were able to get a hold on some of the advanced positions in the Mannerheim Line, they would still have an almost impregnable chain of strong points to overrun before they were through” (‘Times’, 13 February 1940; p. 6). And Mannerheim himself told his troops on 17 February 1940: “You may rest assured the enemy will never succeed in breaking our lines.” (‘Observer’, 13 February 1940; p. 9). Deja vu ["Bakhmut our fortress"] Until almost the last day of the war, Western press reports from Finland gave the impression that the Red Army was being ignominously defeated. Winston Churchill, then First Lord of theAdmiralty, declared in a broadcast on 20 January 1940: “Finland . . . shows what free men can do. . . . They have exposed for all the world to see the military incapacity of the Red Army and Air Force. . . . Everyone can see how Communism rots the soul of a nation.” (‘Keesing’s Contemporary Archives’, Volume 3; op. cit.; p. 3,808). Deja Vu George Steer*, the ‘Daily Telegraph’ special correspondent in Finland. reported from Helsinki on 17 February: “By the end of the week the Isthmus offensive will have been raging for a fortnight. . . . I have not been to the front, nor has any other journalist, during that time.” (‘Daily Telegraph’, 17 February 1940; p. 6). and Virginia Cowles* cabled a similar story on 10 March: “No foreign correspondent here in Finland is allowed to visit any front whatsoever when a battle is taking place. All correspondents have been barred from the Isthmus for over a month now. They must rely for their news on the official communique, which is handed out in Helsinki each evening.” (‘Sunday Times’, 10 March 1940; p. 11). Western countries also heavily supported Finland in the Winter War. Deja Vu x2

Socialism and communism isnt the same thing, all the nordics are still very socialistic like but never has been communist​@@rewriting-history

Thank you! Appreciate it all!

Yes, the Finnish south eastern border looks like a chunk was sliced of with a knife.

Oh nice! I should make a similar video where I do countries in different video games

How about a Countryballs RPG (this took me a long time to make I hope you like it) The UK/British Empire: summoner *summons it’s colonies to battle* The USSR or Russia: the big brute/tank *has loads of health but is slow* Germany: the fast speedster *is the fastest character in all aspects but has low health* France: the defender *holds the line with shields, barricades, etc* The USA: gunslinger *long range, fast fire rate and near endless amounts ammo* Poland: glass cannon *has low health but dose loads of damage* Belgium: support *buffs allies stats but has lower health than most* Saudi Arabia: healer *heals allies with oil to help their military* Italy: flamethrower *fires up the oven or Roman fire* The Netherlands: Earth holder *uses the land they take from the water as attacks* Mexico: witch/wizard *uses dru- I mean potions* Vietnam: sneaky *is really quiet to sneak up on enemies* South Korea: debuff *sings songs that can affect enemies in negative ways* Japan: swordsman *fast paced melee combat* China: revival *can revive themselves without any assistance* India: illusionist *uses illusions to confuse the enemy like multiplying* Chile: one by one * does lots of damage but only to one target at a time* Brazil: green warrior *uses the nature as a weapon* Finland: fringed *uses Ice attacks* Indonesia: scuba solder *uses water as an attack* Ethiopia: piercer *uses attacks that pierce through enemies* Switzerland: neutral * using diplomacy persuades enemies to attack their own aka hypnosis* Liberia: mini fighter *uses similar tactics as the USA but with slightly worse stats in some areas but better in others* Greece: striker *dosnt do much base damage but has high crit chance* Romania: vampire *drains enemy health and absorbs it for themselves* Panama: phase *has chances to not take damage* North Korea: explosives *does heavy mid damage in large areas* Bulgaria: death blow *the more damage taken the more damage dealt* Ireland: rager *can get into a drunken rage upping stats for a short while* Afghanistan: copy cat *takes enemies weapons and abilities to use against them*

USSR and Germany should be flipped, Germans rush, the soviets do the deep battle/ defense in depth.

It's not PowerPoint, what do you mean?

I'm thinking very soon, it was successful and I liked the video!

It was a long video, I will try to improve this in the future

I will do this very soon! Stay tuned!

The USSR had already pushed the Germans back by the time most of the leased equipment had arrived. And I don’t doubt they could have found a different route for it.

Always big Finland!

Not a bit fan of tanks or military tech at the time. As I grow, I will learn more and be able to make more accurate videos

pretty sure the main issue with the tanks was not sending them with infantry support, so they just got blown up

@@realawesomeos ye it was more a doctrine thing than a technology thing, the Soviets eventually did catch up and destroy the Germans by 1942. For about 75% of the war the Germans were on the defensive. The utter failure that was Kursk really shows just how bad off they were.

​@@rewriting-historyreally? The tanks are the coolest part of the war and arguably the only reason Germany succeeded as much as it did.

Wasnt the thing that not all soviet tanks were made as good as they were supposed to be, to make them faster?

Not currently. I'm planning to create a platform where I will create content in Bulgarian regarding many topics. But this will happen after I have secured myself financially, right now I cannot afort it!

I love it! Will do it soon!

I like it! I will do that for sure!

Palpatine good good

Unrealistic for Romania to join the central powers, they joined the war to get Transylvania form Austria-Hungary. And they can't really be bribed like Italy was by the allies, because Russia didn't have a ton of land Romania wanted, the main goal was always Transylvania. It was like allace-loraine was to France

Eh besarabia odesa It's called a what if for a reason

@@00martoneniris86 true, but it still should be grounded in reality. Bessarbia is just less valuable than Transylvania, and Odessa wasn't even Romanian, it was just given to Romania in WWII to compensate them for losing land to Hungary

Liked, cool.

I'll make it eventually don't worry

Nice! I will save it for later! Thanks for the suggestion!

I will do a similar idea very soon!

I will look into it for sure! No idea what this is, but I will read more

Ah yes I missed that. To be fair, there isn't a lot of information about this election online

@@rewriting-history Yeah that is true, i only know this because im finnish :P

Huh that's interesting! Will look into it

Finland has not been in war with Sweden

Or Russia. Finland was in war with soviets 2 times. Only wars we had

​@@mrhater123But the finns have.

​@@mrhater123What about the wars before the independence and the civil wars?

I had this idea months ago, need to try it out already

@@rewriting-history cool! you will realase it when?

I will do something similar very soon, stay tuned!

That's my goal. To make scenarios that nobody else has covered before!

yes@@rewriting-history

I will do it in a bit, I still have other ideas

One of three things: 1- Finland is fully annexed like Estonia and Ukraine were. 2- Finland is made into a puppet state and loses land similar to what the Soviets did to Poland. 3- Exact same thing as if they did poorly expect Finland surrenders faster allowing the Soviets to better redeploy against Germany.

You're welcome! I add them to all of my videos!

It is! I'm trying many new styles to see what people like!

Epic

I will work on it, thought it would be interesting

@@rewriting-history k

Hungary wiil not be hungry anymore

Oh no! It's starting in here too!

​@@rewriting-historyi remember watching your monaco video while eating chocolate pudding

Well a win is when you defeat your opponent, so I am afraid paper says different

Maybe close, Finland want keep they own territory. Thats all.

​@@martin7002papers don't tell the full story

No

The goal of the ussr was to keep a distance between Leningrad and Finland

Then the war would never end. I have to draw a line somewhere for the sake of the video

@@rewriting-history it would also threathen viipuri directly. im not saying its highly unrealistic now but most likely finland would give up very minor lands. but nothing too close to the important finnish city

My girlfriend helped me film these coins :D

Hello from Bulgaria! I appreciate it. I like your idea, will save it for later!

@@rewriting-history yay thank you You're from Bulgaria?, Cool nice. 🇻🇳🤝🇧🇬

Not quite the Soviet goal was to make a land buffer for Leningrad. Finland surrendered a lot of land which made that buffer in return for peace. This is called surrendering to a losing enemy who would be strategically advantageous to lose to on your own terms.

​@@CycnusInfernusThe context is that the USSR offered France and UK a proposal to jointly station 1 million troops in Czechoslovakia to stop Germany from annexing them, at which France initially agreed, but the UK who was against it for some reason pressured France out of it and France withdrew from it. So having that happened and Germany continuing to annex countries and pressing for territorial claims in Lithuania and Poland, this agreement comes off as "we know you're gonna annex more countries and the West is not gonna do anything about it, so don't cross this line and don't get involved in the Balkans". And you're sad that N. Germany didn't get a say in Lithuania as well?

Appreciate it

I should have expanded it there too

@@rewriting-history yeah, getting deep it could be very complicated with internal problems and the fact the kazakhs tried to revolt during WWI