Finland wants to join Russia

[cobra commando]

Finland feels vulnerable amid Russian provocations | Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

 

[adam7]

Good one. :thumb:

Just because they report what other do not report, doesn't make it propaganda.

No, but lying makes it black propaganda.
(White propaganda is giving facts, but leaving out some)

RUS media is state controlled and has created a black propaganda bubble for the Russian ppl, who now think that NATO may attack any day. Wont even go into the stuff they fabricate abt Ukraine.

RT and Sputnik in various languages aim to spread confusion. The nearer you are to Russia and the stuff those propaganda outlets fabricate, the more you are able to judge the BS. It's actually sad that a country takes that route. Won't end well

 

[adam7]

thanks. Isn't there still a minority Karjalais ? u drew Karjalais a parallel to Kashmir... I try to imagine I myself knew abt Kashmir from a Japanese book with lots of sketches from which most of my knowledge on India came

There is still a minority of Carelians of less than 8%, in the "Carelian Republic", but Russian education policy makes it almost impossible for them to retain their mother tongue, since education is in Russian with some token education in Carelian, a language very near to Finnish. As in other parts of Russia, there is a structural Russification going on.

Btw, denying a populace of their language, is defined in international law as genocide.

 

[adam7]

I find it difficult to imagine all of Finland wanting to join Russia.

I Find it difficult to find more than 10 (ten) Finns wanting to join Russia :biggrin2:

 

[adam7]

If you ask me, it was a probably a mistake that Lenin gave Finland independence in 1917, assuming they will become part of NATO. It is good they are neutral so far.


People like to turn a blind eye to events that do not fit their narrative. The land was sieged by Stalin, but prior to that, Lenin granted Finland independence.

Lenin "gave" Finland independece about as much as George III gave independence to the 13 colonies, now called USA.

Lenin was after the Bolshevik coup hanging on by his nails to power. He didn't need additional foes, and knew that he couldn't prevent the Finnish independence. He further knew that Finnish reds were planning an insurgency to start soon.. So he signed the document as a tactical move, to ease his burden, but expected that Finnish reds would take power, and rejoin Red Russia. The red insurgency started in less than a month but was finally defeated in May 1918.

 

[adam7]

Our PAKFA program with the Russians will be the most advanced fighter plane in the "world", when it comes into service. Yet here we are, buying/co-developing it with the Russians.

You have been sold down the river by the Russians. PAKFA/T-50 will not have very good stealth, and the manoeuvrability in dogfights with its vectored thrust is about as relevant as bayonets for an army.

Russians are great on hyping their weapon systemssystems, but about the ononly war Russian weapons systems have been victorious over western systems were in the Indo-Pakistani war in East-Pakistan.

 

[pmaitra]

Lenin "gave" Finland independece about as much as George III gave independence to the 13 colonies, now called USA.

Lenin was after the Bolshevik coup hanging on by his nails to power. He didn't need additional foes, and knew that he couldn't prevent the Finnish independence. He further knew that Finnish reds were planning an insurgency to start soon.. So he signed the document as a tactical move, to ease his burden, but expected that Finnish reds would take power, and rejoin Red Russia. The red insurgency started in less than a month but was finally defeated in May 1918.

I completely understand what you are saying, and I disagree.

Had it not been for Lenin, Finland would have never gotten independence. The Russian Army would not have been diverted countering the reds, and so, they would have crushed Finnish independence dreams. The Finns knew that, and that is why, they did not demand independence, just broad autonomy within Russia.

Basically, my point stands, that Finland had its independence served on a platter.

 

[adam7]

I completely understand what you are saying, and I disagree.

Had it not been for Lenin, Finland would have never gotten independence. The Russian Army would not have been diverted countering the reds, and so, they would have crushed Finnish independence dreams.

Basically, my point stands, that Finland had its independence served on a platter.

What you are now arguing is something quite different than earlier.

The standard CW propaganda was the "Lenin gave.." BS. Actually Finnish political leaders used this, but it was somewhat insincere. The Finnish thought was that if Lenin has given something, lesser leaders can not contradict this decision of the Soviet saint. Get it? :biggrin2:

If you are now saying, that Finland used the weakness of the new Bolshevik coupsters, you are completely correct.

For your information, Russian white generals suggested that the battle tested and victorious Finnish army would continue to St. Petersburg, and take it over and establish white rule there. Remember that the Bolsheviks were fighting several white armies at the time, and a Finnish attack would likely break the backbone of the Reds.

However, the white generals didn't accept Finnish independence, which meant that the former general of the Russian Imperia Army, Finnish general Mannerheim didn't even propose the plan to the political leaders of Finland.

 

[pmaitra]

@adam7, I have no intention of quoting your post, leave alone reading it.

The right wing Nazi sympathizing Finns carried out pogroms, imprisonment, and executions against pro-Russia Finns, and after a reign of terror, very few pro-Russia Finns remained. The current generation predominantly emerges out of that right wing Nazi sympathizing Finns of yester-years, and the Finnish education system, including its distorted version of history, reflects that.

If I have to study Finnish history, I will never read a Finnish history textbook, or seek advice from one who is educated in such.

You should read the existing threads. I don't have time to explain everything in detail, once again. You just go and read my existing posts, quote them, and say you disagree, and we'll call it a day.

 

[adam7]

I've read a few threads and I'm amazed how the stuff gets personal and names are called very fast.

Calling a Whites of 1918 "Nazi symphatizing Finns" a number of year before Nazis ever arose is quite an argument. Also answering to a post, saying that one will not read the original post is something I personally haven't seen earlier. A novel approach one could say :biggrin2:

A fact is that 6 years after the Civil War in the 1924 election, socialists got almost 40% of the parliament seats. The election system then as now is proportional, so this pretty well reflected popular vote. Hard to appreciate your argument abt Pro-Russians. For most Finns the Civil War was a Ciwil War between left wing socialism and traditional society. Since a few thousands Russian troops took part on the Red side, and Russian Bolsheviks assisted Finnish reds both politically and arming the Reds, the war has also been called an independence war.

Interesting that you are educating me in Finnish history and the intricacies of the Finnish education system.

Usually pulling the Nazi card is considered as having lost an argument. However, I didn't join the forum to win or loose arguments, just to discuss.

.......

 

[jouni]

I've read a few threads and I'm amazed how the stuff gets personal and names are called very fast.

Calling a Whites of 1918 "Nazi symphatizing Finns" a number of year before Nazis ever arose is quite an argument. Also answering to a post, saying that one will not read the original post is something I personally haven't seen earlier. A novel approach one could say :biggrin2:

A fact is that 6 years after the Civil War in the 1924 election, socialists got almost 40% of the parliament seats. The election system then as now is proportional, so this pretty well reflected popular vote. Hard to appreciate your argument abt Pro-Russians. For most Finns the Civil War was a Ciwil War between left wing socialism and traditional society. Since a few thousands Russian troops took part on the Red side, and Russian Bolsheviks assisted Finnish reds both politically and arming the Reds, the war has also been called an independence war.

Interesting that you are educating me in Finnish history and the intricacies of the Finnish education system.

Usually pulling the Nazi card is considered as having lost an argument. However, I didn't join the forum to win or loose arguments, just to discuss.

.......

Welcome to forum, do not be angry at @pmaitra, he has debated with me almost a year now and surely we both have gotten few extra grey hair. Do not take it to yourself if things go personal, it only adds to the spice, because forum rules prevents too insulting posts. Please go to members section thread and introduce yourself to other forum members....there is somewhere a thread for that.

 

[amoy]

There is still a minority of Carelians of less than 8%, in the "Carelian Republic", but Russian education policy makes it almost impossible for them to retain their mother tongue, since education is in Russian with some token education in Carelian, a language very near to Finnish. As in other parts of Russia, there is a structural Russification going on.

Btw, denying a populace of their language, is defined in international law as genocide.

thanks for briefing on Carelians.

born bilingual, to the last para I have a slightly different opinion _ languages either evolve or die a natural death in the human history. no fuss abt "genocide" in every instance.

~Tapa talks: Orange is the new black.~

 

[adam7]

thanks for briefing on Carelians.

born bilingual, to the last para I have a slightly different opinion _ languages either evolve or die a natural death in the human history. no fuss abt "genocide" in every instance.

~Tapa talks: Orange is the new black.~

It's not a statement of opinion, but of fact concerning international law.

In "Russia minority culture" is folk dances and traditional folk dresses. It's not a "natural death". (That was an opinion)

 

[Artemis]

There is still a minority of Carelians of less than 8%, in the "Carelian Republic", but Russian education policy makes it almost impossible for them to retain their mother tongue, since education is in Russian with some token education in Carelian, a language very near to Finnish. As in other parts of Russia, there is a structural Russification going on.

Btw, denying a populace of their language, is defined in international law as genocide.

Russia makes genocide against Carelians? It something brand new. Lol

 

[Akim]

Btw, denying a populace of their language, is defined in international law as genocide.

There is no genocide, this displacement of the unwanted. Used since the time of Andropov: 't like it - leave.

 

[adam7]

There is no genocide, this displacement of the unwanted. Used since the time of Andropov: 't like it - leave.

You are responding to something else than I said.

Btw, see

http://listverse.com/2010/02/26/10-modern-cases-of-linguistic-genocide/

 

[Akim]

You are responding to something else than I said.

Btw, see

http://listverse.com/2010/02/26/10-modern-cases-of-linguistic-genocide/

The same. Someone in modern Russia shot for the use of the Finnish language?

 

[adam7]

Have a read:

http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~patrickp/lhr/Linguistic genocide.htm

This applies to most minority languages in Russia, where education is in Russian, and minority languages are in practice relegated to "kitchen languages". This is especially clear in occupied Crimea, where speaking Ukrainian can get you fired, beat up or worse.

To connect back to the original theme of the thread, Russification measures in the late nineteenth century started Finnish independence movement in the first place. From a Finnish point of view the "news" in Russian domestic media about Finland "wanting to join" Russia were completely crazy. From the uninformed Russians, living under the propaganda dome of the greatness of their country, the "news" was a lot harder to understand to be completely false.

 

[Akim]

Have a read:

http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~patrickp/lhr/Linguistic genocide.htm

This applies to most minority languages in Russia, where education is in Russian, and minority languages are in practice relegated to "kitchen languages". This is especially clear in occupied Crimea, where speaking Ukrainian can get you fired, beat up or worse.

To connect back to the original theme of the thread, Russification measures in the late nineteenth century started Finnish independence movement in the first place. From a Finnish point of view the "news" in Russian domestic media about Finland "wanting to join" Russia were completely crazy. From the uninformed Russians, living under the propaganda dome of the greatness of their country, the "news" was a lot harder to understand to be completely false.

These are isolated cases. In Crimea is really small Ukrainian language is used. More conflict there when using the Ukrainian culture. Here the infringement of the Crimean-Tatar language is really genocide because it is the language of the closed people. However, the destruction of such language there yet. There is an infringement of the rights of Ukrainian and Tatar-speaking there there is. You cannot destroy the Finnish language if it is spoken by a neighbouring country. The Kurdish language-can. Now linguistic genocide have is in the occupied part of the Donbass, where the use of the Ukrainian language, Ukrainian Newspapers, TV, websites, you can be arrested, even executed. However, officially, Russia is not responsible for these areas.
The Kremlin likes to say about the infringement of the rights of Russian speakers in the Baltics and in Ukraine, but he does himself. Before the annexation of Crimea, in Russia lived 1.5 million Ukrainians. There is not one newspaper, or not one of the regional TV channel in the Ukrainian language. But still, I can't be called genocide.

 

[adam7]

If you read the article to which i linked, even though linguistic genocide is not in the convention, the definition was never contended.

This is, however, a sidetrack from the the subject of the thread, so I will leave the sidetrack at this.