|
JcDent posted:Like Hungarians, the Finns come from Finno-Ugric stock, which is why their languages are gibberish. I assume the F-Us came from rhe general direction of Asia.
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 10:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 18:22 |
|
|
Nenonen posted:You shouldn't think for a second that any agreement between Stalin and Roosevelt was going to stop Stalin from turning Finland into a Soviet outpost if it suited their needs. Neither should you think that Finland wasn't at Soviet Union's mercy after the armistice. But I think I'd rather have Russians in Porkkala than in Santahamina... At the time, Stalin was quite happy with giving in to FDR's vision. Stalin as an actor in the whole Finnish drama tends to be rather misrepresented as a bloodthirsty conquering warlord hellbent on capturing plucky lil' Finland, when there's a whole lot of information on the subject: Stalin later regretted scuppering plans on Swedish-Finnish military cooperation (Swedes pulled out because of Stalin protesting) and post-war, he was entirely against Finnish Communist Party plans on revolution, since a stable bourgeoise Finland was far preferable to having to spend Soviet resources on pacifying a hellscape of swamp mongols fighting a civil war. Nevermind that pre-WW2, Soviet diplomacy was very much in favor of keeping border states neutral and only after this effort failed, the hardliners like Molotov took over Soviet diplomacy. Knocking Finland out of the war and shortening the front by a long stretch was good enough for Stalin.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 10:36
|
|
|
Kemper Boyd posted:Knocking Finland out of the war and shortening the front by a long stretch was good enough for Stalin. Sure. But you originally suggested that Finland being occupied by Soviets in 1944 would not have had consequences to Finnish sovereignty and that Stalin was anyway going to let Mannerheim et al stay in power which sounds dubious to me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 11:04
|
|
|
It's not like the Soviets kept every bit of territory they ended up occupying (Manchuria comes to mind), and it's not impossible at all that Stalin might see upholding an agreement with the US to be more important than holding on to Finland in terms of their national interest.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 12:39
|
|
|
He got more than enough for his investment come Yalta and Tehran...
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 12:43
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Like Hungarians, the Finns come from Finno-Ugric stock, which is why their languages are gibberish. I assume the F-Us came from rhe general direction of Asia. Under US law, they're white. There was a lawsuit about it in 1908, as people were trying to keep the filthy Finns out but the only immigration laws on the books were the ones banning Asians. http://www.historymuseumeot.com/mfahs/htm/part8_0026.htm
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 14:19
|
|
|
Legally white, eh? So the Germans had a parasite radar that exploited Chain Home to track Brits? Probably didn't help much.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 15:31
|
|
|
Are there cold war versions of wehrabingo for all the "The tank needed an autoloader because soviet crews were too stupid to load shells the right way" type stuff?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 19:34
|
|
|
OK, thread, I've started reading two history books. The first is "Voltaire's Bastards" by John Ralston Saul. It is from the early 1990s, and concerns the 'dictatorship of reason in the west.' I'm not sure if anyone here has real strong opinions on it. I'm liking it, and Saul's already laid out some stuff I may have to articulate here/the cold war thread. (I know the cold war thread will dig Saul's ripping on Robert MacNamera, at any rate.) The second I've just started is "Seven Pillars of Wisdom" by TE Lawrence. I've always wanted to read this book, and just thought I'd mention it here in case it turns out to be a Boy's own adventure of the Arab Revolt.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
that book is extremely gay
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
It's the gayest book and also the most wonderful. I don't think it's very boys own, as I read a fuckton of boys own style travel writing from 1850-1920. Lawrence had a romanticised but also really cynical way of looking at his situation - romanticised towards the Arabs and cynical towards the British. It's pretty delightful to read, but also romantic, depressed and sadomasochistic. It's very much in the tradition of British imperialist adventures - a romantic and ever-so-slightly failed poet encounters the other and falls in love with it, seeing "home" as a decadent society fallen from the "pure grace" of the foreign.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
the brits probably wrote like that then because literally any other society on earth would be more fun to live in than late 19th century england and they were all desperate to escape
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 20:31
|
|
HEY GAL posted:the brits probably wrote like that then because literally any other society on earth would be more fun to live in than late 19th century england and they were all desperate to escape Pretty much yeah. It loving sucked unless you were rich. Still kind of does now, but we got central heating and there is slightly less racism.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
100 Years Ago Since it worked so well so recently, the Germans are going to send out another blockade runner. This one's going to recapture the success of Kronborg and try to send more badly-needed supplies to Colonel von Lettow-Vorbeck in Africa. The Ottoman Third Army begins retreating from Koprukoy just in time; General Nixon leaves Mesopotamia (and our story) with some extremely impotent fulminating; Louis Barthas inevitably finds something to complain about while at home on leave; Bernard Adams gets his own leave chit; and Robert Palmer watches the Engineers failing to build a bridge over the Tigris, with some excellent dry sarcasm even in the middle of an all-day rainstorm. quote:Dug a bridge-head perimeter. We are waiting for the bridge.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Pretty much yeah. It loving sucked unless you were rich. I don't know, austerity in the GB came up in the cold war thread recently, and there were some interesting  posts:Forums Terrorist posted:I don't think people itt realize just how badly austerity has mauled large parts of Britain. Godholio posted:This is definitely the case. gfanikf posted:Like actually bad...or just equivalent to living in America? Forums Terrorist posted:As in "significant parts of the poor are suffering from diseases normally only found in starving Africans". Or how the latest changes to how housing benefits works means half the population can't afford to live in most of Britain. Nebakenezzer posted:e: ^^^ Jesus Christ mlmp08 posted:Austerity. inkjet_lakes posted:Phone posting so I can't go full retard on austerity (my wife is disabled so believe me I want to), anyway exhibit two: What has changed? Well... poisonpill posted:Cameron is being rather pig-headed about this entire situation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 21:52
|
|
OK, that is worse than I thought
|
It's pretty lovely like, two people in a family can hold down 9-5 jobs and still have to use the foodbank levels of lovely.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 22:08
|
|
|
Not everyone is born with the dick up in the pig's head.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:It's pretty lovely like, two people in a family can hold down 9-5 jobs and still have to use the foodbank levels of lovely. I.e. basically America!
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 22:22
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:the brits probably wrote like that then because literally any other society on earth would be more fun to live in than late 19th century england and they were all desperate to escape No? I mean it sucked but 19th century Russia or America wasnt really better if you were poor.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
The new thirty years war will be wandering gangs of starvation wage people fighting with other gangs of starvation wage people over if the minimum wage can be indexed to inflation and raised or not
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 22:28
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:No? I mean it sucked but 19th century Russia or America wasnt really better if you were poor. Let me remind you that living in Russian Empire meant that you were still a medieval peasant, corvee labor and all that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
but you did not have to be english
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 22:57
|
|
|
Certain parts of the middle class in Britain in the late 19th and early 20th century were essentially born into a comfortable servitude as part of the empire's civil service, which is an interesting topic I can go on about at length, but yes: our current government is desperately trying to drive us back to the golden age of 1913 at all costs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 23:09
|
|
|
lenoon posted:Certain parts of the middle class in Britain in the late 19th and early 20th century were essentially born into a comfortable servitude as part of the empire's civil service, which is an interesting topic I can go on about at length, but yes: our current government is desperately trying to drive us back to the golden age of 1913 at all costs. Please, by all means do go on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 23:11
|
|
|
lenoon posted:Certain parts of the middle class in Britain in the late 19th and early 20th century were essentially born into a comfortable servitude as part of the empire's civil service, which is an interesting topic I can go on about at length, but yes: our current government is desperately trying to drive us back to the golden age of 1913 at all costs. Weird.* The some of the elite in North America similarly see the turn of the last century as the ideal time (IE when they had the most power) *it is not weird at all
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2016 23:21
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Are there cold war versions of wehrabingo for all the "The tank needed an autoloader because soviet crews were too stupid to load shells the right way" type stuff? Of course! Just look for any instances of "Autoloader that eats conscript arms" and you've found one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 01:23
|
|
|
lenoon posted:Certain parts of the middle class in Britain in the late 19th and early 20th century were essentially born into a comfortable servitude as part of the empire's civil service, which is an interesting topic I can go on about at length, but yes: our current government is desperately trying to drive us back to the golden age of 1913 at all costs. I object to the idea that Cameron and Co. want to go back to 1913. They aren't funding the Royal Navy nearly well enough. Besides, the government of that day were actually trying to increase social spending.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:They aren't funding the Royal Navy nearly well enough.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:the things we study are not coming back, not ever, move past and heal This is a good thing, especially for your area
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:20
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:the things we study are not coming back, not ever, move past and heal Pity. The British could use a Campbell-Bannerman these days. And I'd love to see what Lloyd George would do to Nick Clegg.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
Splode posted:This is a good thing, especially for your area
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:38
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:on the bright side, the people who weren't starving to death or catching diseases at the time would dress more flamboyantly
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:40
|
|
|
I thought this might be appreciated here. An interview with the "Dragonman" of Colorado Springs. It started out as an interview about gun control, and ended up being a tour of his amazing, one-of-a-kind WW2, US Military, and 50s hot rod museum. Click the link for some awesome pictures of his compound and museum. http://krcc.org/post/wish-we-were-here-episode-11-dragonman-behind-guns Seriously, if you find yourself in Colorado Springs visit this museum, it is hands-down the best military museum I've ever been to and I've been to a lot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 02:44
|
|
|
Nine of Eight posted:Of course! Just look for any instances of "Autoloader that eats conscript arms" and you've found one. I meant specifically a bingo sheet for it  Maybe I should make one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 11:22
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:the things we study are not coming back, not ever, move past and heal Some people have started arguing the 30-Years-War has come back, this time for Islam and this time somewhat farther to the East and South of Germany.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 11:43
|
|
|
Libluini posted:Some people have started arguing the 30-Years-War has come back, this time for Islam and this time somewhat farther to the East and South of Germany. But the ISIS goons don't look nearly as fancy as Landsknechts This reboot sucks
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 12:12
|
|
|
Libluini posted:Some people have started arguing the 30-Years-War has come back, this time for Islam and this time somewhat farther to the East and South of Germany. And these people should be derided as eurocentric idiots. e: I considered Saddam as the new Napoleon, as Middle East history itself suffers of a distinct lack of warring dictators to compare with. Nenonen fucked around with this message at 12:30 on Jan 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 12:23
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:And these people should be derided as eurocentric idiots. Nenonen posted:e: I considered Saddam as the new Napoleon, as Middle East history itself suffers of a distinct lack of warring dictators to compare with. Was Saddam especially brilliant as a strategist? I thought he was much better as a politician.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 13:15
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:And these people should be derided as eurocentric idiots. What did you expect from goons who post in D&D?
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 13:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 18:22 |
|
|
Libluini posted:Some people have started arguing the 30-Years-War has come back, this time for Islam and this time somewhat farther to the East and South of Germany. Could have sworn I read a thing comparing the 30YW to the Congolese wars and the way they kept drawing in neighboring nations. Like I said before, if I was a total shithead I'd be writing an article about how we need a new Ever Victorious Army to put ISIS in their place.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 13:26
|
|