November 30, 1939

Status
Not open for further replies.

Cosmoline

Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2002
Messages
23,646
Location
Los Anchorage
Sixty-eight years ago today, a little war started that would change the world. Finland fought off a vastly superior Soviet force, exposing the political and tactical weaknesses in the Red Army and prompting Hitler to consider attacking east instead of west. With the so-called "phoney war" in the rest of Europe, the Winter War was the first time modern military equipment came into play during WWII proper. And as the experience showed, the Spanish Civil War had just been a warmup.

The Winter War is worth remembering as a time of dramatic change in small arms, as well. Tactically, the Finnish were forced by necessity to rely on fast-moving small units with a knowledge of terrain and the ability to move through it. The world was amazed to see how effectively a small number of ski troops had been able to chop up and destroy the much superior Soviet mechanized units. These experiences encouraged the development of specialized units in larger nations including our own 10th Mountain. Minnie Dole is said to have come up with the idea for the 10th through reading of the Finn's exploits. These units did best with automatic and semiautomatic weapons combined with portable explosives. They needed to strike fast with overwhelming firepower, destroy key elements of the offensive force, then pull out just as fast. In a way they were the fore-runners of modern special forces.

The war also saw the shift from WWI style weaponry--bulky water-cooled machine guns, long infantry bolt action repeaters, and small tanks--with what became typical WWII weaponry--light machine guns and more portable medium machine guns, and of course the awesome Suomi SMG that gave rise to the PPsH-41 on the Soviet side. Semiautomatic battle rifles such as the SVT-38 were also field tested, leading to refinements in design. The weakness of existing anti-tank weapons was exposed and the Molotov Cocktail was created as a stopgap. As a cheap, widely-issued projectile weapon the cocktail was in a way a precursor to the disposable rocket launchers used later in the war. The success of focused, accurate artillery called in by forward observers as opposed to across-the-line bombardments ordered from the brass in the rear was highlighted. And the weakness of light T-24 tanks was underscored by the famous cocktails. The terrible toll taken by Finnish snipers prompted the Red Army to start training more of its own. These in turn helped to reverse the tide of German victories later in the war.

We Americans are the current owners of many of the actual rifles from that period and the Fino-Soviet wars that followed. Millions of Mosin-Nagants saw service on both sides and many of these are now in the US. As such I think we need to give a tip of the hat to the courage on both sides of that now-forgotten conflict. Plus, if it hadn't been for the courage of the Finns and sacrifice of the Red Army Men, WWII would have probably taken a very different direction. A fast victory with minimal Soviet losses may have convinced Hitler to leave the USSR alone and concentrate on destroying Britain. Conversely, the defeat of many Red Army units forced changes in the policial and tactical structure of that force and helped it weather the storm of 1941. In its own way the Winter War is as important to world history as the Battle of Britain, perhaps more so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War

Portions of a very good recent documentary called "Fire and Ice" can be found here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrsH4K7HKtg

400103NorjalaisiaVapaaehtoisia.jpg
 
Last edited:
Was just in the local bookstore today, they had a display set up with books about the Winter War. Very strong Finnish population here, and it shows.

Wish I had some money, seems interesting to read about.
 
The Russians were horribly equipped and horribly led, like the Germans in their invasion of Russia, the Russians were not prepared to fight a winter war. The Finns fought a mostly static war because of manpower and materiel shortages, so they occupied strongpoints that took advantage of lakes and waterways which channeled the Russian columns into kill zones.

A more influential war was the one fought between Japan and Russia in 1939 at Khalkin Gol (Nomonhan). This was a full-scale war fought on the borders of Mongolia when Japan tried a land-grab into the Soviet Union. Japan's most powerful army was destroyed by the Soviets' unending manpower, tanks and artillery. This experience turned Imperial Japan's attention towards the West, ultimately resulting in Pearl Harbor and war with the United States. Russia's new hero from this war, Gen. Zhukov returned to Europe in time to fight the Germans at Moscow and Stalingrad...
 
They experimented with some optics but nothing worked very well in the extreme conditions.

As far as the border battles of Khalkin Gol, it's another interesting chapter in the runup to WWII, but the scale of it was minor compared with the Talvisota. A little over 100,000 troops total were engaged, compared with a million soviets alone in the Winter War vs. a quarter million Finns in uniform. The Winter War was also the first total war of the period, with the entire population of Finland called up in one form or another to survive. This type of total war would reach Britain later in 1940, the USSR itself in 1941, the US in 1942 and finally in Germany and Japan by '44 and '45.
 
I agree with Cosmoline.

The Nomonhan Incident was an relatively minor series of border skirmishes between a ragtag Soviet-Mongolian army and a veteran Japanese battle group. It is a interesting study in tactics, as the Soviets should not have won the way they did. As interesting as it is, the Nomonhan Incident is not as historically significant as the Talvisota.

Nomonhan (or Khalkhin Gol) proved to the Japanese that the Soviets were willing to put up a fight over relatively small amounts of land. It did eventually lead to the Soviet-Japanese neutrality pact in 1941, which lasted until Operation August Storm in August 1945. The Japanese didn't commit any more troops to the border squabbles with the Soviets because they had their hands full fighting Jiang Jieshi (Chiang Kai-shek)'s Guomingdang in Central/South China and Mao Zedong's CCP in the North.

Plus the Japanese were starting to feel the effects of joint American-European embargoes. They were running out of iron, rubber, coal, and most importantly oil. Nomonhan had little to do with the Japanese decision to go to war with the United States. They never had any ambitions to gain territory in Siberia or Mongolia; they wanted to test Soviet military might in case the Soviets had any ideas of reclaiming the territory that was taken from them (the Russians) at the Treaty of Portsmouth which ended the Russo-Japanese War in 1905.

The Japanese struck Pearl Harbor because they had less than 6 months of oil reserves left and needed to remove the U.S. Pacific Fleet to enable a strike against the oil-rich Dutch East Indies (Indonesia), not because they were foiled by Zhukov in 1939 and couldn't expand into Mongolia. So the point I'm trying to make (in a very roundabout way) is that there is no way that Nomonhan can be viewed as more significant than the Talvisota. While it is an interesting and mostly forgotten piece of history, it does not even come close to eclipsing the importance of the Finnish resistance against blatant Soviet aggression.

Rant over.
 
Simo Hayha, the greatest sniper in history, fought in the Winter War. 505 confirmed rifle kills and around 200 SMG kills in less than 100 days of action. :eek:
 
Don't forget that Hayha made all those kills with iron sights. If you do the math it averages out at about 5 kills per day in temperatures as low as -40F. Plus, he had damn near half his face shot off and he lived!


In case anyone is wondering, he used a M28 rifle because it fit him the best (he was short-around 5').
 
Isn't that Doug Browsers? I've never been able to find it. William Trotter's "A Frozen Hell" is very good.

The 1989 film "Talvisota" is a particularly brutal look at the war. There's a cut-down version available stateside in Region 1 release but large chunks of the 3+ hour original have been removed for who knows what reason. As a result it tends to cut rather abruptly at times. But even the cut down version is impressive. I rank it as the ultimate Mosin-Nagant movie. It has none of the silly romance or retro agitprop of "Enemy at the Gates."

It's sort of a Finnish "Band of Brothers." Actually "Band of Brothers" is sort of an American "Talvisota." The dour, matter-of-fact retelling that impressed people so much with the HBO movie was in fact taken from European cinema and was not Spielberg's invention. Here's a scene where the Russians give them a Christmas present and the Finns celebrate with cocktails

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11_EvCsU46I&feature=related
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top