On deepstatemap, a website where you can follow the progress of the war in Ukraine and who controls what territory, the Ukrainians have now added Murmansk and Karelia as occupied territory by Russian forces. Previous maps have been concentrated around Ukraine, Eastern Europe and the Caucasus, but now they have added the rest of Europe now also adding these territories as occupied. Is Ukraine encouraging Finland to seize the moment because in that case I’ll pack my skis and prepare for Winter war 2.0

29 comments

  1. Btw, I support Ukraine 100% in this war, this post was not made to ridicule or blame Ukraine for escalating the conflict, I just thought it was hilarious that after months of absurd and deranged territorial claims from Russia, they now get a taste of their own medicine, sincerely your western neighbour 🇸🇪

  3. Those areas are so ruined that rebuilding them would render Finland bankrupt. Connection to artic ocean would be nice though.

  5. They were occupied yes, but we aknowledged them as Russian lands when Talvisota ended so they belong legally to Russia now. Nowadays the area is so Russian that we dont really even want them back.

  7. Iatg if our politicians are dumb anough to go lay claims on any of these lands (expect the one that gives access to north sea) and go to war and waste soldiers and resources to get back that shithole I will not do anything at all about it (trust me)

  13. Those areas were annexed by soviets. Ingrian Finns in those areas were kind of genocided when soviets forcibly moved them around soviet union, mainly to siperia.

    Not areas worth losing lives over nowadays.

    But hypotetically speaking if things were to go FUBAR in ruzzia, it would get balkanized, it would be really funny to get those areas back, if it could happen without bloodshead after 80 odd years. I mean it would further empathize that all those soviets back in 1939-1940 and 1941-1944 died for jackshit.

  14. I would have so much land to claim in the Karelian isthmus and a very nice city flat in the centre of Viipuri. Too bad it’s all in ruins.

  15. Funnily enough, the Australian constitution states that New Zealand can become part of Australia, like, if it wants to, for whatever reason, but no pressure.

    I think the Finnish approach is that once a region is Russian, it’s Russian. We’re not budging our borders.

    ​

    Edit: what I’m saying is, Finland wouldn’t take these lands if the whole global community begged us to, not even for humanitarian reasons.

  16. More than fair. Those lands were taken after THEY attacked US. That’s exactly the same like nowadays in Ukraine. Totally uncalled for.

  18. The current borders are recognized by both Finland and Russia. The peace deal might have been unfair, but it was almost 80 years ago.

  20. How should I put it? It’s a bit like your neighbour taking a shit in your bowl of porridge and then asking if you still want it back.

  24. Those areas used to be valuable parts of Finland. Now they’re completely bankrupt and in shambles because they’ve been a part of russia for so long and Russians have murdered all the finnish people there so no real reason to want them back. Russia is a country that has an anti-midas touch. Everything that country touches turns to shit.

  25. Not Murmansk. Karelian Isthmus, Salla (eastern part), and Petsamo. All of these should be returned to their rightful owner, Finland.

  26. That’s the same thing as marking texas as a part of mexico occupied by usa.

    Those areas going to Soviet Union were listed in the peace treaty that Finland and Soviet Union signed when Finland lost the war and pissed off the Germans.

    When Soviet Union collapsed in the 90s, those areas were even offered back to Finland, but we refused, because the 90s was a really bad time financially to even think about rebuilding those areas.

    But yes, an access to the Arctic waters would be really nice.

  27. Some chief stupid stuff, Viipuri is not in bad condition and can be easily restored (if granted Autonomy from St. Pete), but people, whether they are Karelian or not, primarily speak Russian here and, honestly, are not neither culturally, nor mentally aligned to Finns nowadays.

  28. If Russia faces imminent collapse once more, there’s an argument to be made for the restoration of the old borders. The territories were seized by a illegal and illegitimate invasion, just as Crimea was. Besides, surely Finland has the right to go on a peacekeeping mission to protect Finnish minorities, just as Russia does every few years.

    Many people bring up the local Russian populations and degraded infrastructure as a problem. As far as I know, Russia has never been shy to do some “population transfers” surely they’d gladly accept their people back safely in mother Russia, via a mass deportation.

    The infrastructure problem could be mitigated with handing lands back to the children and grand-children of its original owners and giving some tax cuts, land grants or similar benefits to settlers. With the most useful land inhabited again, the infrastructure can be built up for a hefty price in those areas, and mostly abandoned elsewhere. I’ve heard nature reserves are a major deal these days, and you can’t ever have too much timber for the logging industry.

    For the good parts, you’d have plenty of new resources and opportunities to exploit. Full control of the Saimaa canal, an Arctic port, Petsamo nickel reserves and a further defensive buffer out east to name a few. With Finnish Karelia greatly expanded, there’d be more room for a Karelian cultural revival as well.

Leave a Reply