Author Topic: War  (Read 1069 times)

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7339
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
War
« on: February 08, 2022, 12:24:17 am »
https://www.yahoo.com/news/why-progressives-cautious-anti-war-105457061.html

Quote
For most of my life, the anti-war movement — such as it is — has been a primarily left-of-center phenomenon.

When you think of the Vietnam War, images of hippies, Jane Fonda and Eugene McCarthy probably come to mind. The "nuclear freeze" campaign of the 1980s was similarly a lefty occurrence. When President George W. Bush prepared to launch the invasion of Iraq in 2003, it was mostly liberals and leftists who took to the streets in protests — and when Americans got fed up with that misbegotten war, they elected Democrats to put an end to it.
...
the hawks-versus-doves clash in this country has largely been a right-against-left conflict.

Yes, because Vietnam and Iraq are non-Western countries. True Leftists supported Clinton's wonderful Operation Deliberate Force against Serbia, a Western country. We would have supported war against Apartheid South Africa, a Western country, had it refused to surrender. We support war against Israel, a Western country. It is only False Leftist geopolitical idiots who are opposed to the US getting into wars without even considering whether the target is a Western country or a non-Western country.

Quote
Now Russia appears to be on the cusp of invading Ukraine — Jake Sullivan, the national security adviser, warned Sunday that war could come within days — and some of the loudest voices for U.S. restraint are coming from conservatives. It's kind of weird!

No, it's not weird at all. Russia is a Western country, so of course rightists don't want war against Russia. Rightists are only opposed to the US warring against Western countries, while having no problem with the US warring against non-Western countries. They are our opposites.

Quote
That's led some observers to wonder if there might be a natural alliance between those elements on the left and right urging U.S. restraint in Eastern Europe.

Only False Leftists will join rightists calling for restraint against Turandom. True Leftists will not rest until Turandom has ceased to exist.

Quote
Maybe. But there are a few reasons antiwar progressives should be cautious, at the very least, about making common cause with the Trumpist right:

We are not progressives, and we are not anti-war. We are only opposed to fellow former victims of Western colonialism (among which we include America) fighting one another instead of uniting against the Western colonial powers. Nevertheless, at least even False Leftists seem to be catching on that rightists are against war with Russia for all the wrong reasons.

Quote
Carlson's opposition to aiding Ukraine is rooted — rhetorically, at least — in his longstanding inability to tell the difference between immigration and an actual military invasion. It's a chance to knock "open borders" Democrats. Why would we protect Ukraine's borders and not our own?

For Carlson, this is an explicitly racial question, cast in typically bad-faith terms.

To keep thing simple, in Carlson's mind, Russians are "white" and Ukrainians are "white", therefore Russia invading Ukraine is OK because it's OK to be "white".

Quote
Carlson once rooted on the Iraq War by calling Iraqis "semi-literate primitive monkeys."

For Carlson, it's also OK for "whites" to invade "non-whites" because it's OK to be "white".

Quote
Dreher believes American opposition to a Ukraine invasion stems from anger over Vladimir Putin's opposition to gay rights.

"This cold war with Russia is an extension of the culture war within American society, waged by elites against the American people," Dreher wrote in his blog at The American Conservative. That reading might be the product of Dreher's particular passions, but maybe not. Much of the right, after all, sees Putin as one of the world's leading defenders of Christendom.

Jesus never taught homophobia, therefore homophobia is not Christian. The Orthodox Church that Putin defends is not Christian. It is Mosaic. More about Dreher (and Carlson) here:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/enemies/hungary-v4/msg7892/#msg7892

Continuing:

Quote
Hawley isn't really being dovish when he argues against Ukraine's entry into NATO. He just doesn't want America to divert its attention away from a possible confrontation with China. That's where the real action is. "The United States can no longer carry the heavy burden it once did in other regions of the world — including Europe," he recently wrote to Secretary of State Antony Blinken. "To the contrary, we must do less in those secondary theaters in order to prioritize denying China's hegemonic ambitions in the Indo-Pacific."

None of this is the humanist pacifism of, say, Martin Luther King Jr. or Daniel Berrigan. It's something darker, uglier, and angrier.

Indeed. Of course, we agree with Hawley that the US can no longer carry the burden it once did in other regions of the world. Where we disagree is where the US should prioritize. We believe the US should completely pull out of the Indo-Pacific in order to concentrate on countering the rise of Turandom. Put another way, America should succeed the role that National Socialist Germany created back in WWII, while encouraging China to succeed the role that Japan created back in WWII.

Quote
That doesn't mean that the anti-war left shouldn't work with whatever allies they can find. The goal of those who advocate American restraint should be to avoid a war with Russia, not to signal their own virtue. But they should tread carefully. The world that Tucker, Hawley, and the rest hope to create is very different from the one progressives want.

The indiscriminately anti-war False Left is not our ally. We do not advocate American restraint. We advocate American heroism. The world that True Leftists want to create is different from either the one that rightists want to create or the one that False Leftists want to create. The world we envision is a world without Western civilization. Any war in service of this vision is a war which we support. Any war which might interfere with this vision is a war which we oppose.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2022, 12:47:44 am by 90sRetroFan »

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7339
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: War
« Reply #1 on: March 10, 2022, 11:29:57 pm »
Our enemies remind us why we should want the war in Ukraine to keep going for years:

https://vdare.com/posts/will-a-giant-wave-of-migrants-from-africa-head-toward-europe-again-due-to-mr-putin-s-war

Quote
Ukrainian farmers obviously have more pressing priorities right now than sowing their fields. And in any case, the Russian blockade and conquest of most of Ukraine’s Black Sea coast will prevent exports of wheat to the countries that rely on them most.

Between them, Russia and Ukraine account for a third of the world’s supply of wheat, but in fragile countries across the Middle East and Africa, where wheat bread is the staple food, the dependency on Ukrainian grain is even higher.
...
The potential consequences of hunger and social unrest, and perhaps accelerated state collapse and mass migration northwards, will be a major concern for European politicians in the coming year unless the war comes to a swift conclusion.
...
So, one potential result of Mr. Putin’s War is violent unrest in the Global South, setting off another round of mass migration to the Global North.
Like Like x 1 View List

guest55

  • Guest
Re: War
« Reply #2 on: March 10, 2022, 11:42:35 pm »
It is all coming together perfectly! Operation Gaddafi may be getting the much needed reserves it's been lacking sooner than we imagined!

rp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1091
    • View Profile
Re: War
« Reply #3 on: March 16, 2022, 10:42:50 pm »
Going back to this comment:
http://aryanism.net/blog/aryan-sanctuary/thank-you-for-remembering-us-duginists/comment-page-1/#comment-183404

Can we count on Operation Barbarossa to pay dividends in a potential conflict with Russia, thus handing us an easy victory over Turandom?
« Last Edit: March 16, 2022, 10:59:48 pm by rp »

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7339
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: War
« Reply #4 on: March 17, 2022, 12:06:15 am »
I think the effects have dissipated by now. What we should be thinking about is how to get Barbarossa II going. Now would be a very good timing for it. Even those who do not care about colonial-era history should be able to understand the moral case for Russia losing territory as punishment for the recent invasion, as I was explaining here:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/news/re-duginism-1134/msg11997/#msg11997

Quote
Absent retaliatory invasion into Russian territory, even if Russia comes out on the other side of this war having totally failed to capture Ukraine, it will have lost nothing except troops and weapons. Who will foot the bill for all the infrastructure damaged by Russia, and for all other expenditures incurred as a result of the war? Some people out there literally believe that Russia's loss of troops and weapons can be counted as the payment. No! If I smash up my neighbour's house with a baseball bat, breaking the baseball bat in the process, I am not thereby (on account of the broken baseball bat) absolved of paying the damages to my neighbour's house! I should have to give my house to my neighbour! Similarly, the only sure way to in effect get Russia to pay is by acquiring Russian territory and resources.

But Russia is obviously not going to agree to this, so the only way to make it lose territory is to take it militarily. Now is the time to do it! Russia is sending in reinforcements into Ukraine, which weakens its defences elsewhere:

Quote
Putin's manpower problem: Russia 'is drafting in troops from Siberia and the Pacific as well as Syrians and mercenaries' in desperate attempt to get stalled Ukrainian invasion going after punishing losses

The obvious move is to wait until all the reinforcements are inside Ukraine, and then open up multiple new fronts of war on Russian territory itself! No way can Russia hold Koenigsberg right now if NATO simply decided to take it back.



China and Japan are fools to not take back Outer Manchuria and Karafuto ASAP! With the troops in Armenia going to Ukraine, Turkey can now also invade and take back Crimea:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea

Quote
Crimea (or the Tauric Peninsula, as it was called from antiquity until the early modern period) has historically been at the boundary between the classical world and the Pontic–Caspian steppe. Its southern fringe was colonised by the Greeks and then ruled by the Persians followed by the Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire, and finally successor states including the Empire of Trebizond and Principality of Theodoro. During the entirety of this period the urban areas were Greek-speaking and eventually eastern Christian (Eastern Orthodox). During the collapse of the Byzantine state some cities fell to its creditor, the Republic of Genoa, until eventually all were absorbed by the rapidly rising Ottoman Empire.

guest55

  • Guest
Re: War
« Reply #5 on: March 17, 2022, 12:32:44 am »
The host of "Speak The Truth" made a good point in one of his videos as well: The troops arriving from the middle-east region to reinforce Putin's failing invasion are not used to the weather in Ukraine. It is much colder in Ukraine than in Syria. This will have an effect on their performance as well. Reminded me of what Hitler said about Muslims fighting in Europe actually.

I still do not understand why reclaiming Crimea even for Ukraine is not being discussed at all by so many....


rp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1091
    • View Profile
Re: War
« Reply #6 on: March 17, 2022, 12:43:41 am »
". Even those who do not care about colonial-era history should be able to understand the moral case for Russia losing territory as punishment for the recent invasion, as I was explaining here:"

But wait a minute, don't we support the invasion because it kills Ukrainians? Or do we only support it insofar as it achieves the aforementioned objective, but oppose it because it benefits Russia? If the latter case, why should we oppose it solely because it benefits Russia? Because it strengthens Turandom more broadly?

guest55

  • Guest
Re: War
« Reply #7 on: March 17, 2022, 12:56:58 am »
Personally, I never supported the invasion to begin with, but I'm glad it happened. Look at all the positives that have come from it already too though, the EU uniting, Germany rearming itself, etc. I've always taken Patton and Hitler's words to heart on the subject, namely that sooner than later America would have to fight Russia. So, in that regard, Turanians taking each other out now makes things easier for America in the long run.

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7339
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: War
« Reply #8 on: March 17, 2022, 01:28:52 am »
"don't we support the invasion because it kills Ukrainians?"

To support the invasion would imply that we want the invasion to succeed. We do not. Therefore we do not support the invasion. We are merely glad that the invasion attempt occurred. We still want the attempt to ultimately fail, and lead to Russia ending up in a worse position than it was before the attempt.

"Or do we only support it insofar as it achieves the aforementioned objective, but oppose it because it benefits Russia?"

Again, "support" is the wrong word. The worst scenario for us would have been if the invasion went as Putin (and genuine Putin supporters) wanted it to go: Ukraine surrenders without a single Ukrainian dying. Fortunately, this ship has already sailed.

"If the latter case, why should we oppose it solely because it benefits Russia? Because it strengthens Turandom more broadly?"

Yes. Recall:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics

Quote
Ukraine should be annexed by Russia because "Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning, no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness, its certain territorial ambitions represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics".

We are anti-Duginists.

rp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1091
    • View Profile
Re: War
« Reply #9 on: March 17, 2022, 08:56:40 pm »
BTW, what is your stance on children being casualties of war, in particular, if there is no way to evacuate them (as in Ukraine)?

guest55

  • Guest
Re: War
« Reply #10 on: March 17, 2022, 11:23:27 pm »
What is really starting to bother me about many talk show hosts and news presenters is how quickly important and pertinent information falls down the memory hole in the face of a more minor detail. It's almost like as soon as Russia invaded Ukraine everyone instantly forgot about climate change and the coming refugee crisis and wars over resources like water that are soon to occur on this planet. Add these following points together folks, and then perhaps you will get a clearer picture of the danger lurking around the next corner? This is why you all should be talking about finishing off Putin now!:

Putin’s Thousand-Year War
Quote
The reasons for his anti-Western enmity stretch back over Russia’s entire history—and they will be with us for a long time.
Quote
Whether or not Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine ends any time soon, what is certain to continue is the Russian president’s abiding hatred and mistrust of the United States and other Western powers, which he believes left him no choice but to launch an unprovoked war.

It’s not just Putin. These views are shared by the many Russian elites who have supported him for two decades. They have also been a chief reason for Putin’s domestic popularity—at least until recently, when his invasion ran into fierce resistance—even as he has turned himself into a dictator and Russia into a nearly totalitarian state reminiscent of the Soviet Union at its worst. It is an enmity worth probing in depth, if only to understand why Washington and the West almost certainly face another “long twilight struggle” with Moscow—in former U.S. President John F. Kennedy’s words—rivaling the 45-year Cold War.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/03/12/putins-thousand-year-war/?utm_source=pocket-newtab

Defense Department warns climate change will increase conflicts over water and food
Quote
Climate change poses a serious threat to U.S. military operations and will lead to new sources of global political conflict, the Department of Defense wrote in its new climate adaptation plan.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/08/defense-department-warns-climate-change-will-increase-conflicts.html

Swathes of Middle East and North Africa will be too hot for humans as early as the 2040s: study
Quote
By the middle of this century, the region will see heat waves 10 times more often, with temperatures inching close to 50 C in the warmest months
https://nationalpost.com/news/world/swathes-of-middle-east-and-north-africa-will-be-too-hot-for-humans-as-early-as-the-2040s-study

It seems so many human-beings forget the bigger picture entirely as soon as there is a smaller detail that warrants a lot of attention. Human-being, you are running out of time! Better get your act together! It feels like many just want to keep playing by the same exact playbook even though the game has totally changed! Russia's military defeat in Ukraine is a perfect example of this too!

NATO vs Russia - Who Would Win Military Comparison
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzdclYQkOrc

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7339
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Atlantic Alliance Drifting Apart?
« Reply #11 on: April 28, 2022, 09:32:29 pm »
Our enemies think NATO is doing too much (when in reality it is doing too little):
 
https://vdare.com/articles/patrick-j-buchanan-will-putin-submit-to-u-s-imposed-weakening

Quote
Said Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on his return from a Sunday meeting in Kyiv with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy:

The United States wants "to see Russia weakened to the point where it can't do things like invade Ukraine."

"Russia," said Austin, has "already lost a lot of military capability and a lot of its troops ... and we want to see them not have the capability to very quickly reproduce that capability."

Thus, the new, or newly revealed, goal of U.S. policy in Ukraine is not just the defeat and retreat of the invading Russian army but the crippling of Russia as a world power.

The sanctions imposed on Russia and the advanced weapons we are shipping into Ukraine are not only to enable the country to preserve its independence and territorial integrity but also to inflict irreversible damage on Mother Russia.

Putin's Russia is not to recover soon or ever from the beating we intend to administer, using Ukrainians to deliver the beating, over an extended period of time.

I fail to see a problem here.

Quote
Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu has seen through to the true objectives of some NATO allies:

"There are countries within NATO that want the Ukraine war to continue. They see the continuation of the war as weakening Russia. They don't care much about the situation in Ukraine."

This certainly describes how I (unlike the Ukraine-worshipping False Leftists) feel.

Quote
But to increase steadily and substantially the losses to Russia's economy, as well as its military, the war must go on longer.

And a long war translates into ever-greater losses to the Ukrainians who are alone in paying the price in blood of defeating Russia.

I would be even happier to see the war expanding into V4+ territory.

Quote
Is Austin committed to fighting this war to the last Ukrainian?

I am not Austin, but if I were, I would be. Why not, especially when Ukrainians themselves claim to be similarly committed?

Quote
How many dead Russian soldiers -- currently, the estimate of Russian losses is 15,000 of its invasion force -- will it take to satisfy Austin and the Americans?

Again, I am not Austin, but:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia#Military

Quote
As of 2021, the military have around a million active-duty personnel, which is the world's fifth-largest, and about 2–20 million reserve personnel.[258][259]

20 million at least, and:

Quote
Population
• 2022 estimate
Neutral decrease 145,478,097

145478097 ideally.

Back to enemy article:

Quote
To achieve, say, a loss of 50,000 dead Russians, how many Ukrainians would have to lose their lives as well?

I would have preferred all of them never to have been born in the first place, but at least this way many who would otherwise have reproduced will not do so. The effect will still be to improve the gene pool in the long-term.

Quote
How many Ukrainian cities would have to share the fate of Mariupol?

I would have avoided bombing the simple apartment blocks (which could have been used to house climate refugees) and only destroyed the Homo Hubris buildings. But it is 100% Russia's fault for doing almost the exact opposite.

Quote
Does a war to bleed the other side to death also contradict the moral conditions for a just war?

On the contrary, this is the only way to avoid having to fight them again in the future. It is precisely those who hate war (such as myself) who will aim to bleed the other side to death one and for all. It is Turanian raiders who never do this because they plan to raid again later (they being the ones who positively enjoy war).

Quote
Then there are the practical considerations.

When we say we will so weaken Russia that it cannot threaten its neighbors again, we are talking about conventional weapons and power.

Nothing done in Ukraine in this two-month war has diminished the Russian arsenal of 6,000 nuclear weapons, the world's largest stockpile.

And the more we destroy Russian conventional power, the more we force Moscow to fall back onto its ace in the hole -- nuclear weapons.

Unless we counterinvade into Russian territory. Is Russia going to nuke Russian cities in order to kill the counterinvading troops occupying those cities?

Quote
Which raises the question:

Will Putin accept a U.S.-induced permanent reduction in Russia's standing as a great nation? Or would Russia resort to weapons that could avoid that fate and avoid as well the long and debilitating "forever war" some Americans want to impose on his country?

If we are going to bleed Russia into an irreversible strategic decline, is Putin a ruler of the mindset to go quietly into that good night?

Are Putin & Co. bluffing with this implied nuclear threat?

It is always better to call the enemy's bluff than let them get away with the bluff.

And again, how exactly does Putin use nukes against troops which have counterinvaded into Russian territory? Yes, he can nuke NATO territory, but that will not stop the troops already inside. To stop those troops, he would have to nuke his own people at the same time. This is why, the sooner we push this war into Russian territory, the less credible Putin's bluff will sound.

Quote
When Georgia invaded South Ossetia in 2008, Putin's Russian army reacted instantly, ran the Georgians out and stormed into Georgia itself.

When the U.S. helped to overthrow the pro-Russian government in Kyiv in 2014, Russia plunged in and took Crimea, the Sevastopol naval base, and Luhansk and Donetsk.

When Ukraine flirted with joining NATO and Biden refused to rule out the possibility, Putin invaded in February.

When he warns of military action, Putin has some credibility.

And in this talk of using tactical atomic weapons to prevent the defeat, humiliation and diminution of Russia itself, is Vladimir Putin bluffing?

There is only one way to find out for sure, and that is by not backing down.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2022, 10:14:05 pm by 90sRetroFan »

SirGalahad

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 189
    • View Profile
Re: War
« Reply #12 on: April 29, 2022, 01:00:27 pm »
"On the contrary, this is the only way to avoid having to fight them again in the future. It is precisely those who hate war (such as myself) who will aim to bleed the other side to death one and for all."

I would also assume that it has a dysgenic effect for the enemy side, since all the Turanians inherently militaristic enough to proudly fight in the war will be the first to die, leaving behind the Turanians who don't have as much of a will to fight, and even some of the noble ones who avoided fighting in the war not just out of survivalism, but because they were against it out of principle
« Last Edit: April 29, 2022, 01:02:41 pm by SirGalahad »

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7339
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: Atlantic Alliance Drifting Apart?
« Reply #13 on: May 09, 2022, 12:45:45 am »
Finally mainstream journalism is starting to understand the need to reduce Russian territory:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/another-russia-even-possible-075600721.html

Quote
It is time to finally open your eyes and stop looking for "good Russians."

Instead, it must be made clear that the Russian Federation is a multinational state. Much of its territory is not inhabited only by Russians, but by the native peoples who lived on this land for centuries.
...
The struggle of the peoples of Ukraine, the Baltic states, the Caucasus, Central Asia and all the others buried the empire of evil — the USSR. The newest evil empire — the Russian Federation — must be buried in the struggle for the national liberation of Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Ischkeria, Tuva, Sakha-Yakutia, Buryatia and other countries.

This process should not be feared just as the short-sightedly Western powers feared the collapse of the USSR. On the contrary, it should be encouraged.

Yes, Russia at the absolute minimum must be reduced to its pre-1533 borders:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/russia-the-last-colonial-empire/msg5125/#msg5125



Until this happens, war against Russia must continue.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2022, 12:51:31 am by 90sRetroFan »

90sRetroFan

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7339
  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION MUST DIE!
    • View Profile
Re: War
« Reply #14 on: May 12, 2022, 08:03:35 pm »
With Finland to join NATO, now is a good time to bring up land that Finland should take back from Russia:

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

Quote
The Winter War,[F 6] also known as the First Soviet-Finnish War, was a war between the Soviet Union and Finland. The war began with a Soviet invasion of Finland on 30 November 1939, three months after the outbreak of World War II, and ended three and a half months later with the Moscow Peace Treaty on 13 March 1940.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_Peace_Treaty

Quote
Finland ceded approximately half of Finnish Karelia, exceeding the amount of territory demanded by the Soviets before the war. The ceded area included Finland's industrial centre, the city of Viipuri (Finland's second-largest city [Population Register] or fourth-largest city [Church and Civil Register], depending on the census data[6]), Käkisalmi, Sortavala, Suojärvi, and the whole of Viipuri Bay (with its islands). Much of this territory was still held by the Finnish Army. Military troops and remaining civilians were hastily evacuated inside the new border: 422,000 Finns, i.e. 12% of Finland's population, lost their homes.

There was also an area that the Russians captured during the war that remained in Finnish hands according to the treaty: Petsamo. The treaty also stipulated that Finland would grant free passage for Soviet civilians through Petsamo to Norway.

Finland also had to cede a part of the Salla area, the Finnish part of the Kalastajansaarento (Rybachi) Peninsula in the Barents Sea, and in the Gulf of Finland the islands of Suursaari, Tytärsaari, Lavansaari (now Moshchny Island о. Мощный), Peninsaari (now Maly Island, о. Малый) and Seiskari. Finally, the Hanko Peninsula was leased to the Soviet Union as a naval base for 30 years at an annual rent of 8 million marks. The total area ceded by Finland amounted to approximately 9% of its territory.



Quote
The harsh terms imposed on the Finns led them to seek support from Nazi Germany.[citation needed] The Winter War and the subsequent peace treaty were core factors in leading to what would become the Continuation War, when hostilities resumed in 1941.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuation_War

Quote
The Continuation War, also known as the Second Soviet-Finnish War, was a conflict fought by Finland and Nazi Germany against the Soviet Union from 1941 to 1944, as part of World War II.[Note 3] In Soviet historiography, the war was called the Finnish Front of the Great Patriotic War.[Note 4] Germany regarded its operations in the region as part of its overall war efforts on the Eastern Front and provided Finland with critical material support and military assistance, including economic aid.[19]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_Armistice

Quote
The Moscow Armistice was signed between Finland on one side and the Soviet Union and United Kingdom on the other side on 19 September 1944, ending the Continuation War.[2] The Armistice restored the Moscow Peace Treaty of 1940, with a number of modifications.
...
The conditions for peace were similar to what had been agreed in the Moscow Peace Treaty of 1940: Finland was obliged to cede parts of Karelia and Salla, as well as certain islands in the Gulf of Finland. The new armistice also handed all of Petsamo to the Soviet Union



We should advocate Continuation War II to take back the islands in the Gulf of Finland, as well as Petsamo, Salla and especially Karelia. This would enable another front of war to be opened against Russia. The more fronts of war able to be simultaneously opened against Russia, the better.