Ukraine

[Gergar12]

...which means Finland would be more likely to need help.

You're viewing this purely from the perspective of strengthening NATO, not from the perspective of the countries requiring protection.

If that were the case we would have Yemen in NATO. For the record, I am for both joining.

Based on what? Sweden has better navy sure, in air they're quite equal, but on land Finland absolutely destroys Sweden. More men (war time strenght 55k vs 280k), more tanks, more artillery (Finland has the largest artillery in western Europe).

They have better air power. They have twice as many jets.

Finland vs Sweden: Military Facts and Stats

Budget, Main battle tanks, Combat aircraft, Per capita, War deaths and 120 More Interesting Facts and Stats

www.nationmaster.com

 

[Hawki]

Based on what? Sweden has better navy sure, in air they're quite equal, but on land Finland absolutely destroys Sweden. More men (war time strenght 55k vs 280k), more tanks, more artillery (Finland has the largest artillery in western Europe).

The Finns are thin.
They fit more in.
They're better than the Swedes.
But they should not hurry,
They should fight the Ruskies,
That is what Europe now needs.

(For the record, no-one's 'better,' just popped into my head).

 

[Silvanus]

If that were the case we would have Yemen in NATO. For the record, I am for both joining.

??? There are obviously other requirements.


Anyway, Finland has formally confirmed its application, rendering Putin's strategy to prevent NATO expansion by threatening non-members a complete backfire.

 

[bluegate]

??? There are obviously other requirements.


Anyway, Finland has formally confirmed its application, rendering Putin's strategy to prevent NATO expansion by threatening non-members a complete backfire.

Let's hope that soft Russian assets like Hungary don't veto it.

 

[Lykosia]

If that were the case we would have Yemen in NATO. For the record, I am for both joining.



They have better air power. They have twice as many jets.

Finland vs Sweden: Military Facts and Stats

Budget, Main battle tanks, Combat aircraft, Per capita, War deaths and 120 More Interesting Facts and Stats

www.nationmaster.com

Finland just last year ordered 64 F-35s. After those are delivered, Sweden has nothing comparable. Finnish AA defense is better as well.

What is a big difference between the two is that Finnish society is militaristic. Something many Finns even don't understand. It's built on the expectation that Finland may be forced to fight a war with Russia again and thus it's built around the concept of total war. A lesson Finland learned in WW2. A war Sweden avoided. Laws and other parts of the society are built so that Finland can fast and easily turn the country into war time economics and after the first line reserve on 280 000, Finland can call over 700 000 more troops into arms with minimal training, thanks to mandatory military service for men.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Sweden has the better military.

I think if the current war is showing anything, it's that the concept of a "better" military is actually quite complicated and needs some additional context.

I said this earlier, but it seems pretty clear that part of the reason the Russian military is performing so badly is because Russia has the military budget of the United Kingdom, but tries to spend it like the United States. There's a cottage industry of war nerds out there who like to try and quantify military strength, but those people have consistently rated Russia as one of the strongest militaries on earth. None of that is translating into success because it turns out most of the money goes on prestige projects and developing capabilities which would only be relevant in some hypothetical war between superpowers. That's how you end up with absurdities like hypersonic missiles being fired at warehouses that are probably worth far less than the missile itself, while planes are reduced to bombing cities because their weapons aren't accurate enough to do anything else and get shot down by Soviet-era surface to air missiles.

The point of a strategic alliance like NATO is that no one country needs to have every single capability, they just need to be capable of contributing and integrating, which Finland absolutely is.

 

[Agema]

Let's hope that soft Russian assets like Hungary don't veto it.

Probably not. Hungary is run by a prize prick with autocratic right-wing fantasies, but Hungary is also keenly aware of being a small country dependent on its neighbours. There is a very strict limit to how far Hungary is willing to push.

Turkey is a trickier issue, because Turkey is busy looking at carving out a new niche for itself as a regional power in the Caucasus and Middle East. Although still a competitor of Turkey, Russia is no longer the simple enemy as it was historically, because Turkey is now in the business of balancing various neighbouring entities to advance its own interests. Turkey may well be interested in keeping Russia relatively on-side because Turkey might see it as a potential ally against EU/US interests.

 

[Seanchaidh]

Jesus Christ, why don't you address what was actually said, rather than this irrelevant strawman blather?

Why don't you?

 

[Silvanus]

Why don't you?

No u

 

[thestor]

There is a British site, rusi.org, with some interesting articles on the conflict and the Russian military. An example:

Corruption in the Russian Armed Forces

Corruption is endemic in Russia and is pervasive within its defence industrial sector and armed forces. Evidence from Ukraine suggests that it is costing Russian lives.

rusi.org

 

[Hades]

No u

NO YOU!

 

[Gordon_4]

I think if the current war is showing anything, it's that the concept of a "better" military is actually quite complicated and needs some additional context.

I said this earlier, but it seems pretty clear that part of the reason the Russian military is performing so badly is because Russia has the military budget of the United Kingdom, but tries to spend it like the United States. There's a cottage industry of war nerds out there who like to try and quantify military strength, but those people have consistently rated Russia as one of the strongest militaries on earth. None of that is translating into success because it turns out most of the money goes on prestige projects and developing capabilities which would only be relevant in some hypothetical war between superpowers. That's how you end up with absurdities like hypersonic missiles being fired at warehouses that are probably worth far less than the missile itself, while planes are reduced to bombing cities because their weapons aren't accurate enough to do anything else and get shot down by Soviet-era surface to air missiles.

The point of a strategic alliance like NATO is that no one country needs to have every single capability, they just need to be capable of contributing and integrating, which Finland absolutely is.

Also you can have the best toys in the world but it isn't going to matter for shit if your servicemen and women aren't trained, drilled and inspired to fight to a high degree.

 

[Agema]

Also you can have the best toys in the world but it isn't going to matter for shit if your servicemen and women aren't trained, drilled and inspired to fight to a high degree.

Although, as the above link suggests, many of those toys have been sold by rank and file alike for personal gain. This is the sort of reason why countries with endemic corruption have a great deal of problem getting stuff done.

And again, why Putin is a disaster. Putin and his cronies are merely the top of a huge mountain of corruption: corruption is hard to squash at the best of times, but effectively impossible when the government is run by the most successful corrupt people in the land. And so Russia will continue to squander the hard work, creativity and talents of its people.

 

[Worgen]

 

[Avnger]

Lance corporals in a fighting mood? No need for alcohol to do that. Just cut the dietary crayon budget by a third instead.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Also you can have the best toys in the world but it isn't going to matter for shit if your servicemen and women aren't trained, drilled and inspired to fight to a high degree.

More importantly, I think, it that in any conflict involving Russia and Finland is going to involve a Russian first strike. All the fancy jets and artillery in the world won't do you a bit of good if they're burning on the tarmac. How's Ukraine's airforce doing?

 

[thestor]

Also you can have the best toys in the world but it isn't going to matter for shit if your servicemen and women aren't trained, drilled and inspired to fight to a high degree.

Another video, an hour long, but I liked it. The author argues, that Russia invested in vanity projects, like tanks, ships and aircraft, and completely neglected boring stuff, like logistics, communications:

EDIT. Video is from 5th March btw.

 

[Silvanus]

Less than a day after the Turkish foreign minister said that they supported NATO being open to all European countries that wished to apply, Turkey has now stated they will block Sweden and Finland's applications.

Erdogan says Swedish, Finnish delegations should not bother coming to Turkey

Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan said on Monday that Swedish and Finnish delegations should not bother coming to Ankara to convince it to approve their NATO bid.

www.reuters.com

Russia has directly threatened both countries with military action in the last two months.

Surely there need to be regional defensive agreements of some kind, else we'll be looking at yet another Russian invasion in a few years. Denmark, Iceland and Norway pledged to protect Sweden and Finland if they came under Russian attack while their applications were under consideration. Could there be a longer term agreement of that kind, without requiring NATO?

 

[Hades]

Less than a day after the Turkish foreign minister said that they supported NATO being open to all European countries that wished to apply, Turkey has now stated they will block Sweden and Finland's applications.

Ah I was wondering whether Erdogan or Orban would be the traitor within the western ranks. Guess its Erdogan.

 

[Silvanus]

Deputy chairman of Russia's Defence Committee, and leader of the nationalist pro-Putin Rodina party, appeared on state TV disputing Finland's right to exist as a state, and threatening that Russia could strike the UK in 200 seconds.

Russia makes new threats over use of Satan-2 hypersonic nuclear missile on Britain

Kremlin official also says it is ‘absolutely legitimate’ for Russia to question existence of Finland

www.independent.co.uk

This is all totally normal political discourse.