That border is exactly why they’re advocating for the membership. Consider: how many NATO members did Russia have an open war with in the past thirty years? How many non-members? That is the logic being applied here. If you go off the premise that “Russia is expansionist and Putin is a megalomaniac who wants to rebuild Soviet Empire”, it makes some strange type of sense.
Of course, from an imperialist (pro-US) point of view, it more or less makes sense. The population has probably been led to believe that they should fear a Russian invasion if they don’t join NATO. My point was that I don’t think Russia is anywhere near as willing to accept NATO expansion as it was 10 years ago, so I can’t see how this could possibly improve Finland’s security
Well what are the options? Actually invade Finland if it gets signed up and risk the Article 5? Not to mention that Finland is not Ukraine and had a lot more time to prepare and shore up, not to mention the border with Sweden - a major arms manufacturer. And that’s not even getting into the viability of a war on two fronts.
The options for Russia? Militarily, I don’t think there’s much they can do that wouldn’t risk WWIII. Economically, in 2019, about 14% of Finland’s imports came from Russia, but it’s clearly far less dependent on Russia than many other European countries, so I don’t know how much of an impact ceasing trade will have.
For Finland? The alternative is to try to restore neutral relations with Russia or at least to not officially join the world’s largest terrorist organization, but I’m far from an expert w.r.t. geopolitics or economics, and I’m also not from Finland
Either way, I don’t think there’s much chance of Amerika (and the rest of NATO) de-escalating unless the people revolt
Why’s that?
I’m really just basing it on the massive border between Finland and Russia – don’t know much beyond that
That border is exactly why they’re advocating for the membership. Consider: how many NATO members did Russia have an open war with in the past thirty years? How many non-members? That is the logic being applied here. If you go off the premise that “Russia is expansionist and Putin is a megalomaniac who wants to rebuild Soviet Empire”, it makes some strange type of sense.
Of course, from an imperialist (pro-US) point of view, it more or less makes sense. The population has probably been led to believe that they should fear a Russian invasion if they don’t join NATO. My point was that I don’t think Russia is anywhere near as willing to accept NATO expansion as it was 10 years ago, so I can’t see how this could possibly improve Finland’s security
Well what are the options? Actually invade Finland if it gets signed up and risk the Article 5? Not to mention that Finland is not Ukraine and had a lot more time to prepare and shore up, not to mention the border with Sweden - a major arms manufacturer. And that’s not even getting into the viability of a war on two fronts.
The options for Russia? Militarily, I don’t think there’s much they can do that wouldn’t risk WWIII. Economically, in 2019, about 14% of Finland’s imports came from Russia, but it’s clearly far less dependent on Russia than many other European countries, so I don’t know how much of an impact ceasing trade will have.
For Finland? The alternative is to try to restore neutral relations with Russia or at least to not officially join the world’s largest terrorist organization, but I’m far from an expert w.r.t. geopolitics or economics, and I’m also not from Finland
Either way, I don’t think there’s much chance of Amerika (and the rest of NATO) de-escalating unless the people revolt