67 comments

  1. Putin “we view Finlands fear of us invading them as a threat and therefore are considering invading them”

    1. @WellWellWell when did nato attack Russia last time exactly? Take all the time you need to find some evidence

    2. @WellWellWell NATO didn’t exist during Napoleon’s invasion if that’s what you’re referring to. Russia needs to get over its historical paranoia and deep seated hatred of Europe. If the French can forgive Germany for two world wars, why can’t Russia?

  2. Good, Russia should “boost military assets in the region” with Finland joining NATO. That will help divert resources away from threatening Ukraine or other neighbors. Russia just keeps digging a bigger hole for itself.

    1. @knowledge yes, but what we were talking about was Finland joining NATO and Russia making threats, all because Russia invaded Ukraine and is waging a war of aggression. None of that mentioned the United States or nuclear weapons. Unlike Russia, the United States does not try to control its allies. What you’re doing there is called “deflection.”

    2. @Vulcan Tourist ah the Putin stooge shows his face. If we control our allies, then why is Turkey saying they might not support Finland and Sweden joining NATO? Why has France, on several occasions, refused to let the US overfly its territory? Why does Israel basically do whatever they want? It is YOU my friend who needs the history lesson. It’s a basic difference in outlook from the Soviet/Russian aligned world view – we want democracy, which means the countries determine what’s right for THEM. Sure, we share our viewpoint and we try to influence them. But it’s their decision. Meanwhile Russia installed puppets like Lukashenko and criminalizes independent media. And they invade their neighbors. This isn’t about the US. This is about Putin’s childish need for control and his desire for a return to the Soviet era.
      I, like most Americans, never wished ill on Russia. We could disagree and compete and that’s fine. I was happy to see Russians enjoying a good life and being part of the civilized world (had relationships with Russians going back to the 1990’s). We had no desire to invade Russia or start a war with them. The Ukrainians wanted to join NATO because they felt threatened by Russia, not because we wanted them to. It turns out, they had a good reason, because Russia invaded them in a war of aggression. So Putin created the problem he says he was trying to solve. Wag the dog.

  3. The thing is that Finland has ticked all the boxes for joining a long time ago. It’s just we’ve for stupid reasons not joined before. All glory to Ukraine, but we’ve been integrating ourselves into the alliance for over 20 years like Sweden has, and there’s no double standard.

    1. Finland is more NATO compliant than some NATO countries are. They have been ready to apply to NATO when the time was right. Neutrality made sense for them for a long time. Joining NATO might be seen as aggression by Russia. But Russia has show that it does not respect the boundaries of it’s neighbors. Finland knew it was prepared to join NATO in case they ever needed to. It is called being prepared.

    2. @Alan yes. And what we did was unforgivable. And we’ve come a long way since. If what we did was bad, what Russia is doing is worse. If anyone can say how stupid and immoral it is to invade a country these days, it’s the US. And if certain Russians just saw what we did and decided that gives them a free pass to do the same, that says a lot about people who use that as their justification.

  4. Russia crying that Finland joining NATO is a security risk is simply translated as “Finland joining NATO ruins our plans of invading the Baltic States”…

    1. @C Mendoza they may not be planning to attack Finland for now, but can do it later on if they succeed in Ukraine.

  5. How dare they protect their property! What normal thinking person wouldn’t take steps to protect their family and home? Does anyone think someone who wishes to do harm needs an excuse to commit it? The timing lends itself to the perfect opportunity for Finland to take this step so why squander it?

  6. I love Ukraine, but they had time to correct things that were hindering their NATO ascension after they applied in 2008, including low public support in Ukraine for NATO between 2008-2014, after which the Crimea situation made things even more complicated. Finland in contrast, has developed to be NATO compliant for decades – some analysts say Finland is more NATO compliant than almost every other current member. Another thing is that Finland’s army has been specifically designed since 1945 to be effective against Russian/Soviet invasion even by itself, so we would not be taking away from the security structure, but adding to the defense of the whole region.

    1. it certainly says a lot when you’re whole military is designed to defeat the invasion of a certain neighbor…

    2. @mark might Because Finland has been a partner to NATO for decades. There are operational requirements to be Part of NATO. Ukraine had not yet met those requirements.

  7. Finland as well as Sweden are far from neutral they have cooperated with NATO and participated in joint operations with NATO forces for years as well . Iraq , Afghanistan , Kosovo and other regions in the middle east, it’s correct what this news video has been saying and more important than that joint intelligence sharing with NATO . Russia cannot face NATO , the Russian military has been greatly overrated ,full of conscripts who don’t even want to fight . Many Russian soldiers are just looting ukrainian villages , they don’t even have food for themselves . Ukraine will win by the fall !! And Russia will be much weaker country and deserve it

    1. I really hope that , Russia will be humiliated to such an extend that they wont be able to carry on such invasion……..

    2. They wouldn’t have been helped by NATO, in the same way Ukraine is not helped by mark troops from NATO.

  8. Finland 🇫🇮 = we want to join NATO because of Russians threats
    Russia = threatens Finland don’t join NATO or else!
    Finland = thanks you just proved our point

    1. @Stan Farshtei Im sorry for your situation, but weve Been NATO partner 20+ years.

      Our Army has Been allways “up-to-date”.
      Were not in active conflict.
      And Ukraine started to want to join NATO and EU after yanukovits was overthrown.

      These arent double standards this IS just how things are.

      Slava Ukraini.

  9. To have the Finnish armed Forces joining NATO makes the world more safe. Huge asset to the great military alliance that is NATO!

    1. @Minni Sihvonen that’s not a smart statement but if you care about civil rights you should understand this:
      On 19 March 2011, a multi-state NATO-led coalition began a military intervention in Libya, to implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, in response to events during the First Libyan Civil War. With ten votes in favour and five abstentions, the UN Security Council’s intent was to have “an immediate ceasefire in Libya, including an end to the current attacks against civilians, which it said might constitute “crimes against humanity” … [imposing] a ban on all flights in the country’s airspace — a no-fly zone — and tightened sanctions on the [Muammar] Qadhafi regime and its supporters

      In other words you ignore terrorism coming from the dictator and blame peacekeepers.
      NATO is not about war, it’s about keeping the peace, Russians are deluted thinking NATO is an aggressor while they are the only aggressors in realitty. For this simple fact countries are becoming members to prevent the bully attacking like they did Ukraine since 2014.

    2. @Minni Sihvonen , perhaps you don’t know how all that started with Gaddafi taking down a civilian passenger jet first.

    3. @zhang MW yes it’s NATO for North Atlantic Treaty Organization
      nothing about Asia in the name.

    4. @Hurri Doesn’t matter what happened before, the other guy said NATO never attacks or invades, yet they do all the time.

  10. The world cannot overestimate this change. It is massive, and it is entirely the faiult of Mr V Putin. Even as an American I could understand why Finland for so long wanted to maintain neutrality. It seemed a careful, sane policy. Things have changed. Finland receives some Russan television. There have been open discussions on Russian media of what countries Russia would invade AFTER UKRAINE. What else could the Finns do?

    1. @HK Foo Because they are highly distracted in Ukraine and although they will respond, they simply can’t afford to direct a very strong response towards Finland at the moment. They have both the motivation AND the perfect opportunity to join, right now. If they wait for Russian power to recover then Russia might be able to make it much harder for Finland to join.

  11. Even though Russia has in the past fought militarily against Finland to take its border, Finland has historically stood as a neutral country. It has served the region and its own interests well. It has been host to crucial talks between the US and USSR/ Russia. Now, Russia has only itself to blame for forcing Finland’s hand to change its treaty status. With the annexation of the Crimea and now invasion of the rest of Ukraine, another neutral country, it would be foolish for Finland to stand on its own and presume Russia would never dare to repeat what it is doing in Ukraine. Putin’s regime has shown the world that it does as it pleases and is beholden to no one, for reasons it does not see fit to share with the world community, backed by the unspeakable threat of nuclear weapons. From this point on, why would any adjacent neutral country have any assurance that the same could not happen at any time, without warning?

    1. @HenriB We are all at risks of nuke war and be playing football in heaven.
      Why now to add problems?

    2. @Hurri correct. What I mean by “changing its treaty status” is changing from being neutral and no treaty to now having to sign a treaty with NATO, thereby having to align with one side. Had Russia shown that neutral countries are sacrosanct as they should be, this would not have been necessary. But here we are.

  12. Since Putin cannot be trusted, Finland and Sweden have every right to help secure their countries prior to any Russian thoughts of invading them. Why should they wait like Ukraine did.

    1. @Loyalty , that treaty ended with the Soviet Union. No new treaty was made with Russia.
      PS. the word neutrality was not in the name of that treaty. Obvious if you think a bit.

  13. Someone wrote a comment about why Russia see it as a problem that NATO countries have missiles that can strike Moscow, when Russia has missiles that can strike any part of NATO territory. Russia is the aggressor, and if NATO wanted a war with Russia, then they have had plenty of good opportunities lately to find an excuse for such a war. But NATO dont want war with Russia, and so the only problem NATO memberships poses for Russia, is that now Russia cant easily invade the countries that join NATO… If they feel so threatened by NATO, then maybe they should try to make people feel safe having them as neighbors. But instead they continue their tradition of invading other countries and killing civilians like it was nobodys business… This stuff cant go on forever, regardless of the threat of nuclear war…

  14. Putin’s reaction is SOOO predictable. Who will take him seriously? He knows full well that he drove Finland and Sweden to ask their admissions in NATO by his own attitude, and now he’s clutching his pearls and hurling threats. Come on, Vladdy, be serious and own up.

    1. Yes, it’s pretty sad. Stuck in his same old ways, he is kidding only himself. And if he only chooses to shed this old skin, the world will actually praise him for it, even though he will still be held accountable for the atrocities committed by his armies.

  15. Russia:
    *Invades Ukraine to stop them from joining NATO.

    Finland:
    “Guess I’ll join NATO so Russia doesn’t invade me.”

  16. That’s the entire point, Vlad. It’s never been about threatening Russia, it’s been about protecting Finland.

    1. @ISubToTheBest Why are you laughing ?
      In the end Russia still has 7000 nukes. Finland has none.

  17. I am a Finn. The actions Russia has done show that they might be invading other countries as well. That is how Finland thinks/sees it whether you like it or not. Finland looks the ACTIONS … not the talk Russia does. It does not matter what Russia SAYS…. it matters what they DO.

    1. @sabby7890 don’t be sorry about that, as one Finnish PM once replied it would be much worse if there was no border.

    2. @hobsdigree2 ,
      “Finland is the only non-NATO European Union state bordering Russia. Finland’s official policy states that a wartime military strength of 280,000[2] personnel constitutes a sufficient deterrent. ”
      “With an arsenal of 700 howitzers, 700 heavy mortars and 100 multiple rocket launchers, Finland has the largest artillery capability in western Europe.[9] Homeland defence willingness against a superior enemy is at 76%, one of the highest rates in Europe.”
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_Defence_Forces

    3. NATO’s Article 5 is big, it essentially makes a invading country have to decide if it wants to go to war with North America and Europe all at one time.
      Joining NATO just puts the invasions threat to an end once and for all.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.