Finland is not "getting American nuclear missiles now". Read the article.
The US would not allow Russia to put nukes in Cuba. If Russia tried, the US would simply blockade Cuba again and seize any cargo ships like we routinely do to NK and Iran.
but the mighty Ruzzian Navy would sally forth and strike down blah blah
You mean the Russian Navy that had its flagship destroyed by a couple Ukrainian missiles? The Russia Navy that just got cucked IN A HEAVILY DEFENDED PORT by drone speedboats?? LOLOLOL dude that Russian Navy of yours isn't in any shape to take on the USN anymore, and Putin doesn't have the money or men to spare to start picking new fights.
Keep imagining you're still a great power capable of great power politics. You're not. You haven't been for a long time. All you could do at this point is flip the chessboard with a general nuclear exchange, but everyone knows you won't do it, because being alive and a loser is still better than being dead.
This poster has a single comment on September 29th, then nothing until today, where he/she/trollself posted five articles all aimed at dividing Finland and the US.
All indications are this account was created by the first forum slider smart enough to wait out the handshake period but dull enough to make their agenda extremely obvious.
The news article only says nukes "could possibly" be positioned in Finland after it joins NATO.
The Finnish Prime Minister only said "There isn't even interest (within NATO) to put nuclear weapons or bases in Finland," in May. She never made any explicit promise to ban nukes. Nor could she unilaterally.
Finland's foreign and defense ministers, Pekka Haavisto and Antti Kaikkonen, gave a "commitment" to NATO in July that they wouldn't seek "restrictions or national reservations" if Helsinki's application is accepted.
Why should Finland make guarantees of any sort to Russia? Russia is neither owed nor entitled any one-sided promises beneficial to Russia. Russia is a crumbling empire with its whole military capacity tied up and getting destroyed in Ukraine.
Also, who gives a shit? Nobody but a slavsquatter angry and seething that everyone and their mother gives 0 fucks about "disrespecting" his weak, crumbling little country. OP and the people upvoting OP are Putin shills.
You're openly for the child abuse and homosexuality Russia is fighting against? We need to find all of you if you're in the US, and deport you to the afterlife.
I'm still partial to my own solution. Declare war, take a token strip of land and heavily fortify it.
With what army? Finland has a high tech modern air force better than anything Russia has + advanced SAMs like the NASAMS II, so Russia's air force stays home. Finland also has hundreds of Leopard 2 main battle tanks, and over 650 heavy artillery, and another 100 SPAs & 30 GMLRS equipped rocket artillery.
Russia doesn't have anything like that anymore. Russia has a few hundred tanks left in Ukraine as it keeps feeding in old refurbished tanks into Ukraine to get destroyed. The vast majority of Russia's tank force and other armored vehicles have already been destroyed or captured.
And what do you think "heavily fortify" will do in 2022? We already know what that looks like: Russians digging out pits for their vehicles to sit in, and said vehicles routinely get destroyed by drones & gps guided artillery. Troops in trenches? The trenches can just get bypassed and cut off. Russia doesn't have the manpower to defend a wide geographic area to stop the Finns from simply going around the trenches and cutting off their supplies.
over 650 heavy artillery, and another 100 SPAs & 30 GMLRS equipped rocket artillery.
So many hundreds. And Ukraine cucked the whole Russian military with only a dozen or so HIMARS, soooooo.
I've seen copium and I've seen copium, but this takes the cake.
Why do you think it's wrong that Russia has a few hundred tanks left in Ukraine? Oryx has photographic evidence of 1,419 Russian tank losses so far, and there aren't going to be photos of every loss, so the real number is somewhere between 1500-2500 somewhere, which is essentially the entire Russian deployable tank force pre-invasion. Russia has had to keep refurbishing old tanks to keep SOME tanks in the field, so in the last 2 months a lot of the losses have been T-62s and T-64s. So this is barrel scraping for Russia. If you have contrary evidence, by all means.
You literally think a corrupt puppet shithole non-country is going to beat Russia...
not particularly corrupt, certainly not more than russia
not a puppet
is a country
has already been winning the war for months, hence why Putin was forced to cope with a mobilization.
I'm sure you'll blame Biden and the "libs" once the said non-country starts losing badly...
Why would I? And how delusional do you have to be to believe that Ukraine would ever start losing?
over 650 heavy artillery, and another 100 SPAs & 30 GMLRS equipped rocket artillery.
So 1/20 of the French army in 1940. Very impressive!
So many hundreds. And Ukraine cucked the whole Russian military with only a dozen or so HIMARS, soooooo.
You're still bragging about your Pothole Makers like you're a shareholder of Lockheed Martin.
Oryx has photographic evidence of 1,419 Russian tank losses so far
Even imagining that this is not war propaganda, out of (tens of) thousands? Literally nothing.
Russia has had to keep refurbishing old tanks to keep SOME tanks in the field, so in the last 2 months a lot of the losses have been T-62s and T-64s. So this is barrel scraping for Russia. If you have contrary evidence, by all means.
Here's my contrary evidence: Russia has some of the world's most extensive natural resources. It would be trivial to turn out hundreds a tanks a week, as happened in World War II.
What disappoints me most is the Russian airforce. The responsible officer should follow the example of his predecessor in June 1941.
has already been winning the war for months, hence why Putin was forced to cope with a mobilization.
Sending the flower of your youth to die for American imperialism is not 'winning'.
not a puppet
Literally run by Victoria Nuland...
is a country
Where was this totally real country in 1990?
Why would I? And how delusional do you have to be to believe that Ukraine would ever start losing?
How delusional do you have to be to imagine that Russia could lose anything?
So far, Ukraine cannot even take Kherson, though considering the bad position of the Russian army there, I'd not be surprised if they did withdraw.
You have Russia Derangement Syndrome and Putin Derangement Syndrome, probably because you were raised by Cold Warrior parents.
The artillery power of the French army in 1940 was actually very large and outshined Germany's by a wide margin. Germany won the Battle of France handily thanks to getting lucky in the Ardennes + having a decisive airpower advantage.
You're still bragging about your Pothole Makers
You keep saying "potholes" even though HIMARS strikes shut down both bridges into Kherson and forced the Russians to rely on ferries.
So far, Ukraine cannot even take Kherson, though considering the bad position of the Russian army there, I'd not be surprised if they did withdraw.
They've made a lot of progress in the past 2 months. Remember when you were saying that Ukraine couldn't do offensives at all shortly before they did?
The artillery power of the French army in 1940 was actually very large and outshined Germany's by a wide margin. Germany won the Battle of France handily thanks to getting lucky in the Ardennes + having a decisive airpower advantage.
Every part of the French army outshone the German army, even the number of its aircraft. It was the appallingly poor leadership that did them in. That said, having 1/20 of the artillery of France is not exactly impressive.
You keep saying "potholes" even though HIMARS strikes shut down both bridges into Kherson and forced the Russians to rely on ferries.
They attacked "their own" infrastructure? Regardless, I should hope it would do better than the pictures you were bragging about a while back - because you'd be very sad for your tax dollars to pay for something as useless.
They've made a lot of progress in the past 2 months. Remember when you were saying that Ukraine couldn't do offensives at all shortly before they did?
Any idiot can take undefended areas. I counted on the Russians not being idiots - which unfortunately is often a fool's bet.
It stops NATO membership though, unless NATO wants to be at war with Russia.
The Accession protocol was already completed on 5 July 2022. NATO members unanimously agreed to formally invite the countries to join on June 29. It's already done.
It's too late for Russia to try some trick to stop it from happening, especially since if NATO allowed such a trick to succeed, it would mean Russia would have a veto over NATO's membership, which is already something that NATO members are entirely against.
If Russia invaded and started a war with Finland, the sanctions against Russia would get far, far worse, and Finland, unlike Ukraine, would have no compunction against counter-attacking into Russian territory and occupying it.
It should be obvious at this point that the Finnish military is far more powerful and capable than whatever Russia could spare.
You're such an idiot. If you want to come at me like you caught me in a mistake, you'd better do your homework first, pleb.
Turkey and Hungary already voted in June as NATO members and approved.
If you read the article and weren't a retard, you would see that Hungary and Turkey the only two remaining to complete parliamentary ratification. This is a formality after treaties are signed.
The Accession protocol was already completed on 5 July 2022. NATO members unanimously agreed to formally invite the countries to join on June 29. It's already done.
I don't think this is quite right - I've read that Sweden and Finland are still negotiating. But yes, Putin being extraordinarily cautious and risk-averse means he wouldn't have done it, but he should have.
It's too late for Russia to try some trick to stop it from happening, especially since if NATO allowed such a trick to succeed, it would mean Russia would have a veto over NATO's membership, which is already something that NATO members are entirely against.
If they don't want that, they should feel free to start World War III. That's how you win stuff. Create a fait accompli and challenge your enemies to do something about it.
If Russia invaded and started a war with Finland, the sanctions against Russia would get far, far worse
Oh, boo hoo, the sanctions of the GAE have turned out to be as toothless as the Empire itself. Remember when it got its ass handed to it by the Taliban, and it blew up an Afghan family of allies in retaliation?
and Finland, unlike Ukraine, would have no compunction against counter-attacking into Russian territory and occupying it.
LOL! A country of five million is going to occupy Russian territory. Are you real? You're just all wishful thinking, it seems.
It should be obvious at this point that the Finnish military is far more powerful and capable than whatever Russia could spare.
Russia has a peacetime military of 1 million. If 15% are in Ukraine, that leaves 850,000 - which likely have other duties. So pull Siberian and Caucasian divisions west, and threaten nukes on any country that tries to take advantage of it (like GAE ally Azerbaijan). Otherwise, just mobilize.
Ukraine could barely win with overwhelming numbers against a few hundred police officers in Kharkov oblast...
Yes, Putin being extraordinarily cautious and risk-averse
Putin invaded Ukraine to begin with. That's not "extraordinarily cautious and risk-averse".
If they don't want that, they should feel free to start World War III.
What World War III? Russia stands alone, with no friends, no allies, and no military. What would Russia fight this WW3 with? Babushkas & Gopniks?
NATO can utterly destroy any Russian incursion with conventional weapons, just like the US already demonstrated in Syria when Russia tried to attack an American-supported position, and the US annihilated them.
I've told you dozens of times: Russia will not use nukes. Putin and the rest of his leadership cabal have good lives of wealth and luxury, and don't want to die.
the sanctions of the GAE have turned out to be as toothless as the Empire itself.
The sanctions thus far have been limp dick because most of Europe [in particular France & Germany] simply didn't care much about Ukraine. Things would be different with Finland. They see Finland as one of their own.
LOL! A country of five million is going to occupy Russian territory. Are you real? You're just all wishful thinking, it seems.
History is replete with examples of smaller countries defeating larger ones in wars, and that would be true even if Russia's entire military was not tied down in Ukraine.
Russia has a peacetime military of 1 million.
On paper. The vast majority of those are not combat troops and not "deployable". Many are things like "railway troops" who can't fight.
If Russia really had 1 million troops, why did Putin need a partial mobilization? Why were the units defending the Kharkiv sector at 25% strength?
So pull Siberian and Caucasian divisions west
There is no such thing. Every combat capable troop was already "pulled" early in the war. Russia's total DEPLOYABLE combat force was only about 200k, and that was all sent to Ukraine Day 1. Afterwards, Russia had to start scraping non-combat units for replacements, together with offering large sums of money & opening the prisons. Even all that wasn't good enough, so a partial mobilization was required as a last resort.
You seem to believe that Russia has all sorts of "spare" troops lazing around which could be used. It does not. It never has. These troops only exist in your imagination.
Putin invaded Ukraine to begin with. That's not "extraordinarily cautious and risk-averse".
A clever man would have swallowed up all of it in 2014, when it was in state collapse, and couldn't even beat ragtab rebel forces, rather than letting the ulcer fester and become a mortal NATO threat.
I don't judge though, maybe it could not have withstood the withering GAE response.
What World War III? Russia stands alone, with no friends, no allies, and no military. What would Russia fight this WW3 with?
Nuclear weapons.
NATO can utterly destroy any Russian incursion with conventional weapons
It wouldn't though.
The sanctions thus far have been limp dick because most of Europe [in particular France & Germany] simply didn't care much about Ukraine. Things would be different with Finland. They see Finland as one of their own.
LOL! I know this is your cope, because you sure love your economic terrorism, but reality is that the economic terrorism has been far more extensive than anyone expected. And it was so from the very beginning, when Germany canceled Nord Stream 2 which you later blew up after mere recognition of the People's Republics. But now that they have failed utterly at "reducing the rouble to rubble", as Joe Biden bragged about when it was at 150 to the dollar, you try to dismiss them.
History is replete with examples of smaller countries defeating larger ones in wars, and that would be true even if Russia's entire military was not tied down in Ukraine.
There is no example of a country of 5 million occupying the territory of a country of 150 million.
If Russia really had 1 million troops, why did Putin need a partial mobilization? Why were the units defending the Kharkiv sector at 25% strength?
I thought not wanting to depopulate the border areas. But why does Russia need soldiers on its frontier with China?
You seem to believe that Russia has all sorts of "spare" troops lazing around which could be used. It does not. It never has. These troops only exist in your imagination.
Just lik a "Ukrainian victory" exists only in yours.
i think the solution isn't to side with psychopathic superpower 2 over psychopathic superpower 1, man. especially when they ultimately serve the same global psychopathic interest which just wants to hurt the common, not-psychopathic man such as you or me.
At most 500,000 Russian soldiers are in Ukraine and not even all of the Russian equipment and they still have large reserves of soldiers they could mobilize if they wanted.
Russia already scraped the barrel for Ukraine and was forced into involuntary conscription to replace losses. They are barely holding the line as it is.
Some units around Kharkiv in September when Ukraine attacked were only at 25% strength. That would not have been the case if Russia had these "large reserves" you seem to think they have.
Finland has tiny & weak military and war with Russia would be over in just hours.
Finland actually has a very powerful military compared to whatever Russia could scrape together. Finland has a high tech modern air force better than anything Russia has + advanced SAMs like the NASAMS II, so Russia's air force stays home. Finland also has hundreds of Leopard 2 main battle tanks, and over 650 heavy artillery, and another 100 SPAs & 30 GMLRS equipped rocket artillery.
Russia doesn't have anything like that anymore. What little Russia has left is desperately trying to hold the like in Ukraine and barely managing to stave off collapse.
Cuban Missile Crisis 2 : Feminist Boogaloo.
Finland is not "getting American nuclear missiles now". Read the article.
The US would not allow Russia to put nukes in Cuba. If Russia tried, the US would simply blockade Cuba again and seize any cargo ships like we routinely do to NK and Iran.
You mean the Russian Navy that had its flagship destroyed by a couple Ukrainian missiles? The Russia Navy that just got cucked IN A HEAVILY DEFENDED PORT by drone speedboats?? LOLOLOL dude that Russian Navy of yours isn't in any shape to take on the USN anymore, and Putin doesn't have the money or men to spare to start picking new fights.
Keep imagining you're still a great power capable of great power politics. You're not. You haven't been for a long time. All you could do at this point is flip the chessboard with a general nuclear exchange, but everyone knows you won't do it, because being alive and a loser is still better than being dead.
Oh-Kay USA!
This poster has a single comment on September 29th, then nothing until today, where he/she/trollself posted five articles all aimed at dividing Finland and the US.
All indications are this account was created by the first forum slider smart enough to wait out the handshake period but dull enough to make their agenda extremely obvious.
Why would you not be against globalhomo and child abuse?
The news article only says nukes "could possibly" be positioned in Finland after it joins NATO.
The Finnish Prime Minister only said "There isn't even interest (within NATO) to put nuclear weapons or bases in Finland," in May. She never made any explicit promise to ban nukes. Nor could she unilaterally.
Finland's foreign and defense ministers, Pekka Haavisto and Antti Kaikkonen, gave a "commitment" to NATO in July that they wouldn't seek "restrictions or national reservations" if Helsinki's application is accepted.
Why should Finland make guarantees of any sort to Russia? Russia is neither owed nor entitled any one-sided promises beneficial to Russia. Russia is a crumbling empire with its whole military capacity tied up and getting destroyed in Ukraine.
Also, who gives a shit? Nobody but a slavsquatter angry and seething that everyone and their mother gives 0 fucks about "disrespecting" his weak, crumbling little country. OP and the people upvoting OP are Putin shills.
We are the only 2 shitting on Russia while there are a dozen FSB contractors spamming RUSSIA STRONK posts on the other side.
You're openly for the child abuse and homosexuality Russia is fighting against? We need to find all of you if you're in the US, and deport you to the afterlife.
I'm still partial to my own solution. Declare war, take a token strip of land and heavily fortify it.
With what army? Finland has a high tech modern air force better than anything Russia has + advanced SAMs like the NASAMS II, so Russia's air force stays home. Finland also has hundreds of Leopard 2 main battle tanks, and over 650 heavy artillery, and another 100 SPAs & 30 GMLRS equipped rocket artillery.
Russia doesn't have anything like that anymore. Russia has a few hundred tanks left in Ukraine as it keeps feeding in old refurbished tanks into Ukraine to get destroyed. The vast majority of Russia's tank force and other armored vehicles have already been destroyed or captured.
And what do you think "heavily fortify" will do in 2022? We already know what that looks like: Russians digging out pits for their vehicles to sit in, and said vehicles routinely get destroyed by drones & gps guided artillery. Troops in trenches? The trenches can just get bypassed and cut off. Russia doesn't have the manpower to defend a wide geographic area to stop the Finns from simply going around the trenches and cutting off their supplies.
You Team Putin guys are not living in reality.
They have dozens of pieces of artillery! DOZENS!
Dude...
I've seen copium and I've seen copium, but this takes the cake.
You literally think a corrupt puppet shithole non-country is going to beat Russia...
I'm sure you'll blame Biden and the "libs" once the said non-country starts losing badly...
over 650 heavy artillery, and another 100 SPAs & 30 GMLRS equipped rocket artillery.
So many hundreds. And Ukraine cucked the whole Russian military with only a dozen or so HIMARS, soooooo.
Why do you think it's wrong that Russia has a few hundred tanks left in Ukraine? Oryx has photographic evidence of 1,419 Russian tank losses so far, and there aren't going to be photos of every loss, so the real number is somewhere between 1500-2500 somewhere, which is essentially the entire Russian deployable tank force pre-invasion. Russia has had to keep refurbishing old tanks to keep SOME tanks in the field, so in the last 2 months a lot of the losses have been T-62s and T-64s. So this is barrel scraping for Russia. If you have contrary evidence, by all means.
not particularly corrupt, certainly not more than russia
not a puppet
is a country
has already been winning the war for months, hence why Putin was forced to cope with a mobilization.
Why would I? And how delusional do you have to be to believe that Ukraine would ever start losing?
So 1/20 of the French army in 1940. Very impressive!
You're still bragging about your Pothole Makers like you're a shareholder of Lockheed Martin.
Even imagining that this is not war propaganda, out of (tens of) thousands? Literally nothing.
Here's my contrary evidence: Russia has some of the world's most extensive natural resources. It would be trivial to turn out hundreds a tanks a week, as happened in World War II.
What disappoints me most is the Russian airforce. The responsible officer should follow the example of his predecessor in June 1941.
Sending the flower of your youth to die for American imperialism is not 'winning'.
Literally run by Victoria Nuland...
Where was this totally real country in 1990?
How delusional do you have to be to imagine that Russia could lose anything?
So far, Ukraine cannot even take Kherson, though considering the bad position of the Russian army there, I'd not be surprised if they did withdraw.
You have Russia Derangement Syndrome and Putin Derangement Syndrome, probably because you were raised by Cold Warrior parents.
The artillery power of the French army in 1940 was actually very large and outshined Germany's by a wide margin. Germany won the Battle of France handily thanks to getting lucky in the Ardennes + having a decisive airpower advantage.
You keep saying "potholes" even though HIMARS strikes shut down both bridges into Kherson and forced the Russians to rely on ferries.
They've made a lot of progress in the past 2 months. Remember when you were saying that Ukraine couldn't do offensives at all shortly before they did?
Every part of the French army outshone the German army, even the number of its aircraft. It was the appallingly poor leadership that did them in. That said, having 1/20 of the artillery of France is not exactly impressive.
They attacked "their own" infrastructure? Regardless, I should hope it would do better than the pictures you were bragging about a while back - because you'd be very sad for your tax dollars to pay for something as useless.
Any idiot can take undefended areas. I counted on the Russians not being idiots - which unfortunately is often a fool's bet.
Finland has hundreds of Leopard 2 tanks, which are better than anything Russia has.
Finland's wartime strength is 240k troops. It keeps about 40k at short term readiness, which is more than enough.
I'm sure Stalin said the same thing for the Winter War and how did that turn out?
It stops NATO membership though, unless NATO wants to be at war with Russia.
I meant a tiny strip of territory, 20 by 20 km or something, of no man's land
The Accession protocol was already completed on 5 July 2022. NATO members unanimously agreed to formally invite the countries to join on June 29. It's already done.
It's too late for Russia to try some trick to stop it from happening, especially since if NATO allowed such a trick to succeed, it would mean Russia would have a veto over NATO's membership, which is already something that NATO members are entirely against.
If Russia invaded and started a war with Finland, the sanctions against Russia would get far, far worse, and Finland, unlike Ukraine, would have no compunction against counter-attacking into Russian territory and occupying it.
It should be obvious at this point that the Finnish military is far more powerful and capable than whatever Russia could spare.
You're such an idiot. If you want to come at me like you caught me in a mistake, you'd better do your homework first, pleb.
Turkey and Hungary already voted in June as NATO members and approved.
If you read the article and weren't a retard, you would see that Hungary and Turkey the only two remaining to complete parliamentary ratification. This is a formality after treaties are signed.
Next time you think you've got me, guess again.
I don't think this is quite right - I've read that Sweden and Finland are still negotiating. But yes, Putin being extraordinarily cautious and risk-averse means he wouldn't have done it, but he should have.
If they don't want that, they should feel free to start World War III. That's how you win stuff. Create a fait accompli and challenge your enemies to do something about it.
Oh, boo hoo, the sanctions of the GAE have turned out to be as toothless as the Empire itself. Remember when it got its ass handed to it by the Taliban, and it blew up an Afghan family of allies in retaliation?
LOL! A country of five million is going to occupy Russian territory. Are you real? You're just all wishful thinking, it seems.
Russia has a peacetime military of 1 million. If 15% are in Ukraine, that leaves 850,000 - which likely have other duties. So pull Siberian and Caucasian divisions west, and threaten nukes on any country that tries to take advantage of it (like GAE ally Azerbaijan). Otherwise, just mobilize.
Ukraine could barely win with overwhelming numbers against a few hundred police officers in Kharkov oblast...
Putin invaded Ukraine to begin with. That's not "extraordinarily cautious and risk-averse".
What World War III? Russia stands alone, with no friends, no allies, and no military. What would Russia fight this WW3 with? Babushkas & Gopniks?
NATO can utterly destroy any Russian incursion with conventional weapons, just like the US already demonstrated in Syria when Russia tried to attack an American-supported position, and the US annihilated them.
I've told you dozens of times: Russia will not use nukes. Putin and the rest of his leadership cabal have good lives of wealth and luxury, and don't want to die.
The sanctions thus far have been limp dick because most of Europe [in particular France & Germany] simply didn't care much about Ukraine. Things would be different with Finland. They see Finland as one of their own.
History is replete with examples of smaller countries defeating larger ones in wars, and that would be true even if Russia's entire military was not tied down in Ukraine.
On paper. The vast majority of those are not combat troops and not "deployable". Many are things like "railway troops" who can't fight.
If Russia really had 1 million troops, why did Putin need a partial mobilization? Why were the units defending the Kharkiv sector at 25% strength?
There is no such thing. Every combat capable troop was already "pulled" early in the war. Russia's total DEPLOYABLE combat force was only about 200k, and that was all sent to Ukraine Day 1. Afterwards, Russia had to start scraping non-combat units for replacements, together with offering large sums of money & opening the prisons. Even all that wasn't good enough, so a partial mobilization was required as a last resort.
You seem to believe that Russia has all sorts of "spare" troops lazing around which could be used. It does not. It never has. These troops only exist in your imagination.
A clever man would have swallowed up all of it in 2014, when it was in state collapse, and couldn't even beat ragtab rebel forces, rather than letting the ulcer fester and become a mortal NATO threat.
I don't judge though, maybe it could not have withstood the withering GAE response.
Nuclear weapons.
It wouldn't though.
LOL! I know this is your cope, because you sure love your economic terrorism, but reality is that the economic terrorism has been far more extensive than anyone expected. And it was so from the very beginning, when Germany canceled Nord Stream 2 which you later blew up after mere recognition of the People's Republics. But now that they have failed utterly at "reducing the rouble to rubble", as Joe Biden bragged about when it was at 150 to the dollar, you try to dismiss them.
There is no example of a country of 5 million occupying the territory of a country of 150 million.
I thought not wanting to depopulate the border areas. But why does Russia need soldiers on its frontier with China?
Just lik a "Ukrainian victory" exists only in yours.
i think the solution isn't to side with psychopathic superpower 2 over psychopathic superpower 1, man. especially when they ultimately serve the same global psychopathic interest which just wants to hurt the common, not-psychopathic man such as you or me.
Except the whole Finnish military is available for battle, while the whole Russian military is tied down in Ukraine.
laughs in snow
Russia already scraped the barrel for Ukraine and was forced into involuntary conscription to replace losses. They are barely holding the line as it is.
Some units around Kharkiv in September when Ukraine attacked were only at 25% strength. That would not have been the case if Russia had these "large reserves" you seem to think they have.
Finland actually has a very powerful military compared to whatever Russia could scrape together. Finland has a high tech modern air force better than anything Russia has + advanced SAMs like the NASAMS II, so Russia's air force stays home. Finland also has hundreds of Leopard 2 main battle tanks, and over 650 heavy artillery, and another 100 SPAs & 30 GMLRS equipped rocket artillery.
Russia doesn't have anything like that anymore. What little Russia has left is desperately trying to hold the like in Ukraine and barely managing to stave off collapse.
Finland has hundreds of Leopard 2 tanks, which are better than anything Russia has.
Finland's wartime strength is 240k troops. It keeps about 40k at short term readiness, which is more than enough.
I'm sure Stalin said the same thing for the Winter War and how did that turn out?
Sounds exactly like what Putin's advisers told him about Ukraine.