ADVERTISEMENT

First, I salute the Ukranians for the fight they're putting up, and if possible

Let me see if I can get this through to you:

Ukraine is not a member of NATO.

Period.

There is no defense pact with Ukraine. There is no reason any country should do anything to support Ukraine other than to oppose Russian imperialism.

Ukraine is NOT - NOT - a member of NATO. NOT a member of NATO. NOT a member of NATO.

NATO doesn't get to concede or allow anything on behalf of Ukraine because, that's right, Ukraine is NOT a member of NATO!

Why is this difficult to understand?

And I don't know who the hell that General was, but he's probably not very bright. Russia is estimated to have more than 100,000 troops in Ukraine now. That's not a "small portion" of it's Army. They've committed more than 80% of their deployed combat power in Ukraine now.

That RETIRED General is probably full of shit. Be careful with those guys. You don't know his background. He doesn't have access to any intelligence or anything else anymore. He's collecting a paycheck to say stuff on TV.
Where did I say Ukraine was a NATO member.
The NATO Countries, you know the ones that formed a pact to protect each other from Russian and Communist aggression, conceded a current non communist country to Russia.
Or, NATO, the pact formed to counter Russian and Communist aggression just rolled over and let Russian expand Communism.
Maybe he got the reason the 40 mile convoy is sitting idle wrong.
The Russians obviously aren't trying to save the Ukrainian infrastructure, they are currently bombing the piss out of the world' largest Nuclear Power Plant.
 
Last edited:
This isn’t Risk, dipshit. It’s not just about lining up troops and shooting in lines. It’s damn hard to invade and occupy territory. Russia would want nothing to do with invading Finland. Absurd.
Here is a quote from the article that I posted above: "“It is obvious that if Finland and Sweden join NATO, which is primarily a military organization, this would have serious military and political consequences that would compel the Russian Federation to take retaliatory steps,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said last week."

Russia has already invaded Ukraine, which is eight times larger than Finland and has about eight times more people, 43 million vs 5.6 million. Your suggestion that Russia's army couldn't beat Finland is nonsense.

Here is yet another story about Finland joining NATO and Russia's reaction: Will Russia Invade Finland?
 
Last edited:
Here is a quote from the article that I p[osted above: "“It is obvious that if Finland and Sweden join NATO, which is primarily a military organization, this would have serious military and political consequences that would compel the Russian Federation to take retaliatory steps,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said last week."

Russia has already invaded Ukraine, which is eight times larger than Finland and has about eight times more people, 43 million vs 5.6 million. Your suggestion that Russia's army couldn't beat Finland is nonsense.
It’s fairly obvious I’m arguing with an actual potato.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BuilderBob6
Where did I say Ukraine was a NATO member.
The NATO Countries, you know the ones that formed a pact to protect each other from Russian and Communist aggression, conceded a current non communist country to Russia.
Or, NATO, the pact formed to counter Russian and Communist aggression just rolled over and let Russian expand Communism.
Maybe he got the reason the 40 mile convoy is sitting idle wrong.
The Russians obviously aren't trying to save the Ukrainian infrastructure, they are currently bombing the piss out of the world' largest Nuclear Power Plant.
How can NATO concede something that isn’t its “possession”? Do you advocate sending troops into every country in the world attacked by an aggressor? What is the US national interest in Ukraine?
 
I present data, historical facts and up-to-date news articles. You respond with name-calling and insults. How about debating this issue like an officer and a gentleman?
I tried. You’re arguing about whether the Russian Army is better than the Finnish Army. It clearly is.

I am arguing that a Russian occupation of Finland would be their equivalent of the Soviet Afghanistan. You don’t seem to grasp the crux of the argument, and I don’t care to try explaining it any further.
 
I tried. You’re arguing about whether the Russian Army is better than the Finnish Army. It clearly is.

I am arguing that a Russian occupation of Finland would be their equivalent of the Soviet Afghanistan. You don’t seem to grasp the crux of the argument, and I don’t care to try explaining it any further.
You could just as easily argue that a Russian occupation of Ukraine would be their equivalent of the Soviet Afghanistan, and that may easily become true. But that didn't stop Russia from invading.

Finland and Sweden are swiftly moving toward NATO membership and Russia has already threatened both countries with " . . . serious military . . .consequences that would compel the Russian Federation to take retaliatory steps. . . . " That is clearly a threat of military attack.

You claim that I don't "grasp the crux of the argument' yet you have repeatedly failed to present your case. You said that a Russian invasion of Finland is an "absurd" scenario yet if Finland and Sweden do indeed join NATO, it could easily happen.
 
You could just as easily argue that a Russian occupation of Ukraine would be their equivalent of the Soviet Afghanistan, and that may easily become true. But that didn't stop Russia from invading.

Finland and Sweden are swiftly moving toward NATO membership and Russia has already threatened both countries with " . . . serious military . . .consequences that would compel the Russian Federation to take retaliatory steps. . . . " That is clearly a threat of military attack.

You claim that I don't "grasp the crux of the argument' yet you have repeatedly failed to present your case. You said that a Russian invasion of Finland is an "absurd" scenario yet if Finland and Sweden do indeed join NATO, it could easily happen.
Many things “could happen”, but if Russia were to take that step against Finland and/or Sweden, you know that we literally would be in the opening salvos of WW III. I just don’t think Putin is that callous or reckless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gr8indoorsman
You could just as easily argue that a Russian occupation of Ukraine would be their equivalent of the Soviet Afghanistan, and that may easily become true. But that didn't stop Russia from invading
Agreed, however if they’re already engaged in Ukraine, the likelihood of them invading literally anyplace else that doesn’t share a front is beyond remote.

So like I’ve been saying: we should hope Russia is stupid enough to invade multiple countries, even non-NATO countries, with the hope of occupying for any length of time. It would utterly crush them militarily and economically. They are nowhere near the power that the USSR was in either respect, and the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan played a large role in the undoing of the Soviet Union.

The same would be true of any long term Russian occupation of an independent European state, including Ukraine.

And that has been my entire point. That’s why I said this isn’t Risk where your plan is to just move armies on a map and win.

Putin is a lot of things, but he isn’t abjectly stupid. Invading Finland would be abjectly stupid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheCainer
Many things “could happen”, but if Russia were to take that step against Finland and/or Sweden, you know that we literally would be in the opening salvos of WW III. I just don’t think Putin is that callous or reckless.
Right, that is exactly what is on the line right here: WW III, and a ground war could easily get out of hand and go nuclear. The cowardly but prudent thing to do at this juncture is for NATO to reject Finland and Sweden as NATO members and maintain the status quo that has been in place for decades, often called 'Finlandization'.

Will Russia invade Finland? Why country is not in Nato and what it means amid Putin’s invasion of Ukraine​

Russia has directly warned both Finland and Sweden against joining Nato, threatening military action​

General view of the Helsinki's townhall lighted in colours of Ukraine's flag in solidarity with the country after Russia launched a massive military operation against Ukraine in Helsinki, Finland February 24, 2022. Lehtikuva/Jussi Nukari via REUTERS ATTENTION EDITORS - THIS IMAGE WAS PROVIDED BY A THIRD PARTY. NO THIRD PARTY SALES. NOT FOR USE BY REUTERS THIRD PARTY DISTRIBUTORS. FINLAND OUT. NO COMMERCIAL OR EDITORIAL SALES IN FINLAND.


author avatar image
By Alex Finnis
Reporter
March 3, 2022 4:44 pm

What are Vladimir Putin’s true intentions? This is the questions people across the world are asking, as his Russian forces continue pepper Ukraine with missiles.
Very few people on the planet know the answer.
There are fears President Putin may not stop at Ukraine, should he succeed. He may attempt to expand his empire into neighbouring countries such as Moldova and Georgia. Even the Baltic states, despite being Nato members, cannot be ruled out.

Another potential target is Finland, which shares an 830-mile border and already fought with Russia less than a century ago, during the Winter War.
What are the chances of Russia invading Finland? Here is what we know.

Could Russia invade Finland?​

Russia has directly warned both Finland and Sweden against joining Nato, threatening military action.
Ukraine’s ambitions to join the Western alliance have been a huge touchpoint in Russia’s invasion.

“Finland and Sweden should not base their security on damaging the security of other countries and their accession to Nato can have detrimental consequences and face some military and political consequences,” foreign affairs spokesperson Maria Zakharova said during a news briefing.
The Russian Foreign Ministry added on Twitter: “We regard the Finnish Government’s commitment to a military non-alignment policy as an important factor in ensuring security and stability in northern Europe.
“Finland’s accession to Nato would have serious military and political repercussions.”
Keir Giles, a senior consulting fellow at London-based think-tank Chatham House, said President Putin’s aim of “reversing history and going back to Russia’s status as it was over 100 years ago also directly affects other neighbours”.
“This means Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Finland.”
Finland, like Ukraine, is not part of Nato. It is, however, part of the EU.
The EU has a mutual defence clause for any member nation that is “victim of armed aggression on its territory”.

This means if Russia were to invade Finland, it could find itself at war with all 27 EU member states, which could then engage Russian forces directly.

Why is Finland not in Nato?​

Of the 27 EU members, Finland is one of just six that is not also a member of Nato.
The other five are Austria, Cyprus, Ireland, Malta and Sweden.
Finland does have relations with Nato, but up until now has believed it does not need Nato membership to remain secure.
The Russian-Finnish Winter War that took place from 1939 to 1940 created a strong belief of military prowess for Finland. Finland also makes adolescent males report for a short and intense period of military training, meaning it has a large and capable citizen military reserve.
However, Russia’s actions may be driving Finland towards Nato membership.
Finnish President Sauli Niinisto has stressed: “Finland’s room to manoeuvre and freedom of choice also includes the possibility of military alignment and of applying for Nato membership, should we ourselves so decide.”

While the country’s Prime Minister, Alexander Stubb, has said “at this rate, we have no other option but to join”.
A recent public poll has suggested the majority of the population also now supports Nato membership.

Are Nato members under threat from Russia?​

Karin von Hippel, who was a nonpolitical senior adviser at the US State Department during the Obama administration, told NBC President Putin could potentially target non-Nato nations in Eastern Europe, such as Moldova and Georgia.
He added that if the Russian leader “starts to slowly expand his empire, there will be several other places that are in Nato that are going to be getting extremely stressed out”.
“It’s very unclear at this stage that anyone can convince Putin to do anything other than what he wants to do,” he said.
UK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss has said Britain will join its Baltic allies in moving from “deterrence to defence” on its borders.
Speaking at a press conference in Lithuania, she said: “The UK’s commitment to the Baltics and to Article 5 are unyielding.”

Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are all part of Nato. Nato uses a principle of collective defence under Article 5 of its treaty. It means an attack against one Nato member is considered an attack against all.
“We are reinforcing Nato’s eastern flank and supporting European security through the UK-led Joint Expeditionary Force,” Ms Truss added.
“We are here in the Baltic region. We lead and have doubled our enhanced forward presence in Estonia. Our allies are leading troops across the Baltics.
“At the Nato foreign ministry meeting tomorrow (Friday) we will be working together to strengthen our collective defensive in light of the changed security situation across Europe.”
The Foreign Secretary echoed comments made by Lithuanian foreign minister Gabrielius Landsbergis, who said it is vital the Baltic states move from “deterrence to defence”.
“This is why we need a change in political approach,” he said.
“We also need practical means for that and they are needed for all three Baltic states.

“So that if Putin decides to test Nato resistance in this region it would be responded right way.
“It would get a political response and also a clear defensive response, if that would be needed.”
The comments imply that if Russia were to attempt to annex any of the Baltic states, Nato would respond with full military might, plunging the West into a war with Russia.
 
Germany in 1939 did not have 6,000 warheads and the ability to incinerate the western world. You can not make Putin a pariah and them expect him to act responsibly.

Biden's weakness and stupidity brought us here. But now that we are facing war, we need to avoid it as much as possible, Biden is a dangerous fool and can get many many Americans killed with his blunders in a time of war. The lessor of two evils at this point.
I guess you are right. I had forgotten about Biden withholding military aid to Ukraine while waiting on a favor.

mea culpa
 
  • Like
Reactions: indy35
I guess you are right. I had forgotten about Biden withholding military aid to Ukraine while waiting on a favor.

mea culpa

Bush: Georgia
Obama/Biden: Crimea
Trump: ...
Biden: All of Ukraine

Do you see a pattern here?
 
Bush: Georgia
Obama/Biden: Crimea
Trump: ...
Biden: All of Ukraine

Do you see a pattern here?
Are you serious? Of course I do. Even a blind man can see it.

Putin had his own stooge in the WH with Trump and didn't have to misbehave.

It's really as simple as that.

Let's find out what was said in those one-on-one meetings Trump and Putin had while he was president. Even his staff wasn't informed.

Why weren't they?

https://www.google.com/search?q=tru...me..69i57.11435j1j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
 
You have been brainwashed
That's the best example of irony I have ever seen.

Today we are hearing John Bolton saying that Trump would have pulled out of NATO if he had been reelected. Wonder why?

Chew on that for a while.
 
That's the best example of irony I have ever seen.

Today we are hearing John Bolton saying that Trump would have pulled out of NATO if he had been reelected. Wonder why?

Chew on that for a while.
Bolton hates Trump so what he says means nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TwinDegrees2
Today we are hearing John Bolton saying that Trump would have pulled out of NATO if he had been reelected.
Bush, Obama and Trump all criticized NATO for the many members who failed to dedicate the pledged 2% of GDP to military spending. Both Obama and Trump were successful in getting better compliance. Trump talked the toughest and by threatening to pull our troops out of Germany. But now, of course, Putin’s invasion of Ukraine has convinced all of the stragglers that they need to pony up 2% and maybe a good deal more.

NATO spending
 
Bolton hates Trump so what he says means nothing.
So does Cheney, Kinzinger, Barr, Kelly, Mattis, the Bush family, Romney, McConnell, Murkowski, Kristol, Sykes, Sasse, Kasich, Whitman, Fiorina, Dent, Hagel, Flake, McRaven, Boehner, Coats, Cohen, Kemp, McMaster, Scaramucci, Cohn, Tillerson, any member of Congress that voted to impeach.....either time, any member who certified the election, and any member who voted for the infrastructure bill. That's off the top of my head. Doesn't include all the former officials of the trump admin who were fired or who have now turned against him.

They all hate trump. Therefore they are all RINOs, idiots, and whatever they say are lies. Only people who still support trump are to be listened to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheCainer
So does Cheney, Kinzinger, Barr, Kelly, Mattis, the Bush family, Romney, McConnell, Murkowski, Kristol, Sykes, Sasse, Kasich, Whitman, Fiorina, Dent, Hagel, Flake, McRaven, Boehner, Coats, Cohen, Kemp, McMaster, Scaramucci, Cohn, Tillerson, any member of Congress that voted to impeach.....either time, any member who certified the election, and any member who voted for the infrastructure bill. That's off the top of my head. Doesn't include all the former officials of the trump admin who were fired or who have now turned against him.

They all hate trump. Therefore they are all RINOs, idiots, and whatever they say are lies. Only people who still support trump are to be listened to.
The Republicans are going to be in charge again soon. Cry, bitch. Have you noticed how unpopular the agenda you voted for is? Will you recognize that or keep blabbering on about Trump?
 
So does Cheney, Kinzinger, Barr, Kelly, Mattis, the Bush family, Romney, McConnell, Murkowski, Kristol, Sykes, Sasse, Kasich, Whitman, Fiorina, Dent, Hagel, Flake, McRaven, Boehner, Coats, Cohen, Kemp, McMaster, Scaramucci, Cohn, Tillerson, any member of Congress that voted to impeach.....either time, any member who certified the election, and any member who voted for the infrastructure bill. That's off the top of my head. Doesn't include all the former officials of the trump admin who were fired or who have now turned against him.

They all hate trump. Therefore they are all RINOs, idiots, and whatever they say are lies. Only people who still support trump are to be listened to.
They probably do all hate Trump. No one knows what someone else would do depending on circumstances. They can only speculate so it means next to nothing.
 
That's the best example of irony I have ever seen.

Today we are hearing John Bolton saying that Trump would have pulled out of NATO if he had been reelected. Wonder why?

Chew on that for a while.

You are literally pointing to a private meeting between Trump and Putin as evidence that they are in cahoots, while discounting that Trump was the only president in over 20 years to actually hold Putin in check.

You are completely unhinged.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TwinDegrees2
You are literally pointing to a private meeting between Trump and Putin as evidence that they are in cahoots, while discounting that Trump was the only president in over 20 years to actually hold Putin in check.

You are completely unhinged.
That's a compliment coming from you.
 
They probably do all hate Trump. No one knows what someone else would do depending on circumstances. They can only speculate so it means next to nothing.
The POINT is, you constantly dismiss the opinions of officials and experts only because they don't like trump or he doesn't like them. Freaking stupid argument. They can dislike trump and still be right, not just on opinions, but facts.

Like the election. Anybody that doesn't go along with Trump's version does so because they hate him, not because of the facts of the election. He says it, you repeat it
 
The POINT is, you constantly dismiss the opinions of officials and experts only because they don't like trump or he doesn't like them. Freaking stupid argument. They can dislike trump and still be right, not just on opinions, but facts.

Like the election. Anybody that doesn't go along with Trump's version does so because they hate him, not because of the facts of the election. He says it, you repeat it
Listen no one knows what’s in the head of someone else. That’s a fact and not a stupid argument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YouSayPotato
Listen no one knows what’s in the head of someone else. That’s a fact and not a stupid argument.
That made no sense the first time you said it. What are you talking about when you say opinions or speculate......what's in someone's head? After you said we shouldn't listen to Bolton because he hates trump, I gave you an incomplete list of people just like Bolton.
If you're trying to say you take Trump's opinion......on anything ......over what all the other officials and experts say........then you should take a hard look. His opinion was that the election was rigged, his Intel agencies were wrong, and the hurricane was supposed to hit Alabama.
 
That made no sense the first time you said it. What are you talking about when you say opinions or speculate......what's in someone's head? After you said we shouldn't listen to Bolton because he hates trump, I gave you an incomplete list of people just like Bolton.
If you're trying to say you take Trump's opinion......on anything ......over what all the other officials and experts say........then you should take a hard look. His opinion was that the election was rigged, his Intel agencies were wrong, and the hurricane was supposed to hit Alabama.
Look Bob I get it you hate Trump about as much as I do Obama. I quit bringing up Obama doesn’t know how many states we have. To argue about what someone might do when they aren’t or are in control is ridiculous. Again no one knows what’s in someone’s head beside the person that’s speculated about. One cannot say they would do this or that, because they don’t really know. It makes for a good story for people to like or dislike based on their beliefs.
 
Look Bob I get it you hate Trump about as much as I do Obama. I quit bringing up Obama doesn’t know how many states we have. To argue about what someone might do when they aren’t or are in control is ridiculous. Again no one knows what’s in someone’s head beside the person that’s speculated about. One cannot say they would do this or that, because they don’t really know. It makes for a good story for people to like or dislike based on their beliefs.
Hello? I'm not arguing whether Bolton's opinion was right.

No.....lol.....you said he," what he (Bolton) says means nothing." Not just his opinion on this topic. Anything. Everything. Everytime......and everybody else that dislikes trump or he dislikes. Doesn't matter about this ONE topic. This is what you say on ANY topic. You completely dismiss what these people say for no other reason than they don't like trump.

You want to narrow it down to this one thing Bolton said because your completely generalized statement is BS.......but yet you use it all the time. It's lazy und uniformed and completely trump like.
 
Hello? I'm not arguing whether Bolton's opinion was right.

No.....lol.....you said he," what he (Bolton) says means nothing." Not just his opinion on this topic. Anything. Everything. Everytime......and everybody else that dislikes trump or he dislikes. Doesn't matter about this ONE topic. This is what you say on ANY topic. You completely dismiss what these people say for no other reason than they don't like trump.

You want to narrow it down to this one thing Bolton said because your completely generalized statement is BS.......but yet you use it all the time. It's lazy und uniformed and completely trump like.
We are talking about Bolton saying Trump would have pulled out of NATO had he been re-elected. Bolton doesn’t know what Trump would have done. He has an opinion that’s it. His opinion isn’t noteworthy since he hates Trump. Make Trump look bad or stupid is the opinion of people that hate or dislike him. No different than your opinion. You don’t know what Trump would have done and neither does Bolton.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crayfish57
We are talking about Bolton saying Trump would have pulled out of NATO had he been re-elected. Bolton doesn’t know what Trump would have done. He has an opinion that’s it. His opinion isn’t noteworthy since he hates Trump. Make Trump look bad or stupid is the opinion of people that hate or dislike him. No different than your opinion. You don’t know what Trump would have done and neither does Bolton.
IM NOT TALKING ABOUT HIS OPINION BEING CORRECT OR NOT.

For the last time, I'm saying you dismiss his opinion, and that of all the others I listed and many more......whatever the opinion is, on whatever matter it is.....just because he hates trump. That's the entire basis for your immediate dismissal if what he says. You can't believe anything he says because he hates trump.

IF you come back with your same reply I'll assume you just can't admit it's an asinine take
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Crayfish57
IM NOT TALKING ABOUT HIS OPINION BEING CORRECT OR NOT.

For the last time, I'm saying you dismiss his opinion, and that of all the others I listed and many more......whatever the opinion is, on whatever matter it is.....just because he hates trump. That's the entire basis for your immediate dismissal if what he says. You can't believe anything he says because he hates trump.

IF you come back with your same reply I'll assume you just can't admit it's an asinine take
Conversely, you do the exact same thing if Trump says something or someone says something in support of him. You immediately dismiss their opinions, too, no?
 
IM NOT TALKING ABOUT HIS OPINION BEING CORRECT OR NOT.

For the last time, I'm saying you dismiss his opinion, and that of all the others I listed and many more......whatever the opinion is, on whatever matter it is.....just because he hates trump. That's the entire basis for your immediate dismissal if what he says. You can't believe anything he says because he hates trump.

IF you come back with your same reply I'll assume you just can't admit it's an asinine take
WHY ARE WE YELLING
 
What you've seen invading Ukraine thus far has been a very small portion of Russia's military. Things are going to get very tough on Ukraine very soon.

Putin won't do anything with NATO countries for several years, as he let's this die down. But I'd be willing to bet he'll start prodding the Baltic's when he feels the time is right. This isn't a short game for him. This is him building his legacy...
According to analysts they are relying heavily on one year conscripts. Their only veteran soldiers and engaged in the south . They do not have a huge standing army.
 
The harsh reality is that Russia invaded a peaceful Ukraine as it was seeking NATO membership and that appears to be Putin's reason for the attack. Within the past two weeks, Russia issued this threat: 'Finland and Sweden should not base their security on damaging the security of other countries and their accession to NATO can have detrimental consequences and face some military and political consequences.'

Russia warns Finland and Sweden

Now, to me it is clear that the foremost issue for Russia is NATO expansion. The courageous and upright course of action here is to bring these nations into NATO. However the risk of doing so is escalating the current conflict into WW III and perhaps nuclear war. I suggest we tuck tail and add no new members to NATO, and in fact should stop talking about NATO expansion at this time. Within the past three days the Prime Ministers of both Sweden and Finland said essentially the same thing.

Swedish PM

Former Finnish PM
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crayfish57
IM NOT TALKING ABOUT HIS OPINION BEING CORRECT OR NOT.

For the last time, I'm saying you dismiss his opinion, and that of all the others I listed and many more......whatever the opinion is, on whatever matter it is.....just because he hates trump. That's the entire basis for your immediate dismissal if what he says. You can't believe anything he says because he hates trump.

IF you come back with your same reply I'll assume you just can't admit it's an asinine take
What is it like in your world @BuilderBob6 ? You never reply, I seriously would like an insight into whatever the hell goes on in your world and why it made you this way? I think we could actually do a reality series. You would make money and be able to afford supplies to build your dog houses out of top grade materials .
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT