In all fairness to the Finns,

They allied with Axis Germany because they had been bullied and threatened by Russia for centuries... and were facing a Soviet invasion.

So, in the time period before all the Nazi atrocities were discovered, I'd argue that it would be acceptable (not good or noble, just politically understandable) for the Finnish leadership to align itself with Germany. Also, considering their limited armaments (Brewster Buffalos, skis) the Finns did alright against the Soviet army.

But... I'd have to agree with Springer (and thus freeze hell) in saying that Finland's military is no match for any other European army that's actually militarized and armed.

Now... hasn't this thread gone on long enough?

Best standing army in Europe is UK, Fulcrum, not Finland. Hell, no one gives Finland a second thought. Even the French get more consideration!

Salem and Fulcrum both, you live in a very narrow perception of reality. Read:

Not ever one is big and strong enough to kick an attackers ass. So0me of us, mainly, us females, are smaller and have a disadvantage over larger male attckers. men dont need guns to attack females. They have superior size and strength.

Thus, guns are good for the smaller people who cannot defeat large attackers with strength. Some of us lack styrong muscles. besides, hand to hand combat in a criminal setting is pretty stupid. DFistance is better.

Salem, I disagree with you 100%. It is not the duty of the state to protect me. I refuse to allow the state to handle any aspect of my being. My point:

giving the state control of your safety, health, wellbeing, employment, ect is the way to slavery.

My life is my own, I protect it. I protect myself period. I do not trust, nor WANT the state to protect me.

Guns are great, perhaps one of the last things in the US that makes this country livable. Even that they attempt to rob from us, thats one of my fears of having a democrat in office, he might try and continue Clintons sickeing disarming of the population.

The police and military shouldnt have guns exclusively, this is the road to a police state. When the population is armed as well, it keeps the police in check. That ever looming threat of armed inssurection....

Distance is the key. And most criminals do not use guns. They use knives and other weapons. Thus, distance a much needed advatage.

And I would not feel bad about blowing away a sicko psychopath who was going to kill or harm me. His safety is not my concern. If he had a brain, it would be his concern, and hed get a new hobby.

I agree when you say that peoples of small size can need weapons... But when you say that without armed civilians the country become a police controlled state.... Sorry I disagree you totally, most country in the world don't have free guns policy and they are not police controlled state.

You're wrong when you say that we have a narrow point of view of reality, we have a narrow point of view of american reality, wich is quiete different.

[Edited on 2-10-2003 by Salem]