Russia Warns Finland over NATO excercise

Hello again!

Could only find this onthe Swedish news paper
www.aftonbladet.se... 8.ab

HELSINGFORS. Ryssland mullrar över Finlands deltagande i övningar med militäralliansen Nato. – Under vissa förutsättningar kan det skapa en farlig situation vad gäller Rysslands militära säkerhet, säger Rysslands generalstabschef Nikolaj Makarov, enligt finska Yle. Makarov säger vidare att han hoppas att Finland tänker om och i stället närmar sig Moskva. Finlands försvarsminister Stefan Wallin svarar ilsket att "Finland fattar sina egna beslut."

Russia is furious about Finland coperation with NATO and training excercise , Russian General Nikolaj Makarov says this shows like an aggression against Russia, and hopes that Finland re thinks about this, but Finlands Defence minister only says "Finland's own decision to join or not"

edit. bah really angry i cant find anything on other sites..

reply to post by Vozda



Hmm, strange.... All the countries that Russia has either invaded or concurred are now friendly to NATO. Dunnow why that's happening!

Russia needs to shut their yaps, or Finland will kick their asses again like last time.

Originally posted by Vozda
Hello again!

Russia is furious about Finland coperation with NATO and training excercise , Russian General Nikolaj Makarov says this shows like an aggression against Russia, and hopes that Finland re thinks about this, but Finlands Defence minister only says "Finland's own decision to join or not"

So who cares Russia is furious? Who the heck they think they are? In every situation they will stick their noses and have their saying, agreeing or not with some other countries decision. So ridiculously disgusting. I think is their way of self imposing a global importance by playing the role of a victim who is always threatened by the west. So lame. Don't they get it nobody cares about Russia and especially what Russia claims?

reply to post by StupidShouldHurt



Finland got HELLAlucky when they got the Russians out last time. There was no ass-kicking whatsoever. It was pure dumb luck.

Russia wants to be perceived as a superpower. All superpowers want to be superpowers. This means being a bully. Just look at the US. It's the way of things. Doesn't mean their wishes should be taken with any more than a grain of salt.

Finland's ministers aren't the sharpest pencils in the box, but what leaders are? I doubt the people of Finland would allow it to join NATO. There's no room in the budget for NATO membership anyway, even if the people did want it - which they don't. Or, at least I hope there hasn't been some surreptitious campaign for membership that has escaped my attention.

reply to post by StupidShouldHurt


finland ceded territory to russians in the russ-finnish war though russian losses were high.

reply to post by CosmicEgg


Russia is far from a Superpower, they have a tin pot Conscription army, they have mass financial hardship amongst their citizens and they have no money. The only reason Russia gets away with its posturing is at the minute it is not worth the human cost in kicking their arses.

reply to post by michael1983l


russian debt is far lower compared to western debt.Russia has a very balanced budget.

As for kicking the rear be not surprised if USA/NATO ceases to exist after a war with Russia.

reply to post by michael1983l


I said "perceived", did I not? Which country is a genuine superpower anymore? The US? Maybe in relative terms but watch this space. Uncle Sam will cry uncle before long. The fall isn't over.

Putin is in power again. He wants to be the big man on the block and will knock over any puny neighborhood kid to create that illusion, just like whoever the current leader of the US might be.

At the end of the day, it's all posturing. International politics is among the filthiest games on the planet, up there with finance and religion. It's all part of the same ugly side of human civilization. We can't get rid of it fast enough.

Originally posted by mkgandhas
reply to post by michael1983l

 

russian debt is far lower compared to western debt.Russia has a very balanced budget.

I actually agree here. Russia is one of the few countries that has cash reserves.

Now regarding their military. They are in a rebuild mode. Much of their armaments are so antiquated, it's probably more dangerous to them to operate them then it is to use them against their enemies.

That being said, they upped their military spending substantially to rebuild an aging fleet but are no were near US standards yet.

Originally posted by mkgandhas
reply to post by michael1983l

 

As for kicking the rear be not surprised if USA/NATO ceases to exist after a war with Russia.

ETA:

As for Russia being able to compete with the US, not as a stand alone. Russia just do not have the hardware to compete with an initial 1st strike. Russians are resilient though and very resourceful and could cause allot of damage to a much more superior force of the US.

Now, 5 to 10 years from now, that would be a totally different story with the US going the exact opposite of Russia right now in regards to military spending.

reply to post by michael1983l


Tell that to Putin, because he didn't get that message.
Finland as a threat? Really? From what I saw, they are a nation of depressed, gypsy drunks who like to drive in circles on ice. Not much in the way of any sort of military in Finland...I'm pretty sure that Russia can take them.

Finland...tee hee.

Originally posted by Bearack

Originally posted by mkgandhas
reply to post by michael1983l

 

russian debt is far lower compared to western debt.Russia has a very balanced budget.

I actually agree here. Russia is one of the few countries that has cash reserves.

Now regarding their military. They are in a rebuild mode. Much of their armaments are so antiquated, it's probably more dangerous to them to operate them then it is to use them against their enemies.

That being said, they upped their military spending substantially to rebuild an aging fleet but are no were near US standards yet.

Originally posted by mkgandhas
reply to post by michael1983l

 

As for kicking the rear be not surprised if USA/NATO ceases to exist after a war with Russia.

ETA:

As for Russia being able to compete with the US, not as a stand alone. Russia just do not have the hardware to compete with an initial 1st strike. Russians are resilient though and very resourceful and could cause allot of damage to a much more superior force of the US.

Now, 5 to 10 years from now, that would be a totally different story with the US going the exact opposite of Russia right now in regards to military spending.

edit on 6-6-2012 by Bearack because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-6-2012 by Bearack because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-6-2012 by Bearack because: (no reason given)

Conventional weapons will be useless in a war of usa vs russia.It will be chemical,biological and nuclear.US 1 st strike on russian nuclear arsenal would be extremely difficult.plus biolocation will enable submarine detection and targetting at war time.Big trouble.Biolocation is known as dowsing in the west.

Originally posted by mkgandhas

Originally posted by Bearack

Originally posted by mkgandhas
reply to post by michael1983l

 

russian debt is far lower compared to western debt.Russia has a very balanced budget.

I actually agree here. Russia is one of the few countries that has cash reserves.

Now regarding their military. They are in a rebuild mode. Much of their armaments are so antiquated, it's probably more dangerous to them to operate them then it is to use them against their enemies.

That being said, they upped their military spending substantially to rebuild an aging fleet but are no were near US standards yet.

Originally posted by mkgandhas
reply to post by michael1983l

 

As for kicking the rear be not surprised if USA/NATO ceases to exist after a war with Russia.

ETA:

As for Russia being able to compete with the US, not as a stand alone. Russia just do not have the hardware to compete with an initial 1st strike. Russians are resilient though and very resourceful and could cause allot of damage to a much more superior force of the US.

Now, 5 to 10 years from now, that would be a totally different story with the US going the exact opposite of Russia right now in regards to military spending.

edit on 6-6-2012 by Bearack because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-6-2012 by Bearack because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-6-2012 by Bearack because: (no reason given)

Conventional weapons will be useless in a war of usa vs russia.It will be chemical,biological and nuclear.US 1 st strike on russian nuclear arsenal would be extremely difficult.plus biolocation will enable submarine detection and targetting at war time.Big trouble.Biolocation is known as dowsing in the west.

If the use of Chemical or biological weapons take place, that will be a bad thing for the entire world. That would ensure a mutual destruction response which I think both sides aren't willing to go through.

reply to post by Bearack


You haven't seen the amount of nuclear countermeasures the russian federation has invested in since soviet era.Hint: civil defence.

reply to post by mkgandhas


Most of those are seriously antiquated since the Soviet era. If not maintained properly, most just degrades and become nothing more than munition fodder.

Regarding an invasion force from the US. Won't ever happen. Same as their is no viable way for Russia to ever invade the US, the same is true of the US invading Russia. Any confrontation would be a retaliatory strike in some fashion and or a defense of an ally.

reply to post by Bearack


antiquated? They are being reactivated.Check the construction of underground bunkers in Moscow.Previously there were 7000 NOW 12000 ,5000 constructed in 2011-12. Tula has 100 ,vladivostok 300-500.St.Petersburg 4000 .Plus there are several thousand remote shelters in rural areas too.The english russia pics are 2005 .As for invasion it will be wasteful from either side .Biological and nuclear weapons can accomplish far greater strategic objectives at hand.

the russian ministry of defence has 1500 underground command bunkers ,Research bunkers and weapons storage.

What will you target? military bunkers or civilian bunkers?

reply to post by mkgandhas


My apologies. I thought you were referring to Russian armaments.

Originally posted by Bearack
reply to post by mkgandhas

 

My apologies. I thought you were referring to Russian armaments.

95% of the official nuclear missiles are in excellent condition.plus there is yamantau.

Russia is a superpower when their leadership is strong.They have all the people and resources to be that way if their money hadn't been stolen.They do seem to be "warning" a lot lately though.It just seems impotent lately.
People kept saying during the cold war how big and strong the Russian boogey man was.Now they're not seen that way because they have a diminished position militarily.
All it would take is a unifying leader that would get them to work together instead of out of function or fear and they would regain their status again.
They way the current regime barks at the west postioning it's military is futile.

reply to post by cavtrooper7


Futile? That will seen in the coming nuclear war.Western efforts will futile in countering the uranus neptune square.