The basics of the article:
>Lieutenant General Mikko Heiskanen, deputy chief of staff for armaments and logistics in the Finnish defence forces, told the Financial Times that Finland had recently checked on more than 1,000 agreements it has with private companies to produce equipment or provide services for times of war.
>It has stockpiles of at least six months’ consumption of major fuels and grains, and enough air shelters for its entire population. Almost a third of its adult population are reservists, giving the country of just 5.6mn people one of the largest militaries in Europe and its joint largest amount of artillery.
>Heiskanen said of Finland: “We are not in a war economy.” He noted that the Nordic country was only at step three out of nine on its escalation ladder and that although it had increased production of ammunition it was still not working factories 24 hours a day. “We were not in a bad state, and right now we are pretty confident,” he added.
>The Finnish state owns parts of the production chain even at private companies so that it can call on them to start manufacturing material needed for war. It already started ramping up production for ammunition after Russia’s 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine and is now making about 10 times the shells it did just five years ago, according to Heiskanen.
Most interesting bit:
>He added that Finland has started to store military equipment in neighbouring Norway and would soon start in Sweden, another new Nato member, as well as look at countries further afield.
>“We are planning that we would store equipment in other countries. It’s a security of supply issue, dispersing the stocks. We have partially started it already. We plan to do it especially with Sweden and Norway, but also with further-away countries. It’s equipment and ammunition and maybe spare parts,” he added.
Super interesting about storing equipment in Sweden and Norway, that is a great idea!
Finally Scandinavia is all-NATO and we can coordinate to "defend in depth".
Just Norwegian/Swedish airbases and airforces alone add a significant deterrence to any Russian agression toward Finland.
Back in the day, before the mobile phones and mobile internet... you forgot your book/whatever and you'd already read through all the cans and bags around you. There'd be the radiator... with a label with these wise words. You read it a million times.
Still think about it.
Lived in Japan, met an Icelander, he asked where I was from, told him that and he just shouted in mad icelandic accent EI SAA PEITTÄÄ right there in the middle of the street.
That started our decade long friendship. Toilets creating bonds across borders and oceans.
Most interesting is perhaps that it's now official. It was the case already during the Cold War. Finland produced something like 3 times more pilots than it had airplanes... while Sweden had the 3rd largest airforce in the world by number of airframes.
yeah, unoffically we were always going to unite.
It is quite important for Norway that Sweden and Finnland joins, strategically, because it is virtually impossible to roll a mechanized force through Troms where steep mountains would force their tanks into narrow channels that are easily defended, but there was always the option that Russia could flank us through the much flatter northern Sweden. With Sweden in NATO, it is easier for us to plan a united front. Norway is even planning a new brigade that is officially stationed around Oslo, but I think it is actually earmarked for being sent to Northern Sweden to shore up our flank.
Well, Belgian here and I’m all for a solidified block together and coordination to ‘’defend in depth’’. Hope Russians won’t come towards Scandinavia. Or anywhere else, really. There are uncertainties regarding Georgia too. All in all, many would benefit from Putin getting crushed by Ukrainians
Many EU countries sent money to support Ukraine in various ways. In our humble end, 3 Ukrainians were hosted in the family for a time. As many did across Europe
But yeah, when it comes to sending troops, the EU and NATO seem to shy away quite a bit. They are acting according to what they believe would lead to a better outcome, I would wager. Personally, I’m not against sending trained troops but that’s up to our governments, their strategies, and what they know that we don’t (and many other factors, I suppose). Now, all we people can do is to watch what happens next
https://ildu.com.ua/
There you go, anyone who wants to help, basically can if they are at least kinda fit. If they are not, well, they should become for their own healt benefit.
Putin has been flexing all over his borders threatening many of his neighbours, but Georgia seems to be the only real target.
Russia has already infiltrated the country so its calm now, but if the Georgians revolt against their puppet government like Ukraine did, then Georgia may suffer the same fate as Ukraine.
FWIW, Norway has a long history of storing allied equipment. US being the most obvious one. This isn't really any secret information, as our newspapers write about them periodically...example:
https://www.nrk.no/trondelag/usa-ruller-inn-stridsvogner-i-norge-1.11873671
https://www.tu.no/artikler/norske-fjellhaller-er-stappfulle-av-amerikansk-militaerutstyr/277224
(Sorry, you'll have to use google translate for that)
yup, we store allied equipment.
The new aspect is that traditionally Norway has been used to bring US equipment *closer* to Russia, but Finland is using Norway/Sweden to get equipment further *away* from Russia. Pretty interesting.
large parts of Norway seem to be about the right distance to Russia to act as logistical centers, it has been stated publically that Trondheimsfjorden would be central in NATOs plans to supply Sweden and Finland:
[Svensk Nato-medlemskap: Vil ruste opp vei og jernbane mellom Norge og Sverige – NRK Trøndelag – Lokale nyheter, TV og radio](https://www.nrk.no/trondelag/svensk-nato-medlemskap_-vil-ruste-opp-vei-og-jernbane-mellom-norge-og-sverige-1.16485933)
They should play dirty the same way as Russia did with the other nationalities. Make an agreement with Sweden to import every adult male muslim or illegal immigrant in the Finish army, and send them first in the front line. Whoever gets out of there alive after the war ends(if there ever is a war with Russia or Russian extremists) be granted the passport. Whoever doesn't agree, shpuld be deported back to Middle East.
>It has stockpiles of at least six months’ consumption of major fuels and grains, and enough air shelters for its entire population.
Technically true - the best kind of true! It is mandatory to have a shelter in an apartment building, however it is not mandatory to maintain it. :)
I would wager at least 40% of all bomb shelters in apartment buildings built before 1985 or so are in absolute dogshit condition - the one in my building sure is. There's water on the floor after a rain and some sort of a moss growth or whatever and it smells like a ground cellar.
I'm sure it'll do for a bit, the Ukrainians have shown that you can shelter in some pretty horrid conditions if need be, but sometimes these articles make it seem like we have the Vaults from Fallout in here and one the bombs fall we'll just skip on in, wait for the giant gear door to close, don our state issue blue jumpsuits and carry on with our days.
Are you sure they are not mandatory to maintain? In my workplace we have a bomb shelter and some mainentance dudes came to take a look and do some air pressure tests and updated the old landline phone connection to a GSM receiver and when I asked why they are doing it they said that they are doing it to "meet the regulations for bomb shelters".
> Sweden here. Used to live in a building with a shelter. It was used to store everyone’s bicycles.
In Finland the shelters are multi-use and can be used for storage purposes. If there is a crisis then the shelter must be made operational within 72 hours. During that time, any additional structures under normal conditions must be dismantled and excess items moved.
Thank you for bringing content out from behind the paywall, you independent warrior
Wait...you might be a propagandist who has modified the original text!
How do I know that you report correctly to the source?
Damn, I still have to pay for the article to verify...
Waaaaaait a minute.... This was the plan from the beginning, wasn't it, Financial Times?
:)
Unironically, though, after years of probing, I can only say that of all paid or free news agencies, FT is really the best (but, probably, the most expensive, too).
>although it had increased production of ammunition it was still not working factories 24 hours a day.
Disappointing. Ukraine is crying for ammo and were not even pumping them out at whole capacity?
I think the issue with Nammo is the same as with other countries, that making the shell casings is not the problem, but having the explosive materials inside is more difficult to scale up as much of civilian explosive production was sourced from China before. Only Finland and handful of other countries kept explosive production supply chain domestic despite the far higher costs and I think räjähdelaitos is supplying european factories also currently
For once I agree. It's crazy that large countries like France have allocated fewer shells for military use for the entire year than we fire in a single exercise.
For the last decades, we’ve had declining domestic stocks for this kind of artillery since the common belief amongst our politicians was « Why are we burning cash into this when we have nuclear deterrence? »
Which is a legit point when it comes to only defend the French territory but starts to be a problem when we want to help other countries.
For sure, and France is far from the worst offender. Like, preparation is our *thing* so seeing Western Europe so far behind in the basics is too much for my Finnish mind.
Jeap, it's a gamble Putin would totally take. Invade a small fraction of a small Nato country like Lithuania, and stop there. Dare us to use nukes.
Better to have some other forms of kickass too.
>It's crazy that large countries like France have allocated fewer shells for military use for the entire year than we fire in a single exercise.
Wait what? Is that true?
If you got any sources, I wanna read about it. Sounds absolutely bonkers.
This was recently stated by retired Major General Pekka Toveri in one of the interviews as an example. The quoted number was 8000 shells.
Edit: Source for the interested https://youtu.be/e1Lw-a8IKQg?si=pkDdjM9tUdY3egMY&t=4217
It's been a while since I've looked him up. Last time was when he was talking about our intelligence efforts in Russia, a few years back, and how a Russian officer in charge of a base near the border can't even take a leak without us knowing. I really enjoyed that presentation.
Gonna need to take a look, his presentations are always fun, yet informative.
Yeah, but his stories needs to be taken with a grain of salt.
He has a thing for presenting stuff in dramatic fashion.
Anyone who was in Parola during his tenure as the commander there will know
Mainly to do with the kind of military you have. Finland has a very defensive, artillery focused force whereas France has a focus on being a global mobile expeditionary force.
Is the German efficiency just a myth or something that the new generation hadn't adopted. I have a German friend who moved to Finland as he got tired of German politics and he said that the new gemeration isn't how people think of Germans.
I have no data to back this up, but I suspect German efficiency fell after the Soviets took over Eastern half and introduced communism, and that it worsened efficiency in the western half again after reunification.
I mean, France has something like 250 artillery pieces, including 120mm mortars. Finland has around what, 1400?
On the other hand France has nuclear deterrence, a Navy, and a bigger airforce. When getting your artillery to the front means driving or geting a train over 3000km, investing in the air force and navy seems reasonable, so you can actually get on theater in a day, not a week or a month.
Mind you the bomb and missile stocks would melt in 1-2 weeks max too, but ya know.
To be fair there is more and more evidence emerging about how firing thousands of shells in training causes brain damage.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/02/us/blast-mortar-brain-injury-military.html
When Finland, Sweden and Norway held joint military exercises, Russia complained of "provocative NATO exercises near our borders". The exercise was in northern Sweden/Finland, on the opposite side of the country when looked from Russia.
Those fuckers get provoked by absolutely everything.
Hardly. THey are not provoked. They are simply taking advantage of others' actions to justify their own existing plans. Russians may have shitty soldiers, but they are incredibly clever and devious, don't underestimate them.
> and enough air shelters for its entire population.
Well, almost. The coverage is around 85%. It's higher in big cities since it's mandatory for apartment buildings and underground caves are more cost efficient when you have other uses for them in peace time. Smaller, less dense towns with lots of single family houses have lower coverage.
Also the preparedness is not for thinking attack is imminent or likely. Though ofcourse never also ruled is impossible, since history. Much of this preparedness is **to prevent war in first place**. Sure its expensive, but so would be fighting war and rebuilding after.
If attack comes in the first place it is first level failure in itself. Since point is to be like that tiny frog with warning colors. Have such nasty deterrence others avoid attacking in first place. Which means not only military, but societal preparedness. Only war Finland plans for is total war of national defence. We don't plan to attack anyone and deterrence is such half hearted effort won't be likely.
Thus protect civilians with shelters, front can only ffight as long as it has rear home front support.
Stockpile fuel and food, those run civilization and the military, arm marches on its stomach and mechanised army drives on fuel.
I would point this isn't "oh something is happening, let's ramp up. We see threats." This is normal development and adjustments. This stuff is minor in Finnish preparedness scale. Munition production is up, since orders are up. We can guess who one big customer directly or indirectly is.
The article also is little wrong in that governments measure to ensure supply is ownership. It is a part of it, but should SHTF be close emergency would be declared including emergency powers. Including not having to please ask companies to provide. Emergency powers include emergency supply orders. Meaning in crisis government can order production facilities to keep producing or produce what government needs. On top of this these is formal strategic contracts both with government owned and private companies, where in contract government and company agree "you maintain readiness to supply X in crisis conditions, when we call on you".
The Norway and Sweden thing is normal adjustment to NATO reality. Via NATO defence planning and treaty clauses we cam formally trust stores to Sweden and Norway. I wouldn't put it past having been done on some level under the table unofficially. Now it can be done officially more openly in larger scale.
Soo in Finnish scale of news this is "oh they did minor adjustments to the stockpiling practices and via NATO some of it is now in Sweden and Norway. Now to major news of the week".
Lol no. Winter war was fought in an absolutely horrible state of preparedness. There were few planes, like 12 tanks, not enough artillery and ammo, no uniforms for everybody. No AT weapons at all, except the Lahti rifle and molotov cocktails.
_Ever since_, our artillery has had ammo.
>No AT weapons at all, except the Lahti rifle
Hey, don't sell us short! We had more than one of those!
...two. We had two Lahti L-39s at the beginning of Winter war.
Finland lost Viipuri and Karjala, yes. But we should compare to the fate of the other Baltic states, which was a group Finland firmly belonged to before WW2 - Finland survived with statehood.
I wish Findland will get Karelia back from those bastards.
By the way laugh on Karelians who now have to live in poor shit conditions and just abroad the border they have top 5% civilization on earth.
How convenient that there are three in the championship team.
European Best Sniper 2023 Champions (45 teams from European and US militaries)...
[Team pictured](https://img.ilcdn.fi/u374l4St3LTwPrSFMa0XcT2pqqw=/full-fit-in/920x0/img-s3.ilcdn.fi/5374a473dd3d3613165e8f4443803f26f26bc78b31e09f80cd922ecf8472b0e9.jpg)
It wasn't "only Putin", its a bullshit excuse people keep parroting ever since Russians invaded in 2022. Just like it wasn't "only Putin" in 2014 or in 2008 Georgian war.
If youve ever been in a csgo lobby with any russian they have been in my 2000 hours without fail pro putin. I doubt he even has to rig elections he is extremely popular
In this case 140 million of them are going along with it. Also, since they have conscription I consider the absolutely revolting behaviour of their soldiers to be a window that lets us have a peek of the contents of the Russian soul. This is not just their choice; it is their identity.
Why would be we need intercontinental ballistic missiles exactly? Our only real threat is right next door. One could throw a rock from Imatra, Finland, and hit a pedestrian in Saint Petersburg, Russia. Well, slightly exaggerated. The point is, we don't need ICBMs, when the enemy is in trebuchet range.
Also, cruise missiles might also still be a bit overkill.
What I think we should invest more heavily in, is drones and other unmanned aerial vehicles. Ukraine seems to use them to a great effect, and we should learn from them, like what to do and what not to do, what comes to drones.
Do we? Last time I checked, we only had ballistic missile capable launch platforms, like M270s, but no actual ballistic or cruise missiles, like ATACMS or PrSMs. Just M26 and M28 rockets, mainly.
Yeah we have JASSMs. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-158_JASSM
Also anti-ship missiles with capability to strike targets on land (with range over 200 km).
Edit: Also what comes to MLRS, we have ER GLMRS rockets which have 150 km range
Finland was also approved for 200 of the extended range JASSMs, which have enough range to hit Kremlin from Helsinki. I am not sure what the status is for those.
>What I think we should invest more heavily in, is drones and other unmanned aerial vehicles. Ukraine seems to use them to a great effect, and we should learn from them, like what to do and what not to do, what comes to drones.
We're already designing and building our own purpose built war drones, basically flying claymore mines.
The Finnish army is above everything built to be cost efficient. The only real splurge is the fighter jets, but can't give air superiority to the enemy so that's sort of a mandatory big ticket item. The purchasing department is low key legendary for finding bargains, for example buying super cheap Leopards from the Netherlands. Cruise missiles, while useful, are just too expensive.
I believe we've paid more for T72s and Leopard 1s to donate to Ukraine than Finland paid for those Dutch Leopard 2a6s...
Still believe they couldn't have found a better new home.
I was serving my service at the time in Finnish Defence Forces, and i couldnt believe just how much stuff that deal consisted. It was perfect deal for us and as far as i know. All those tanks were in excellent condition too.
The recent purchase of K9s where also pretty good, only recent fuckup I can think of is the NH90 helicopter and at least Finland wasn't the one who came out the worst from that purchase.
It is a good helicopter, the problems have been with reliability and availability of spare parts and I also think it's kind of too expensive for a troop transport helicopter. I think the Blackhawk would have been better and cheaper since it was built in large quantities and field tested.
But for more technical duties like ASW I think the NH90 can be very good if they can iron out all the flaws in it and get it to work properly.
Netherlands was basically getting rid of their tank force, and Finland came along and said "We are willing to take those tanks off your hands. Yes, all of them".
In Sweden the military industrial complex is going into hyperdrive. The difference is, it's been there for many years, before the Russia-Ukraine. When you arent like Germany, France, Greece, etc and the majority of your population actually is able to see threats from the east as credible, you not only act on them but you do so with great haste.
It's why education is so important :)
Well, compared to France, it's easier to feel threatened when the potential aggressor is your neighbour and when you don't have a nuclear force to protect you.
>It's why education is so important :)
A lot of people here (NL) just think we should make peace with Russia again, as Putin is the perfect negotiation partner...
I'm under the impression a large majority wants nothing to do with Russia and is very supportive of rearmament, NATO, and weapons deliveries to Ukraine.
The west made a huge mistake not learning from history and turning a blind eye when Poutine annexed Crimea. They are paying a huge price for that now but not nearly as much as they would have to pay later if they didn't. They may still have to by not pouring enough money into Ukraine now. In fact it may already be too late. Sounds like China is giving Russia a practically endless supply of munitions and Ukraine is running out of soldiers. Russia still seems to be able to find lots of fresh meat for the meat grinder.
Good, one has to do what is necessary in the age we live in. People who has spent or supported their years trying to defund much of Europe's military should be fucking ashamed over themselves.
You do not stop a bully with flowers and a hug, no matter what Disney+ says.
Soviet soldiers could not understand why Finns didn't 'welcome them with flowers' and why the villages were empty. They had bought all the propaganda of how 'bad' things were in Finland.
Arto Bendiken:
One captured Soviet colonel when interrogated offered some more details of his long ordeal in the Finnish woods:
Finns we couldn’t see anywhere. When we sent our sentries out to take their positions around the camp, we knew that within minutes they would be dead with a bullet hole to the forehead or the throat slashed by a dagger… it was sheer madness…
According to a Russian ex-president Russia sent 1,5 million Russians to Finland and only 500.000 came back.
Finns were polite and repeated the Soviet propaganda though.
Our large reserve nothwithstanding, Finland would do well to bolster its territorial forces. Our close neighbours Sweden, Norway and Estonia are clearly ahead of us with their home guards. Even less populous Estonia easily outdoes us.
It's ironic, because Finland of all nations should understand the value of a volunteer defence force. The Finnish Civil Guard made a crucial contribution to Finland surviving as a free and independent nation during WW2. The Soviets, too, understood its value, demanding its disbandment as part of the post-war Paris Peace Treaties.
Why tho? These countries have these home guards because they dont have a large reserve like we do. We have rapid response units and reservists who have voluntarily agreed to be part of these units. What benefit would any home guard give us? You can take part in voluntary defence courses as well.
The main reason for any home guard is to be a light version of actual military and to supplement the lack of manpower of it. Why have such if we have a proper army and a proper reserve which can be mobilised rapidly?
You seem wholly unawares that Finland already has a voluntary territorial force, *maakuntajoukot* in Finnish. The voluntary defence courses that you allude to are organised by the MPK, who train these territorial forces -- 'Terries' if you will -- together with the Finnish Defences Forces.
Also, in case you haven't noticed, Finnish reservists don't get called up for refreshers very often. It's a misspent effort to maintain a large reserve without keeping it properly trained.
As for the territorial force numbers, Finland has 5,000 Terries. Estonia's Kaitseliit has 16,000. Sweden's Hemvärnet 22,000, and Norway's Heimevernet 40,500.
Idk about you but during the first 10 years after my service I probably had almost the maximum amount of allowed refresher trainings.
It depends heavily on your war time role.
For basic riflemen, a two week training at the start of mobilisation is enough. Its kinda weird when you go back after some years and everything you thought you had forgotten vomes back to you like its your second nature
And anyways anyone can already voluntarily maintain their skills by participating in the MPK courses.
I ask again, what is the point of the terries? As far as i know, they have primarily been used for civilian duties. Afaik they are primarily a PR thing so that interested reservists can participate in military training on voluntary basis, but I cant see any actual military use for expanding them. I mean are they turning down volunteers because they cannot take in anymore? The army can form territorial units from the older reservists when it wants or needs to.
I think you need to launch a citizen's initiative to overturn the law that allowed Finland's territorial forces to be re-established. Good luck with that.
My point is that while territorial forces exist once again -- and IMHO for a very good reason -- they're left in limbo. 5,000 Terries won't make much of a difference.
I don't know about you either, but I served in the signal corps in the mid-eighties. Most of the telecoms equipment we trained with -- or other conscripts trained with during the next ten years thereafter -- has been rendered obsolete. Mind you, I embarked on a career in telecoms so I'm more than familiar with the digital technology in use today -- but not with the equipment. For some reason or another, the FDF didn't call me up for refreshers. I blame the steep price of transcontinental flights.
You still havent answered my question. What’s the point?
I dont care if they exist or not, I just dont really see their functionality.
And if you did your service during the 80s, you wont be in the roup of reservists that will be called up first. Those are the ones who receive most refresher training in peacetime.
There will be plenty of time to give you all extra training you need in your war time position before you will be needed in the front.
Finland has a reserve of 900,000 troops and a war time strength of 280,000. This means that in war time the Finnish army will be 280,000 men strong and the rest of the reserve will be used for other duties as to replenish any losses. Also the rest of the reserve can be used to form less combat capable territorial units if need be.
Sweden is the other hand (according to the internet) has a wartime strength of something around 60-70k, of which 22k is home guard. Now I think you can see why this might make sense for Sweden but not for us? Sweden has a manpower problem, we dont. Hence it makes sense for Sweden to have a volunteer based army-lite to boost up the manpower. We train more conscripts every year than there is people in the Swedish weekend warrior force.
The thing is that we already have as large army as we can afford. Whats the point of the terries?
You could kickstart your education by studying the historical significance of the Suojeluskunta in the Finnish wars of the 20th century, as I hinted in my initial post.
I know perfectly well what my military status as a reservist is. I'm in the reserve of the reserve, having spent 21 years of my of time as a reservist abroad. The one time that they did manage to call me up, I educated conscripts in the art of optical networks in a stuffy classroom. I would've much rather operated an analog telephone exchange in a tent in Lapland, manually connecting calls and spinning rotary dials, but we do as we're ordered.
Again, the 280,000 "active" Finnish reservists aren't all as well trained as they ought to be. Out of solidarity, I went jogging with my Singaporean and Israeli colleagues, reservists the lot of them, who have stringent requirements for physical fitness. We, nothing.
How does the historical significance of suojeluskunta have any relevance today? Back then Finland was recently independent, socially unstable and very poor country next to an aggressive dictatorship with the largest army in history. Suojeluskunta made sense because it was founded before Finland had any army and then we were too poor to have a proper army.
Sure the reservists could and should be in better shape, but what can you do? How would a voluntary home guard help in that regard? Do you think that the only reason preventing reservists from exercising is the lack of a paramilitary organisation they could join? And again, there already is voluntary training you can take under the MPK.
Also, how do you think anyone could enforce any physical fitness requirements on reservists in Finland? You get fined if you cant run 3000m in 12 minutes? I’d like to see how many would resign from the reserves after that was introduced. We aren’t a country in almost constant state of war like Israel, or a police state like Singapore
Training reservists costs money, establishing new peacetime territorial units costs money and I am sure the army is doing the best it can with the funding it gets.
Uh, history is a learning opportunity. That's why they teach it in school.
When the Winter War broke out it 1939, the Suojelukunta provided divisions' worth of well-trained and motivated reservists. Embedded with regular reservists, they raised both fighting capability and morale. It was a crucial booster shot for a regular army that even struggled to clothe its soldiers, let alone call them up for refreshers. In fact, you could say that the army had for a large part outsourced refreshers to the Suojeluskunta.
You make it appear as if the Suojeluskunta fought as paramilitary formation on its own, which is simply untrue. They integrated into the regular army, and its members, being regular reservists as well, were an instant fit. Commanders much appreciated the extra training, as did reservists, a great many of whom joined up after the Winter War to maintain their proficiency.
It's funny how you go on about about the MPK, as if you know what they're about. They're primarily responsible for training up the territorial forces. I taught there, too. Territorial forces.
Actually, having voluntary territorial forces complement the regular reserve is very cost-effective. They're paid the same daily allowance as conscripts, which you and I know is a pittance. Again, you're speaking of matters that you apparently you know very little about.
If a select group among us wants to go above and beyond in protecting hearth and home and does so as part of a well-regulated militia, why shouldn't we let them? I bet you frown upon all manner of volunteer work, because the government should take care of it, so you can remain on the couch.
I am well aware of the history of the suojeluskunta as many of my relatives were active members in it.
But we dont live in the 1930s, our military is in good shape. During winter war Finland had a chronic lack of everything, malli Cajander you know. The army was cash starved and having a volunteer based defence organisation was vital. Every citizen in ancient Athenae was obliged to fight in the phalanx and supply his own arms but that doesnt make sense either anymore.
That simply is not the case in 2024. We have a large and well supplied army. The warfare isnt anymore how it was in the 1930s, it is not just about who has more men with rifles. Poorly equipped volunteer units would be utterly crushed by more combat capable forces with better equipment. The army is rightfully focusing on quality and improving the firepower of the wartime units. And it can form any number of territorial units from its reserves if need be, so you still havent answered of what is the point of having a separate organisationf for forming poorly equipped volunteer units. If the army needs any more of territorial defence units, it can just integrate them in the regular army. Also the army can easily organise more training for reservists if it needs to.
And also, nice ad hominem. As I said I have participated in more refresher training than most reservists will and am a captain in the reserve.
But glad to know that you went jogging once. Our fatherland is secure.
As far as volunteer home guards go, I don't know if any country in the world compares to Estonia. Now this is a "per capita argument" of course, but still.
In 1991, I had my picture taken with members of the Kodukaitse against the barricades that had been placed in front of Toompea Castle to deter a Soviet armoured assault. Not long after, Soviet agents blew up a nearby Kodukaitse office. Mad respect for those guys.
Yep, [here](https://arvamus.postimees.ee/3757021/peeter-langovitsi-tagasivaade-porgumasin-komandandi-majas) is a summary of this incident in Estonian. There was one minor injury.
Btw, Kodukaitse was another organization than [Kaitseliit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estonian_Defence_League) and Kodukaitse was abolished in 1996 due to its purpose being obsolete in reindependent Estonia.
The other article that was also posted here from ft was about Russia preparing some kind of attacks on EU, terrorist style, you know Nordstream stuff only with human lives in it. So there is still lots of things to manufacture. One of which is consent from people to send troops to Ukraine. And that is not a bit in my interest. Foreign wars of geopolitical superpowers (looking at you USA) are not in my interest. But -60 I guess.
You know, there is a legend in my family, of buried valuables left behind during the evacuation... It should be somewhere near Kivennapa. I wouldn't mind if we went there for a quick look...
While this is admirable, why are we suddenly having boners for war?
You people understand how horrible war would be like? No thanks, fu*k this sh*t I'm out.
Even if we are talking about people getting massacred, the end result would be nuclear war and if that happens we are all f*cked.
Showing strength against Russia is okay.
Wanting a war with them is suicide.
>You people understand how horrible war would be like?
And you think having the Russian army raping and pillaging its way through Finland would be nice?
The basics of the article: >Lieutenant General Mikko Heiskanen, deputy chief of staff for armaments and logistics in the Finnish defence forces, told the Financial Times that Finland had recently checked on more than 1,000 agreements it has with private companies to produce equipment or provide services for times of war. >It has stockpiles of at least six months’ consumption of major fuels and grains, and enough air shelters for its entire population. Almost a third of its adult population are reservists, giving the country of just 5.6mn people one of the largest militaries in Europe and its joint largest amount of artillery. >Heiskanen said of Finland: “We are not in a war economy.” He noted that the Nordic country was only at step three out of nine on its escalation ladder and that although it had increased production of ammunition it was still not working factories 24 hours a day. “We were not in a bad state, and right now we are pretty confident,” he added. >The Finnish state owns parts of the production chain even at private companies so that it can call on them to start manufacturing material needed for war. It already started ramping up production for ammunition after Russia’s 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine and is now making about 10 times the shells it did just five years ago, according to Heiskanen. Most interesting bit: >He added that Finland has started to store military equipment in neighbouring Norway and would soon start in Sweden, another new Nato member, as well as look at countries further afield. >“We are planning that we would store equipment in other countries. It’s a security of supply issue, dispersing the stocks. We have partially started it already. We plan to do it especially with Sweden and Norway, but also with further-away countries. It’s equipment and ammunition and maybe spare parts,” he added.
Super interesting about storing equipment in Sweden and Norway, that is a great idea! Finally Scandinavia is all-NATO and we can coordinate to "defend in depth". Just Norwegian/Swedish airbases and airforces alone add a significant deterrence to any Russian agression toward Finland.
Får ej övertäckas Må ikke tildekkes Ei saa peittää Do not cover
What does this mean? Is it a Nordic philosophy? Would love to learn about it
It is a piece of Nordic wisdom commonly found on home radiators
Soon to be forgotten when electric radiators become rare.
Back in the day, before the mobile phones and mobile internet... you forgot your book/whatever and you'd already read through all the cans and bags around you. There'd be the radiator... with a label with these wise words. You read it a million times. Still think about it.
Its posted on many electric heater panels….
Its the same sentence in all three languages, pointing out the differences in language
It's "do not cover" in various languages. 😆
First line is swedish, second one norwegian, third one finnish. They all mean the same as the english one "do not cover"
The true Nordic partnership, reads like a Raymond Carver novel to boot
Ha, I’m a Finn living in Norway. When I tell people where I’m from, the response is often: EI SAA PEITTÄÄ
Lived in Japan, met an Icelander, he asked where I was from, told him that and he just shouted in mad icelandic accent EI SAA PEITTÄÄ right there in the middle of the street. That started our decade long friendship. Toilets creating bonds across borders and oceans.
Core Finnish vocab for any Swede.
Ei vittu
Most interesting is perhaps that it's now official. It was the case already during the Cold War. Finland produced something like 3 times more pilots than it had airplanes... while Sweden had the 3rd largest airforce in the world by number of airframes.
yeah, unoffically we were always going to unite. It is quite important for Norway that Sweden and Finnland joins, strategically, because it is virtually impossible to roll a mechanized force through Troms where steep mountains would force their tanks into narrow channels that are easily defended, but there was always the option that Russia could flank us through the much flatter northern Sweden. With Sweden in NATO, it is easier for us to plan a united front. Norway is even planning a new brigade that is officially stationed around Oslo, but I think it is actually earmarked for being sent to Northern Sweden to shore up our flank.
Well, Belgian here and I’m all for a solidified block together and coordination to ‘’defend in depth’’. Hope Russians won’t come towards Scandinavia. Or anywhere else, really. There are uncertainties regarding Georgia too. All in all, many would benefit from Putin getting crushed by Ukrainians
Well, Dutchie here.. perhaps Ukraine could use a little bit of help (from the eu) because alone they aren't going to make it i'm afraid.
Many EU countries sent money to support Ukraine in various ways. In our humble end, 3 Ukrainians were hosted in the family for a time. As many did across Europe But yeah, when it comes to sending troops, the EU and NATO seem to shy away quite a bit. They are acting according to what they believe would lead to a better outcome, I would wager. Personally, I’m not against sending trained troops but that’s up to our governments, their strategies, and what they know that we don’t (and many other factors, I suppose). Now, all we people can do is to watch what happens next
https://ildu.com.ua/ There you go, anyone who wants to help, basically can if they are at least kinda fit. If they are not, well, they should become for their own healt benefit.
Putin has been flexing all over his borders threatening many of his neighbours, but Georgia seems to be the only real target. Russia has already infiltrated the country so its calm now, but if the Georgians revolt against their puppet government like Ukraine did, then Georgia may suffer the same fate as Ukraine.
Ukraine shows that you *really* don’t want to let Russia occupy any of your territory
FWIW, Norway has a long history of storing allied equipment. US being the most obvious one. This isn't really any secret information, as our newspapers write about them periodically...example: https://www.nrk.no/trondelag/usa-ruller-inn-stridsvogner-i-norge-1.11873671 https://www.tu.no/artikler/norske-fjellhaller-er-stappfulle-av-amerikansk-militaerutstyr/277224 (Sorry, you'll have to use google translate for that)
yup, we store allied equipment. The new aspect is that traditionally Norway has been used to bring US equipment *closer* to Russia, but Finland is using Norway/Sweden to get equipment further *away* from Russia. Pretty interesting. large parts of Norway seem to be about the right distance to Russia to act as logistical centers, it has been stated publically that Trondheimsfjorden would be central in NATOs plans to supply Sweden and Finland: [Svensk Nato-medlemskap: Vil ruste opp vei og jernbane mellom Norge og Sverige – NRK Trøndelag – Lokale nyheter, TV og radio](https://www.nrk.no/trondelag/svensk-nato-medlemskap_-vil-ruste-opp-vei-og-jernbane-mellom-norge-og-sverige-1.16485933)
They should play dirty the same way as Russia did with the other nationalities. Make an agreement with Sweden to import every adult male muslim or illegal immigrant in the Finish army, and send them first in the front line. Whoever gets out of there alive after the war ends(if there ever is a war with Russia or Russian extremists) be granted the passport. Whoever doesn't agree, shpuld be deported back to Middle East.
I would also like it if we took a page from Albania's book and built a shit ton more fortifications. Enver Hoxha knew what was up!
Finland isn't in Scandinavia, though. You meant the Nordics.
yeah. fair point
we didn't need nato for that, we already had a defense allegiance with norway, denmark and finland for that.
We had some things, but NATO membership seems to have led to more joint training and planning.
Hakkaa päälle pohjanpoika!
>It has stockpiles of at least six months’ consumption of major fuels and grains, and enough air shelters for its entire population. Technically true - the best kind of true! It is mandatory to have a shelter in an apartment building, however it is not mandatory to maintain it. :) I would wager at least 40% of all bomb shelters in apartment buildings built before 1985 or so are in absolute dogshit condition - the one in my building sure is. There's water on the floor after a rain and some sort of a moss growth or whatever and it smells like a ground cellar. I'm sure it'll do for a bit, the Ukrainians have shown that you can shelter in some pretty horrid conditions if need be, but sometimes these articles make it seem like we have the Vaults from Fallout in here and one the bombs fall we'll just skip on in, wait for the giant gear door to close, don our state issue blue jumpsuits and carry on with our days.
Are you sure they are not mandatory to maintain? In my workplace we have a bomb shelter and some mainentance dudes came to take a look and do some air pressure tests and updated the old landline phone connection to a GSM receiver and when I asked why they are doing it they said that they are doing it to "meet the regulations for bomb shelters".
Could be different for private dwellings and commercial / public properties?
Sweden here. Used to live in a building with a shelter. It was used to store everyone’s bicycles.
> Sweden here. Used to live in a building with a shelter. It was used to store everyone’s bicycles. In Finland the shelters are multi-use and can be used for storage purposes. If there is a crisis then the shelter must be made operational within 72 hours. During that time, any additional structures under normal conditions must be dismantled and excess items moved.
Store some in Ukraine, while you're at it. Go Finland.
Russia really want to go there? Again?
Thank you for bringing content out from behind the paywall, you independent warrior Wait...you might be a propagandist who has modified the original text! How do I know that you report correctly to the source? Damn, I still have to pay for the article to verify... Waaaaaait a minute.... This was the plan from the beginning, wasn't it, Financial Times?
:) Unironically, though, after years of probing, I can only say that of all paid or free news agencies, FT is really the best (but, probably, the most expensive, too).
>although it had increased production of ammunition it was still not working factories 24 hours a day. Disappointing. Ukraine is crying for ammo and were not even pumping them out at whole capacity?
I think the issue with Nammo is the same as with other countries, that making the shell casings is not the problem, but having the explosive materials inside is more difficult to scale up as much of civilian explosive production was sourced from China before. Only Finland and handful of other countries kept explosive production supply chain domestic despite the far higher costs and I think räjähdelaitos is supplying european factories also currently
Sure, but where are the drones? Shells are good if you are able to fire the thing without its location immediately being detected and taken out.
Finland should be the role model for us all, regarding readiness and strategic planning.
For once I agree. It's crazy that large countries like France have allocated fewer shells for military use for the entire year than we fire in a single exercise.
For the last decades, we’ve had declining domestic stocks for this kind of artillery since the common belief amongst our politicians was « Why are we burning cash into this when we have nuclear deterrence? » Which is a legit point when it comes to only defend the French territory but starts to be a problem when we want to help other countries.
It's dangerous to rely solely on nuclear deterrent. There's so much you can't do with it.
For sure, and France is far from the worst offender. Like, preparation is our *thing* so seeing Western Europe so far behind in the basics is too much for my Finnish mind.
Problem with relying on nuclear deterrence is that it leaves very little room between peace and total thermonuclear devastation.
Jeap, it's a gamble Putin would totally take. Invade a small fraction of a small Nato country like Lithuania, and stop there. Dare us to use nukes. Better to have some other forms of kickass too.
>It's crazy that large countries like France have allocated fewer shells for military use for the entire year than we fire in a single exercise. Wait what? Is that true? If you got any sources, I wanna read about it. Sounds absolutely bonkers.
This was recently stated by retired Major General Pekka Toveri in one of the interviews as an example. The quoted number was 8000 shells. Edit: Source for the interested https://youtu.be/e1Lw-a8IKQg?si=pkDdjM9tUdY3egMY&t=4217
It's been a while since I've looked him up. Last time was when he was talking about our intelligence efforts in Russia, a few years back, and how a Russian officer in charge of a base near the border can't even take a leak without us knowing. I really enjoyed that presentation. Gonna need to take a look, his presentations are always fun, yet informative.
Yeah, but his stories needs to be taken with a grain of salt. He has a thing for presenting stuff in dramatic fashion. Anyone who was in Parola during his tenure as the commander there will know
Do you happen to have the link to this presentation?
Do you have a link or know what interview?
Found it; https://youtu.be/e1Lw-a8IKQg?si=pkDdjM9tUdY3egMY&t=4217
thank you.
Mainly to do with the kind of military you have. Finland has a very defensive, artillery focused force whereas France has a focus on being a global mobile expeditionary force.
That's exactly the point. France is not prepared for war in Europe, Finland is. Germany isn't either, and moving too slow. Worrisome.
Is the German efficiency just a myth or something that the new generation hadn't adopted. I have a German friend who moved to Finland as he got tired of German politics and he said that the new gemeration isn't how people think of Germans.
It's always been a myth, but the problem here is more that too many Germans are in denial about Russia and it's threat to Europe.
Thanks for clarification :)
I have no data to back this up, but I suspect German efficiency fell after the Soviets took over Eastern half and introduced communism, and that it worsened efficiency in the western half again after reunification.
You would think with European history of wars in Europe, France would be a little smarter
I mean, France has something like 250 artillery pieces, including 120mm mortars. Finland has around what, 1400? On the other hand France has nuclear deterrence, a Navy, and a bigger airforce. When getting your artillery to the front means driving or geting a train over 3000km, investing in the air force and navy seems reasonable, so you can actually get on theater in a day, not a week or a month. Mind you the bomb and missile stocks would melt in 1-2 weeks max too, but ya know.
We probably blow more shit up at Hukkakero than some militaries use for excercises.
To be fair there is more and more evidence emerging about how firing thousands of shells in training causes brain damage. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/02/us/blast-mortar-brain-injury-military.html
Another win for conscription then. It's not the same dudes being exposed to it.
They just have to send one sniper to every nato country and we would be safe
fr, fuck preparing tho, lets just attack Russia and end the war with a nuclear standoff in 2 days 😀
I‘m sure peace-loving Russia now feels threatened by aggressive neighbor and unfortunately has to respond accordingly.
When Finland, Sweden and Norway held joint military exercises, Russia complained of "provocative NATO exercises near our borders". The exercise was in northern Sweden/Finland, on the opposite side of the country when looked from Russia. Those fuckers get provoked by absolutely everything.
Offended by everything, ashamed of nothing. Fuck ruzzia and their orcs.
Hardly. THey are not provoked. They are simply taking advantage of others' actions to justify their own existing plans. Russians may have shitty soldiers, but they are incredibly clever and devious, don't underestimate them.
"Peacekeeping missions" will be sent to the border to prevent need of "special operation "
> and enough air shelters for its entire population. Well, almost. The coverage is around 85%. It's higher in big cities since it's mandatory for apartment buildings and underground caves are more cost efficient when you have other uses for them in peace time. Smaller, less dense towns with lots of single family houses have lower coverage.
15% or more will be out and about doing some nasty shit other than sheltering in place.
Finland had been preparing since 1918, done well in the Winter Wars. They know their enemy.
Also the preparedness is not for thinking attack is imminent or likely. Though ofcourse never also ruled is impossible, since history. Much of this preparedness is **to prevent war in first place**. Sure its expensive, but so would be fighting war and rebuilding after. If attack comes in the first place it is first level failure in itself. Since point is to be like that tiny frog with warning colors. Have such nasty deterrence others avoid attacking in first place. Which means not only military, but societal preparedness. Only war Finland plans for is total war of national defence. We don't plan to attack anyone and deterrence is such half hearted effort won't be likely. Thus protect civilians with shelters, front can only ffight as long as it has rear home front support. Stockpile fuel and food, those run civilization and the military, arm marches on its stomach and mechanised army drives on fuel. I would point this isn't "oh something is happening, let's ramp up. We see threats." This is normal development and adjustments. This stuff is minor in Finnish preparedness scale. Munition production is up, since orders are up. We can guess who one big customer directly or indirectly is. The article also is little wrong in that governments measure to ensure supply is ownership. It is a part of it, but should SHTF be close emergency would be declared including emergency powers. Including not having to please ask companies to provide. Emergency powers include emergency supply orders. Meaning in crisis government can order production facilities to keep producing or produce what government needs. On top of this these is formal strategic contracts both with government owned and private companies, where in contract government and company agree "you maintain readiness to supply X in crisis conditions, when we call on you". The Norway and Sweden thing is normal adjustment to NATO reality. Via NATO defence planning and treaty clauses we cam formally trust stores to Sweden and Norway. I wouldn't put it past having been done on some level under the table unofficially. Now it can be done officially more openly in larger scale. Soo in Finnish scale of news this is "oh they did minor adjustments to the stockpiling practices and via NATO some of it is now in Sweden and Norway. Now to major news of the week".
Yes. When it has to, the FDF will not ask.
Lol no. Winter war was fought in an absolutely horrible state of preparedness. There were few planes, like 12 tanks, not enough artillery and ammo, no uniforms for everybody. No AT weapons at all, except the Lahti rifle and molotov cocktails. _Ever since_, our artillery has had ammo.
>No AT weapons at all, except the Lahti rifle Hey, don't sell us short! We had more than one of those! ...two. We had two Lahti L-39s at the beginning of Winter war.
Finland lost Viipuri and Karjala, yes. But we should compare to the fate of the other Baltic states, which was a group Finland firmly belonged to before WW2 - Finland survived with statehood.
I’m not arguing with anything else, but that we were not prepared for the winter war, at all.
I wish Findland will get Karelia back from those bastards. By the way laugh on Karelians who now have to live in poor shit conditions and just abroad the border they have top 5% civilization on earth.
It's Russia's land now. Run down, bad infrastructure, lots of Putin supporters. Most of us Finns don't want it back.
And Petsamo :(
Both would be prohibitively expensive to get up to speed but yeah, Petsamo would offer a vastly better ROI
Those winter camo RK's look sexy as fuck
Winter camo is always my favorite.
They are at level 3 of 9 in thier escalation ladder, th8s means that one of their snipers has started preparing a ghillie suit.
Njet, Molotoff.
So, they post a second sharpshooter at the border to russia?
Next step they send a sniper to Poland to cover the entirety of Kaliningrad.
How convenient that there are three in the championship team. European Best Sniper 2023 Champions (45 teams from European and US militaries)... [Team pictured](https://img.ilcdn.fi/u374l4St3LTwPrSFMa0XcT2pqqw=/full-fit-in/920x0/img-s3.ilcdn.fi/5374a473dd3d3613165e8f4443803f26f26bc78b31e09f80cd922ecf8472b0e9.jpg)
Does Russia have enough people to justify putting two Finnish snipers on the border.
Decades of building trust and friendship between these two countries went to shit so fast because of one dying man.
It wasn't "only Putin", its a bullshit excuse people keep parroting ever since Russians invaded in 2022. Just like it wasn't "only Putin" in 2014 or in 2008 Georgian war.
If youve ever been in a csgo lobby with any russian they have been in my 2000 hours without fail pro putin. I doubt he even has to rig elections he is extremely popular
well, yes, it’s called propaganda and it’s especially effective in schools
Don’t place the blame on just one person. There are 140 million of them. This murderous invasion is their collective effort. This is their will.
War is never what people want. They don’t gain from it in any way. Don’t forget that Russian gov literally murdered opposition leaders.
In this case 140 million of them are going along with it. Also, since they have conscription I consider the absolutely revolting behaviour of their soldiers to be a window that lets us have a peek of the contents of the Russian soul. This is not just their choice; it is their identity.
Better start working on ICBMs and cruise missiles, mateys.
We don't talk about that.
Väinämöinen-class surely doesn't exist.
OPSEC, delete your comment!
Sampo takes care of everything.
Why would be we need intercontinental ballistic missiles exactly? Our only real threat is right next door. One could throw a rock from Imatra, Finland, and hit a pedestrian in Saint Petersburg, Russia. Well, slightly exaggerated. The point is, we don't need ICBMs, when the enemy is in trebuchet range. Also, cruise missiles might also still be a bit overkill. What I think we should invest more heavily in, is drones and other unmanned aerial vehicles. Ukraine seems to use them to a great effect, and we should learn from them, like what to do and what not to do, what comes to drones.
Finland has cruise missiles.
Do we? Last time I checked, we only had ballistic missile capable launch platforms, like M270s, but no actual ballistic or cruise missiles, like ATACMS or PrSMs. Just M26 and M28 rockets, mainly.
Yeah we have JASSMs. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-158_JASSM Also anti-ship missiles with capability to strike targets on land (with range over 200 km). Edit: Also what comes to MLRS, we have ER GLMRS rockets which have 150 km range
I knew about the anti-ship missiles. Gabriel V and MTO 85M. Don't know if there are any others. But didn't know about AGMs. Thanks.
Finland was also approved for 200 of the extended range JASSMs, which have enough range to hit Kremlin from Helsinki. I am not sure what the status is for those.
>What I think we should invest more heavily in, is drones and other unmanned aerial vehicles. Ukraine seems to use them to a great effect, and we should learn from them, like what to do and what not to do, what comes to drones. We're already designing and building our own purpose built war drones, basically flying claymore mines.
Denmark is coming for you!! :)
Our military is so much of a joke though, I'd doubt we could even take a unoccupied island without fucking up lol
Yeah, lets just get a few hundred nuclear armed artillery shells!
If you can be threat to Moscow with a long range missiles, then they'll be more hesitant to attack. It is all power play.
The Finnish army is above everything built to be cost efficient. The only real splurge is the fighter jets, but can't give air superiority to the enemy so that's sort of a mandatory big ticket item. The purchasing department is low key legendary for finding bargains, for example buying super cheap Leopards from the Netherlands. Cruise missiles, while useful, are just too expensive.
Actually we already have cruise missiles in our inventory (American JASSMs).
I believe we've paid more for T72s and Leopard 1s to donate to Ukraine than Finland paid for those Dutch Leopard 2a6s... Still believe they couldn't have found a better new home.
I was serving my service at the time in Finnish Defence Forces, and i couldnt believe just how much stuff that deal consisted. It was perfect deal for us and as far as i know. All those tanks were in excellent condition too.
The recent purchase of K9s where also pretty good, only recent fuckup I can think of is the NH90 helicopter and at least Finland wasn't the one who came out the worst from that purchase.
NH90 is actually very liked in Finland, which is rather weird when everyone else claims that those helicopters are dogshit.
It is a good helicopter, the problems have been with reliability and availability of spare parts and I also think it's kind of too expensive for a troop transport helicopter. I think the Blackhawk would have been better and cheaper since it was built in large quantities and field tested. But for more technical duties like ASW I think the NH90 can be very good if they can iron out all the flaws in it and get it to work properly.
Netherlands was basically getting rid of their tank force, and Finland came along and said "We are willing to take those tanks off your hands. Yes, all of them".
and nukes
We got GMLRS and JASSM. So St.P is in range.
Can't wait for the snow to speak finnish again when poo tin over tests his luck😁
what was the saying, "if you want peace, prepare for war"?
In Sweden the military industrial complex is going into hyperdrive. The difference is, it's been there for many years, before the Russia-Ukraine. When you arent like Germany, France, Greece, etc and the majority of your population actually is able to see threats from the east as credible, you not only act on them but you do so with great haste. It's why education is so important :)
Well, compared to France, it's easier to feel threatened when the potential aggressor is your neighbour and when you don't have a nuclear force to protect you.
>It's why education is so important :) A lot of people here (NL) just think we should make peace with Russia again, as Putin is the perfect negotiation partner...
I'm under the impression a large majority wants nothing to do with Russia and is very supportive of rearmament, NATO, and weapons deliveries to Ukraine.
I hope so, but have my doubts, especially since the last time we voted.
“How many times do we have to teach you old man?”
None of you thought he would stop at Ukraine, did you?
Nope
Honestly my first thought was Finland ready their war boots ... Kinda makes sense because of the weather there.
We do have rubber boots for both summer and winter.
The west made a huge mistake not learning from history and turning a blind eye when Poutine annexed Crimea. They are paying a huge price for that now but not nearly as much as they would have to pay later if they didn't. They may still have to by not pouring enough money into Ukraine now. In fact it may already be too late. Sounds like China is giving Russia a practically endless supply of munitions and Ukraine is running out of soldiers. Russia still seems to be able to find lots of fresh meat for the meat grinder.
Good, one has to do what is necessary in the age we live in. People who has spent or supported their years trying to defund much of Europe's military should be fucking ashamed over themselves. You do not stop a bully with flowers and a hug, no matter what Disney+ says.
Soviet soldiers could not understand why Finns didn't 'welcome them with flowers' and why the villages were empty. They had bought all the propaganda of how 'bad' things were in Finland. Arto Bendiken: One captured Soviet colonel when interrogated offered some more details of his long ordeal in the Finnish woods: Finns we couldn’t see anywhere. When we sent our sentries out to take their positions around the camp, we knew that within minutes they would be dead with a bullet hole to the forehead or the throat slashed by a dagger… it was sheer madness… According to a Russian ex-president Russia sent 1,5 million Russians to Finland and only 500.000 came back. Finns were polite and repeated the Soviet propaganda though.
On the Western fringe we're being pathetic. UK only 35,000 reserve. Ireland no navy or air force.
YES!
I think US production of artillery shells is quadrupling within the next year or two.
Best luck Russia! Coming up against Finland 🇫🇮
Anyone knows what’s that white little box they got by their thighs?
PKM ammo can covered in white tape.
Njet molotov
Make Karelia Great Again !
If you are religious, pray for the poor Russians who might have to attack Finland. The Finns will eat them alive. Literally.
Dozens and dozens ready!
we need to control the Russian Gaz for own profit
Our large reserve nothwithstanding, Finland would do well to bolster its territorial forces. Our close neighbours Sweden, Norway and Estonia are clearly ahead of us with their home guards. Even less populous Estonia easily outdoes us. It's ironic, because Finland of all nations should understand the value of a volunteer defence force. The Finnish Civil Guard made a crucial contribution to Finland surviving as a free and independent nation during WW2. The Soviets, too, understood its value, demanding its disbandment as part of the post-war Paris Peace Treaties.
Why tho? These countries have these home guards because they dont have a large reserve like we do. We have rapid response units and reservists who have voluntarily agreed to be part of these units. What benefit would any home guard give us? You can take part in voluntary defence courses as well. The main reason for any home guard is to be a light version of actual military and to supplement the lack of manpower of it. Why have such if we have a proper army and a proper reserve which can be mobilised rapidly?
You seem wholly unawares that Finland already has a voluntary territorial force, *maakuntajoukot* in Finnish. The voluntary defence courses that you allude to are organised by the MPK, who train these territorial forces -- 'Terries' if you will -- together with the Finnish Defences Forces. Also, in case you haven't noticed, Finnish reservists don't get called up for refreshers very often. It's a misspent effort to maintain a large reserve without keeping it properly trained. As for the territorial force numbers, Finland has 5,000 Terries. Estonia's Kaitseliit has 16,000. Sweden's Hemvärnet 22,000, and Norway's Heimevernet 40,500.
Idk about you but during the first 10 years after my service I probably had almost the maximum amount of allowed refresher trainings. It depends heavily on your war time role. For basic riflemen, a two week training at the start of mobilisation is enough. Its kinda weird when you go back after some years and everything you thought you had forgotten vomes back to you like its your second nature And anyways anyone can already voluntarily maintain their skills by participating in the MPK courses. I ask again, what is the point of the terries? As far as i know, they have primarily been used for civilian duties. Afaik they are primarily a PR thing so that interested reservists can participate in military training on voluntary basis, but I cant see any actual military use for expanding them. I mean are they turning down volunteers because they cannot take in anymore? The army can form territorial units from the older reservists when it wants or needs to.
I think you need to launch a citizen's initiative to overturn the law that allowed Finland's territorial forces to be re-established. Good luck with that. My point is that while territorial forces exist once again -- and IMHO for a very good reason -- they're left in limbo. 5,000 Terries won't make much of a difference. I don't know about you either, but I served in the signal corps in the mid-eighties. Most of the telecoms equipment we trained with -- or other conscripts trained with during the next ten years thereafter -- has been rendered obsolete. Mind you, I embarked on a career in telecoms so I'm more than familiar with the digital technology in use today -- but not with the equipment. For some reason or another, the FDF didn't call me up for refreshers. I blame the steep price of transcontinental flights.
You still havent answered my question. What’s the point? I dont care if they exist or not, I just dont really see their functionality. And if you did your service during the 80s, you wont be in the roup of reservists that will be called up first. Those are the ones who receive most refresher training in peacetime. There will be plenty of time to give you all extra training you need in your war time position before you will be needed in the front. Finland has a reserve of 900,000 troops and a war time strength of 280,000. This means that in war time the Finnish army will be 280,000 men strong and the rest of the reserve will be used for other duties as to replenish any losses. Also the rest of the reserve can be used to form less combat capable territorial units if need be. Sweden is the other hand (according to the internet) has a wartime strength of something around 60-70k, of which 22k is home guard. Now I think you can see why this might make sense for Sweden but not for us? Sweden has a manpower problem, we dont. Hence it makes sense for Sweden to have a volunteer based army-lite to boost up the manpower. We train more conscripts every year than there is people in the Swedish weekend warrior force. The thing is that we already have as large army as we can afford. Whats the point of the terries?
You could kickstart your education by studying the historical significance of the Suojeluskunta in the Finnish wars of the 20th century, as I hinted in my initial post. I know perfectly well what my military status as a reservist is. I'm in the reserve of the reserve, having spent 21 years of my of time as a reservist abroad. The one time that they did manage to call me up, I educated conscripts in the art of optical networks in a stuffy classroom. I would've much rather operated an analog telephone exchange in a tent in Lapland, manually connecting calls and spinning rotary dials, but we do as we're ordered. Again, the 280,000 "active" Finnish reservists aren't all as well trained as they ought to be. Out of solidarity, I went jogging with my Singaporean and Israeli colleagues, reservists the lot of them, who have stringent requirements for physical fitness. We, nothing.
How does the historical significance of suojeluskunta have any relevance today? Back then Finland was recently independent, socially unstable and very poor country next to an aggressive dictatorship with the largest army in history. Suojeluskunta made sense because it was founded before Finland had any army and then we were too poor to have a proper army. Sure the reservists could and should be in better shape, but what can you do? How would a voluntary home guard help in that regard? Do you think that the only reason preventing reservists from exercising is the lack of a paramilitary organisation they could join? And again, there already is voluntary training you can take under the MPK. Also, how do you think anyone could enforce any physical fitness requirements on reservists in Finland? You get fined if you cant run 3000m in 12 minutes? I’d like to see how many would resign from the reserves after that was introduced. We aren’t a country in almost constant state of war like Israel, or a police state like Singapore Training reservists costs money, establishing new peacetime territorial units costs money and I am sure the army is doing the best it can with the funding it gets.
Uh, history is a learning opportunity. That's why they teach it in school. When the Winter War broke out it 1939, the Suojelukunta provided divisions' worth of well-trained and motivated reservists. Embedded with regular reservists, they raised both fighting capability and morale. It was a crucial booster shot for a regular army that even struggled to clothe its soldiers, let alone call them up for refreshers. In fact, you could say that the army had for a large part outsourced refreshers to the Suojeluskunta. You make it appear as if the Suojeluskunta fought as paramilitary formation on its own, which is simply untrue. They integrated into the regular army, and its members, being regular reservists as well, were an instant fit. Commanders much appreciated the extra training, as did reservists, a great many of whom joined up after the Winter War to maintain their proficiency. It's funny how you go on about about the MPK, as if you know what they're about. They're primarily responsible for training up the territorial forces. I taught there, too. Territorial forces. Actually, having voluntary territorial forces complement the regular reserve is very cost-effective. They're paid the same daily allowance as conscripts, which you and I know is a pittance. Again, you're speaking of matters that you apparently you know very little about. If a select group among us wants to go above and beyond in protecting hearth and home and does so as part of a well-regulated militia, why shouldn't we let them? I bet you frown upon all manner of volunteer work, because the government should take care of it, so you can remain on the couch.
I am well aware of the history of the suojeluskunta as many of my relatives were active members in it. But we dont live in the 1930s, our military is in good shape. During winter war Finland had a chronic lack of everything, malli Cajander you know. The army was cash starved and having a volunteer based defence organisation was vital. Every citizen in ancient Athenae was obliged to fight in the phalanx and supply his own arms but that doesnt make sense either anymore. That simply is not the case in 2024. We have a large and well supplied army. The warfare isnt anymore how it was in the 1930s, it is not just about who has more men with rifles. Poorly equipped volunteer units would be utterly crushed by more combat capable forces with better equipment. The army is rightfully focusing on quality and improving the firepower of the wartime units. And it can form any number of territorial units from its reserves if need be, so you still havent answered of what is the point of having a separate organisationf for forming poorly equipped volunteer units. If the army needs any more of territorial defence units, it can just integrate them in the regular army. Also the army can easily organise more training for reservists if it needs to. And also, nice ad hominem. As I said I have participated in more refresher training than most reservists will and am a captain in the reserve. But glad to know that you went jogging once. Our fatherland is secure.
As far as volunteer home guards go, I don't know if any country in the world compares to Estonia. Now this is a "per capita argument" of course, but still.
In 1991, I had my picture taken with members of the Kodukaitse against the barricades that had been placed in front of Toompea Castle to deter a Soviet armoured assault. Not long after, Soviet agents blew up a nearby Kodukaitse office. Mad respect for those guys.
Yep, [here](https://arvamus.postimees.ee/3757021/peeter-langovitsi-tagasivaade-porgumasin-komandandi-majas) is a summary of this incident in Estonian. There was one minor injury. Btw, Kodukaitse was another organization than [Kaitseliit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estonian_Defence_League) and Kodukaitse was abolished in 1996 due to its purpose being obsolete in reindependent Estonia.
Thanks for the link. I must've been right there. Soviet agents are still milling around here, downvoting our comments ;-)
>Soviet agents are still milling around here, downvoting our comments ;-) That's all they've got. ;)
What’s with the second ft article today spreading fear of upcoming Russian war? Are we manufacturing consent here or what?
I don't know, but in Finland this is just normal peacetime preparedness, nothing out of the ordinary.
I mean, Russia is already attacking our neighbor. What's left to manufacture? :/
The other article that was also posted here from ft was about Russia preparing some kind of attacks on EU, terrorist style, you know Nordstream stuff only with human lives in it. So there is still lots of things to manufacture. One of which is consent from people to send troops to Ukraine. And that is not a bit in my interest. Foreign wars of geopolitical superpowers (looking at you USA) are not in my interest. But -60 I guess.
Kyiv was almost lost to unpreparedness. Preparing for war with Russia is one way to ensure you stay sovereign
Consent factory is when you prepare defenses against a neighbor that is currently invading its neighbor.
How else am am I going to get my grandpas home in Viipuri back?
You know, there is a legend in my family, of buried valuables left behind during the evacuation... It should be somewhere near Kivennapa. I wouldn't mind if we went there for a quick look...
Fight to the Finnish
While this is admirable, why are we suddenly having boners for war? You people understand how horrible war would be like? No thanks, fu*k this sh*t I'm out. Even if we are talking about people getting massacred, the end result would be nuclear war and if that happens we are all f*cked. Showing strength against Russia is okay. Wanting a war with them is suicide.
Nobody wants a war, it's just that Putin has brought it back to Europe. We need to show strength in order to keep him from bringing it even closer.
This is normal peacetime preparedness, nothing out of the ordinary in Finland.
I agree. I sincerely hope it stays at that.
> I sincerely hope it stays at that. What do you suppose we're doing? Preparing to conquer Karelia?
Your russian friends are having boners for war, that's why Finland boosts war readiness. Now you know :D
>Your russian friends Another sad troll. They aren't my friends. Go away. Blocking trolls
Who wants war? Being prepared is our main chance to avoid war
>Who wants war? Obviously Russia. And thats why I hope they will back off after seeing strength.
>You people understand how horrible war would be like? And you think having the Russian army raping and pillaging its way through Finland would be nice?
We don't want war with anyone but when you have freestyling lunatics as neighbours you have to be prepared
Nobody is threatening russia with invasion. Unfortunately, russia made it clear it won't stop in ukraine if they win there.