Russian invasion of Finland Possible?

Hello,

I was wondering, would a Russian invasion of Finland be possible, similar to the one in Crimea?

Keep in mind Finland is not a member of NATO and Finland had been part of the Russian empire for 100 years..

What is the likelihood of that happening?

No it's not precisely because it's not a member of NATO. There is nothing to be proven..

Ahh forgive me..

Not invasion but rather "spontaneous uprising against fascist Ukraine."

That being said, there wouldn't be an invasion of Finland, though it may well be in Russia's strategic interest to get it back? It is after all very close to St. Petersburg... and it once was a part of Russia.. same as Alaska I guess..  

And given the state of their military I doubt they could pull off another Winter War style defensive campaign?

DostoevskyRasputin wrote:

"spontaneous uprising against fascist Ukraine."

That is correct but you are just trolling...

Im really not.. Im genuinely curious about Finland and war... OK with Alaska I was sorry...  

DostoevskyRasputin wrote:Im really not.. Im genuinely curious about Finland and war... OK with Alaska I was sorry...  

I don't believe you.

DostoevskyRasputin wrote:Hello,

I was wondering, would a Russian invasion of Finland be possible, similar to the one in Crimea?

Keep in mind Finland is not a member of NATO and Finland had been part of the Russian empire for 100 years..

What is the likelihood of that happening?

Again, you seem to project American foreign policy on other countries.
NOT EVERYONE is in the business of invading foreign nations, you know.

Oh, BTW:

Iraq with its hundreds of thousands civilians killed...THAT'S an invasion;
Crimea, with its referendum to join Russia - THAT'S NOT an invasion.

My opinion of course.

Im not saying the war in Iraq was justified..

But it did have some basis in international law (i.e Sadaam not letting inspectors in to inspect his plants, as required by treaty).

As evil as he was, if he survived, the USA would not be quite so worried about Iran. While I disagree with the war, I think its kind of a good thing Sadaam is not in power anymore.

So Im guessing no Finnish war then? Makes sense

Is Finland full of people who consider themselves Russians, like Crimea?
Does Finland host the Northern Fleet?

No, no, and to answer your question, no.

dino00 wrote:

DostoevskyRasputin wrote:

"spontaneous uprising against fascist Ukraine."

That is correct but you are just trolling...

No, it is not.
Ukraine is not a fascist state.

Repeating what the Russian propaganda machine has been blaring does not make it anymore true.

Im not saying the war in Iraq was justified..

No, what you are saying is that the west can invade a dozen countries in the last 20 years for little or no real reason but Russia accepts the referendum result of the Crimea and allows it to join its federation as a democratic and legal process and you call that an invasion.

I guess you must think the west is worse than Stalin.

But it did have some basis in international law (i.e Sadaam not letting inspectors in to inspect his plants, as required by treaty).

Saddam was fully cooperating with the inspectors. It was the US that was using inspections to try to kill Saddam that was the problem.

Look it up.

As evil as he was, if he survived, the USA would not be quite so worried about Iran. While I disagree with the war, I think its kind of a good thing Sadaam is not in power anymore.

So murder is OK with you too? Three of Saddams defence lawyers were executed with him... what sort of legal council do you think he got?

Interesting you think it was Americas decision as to who was in power in Iraq.

So Im guessing no Finnish war then? Makes sense

You might as well ask if an invasion of Austria is on the cards... would be just as pointless.

Glad you asked though... you clearly have the view of most neocon idiots... you can be our weather rock.

I am sure that by your opinion this was all staged even to the point of Putin offering far too much aide so the legitimate leader of the Ukraine would refuse the much lower but actually genuine offer from the EU.
He knew the west could not stand for that and would throw him out of power and in the ensuing chaos will annex the Crimea and split the Ukraine in two so they can get land access to Moldova... except who knew the Ukrainians would be so dumb as to overthrow a legitimate government with a coup? Because they had the west supporting them and the west doesn't wait for legitimate elections or real democracy.

remember the last demonstrations in the UK an US... no problems with police violence then... Of course in the Ukraine the government didn't issue bullets so those killed had to be killed by someone wanting to overthrow the government... of course they shot people on both sides... if I was supporting the coup I would be looking very hard at the pro coup people killed... were they moderates in someones way?

Would make it pretty obvious to work out who did it... even if we didn't have phonecalls confirming it.

TR1 wrote:

dino00 wrote:

DostoevskyRasputin wrote:

"spontaneous uprising against fascist Ukraine."

That is correct but you are just trolling...

No, it is not.
Ukraine is not a fascist state.

Repeating what the Russian propaganda machine has been blaring does not make it anymore true.

Do you know what the original meaning of a fascist state? It means the state is ran by oligarchical big business corporations, bigotry is just a tool to distract the useful idiot plebeians. Ukraine definitively fits the bill, it doesn't necessarily mean it's the "4th Reich" it just means that Chevron gets what it wants, like Ukrainian pipelines free-o-charge.

By that standard Russia is a fascist state.
We even have Il Duce- Putin.

Ukraine doesn't have the strong leader like Russia.

TR1 wrote:By that standard Russia is a fascist state.
We even have Il Duce- Putin.

Ukraine doesn't have the strong leader like Russia.

Yes because Mussolini's fascist Italy was supportive and tolerant of 27 official languages, and I'm sure Putin has forged close military ties with Japan and not China...

This is the silliest idea ever. What would Russia achieve by invading Finland?
They already have mutually advantageous economic relations with them, and no military threat.
Finland joining NATO would in fact be the only thing that would increase the threat vs. Finland.

Same goes for Sweden honestly, which is even more heavily being pushed by elites towards NATO...
Despite that they got thru the Cold War vs. USSR just fine while being outside of NATO,
and again, Russia would gain no coherent benefit by invading them,
it is all pushed by the NATO imperialist caste who aren't really worried about "Russian attack on Sweden",
it just part of the project to encircle Russia with NATO, maintain conflict points in Baltics and East, etc.

Remember Norway's EEZ dispute w/ Russia was hyped as a military flash point?
Oh yeah, and then Russia just resolved it diplomatically.
And Russia have committed to resolve the rest of their Arctic claims according to UNCLOS determination.
(which only the US has not, although they don't have an EEZ conflict with Russia, only with Canada)
Gee whiz. Russian Bear slobbering to take over everything by force. Yup.

The Baltics are disgusting with their nazi glorification/denialism and suppression of Russian human rights,
ignoring that when they were formed as independent countries pre-USSR they in fact recognized Russians
as a component people of their countries, so people now speaking Russian is not some USSR imperialism,
but equivalent to Italian people moving to Switzerland continuing to speak Italian, a language of Switzerland.
But honestly, the only thing Russia should do there if things get bad,
is offer to evacuate and resettle all Baltic Russians to Russia,
having 20% of population (concentrated in cities) suddenly leave will mean economic collapse for the Balts.

FYI, Finland apparently vetoed a clause of the EU resolution on the Ukraine which would have blamed Russia for the situation in SE Ukraine. Why would Russia attack one if it's allies within the EU?

This idea is about on par that Russia will soon be invading Transnistria... You know, that has been defacto independent for the last 25 years with Russian peacekeepers guaranteeing that status... Yup, they now need to invade Transnistria. WTF?

Moldova "proper" itself does not really have a strong anti-Russian orientation, it's current government does but it fairly unpopular, and polls show more support for joining Eurasian Union than the EU. That is without counting Transnistrians, so if the Transnistrians were returned to Moldovan body politic (per the official Moldovan position), it would basically mean an ensured, stable pro-Russia/Eurasian Union sentiment. The pro-EU Moldovan faction honestly needs to also expel/ditch Gagauzia in order to hope to have a stable pro-EU support base, and even then there is strong pro-Russian sentiment especially in northern Moldova.

Basically, the "demonize Russia" tactic is avoiding acknowledging that the EU/Romanian-expansionists have no viable "total win" scenario that is not also a win for Russia. I don't really care what the solution there is, Moldova as a whole remaining Russia orientated, or Transnistria and Gagauzia alone joining a Russia-friendly "Novo Rossiya"/SE Ukraine state... Although honestly, the entirety of Moldova staying Russia aligned (keeping Transnistria and Gagauzia, perhaps in a federal state with Russian guarantee) is really the best of both worlds for Moldovan Moldovans because they get the benefits of Russia while also still keeping the Romanian and thus EU citizenship that Romania granted them.

finland's a buffer state, if the russkies invade it they just increase the borders they share with NATO.

collegeboy16 wrote:finland's a buffer state, if the russkies invade it they just increase the borders they share with NATO.

Maybe a LITTLE increase in border with Norway, but mostly just with crypto-NATO member Sweden.
Still a totally pointless idea that could only increase external conflict and harm cooperation, regardless.
It's not like Russia is lacking for natural resources, what would they take from Finland, TREES?
Finland's value is in it's citizens, and occupation would sabotage their productive cooperation that Russia now enjoys.

Total BS.  Finland is supposed to be looking at buying Iskander-E's FROM Russia, last I heard.
EDIT: Finland turns from ATACMS to Iskander-E

TR1 wrote:

dino00 wrote:

DostoevskyRasputin wrote:

"spontaneous uprising against fascist Ukraine."

That is correct but you are just trolling...

No, it is not.
Ukraine is not a fascist state.

Repeating what the Russian propaganda machine has been blaring does not make it anymore true.

Ukraine is ruled by a fascist elite, not all Ukraine is a fascist state obviously.

Can you give exemples of Russia propaganda...
The opposite is in this topic and you obviosly have saw.

mutantsushi wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:

TR1 wrote:By that standard Russia is a fascist state.
We even have Il Duce- Putin.
Ukraine doesn't have the strong leader like Russia.

Yes because Mussolini's fascist Italy was supportive and tolerant of 27 official languages, and I'm sure Putin has forged close military ties with Japan and not China...

Ukraine has an illegally appointed President giving illegal commands to military to use against Ukrainians, the illegal President is directing paramilitary "National Guard" forces also illegally formed, etc.  Tell the resistance in SE Ukraine it doesn't have a "strong leader".  Illegal coup government wholly deriving it's "legitimacy" on nationalist basis, in essence.  German Nazi also squabbled amongst each other, Night of Long Knives, etc.  Japanese fascists as well.

I am sympathetic to TR1's criticality to Russian government and authoritarian tendencies,
but casting it as fascist while denying events in Ukraine is absurd.  I get that 2 wrongs don't make a right,
but whitewashing the Kiev coup doesn't really change or improve things in Russia at all,
constantly attacking Russia over anything (real or not) destroys the credibility of any real valid criticism
which I agree should have the space to exist and effect a change.  Russia COULD go fascist,
but painting it into a corner over unfounded double standards is not the way to avoid that course of events.

My issue I had with him is that he claims that the neo-nazi's don't have a huge presence in Ukraine and it's simply "Russian propaganda", except that back in January there was 15,000 member rally in Kiev honoring Stephen Bandera:

15,000 Ukraine nationalists march for divisive Bandera

KIEV, Ukraine (AP) — About 15,000 people marched through Kiev on Wednesday night to honor Stepan Bandera, glorified by some as a leader of Ukraine's liberation movement and dismissed by others as a Nazi collaborator.

The march was held in Ukraine's capital on what would have been Bandera's 105th birthday, and many of the celebrants carried torches.

OPINIONLINE: Ukraine unrest shouldn't be ignored

Some wore the uniform of a Ukrainian division of the German army during World War II. Others chanted "Ukraine above all!" and "Bandera, come and bring order!"

However, many of Bandera's followers sought to play down his collaboration with the Germans in the fight for Ukraine's independence as the leader of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, Ukraine's foremost nationalist organization in the first half of the 20th century.

Bandera, who died 55 year ago, remains a deeply divisive figure in Ukraine, glorified by many in western Ukraine as a freedom fighter but dismissed by millions in eastern and southeastern Ukraine as a traitor to the Soviet Union's struggle against the occupying German army.

Bandera was a leader of Ukraine's nationalist movement in the 1930s and 1940s, which included an insurgent army that fought alongside Nazi soldiers during part of the Second World War. Bandera's supporters claim they sided with the Nazis against the Soviet army, believing that Adolf Hitler would grant Ukraine independence.

Ihor Mykolaiv, one of Wednesday night's torch bearers, described Bandera as a man "who fought for the country, the faith and the ideals," but insisted that "Bandera never was on the Germans' side."

However, Bandera did collaborate with the Nazis and receive German funding for subversive acts in the USSR as German forces advanced across Poland and into the Soviet Union at the start of the war.

He fell out with the Nazis in 1941, after the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists declared Ukraine's independence, and he was sent to a concentration camp.

Bandera won back Germany's support in 1944, and he was released. The German army was hoping the Ukrainian insurgents could stop the advance of the Soviet army, which had regained control over much of eastern Ukraine by then. Bandera set up a headquarters in Berlin and oversaw the training of Ukrainian insurgents by the German army.

His group also was involved in the ethnic cleansing that killed tens of thousands of Poles in 1942-44. The Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists portrayed Russians, Poles, Hungarians and Jews — most of the minorities in western Ukraine — as aliens and encouraged locals to "destroy" Poles and Jews.

Bandera was assassinated in 1959 by the KGB in West Germany.

In January 2010, less than a month before his term in office was to end, Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko posthumously decorated Bandera with the Hero of Ukraine award. That led to harsh criticism by Jewish and Russian groups. The award was annulled by a court in January 2011 under President Viktor Yanukovych.

Kiev has been the scene of massive pro-European protests for more than a month, triggered by Yanukovych's decision to ditch a key deal with the European Union in favor of building stronger ties with Russia.

The nationalist party Svoboda, which organized Wednesday's rally, was one of the key forces behind the protests, but other opposition factions have said the Bandera rally is unrelated to the ongoing protest encampment in central Kiev.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/01/01/ukraine-bandera/4279897/

About this invasion of Finland and the thing about us joining NATO, my countrymen formerly opposed nato, but after the recent events, the support for nato has risen quite high and there are talking of a referendum to join nato. Not that i support it of course.

The only reason to invade Finland is a direct military thread to Russia. Threat to Leningrad (Saint-Petersburg now) was a cause of war for the first time, but it was a long time ago. Nowadays Russia has really small military force near Finland's border (only two mechanized brigades iirc plus artillery, support andd AA brigades), and finns are our good neighbours (one of the best, actually). So everything can change only if someone will want to make a NATO outpost upon Finland's soil.

Ukraine doesn't have the strong leader like Russia.

I'm afraid, Ukraine as an independent state dosen't have any other national idiology than hatred towards Russia (with no actual reason) and it dosen't have any other national hero other than a nazi collaborator scum like Bandera