Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 10/07/2025 2:43:56 PM PDT by NKP_Vet
When Finland joined NATO in 2023, the small Nordic nation brought with it one of Europe’s most comprehensive defense systems, built over decades of preparing for the worst along its border with Russia. Instead of a large standing army, Finland relies on universal conscription, a vast trained reserve pool, and a society where everyone has a role in national defense.
As Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Orpo put it in 2025: “By joining NATO, Finland strengthened its own security, but also the stability and security of the whole Alliance. We have over 1,300 kilometers of border with Russia, but we also have a robust national defense capability based on a conscription system, a large and well-trained reserve, and a strong will to defend our country.”
(Excerpt) Read more at military.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Late last year, they came out with a new comprehensive guide on preparedness:
https://www.suomi.fi/guides/preparedness
“Stop! Don’t touch me there. Cuz this is my No-No Square.”
Finns having fun.
Finland is sparsely populated, would be defending a long border, but also would be expected to fight on its own territory. That is the perfect prescription for having universal conscription with a large reserve Force, but very small mobile active duty forces.
But most of the rest of NATO does not share a border with Russia, So they need professional forces capable of deploying outside the country.
The other factor arguing against universal conscription, particularly for the United States, is that it doesn't really do much good to have all those conscripts if you're not going to have the equipment necessary to put them in the field. This isn't world War II. Military equipment was much simpler and could be produced much more rapidly back then. The sophisticated stuff with which our military currently is armed has much longer lead times for production. So we'd have a massive number of universal conscripts, but without the equipment necessary for them to contribute to the war effort.
well, I wouldnt trust my life with their “Plan”... after all... they have never been attacked.
And If I was a gambling man, I would bet a sum they’d pull a France...
I like the Sweden’s strategy. They were doing FAFO long before it entered the language.
That was proven during their peacekeeping in the Balkans,
Errrr.... really?
You might want to look up The Winter War et seq.
https://www.britannica.com/event/Russo-Finnish-War
Best defense? To cite a quote attributed to Yamamoto, but never verfied: “There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass.”
Have the Ruskies been threatening to invade their country or have been massing troops and hardware on their border recently?
Military equipment was much simpler and could be produced much more rapidly back then. The sophisticated stuff with which our military currently is armed has much longer lead times for production. So we’d have a massive number of universal conscripts, but without the equipment necessary for them to contribute to the war effort.
Relatively small drones can be enormous force multipliers for an armed civilian population.
Drone operators can be useful at home or abroad. Drone operators should be armed with easily concealed firearms, so they can avoid being targets when off duty.
All of this should be connected to communications which will be effective if grid power is down, such as with encrypted Starlink capability.
In February 1940, however, the Soviets used massive artillery bombardments to breach the Mannerheim Line (the Finns’ southern defensive barrier stretching across the Karelian Isthmus), after which they streamed northward across the isthmus to the Finnish city of Viipuri (Vyborg). Unable to secure help from Britain and France, the exhausted Finns made peace (the Treaty of Moscow) on Soviet terms on March 12, 1940, agreeing to the cession of western Karelia and to the construction of a Soviet naval base on the Hanko Peninsula.
Finland-all you need to do is watch the movie “Sisu”. Says it all. The sequel is expected to come out in November. Looking forward to seeing it.
Just think of the Clint Eastwood flicks in the 70’s-nostalgic.
Finland has never been attacked?
Did you really intend to say that?
“well, I wouldnt trust my life with their “Plan”... after all... they have never been attacked.”
Finland has never been attacked?
ok... they were attacked and their plan didnt work... Is that better?
not in the last 50 years... and I didnt know about the 1939 attack by russia, but I was right they basicly ended up surrendering to Russian demands.
My point being, all those little countries trying to butch up and wear big boy pants should just stfu and mind their own business...
The Finns shall inherit the earth.
Their plan killed approximately 150,000 Soviet troops, approximately 6 times the number of Finish troops killed.
They gave up about 11% of their territory, but survived as a nation.
They did not surrender to Russian demands. As others mentioned, Russia paid a high price for the land it took.
Finland earned a reputation in that war against the mighty and unstoppable USSR.
Russian losses
126,875–167,976 dead or missing
188,671–207,538 wounded or sick
5,572 captured
1,200–3,543 tanks
261–515 aircraft
321,000–381,000 total casualties
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.