Finnish Border Guard boats patrol the waters near Helsinki, April 28, 2015. The Finnish military fired on Tuesday handheld underwater depth charges as a warning against a suspected submarine in waters near Helsinki, an incident that comes amid growing military tensions with neighbouring Russia.REUTERS/Jussi Nukari/Lehtikuva
Felicity Capon, Newsweek: Finnish military preparing 900,000 reservists for 'crisis situation'
The Finnish Defence Forces are to send letters to all 900,000 of the country's reservists at the beginning of this month, informing them what their role would be in a "crisis situation", causing a row over whether such a move is necessary.
Finland, with its population of 5.2 million, has a small professional army of 16,000. Yet in the event of mobilisation, Finland could call on its former conscripts to fight. Finland's wartime military strength is 230,000.
According to local media reports, the decision was announced via a television advert, telling the nation's reservists "We want to have a word with you", and warning former conscripts that "Conscription is the cornerstone of Finland's defence capability."
WNU Editor: I do not see any possibility of a Russian - Finnish war .... but I guess the Finns have decided that it is best to prepare for the worse.
9 comments:
Dare to mess with the bear.
Can Finland win? No.
But there is always the Continuation War.
The Finnish War caused Barbarossa.
Don't get me wrong. Hitler was racist. He wanted to invade. But if the USSR had not look so weak because of the 1930s purges of the military and the resultant fiasco of the Russo-Finish War, Hitler might have put off the invasion in order to build up more. The Russian seeing this would reply in kind. The resulting arms race might have resulted in neither side seeing a decisive advantage and the war might never have happened.
But when a behemoth loses 100,000 troops to the Finns 14,000 troops, you invite unwanted attention.
Hi, finn here and i just want to tell you that that news is just media overreacting and quoting wrongly, like the earlier "finland used depthcharges on russian submarine!"
Those were warning charges, not able to do any damage, just to announce the foreign submarine that hes been spotted.
Also this letter to 900k reservists has been on the works like 5 years allready and now when its on the table, media jumps into conclusions.
Like i said, media bullshut hype about something that is not related.
Nii saatana.
Would be nice if they tossed in a few real depth charges.
They would not have to toss them too near. Just near enough to play mind games with the submariners.
It is not different than letting another plane eat your prop or jet wash.
Anzino,
Lot's of aircraft have gone down after "eating" jetwash and prop wash.
Warning charges make a loud bang, can deafen sonar operators and "blind" the submarine, if one is there.
Actual depth charge runs are highly inaccurate, and you could wind up sinking the sub by "accident".
Then, you not only have a major environmental mess on your hands, if it's a Kilo, or a mini-Chernoble if it's a Kursk,
Plus, a major International incident and a Russian Navy the will want revenge, so all of a sudden, "your" ships might just start running into old WWII mines that have washed up.
Hainan Island incident
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hainan_Island_incident
What are the Russian doing messing with the Swedes or the Finns?
Now that I think about it maybe it low cost, low risk realistic training for them to see how could they are at navigating and running silent.
But Why bother the Swedes? Since about Battle of Poltava they have bothered nobody.
There is a reason there were 2 Latvian SS divisions.
Anzino,
Ever look at a map of the Baltic Sea?
During the Cold War, and after, both Finland and Sweden, (alledged neutrals) participated in NATO/NSA programs to collect intelligence on Soviet Forces, including early in the Cold War, running overflights and Naval intrusions into Soviet Waters, until Soviet SAM and anti- ship missiles made the job too dangerous.
During WWI, the Baltic became "the German Sea", with the Kriegsmarine blocking the British out at the Straights, and overmatching the Russian Baltic Fleet.
During WWII, pretty much the same situation, until the Soviet Baltic Fleet and Soviet Aircraft overmatched the Nazi's.
Which was smart of the Swedes and Finland.
Russia gained territory in WW2. The U.S. did not. Who are you going to trust and who are you going to watch?
There were still people fighting the Russians in Latvia in the mid 1950s.
For the average Russian Joe, WW2 was the Great Patriotic War and it is.
But for the Russian rulers made no apologies and gave no land up that they stole. So who do you trust?
Anzino,
Swedish and Finnish "neutrality" was "conditional". For example, the Government in Finland was neutral, but the Military and Intelligence Agencies cut their own deals with the US and NATO, violating that neutrality and kept it secret from the Finnish Government and the Public.
And then, if you are only "pretend" neutral, why should the OpFor "respect" your non-existant neutrality?
So, just as today, Sweden and Finland run and help run NATO and US intelligence ops against Russia, Russia does the same against them.
Post a Comment