American Reacts NATO Are Finland and Sweden Military Ready For War with Russia?
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 06. 2024
- Original Video: • Are Finland & Sweden P...
Discord: / discord
Watch stuff and learn and chill hi whatsup ⚔️👋🧐
Hi everyone! I'm an American from the Northeast (New England). I want to create a watering hole for people who want to discuss, learn and teach about history through CZcams videos which you guys recommend to me through the comment section or over on Discord. Let's be respectful but, just as importantly, not be afraid to question any and everything about historical records in order to give us the most accurate representation of the history of our species and of our planet!
Having a diverse perspective is crucial to what I want to achieve here so please don't hold back! I want to learn about all I can! Keep recommending and PLEAESE join my Discord :) ( / discord )
Patreon: / mcjibbin
#sweden
#finland
#nato
#russia
#military
#alliance
#task&purpose
#American
#McJibbin
#History
#AmericanReacts
#Reaction
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
Russian aggression came first, learn their history man. Think about how they’ve taken over territory in the past. They were also allied with the Nazis and took half Poland. They have a history of territorial expansionism
I facepalmed when he said that I literally couldn’t tell if he was serious and when I realized he was I’m thinking has he not studied Russian history?
In Europe they have been extremely expansionist for far longer than nato has. What came first? Easy Russian expansion.
I changed my mind ur right. Clearly Russia was acting in a way that warranted NATO action
Look if you want to be informed about russian Ukraine war you can see history legend and defence politics Asia channels here on CZcams not this gay how is making propaganda
You could say the same about western Europe. But their territorial aggressions weren't against Europeans, so who cares about them.
@Alexei Smirnoff Russia felt threatened by small Baltic states?
What do you think the Baltic states feel about decades of Russian occupation?
Do they not have a right to seek the safety of a defensive alliance?
280 000 doesn't include the age old reservists. Finland has 900 000 total trained reserves (men and women under 60) and _THAT_ does include all the age old reservists.
Also surveys indicate Finnish conscripts are highly motivated
Yes, but 280k is most realistic number. Pulling people from reserve is also slow which can take weeks before they're in full gear. Not to mention potential gaps in training.
Reason for that is the fact that for example reservist rifles (Soviet/German/Chinese AKs) have to be picked up from various hidden locations.
@@perkeletto640 Highest among Europeans and very high also globally speaking. Oh and having 280K wartime actives + 900K war time reserves also means that we have insanely large army potential for our population size. It is in comparison notable that too.
@@UltraCasualPenguin 700 000 is most accurate number if needed. 900 000 and even more is possible but wasted. 700 000 armed soldier is the right number. 280 000 is the number there u have nighvision etc. etc.
@@harrikuusjarvi3795 What is probably going to happen is that up to 280 000 will be fighting at the front/in the air/at sea and reinforcements/replacements are going to come from that remaining 600 000 or so, keeping the fighting strength topped up.
Behind the front, there is also a need for troops; for logistics, security etc. This would be mostly handled by reservist troops, not by the 280 000.
Swedish and Finnish are totally different languages and one can't understand the other. But in Finland, along the coast line, quite a lot of Finns speak Swedish as their mother tounge. The Finnish language is more related to Estonian and, to a lesser extent, related to Sami and Hungarian, while Swedish, Norwegian, Danish, Faroise and Icelandic are related to old Norse. As being from Western Götaland, Sweden, our way of pronounciation is quite close to the Bokmål in Norway. I can understand Swedish, Norwegian Bokmål and Nynorsk quite easy and also Danish with a lesser extent. I can read Icelandic and Faroise (aswell as Dutch and German) but can't understand their spoken languages. If I tried to read Finnish, though, I wouldn't understand a word. Listening to the Finnish language is like hearing a secret fairytale language to my ears.
Thanks. Good information.
Swedish as German and Danish and Duch and English are Germanic languages.
Finnish is not but has some 5000 words from Swedish being a part of Sweden for 600 years.
PS. even small children learn Finnish easily.
Well Finnish and Swedish are two official languages in Finland and must to learn in schools. So WTF you can't understand Swedish...??
@@electricglitter6136 To clarify what Tony said about "I can understand" is not normal. The typical swede can read danish and norwegian to a very high degree. Understand spoken bokmål very well, nynorsk good and danish okay. I've never ever met a swede who can read or understand spoken icelandic, dutch or german at any capacity without studying the languages. Its quite proposterous in fact. Now if you start studying, it would be easier to learn icelandic than finnish without a doubt.
Same!
Finland has a secret weapon Sisu, a spirit to never give up.
Fuck thats cringy as most of finnish army is gay and woke + somali.
While the _Scandinavians_ still have the *Viking* in them! (They never gave up, either.)
The 280,000 was incorrect information about Finnish wartime troops. Conscripts are not counted because they are under training.
The peacetime conscripts brigades (and brigade-sized regiments) are training units and would not deploy in the field in wartime, though they will oversee the mobilisation of the wartime units. The Finnish Defence Forces reserve comprises approximately 900,000 Finnish citizens. The wartime strength of the Finnish Defence Forces is 280,000 soldiers, and this strength is resupplied by other 620000 reservists as applicable. Some 27,000 conscripts are trained annually. Active Reserve is 900000 and Active Service is 23000 (civilian & professional soldiers) And in 2020, the Finnish conscripts were ranked at the top of European armies in terms of motivation and skills. Fairly accurate information about all the world's armies can be found on Wikipedia. With an arsenal of 700 howitzers, 700 heavy mortars and 100 multiple rocket launchers, Finland has the largest artillery capability in western Europe. A large part of Finns can converse or even understand Swedes because Finland has 2 official languages, Finnish and Swedish. A Swede probably doesn't understand a Finn who speaks Finnish. Where do some of the McJibb's information come from? When there are so many guesses or wrong information.
i know right its so annoying watching something and knowing they got it wrong telling it to so many people
Task & Purpose only mentions old stuff in our artillery, ignoring AMOS, K9 Thunder, US MLRS, long range guided precision munitions etc.
Also “conscripts with poor training and morale”. That might be true in the US. Come live next to Russia and see how it goes.
Yep pretty sad how he neglected all that.
However I don’t think for example a North American can understand the mentality of nations and people in those nations that exist beside expansionist countries.
Yeah, that video was first time i saw anything from them and got them immediatly on the list of "channels i wish not to see ever again". Not the slightest bit of work in research were put in the video
IIRC he apologized in a later video for not understanding how the Finnish Conscript system is a "little different" from those of most other countries.
The Finnish military is the result of careful planning. We specifially have the defense forces.
The force that defends Finland.
We have not reduced our defense readiness like many countries, but on the contrary increased it.
Besides our army has many secrets that are not visible in the official informations. 😉
Greetings to our brothers in Sweden and Estonia. 👍
-Finnish special forces soldier
Greeting from Sweden. "Finland sake är vår sak." "Finnish cause is ours". Has been since WW II, even if we didn't have a army that could even defence our self in the beginning of WW II, but was much better in the end.
It's necessary we cooperate; there's no room for national individual pride that prevents a solid defence against a threatening giant to what is still countries around the Baltic w free speech and peace.
And we back you up !
As a Finnish artillery man I have a few things to say about the artillery of Finland. Like the video said we have a lot of old soviet era artillery pieces, but they aren't inaccurate. We take every step possible to make them as accurate as possible and we regularly repair and maintain them. The main force of the artillery are Finnish made howitzers like the one I was trained for 155 K 83-97. That gun is rather old and my battalion was one of the last ones to be trained for this gun. New conscripts are trained for the newer 155 K 98. there are still units trained for older guns but I believe Finland is aiming to use more modern stuff.
Finland is also heavily invested in the South Korean K9 "Thunder" self propelled howitzers. Finland just ordered more of them. I don't remember the exact numbers but I believe that after the purchase Finland has 98 of them. There are also different self propelled howitzers with lower calibers in use. Plus the AMOS mortar but there are not many of those.
TLDR: This video did not do the Finnish artillery justice imo.
Also the FInns will never give up, we fight to the last man. one man once said: "If we don't have independence, we have nothing."
ok. ok. Finland can rise 280.000 troops within days and over 900.000 troops in less than month. video is wrong. Finland didn't fight against Russia in WWI, but 2 times against Soviet Union during WWII. god damn this video is inaccurate. stupid video.
True true
I’m English and this guy has annoyed me. Very arrogant to ignore the will of the people… look at Russian, militarily capable… the army has no will, no allegiance, ill trained and equipped…. A lost cause from day one…. Nuclear is their only decisive option and the Russians know it.
@@silentauditor9513 i mostly meant video he is reacting for, but sure he should know better.
Finnish belongs to the finno-ugric language group, unlike Swedish etc.
Closest language is Estonian and it’s somewhat understandable.
Hungarian has similar roots but is totally unintelligible to a Finnish speaker.
Yes - and Russian and other Slavic languages are in fact more related to English in language family trees - than to Finn. And that said, Swedish too is in a way related to English. Those tongues rooted to populations moving in the European areas from the times about 4K or so years ago when agriculture arrived to Europe. The existence of Finnish in the area is older. Finnish and for example a group of peoples from northern Spain have linguistic relations to the hunter gatherers who existed in Europe and Eurasia before agriculture arrived. Even Sauna has archaeological history of about 9K years.
But many Finnish people understand Swedish.
@@user-lv6rn9cf8m That’s because everyone learns it in school. Also about 6% have Swedish as their mother tongue and we are officially a bilingual country.
@@tonikaihola5408 Yup, also the whole Swedish-Finnish thing which Swedes think sounds old fashioned. Like if you know history, obviously it's this way in a country that used to be Eastern Sweden.
@@lyrigageforge3259 Your history is a little off. Ofcourse, European hunter gatherers was here from way before 10K year ago.
About 9K years ago neolithic Anatolian farmers (genetically identical to modern Sardinians) migrated in to Europe.
First trough the Mediterranean then expanded north over the next couple of thousand years.
This coincided with the hunter-gatherer populations collapsing but they later rebounded somewhat in the north after a few K years.
About 6K years ago the Yamnaya/steppe-pastoralists (proto-Indoeuropean) (first to use horse & oxcart)
started to expand from east of Ukraine toward central Europe and northward (creating the corded ware culture) and also expanding south and east.
Eventually controlling all of Europe as well as Iran and India to such an extent that all those land became one language family (except urgo-finnic/basque).
Hence why it is called Indoeuropean language group.
The exact origins of basque is a mystery. Could also be a derivative of neolithic Anatolian.
Hmm, some Finns do know Swedish, they had to study it at school, it's the second official language in Finland
Hmm, actually some where around 5-10% of the Finns have Swedish as their first language. Like Linus Thorwalds, the programmer that made Linux. And his father was Finn EU parliamentarian for Finland. And he was also native Swedish speaking. And the Finnish Swedish is a dialect of its own.
Anyone attacking finnland is going to feal the full force of the swedish steal. They will regret ever even thinking it.
"Poorly trained and motivated"..? Ehm.. Hmm.. I suggest you ask that from your own professional militarymen who have trained with our boys. Yeah, do that.
😂😂
F-22 Raptor IS not the same as an F-35. Come on.
Yeah when I saw that part I was like, "hang on a minute".
He even searched for F-31 before that lmfao
I believe this has been commented a million times already, but he has got the numbers incorrect.
The war time manpower of Finland at one time is indeed 280k men.
The reserve is 900k.
900k in such a small country equals EVERYBODY, which means the whole freakin COUNTRY is a one big defence force.
And that number dont include womens. Lotta force was something that take preassure of army.
I'm swedish and as to if I can understand Finnish the short answer is simply no, not at all. As for norweigan I can understand pretty much everything it sounds more like a dialect than a different language. Danish is similar to norweigan and swedish but the issue is that it's difficult to understand them because they speak very differently than norweigans and swedes but if i were to read a danish news article for example then i would understand 70-80 percent. Icelandic is much more difficult to understand as they use a lot of archaic words that isn't used in a broad scale in Scandinavia (By this I mean that the basic swedish, norweigan and danish wouldn't use those words although there are certainly dialects that still use them or a sort of evolved version of those words), the pronounciation isn't that difficult to understand and in that way i would say i could more easily pick out certain words that sound like swedish and therefor get a grasp of what is being said in the conversation than danish. So in a way i can understand Icelandic better than Danish but I could only understand about 30-40 percent if it was written Icelandic where as for Danish I could understand almost everything.
Pretty much if you are from the west or north you understand Norwegian, if you are from the south you understand danish... and if you are from Stockholm, you understand people from åland
Good reasoning why Russian agression came first is that Russia existed 100s of years before NATO existed, the world didnt start post ww2. :P
Yep easy answer too I don’t know how Connor thinks that NATO expanded first when Russia has been expanding forcefully long before NATO existed in fact hundreds of years longer. And NATO is not exactly forcing people to join them either unlike a certain nation called Russia which has repeatedly throughout history.
In the context of Finland and Sweden, the Russian Empire invaded Sweden and annexed Finland.
Finland later gained independence and was again attacked by the Soviet Union during WW2.
@Alexei Smirnoff Putin has publicly said in his speeches he wants to invade former parts of the empire.
Also ignoring let’s say Finland, the Baltic states joined because they were invaded by Russia/USSR, didn’t much like it and didn’t want it to happen again. That’s not NATO expansionism, it’s survival instinct.
@Alexei Smirnoff Also Germany stopped invading countries, Russia keeps doing it.
@Alexei Smirnoff No. Russia was attacking us and other countries way before NATO existed.
Also no one is attacking Russia since WW2 Germany. Russia keeps attacking and bullying its neighbors at every turn.
This was definitly Task and Purpose´s worst episode with pisspoor factcheck done..
1:20 Looks like a SAAB Trackfire Remote Weapon Station which is available as an option on the CV90 you also see it on the CB90 at 29:24
22:00 Swedes, Danes and norwegians can usally understand eachother because they are all north-germanic languages. However Finnish is a completly different language with almost no similarities when it comes to language as the other scandinavian countries.
No Finnish and Swedish are completely different languages, like comparing English to Japanese, only languages which are related to Finnish are Estonian, Hungarian and some minority languages in Russia most of which are almost extinct.
I would like to know exactly what you think Nato started? That is just ridicilous.
The reason why NATO expanded so quickly, incorporating the Baltic states, Poland, Czechia and Slovakia after the wall fell in the early 90's was due to the fear from those states to be incorporated by force into Russia, like now Russia to do with Ukraine.
yeah those poor signal and logistics conscripts beat u.s. marines in training. so yeah, there's that...
You got so much wrong here, Connor. Does an injustice to your normally decent reactions 😮
@Alexei Smirnoff True, but the information is so off that I have no idea where he even got it..
If Russia had not invaded Ukraine. The NATO question in Sweden would be dead. We had no interests in joining because as blue eyed, blonde and naive we are after 200 years of peace we never thought Putin would do such a stupid thing. But, the war came and we suddenly was reminded of the losses in Poltava and the 1/3 of our country in 1809....
NATO drew first blood. Facts.
@@andcouncil1 no they didn't.
@@maodmifcnr yes they did.
@@andcouncil1 After the cold war Nato reinvented itself to became a world police to force some other nations to behave. Most of the former Warsaw pact nations felt they wanted to join the defence union just in case. Finland and Sweden didn't join Nato during the cold war because Finland couldn't (Peace treaty and Friendship and cooperation-treaty with Soviet Union) and Sweden didn't want to, probably one reason being, that if they had done it, Soviet Union was perhaps going to twist Finlands arm and force them join Warsaw pact. That didn't prevent Sweden making close cooperation behind the scenes with Nato countries. After the cold war the Soviet Union threat was gone, and the newborn Russia was seen as a lucrative market area, not a threat anymore, so there was no actual need for joining defence alliance. Things started shifting in Russia after Putin took over. Russia stopped the cooperation with Nato and started to see daydreams to bringing back the "glory days" of the Soviet Union, when everybody "honoured" them (=feared and loathed, but not loved). Now we are in the most dangerous war in Europe, when a nuclear power is fighting a war against its unallied neighbour, so the solution to Sweden and Finland is to join the defence alliance, which is the only way to create a barrier against invasion by force, which does not honour international laws and human life.
@@andcouncil1 no. Its only upon russia. We cant take un resolution to back us up
01:20 I think those spider face looking things are usually marking devices. They focus lasers on a target so that allies can target them easily. A computer controls it and anything from above can calculate the exact distance and location of the target it points. These days bombs aren't just dropped around blindly, but instead after release they can actually follow the target before impacting them.
That Finland has one of the best artillery in Europe part is true. It's not the amount of artillery equipment, it's how we use it... And we have better artillery equipment than that, what was showed in the video, not just older stuff.
If you think about it, Russian aggression came about after Soviet frustrations after the Yalta Agreement in February 1945, which Stalin took actions that would lead to the formation of communist puppets known as the Eastern Bloc, while the creation of NATO was in April 1949...I think you're using the Allies interchangeably with NATO, which is incorrect.
Russian aggression came after Soviet aggression (remember also Winter war and invasion in Poland 1939 and taking over Baltic states) which came after Russian aggression. Russia has always been imperialistic land grabber.
Regarding information about forces equipment in UK there's a series of books freely available called Jane's fighting ships ,Tanks ,Aircraft etc which have comprehensive information on performance/ capabilities .
that guys channel is a good ona, i especially like how he clearyfies everything so can understand (the channel ur reacting to i mean)
The sniper was Simo Häyhä. And it was during the winter war 1939-40 that Simo offically killed 500 russian soldier with his sniper rifle. Unofficially there is numbers upwards 800 as he was just as good with his machine gun. He is still considered as the deadliest sniper ever.
You should check out video Nato: How finland would fight war with russia by Sun. It has facts right about finland and it would correct so many things that were wrong in this video. I still like your reactions and u have new subb 👍
In History Finland was a part of Sweden for 700 years until 1809. When Sweden lost the eastern part of land now called Finland to Russia. Sweden/Finland Has in total fought 32 wars against russia !!. But never on todays Sweden soil. Since then Finland has fought 2 more wars against Russia. So warring the russians is in the Finnish/swedish blood. Despite of being vastly outnumbered Sweden/Finland was quite often also the agressor to Russia. Before 1809 war was almost a business model for sweden going back all the way to the viking era. After 1809 the new king Bernadotte figured out that war as a business was over for sweden. Russia had finally figured out how to beat the outnumbered swedes/finns. Just outnumber the swedes/finns even more. So From then on. Peace, not war, was the swedish business model. And still is.
Bonus history fact for the history nerd. There has been 3 major attempts to conquer Russia. Hitler and Napoleon and before them King Karl XII of Sweden. The russian size and vinter stopped all three of them.
The Warsaw Pact during the Cold War included not just Ukraine and other former Soviet republics, but also countries they "acquired" after WWII (Yalta), like Poland and East Germany. That made the power balance much more uncomfortable, and with their massive buildup of offensive weapons, the tanks and artillery now used in Ukraine, a conventional war was expected to go in Soviet favour initially, but then break down with poor logistics.
Dude 280k doesnt include old etc ,we have around 900k military personel,wartime is 280k.
Greatest sniper is not even fair... 500 kills in a year without optics.... Simo was a crazy talented hunter
And btw we are NOT porely motivated we are higly motivated
Yep. Finnish is totally different animal. And our weapons are much more what u can read.
Have to also add that the conscription system was also in use during the winter war and continuation war back in the ww2. For a smaller country like Finland i really think a conscript army is better than having a large army of career soldiers.
Sweden and Finland have not been neutral countries for decades, just being a member of the EU is a big indicator of that and it would be brave of a country like Russia or anyone else to attack an EU member, especially as we're talking modern countries which every war since the second world war has been modern countries against weaker countries that find it hard to fight back.
With all that said, I see no reason why they shouldn't join NATO, any extra security is always a bonus and it sends a powerful message to countries like Russia, basically, since Russia invaded Ukraine, many countries are showing interest in wanting to join the EU and NATO, which is the last thing Putin wanted because he was trying to extend Russia's power but he's pushing more countries towards the EU and NATO and by extension, the west, which in the longer run is making all 3 stronger.
As for Russia and the threats of nukes, it's just desperation from Putin because western weapons are making life hard for them in Ukraine and that is only going to get worse for Putin in November.
Putin is trying to intimidate countries to back down, it seems to be having the opposite impact and ultimately, if Putin isn't careful and does keep pushing that nuke agenda, I suspect it's going to end with his assassination, either from his top generals or advisors or the Russian people might rise up and depose him, this is Putin's personal war that a lot of Russians are either indifferent too or don't want, if the threats of real nuclear war gets close, Putin would likely get hung by a tree by his own people, hence why the west isn't listening to his threats and keeps supplies going to Ukraine, they are calling Putin's bluff which is backing him into a corner, that's only going to get a lot worse for him as European countries diversify oil and gas away from Russia and end up putting a lot more pressure on China and India to not buy as much from Russia with the aim of isolating Russia and making this war very costly to the country, it's a longer term plan, and the damage to Russia is far higher than the gains they get, the west is playing the long game.
Greeting from Finland. Check your
”facts”.
It's been a while since I saw anybody display such attention to the details. Kudos!
As for why all of that materiel related stuff is public, it's for deterrence, and really, you couldn't hide it anyway. I believe even our past peace treaties require it to be available to the UN, so...
The tactics, the defensive plans in place, those are wholly another ballgame. In that department a Finnish officer would be expected to be as tightlipped or moreso than a US one.
What came first, when you think about it, Russia was already being agressive before Nato even existed, they occupied half of Europe after the ww2 and I doubt any of those countries wanted to be part of the Soviet Union. When the Soviet Union collapsed, naturally many ex Soviet coutries wanted to join Nato to prevent being occupied again.
Yeah idk how he didn’t know that or didn’t consider that.
This is what happened between Sweden Finland and Russia more or less exactly 300 years ago (and now in Ukaraine).
czcams.com/video/XjFglWuwn6g/video.html
Greater Wrath
Finnish is in Uralic language family (Finnic group) that's spoken by smaller tribes in Siberia and Northern Scandinavia such as Mari, Khanty, Udmurt, Vepsian, Sami, Komi etc although Finnish, Estonian and Hungarian speakers make up most of the 25 million people who speak Uralic languages.
Swedish is Germanic language.
And, because the languages are in entirely different language families... The only Finnish speaker would get along more with a Samoyedic language speaker like Nenets (pop. under 50,000) than only Swedish speaker.
However, there's saying which goes as: "Finns KNOW how to speak several languages, but they SPEAK none of them" or something... (smh)
So if the Finn can't speak Swedish, they'll use English instead.
Every country lists their military arsenal. Partly because of international agreements but also because.. the enemy will know anyway roughly how much you have and they don't have to deploy spies, which would cause diplomatic conflicts. It is also a deterrent, so that they don't start attacking too easily. Now, is that all that Finland has.. maybe.. maybe not... maybe there are things underground or not... I really don't know, cause if there was, that would be classified. I doubt they have a lot extra if there is any.
Thinking of the numbers like that is also misleading. Most of the Finnish conscripts who are just on reserve have been on mandatory refresher courses and even people who haven't been in the military probably know their emergency assignment.
Yeah - the Q whether NATO-expansion OR Russian aggression came first...is a real hard nut to crack: it depends on which county you ask.
*Correction: it also depends on whether you'ld include the Russian Empire run by a Tzar, as in up 'til the Russian Revolution, the Soviet Empire and the Russia as it exists today and regard them all as the same 'type' of 'entity' - or not. But either way actually - at least, and especially if we would ask Finland in particular, but very much Sweden as well - Russian aggression have always come first...I'm 48 years old - and I cannot remember a time when we've NOT had our water- and/or air-space, more or less aggressively 'invaded' by Russian military military vehicles (U-boats and different types of planes in particular). Even though it was, at least relatively 'quite' for a while after the collapse of the Soviet Empire.
But, even though the answer would most definitively differ whether you'ld ask any neighboring country of Russia, or Russia itself that Q. Keep in mind that most countries that lies in the vicinity of Russia have either been aggressively attacked, invaded or at least threatened, at numerous occasions though - either way! So - those facts alone I believe speaks very much for Russia being the aggressor. If not exclusively so - at least almost.
And if you'ld ask the people of Sweden or Finland - it's Russian aggression - hands down! As a matter of fact - IF Russia wouldn't have invaded Ukraine - Sweden would most definitively have remained neutral, and I'm quite sure the same goes for Finland. Which goes back to the thing you asked yourself before:
Isn't Sweden's and Finland's geographical location and proximity to Russia to a large part the reason why both of our countries have remained neutral? -Oh, hell yes!
But, with such a highly aggressive and to a large extent irrational and unpredictable Tzar as Putin at the helm of Russia...? Well, yeah - now we're ready to make the 'trade off' of our military 'independence'.
You're quite correct with your thinking, I would say. At least if you'ld ask the people of Sweden and/or Finland. (I'm from Sweden myself - that's why I know!).
And about the languages of Scandinavia: yes, Sweden, Denmark & Norway speak a language of "Nordic Germanic" language-family - and are, to a large extent mutually intelligible. Although, it depends very much from which areas we're talking about - since we've several different dialects in all of the above mentioned countries.
Finland is, as you put it: a whole different animal - it is within the "Finnish-Ugric" language-family.
Although, in 'wors-case-scenario': We all in Scandinavia speak quite good English! ;-)
Connor, check out the history of Åland, that's interesting too
27:23 It was the threat of war/take over that made all former warsaw pact countries to join NATO . So it was the threat of a conflict with russia that made for the expansion .
Eastern border has the forests, marshes, swamps and lakes, and it has hill after hill. West has more flat ground and open fields specially in Ostrobothnia where i live. Lapland has rougher terrain to traverse and long distances meaning long supply lines and bad roads for heavy armored vehicles. We also have "rasputitsa", thawing of the ground in the spring and in the autumn it rains all the time. That leaves winter and summer for the Russians, and they are not as good in the winter, still.
St.Petersburg is at the coast of Gulf of Finland. The Kola Peninsula is only way that Russia can operate in the Atlantic Ocean all year long. And it’s F-35 fighters we all ready purchased with $10 billion. I served as FDF Yeager.
every country knows what the other countries have. It's very easy to find out. But countries actually publish every single new purchase because it has a deterrence effect
In Finland joining NATO was something we do with Swedes or we have to abort the mission. In my opinion Sweden had the same line of thinking it but if they only joined it would've left Finland as a true buffer area.
Fun fact under the cold war sweden was at its military peak and a estimated 850 000~900 000 soldiers
Yes, Ukraine, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Finland and Norway border Russian territory ... so they don't have good paranoid feelings about this long border, that is also way too close to St Petersburg. "Mutiny on the Storozhevoy 1975 Part 1 of 3" ... actual Soviet naval mutiny ... and why the Baltic has been strategic since the time of Peter the Great. Current Russian officer complaints are ... that Putin isn't murderous enough! All of this from the Russian POV is actually feeding their paranoia.
Bot? This comment sorta drones off in semi random directions like a machine learning program wrote it.
@@gang-ridertv5433 This format isn't academic, with point-counterpoint and footnotes ;-) It is stream of consciousness, responding to multiple points by McJibbin, run together (so save space).
You are thinking of Simo Häyhä, 505 *confirmed* kills.
It should not be forgotten that as such a small nation, practically every one of us Finns is a relative of a Winter War veteran. A child, grandchild or great-grandchild. It explains the strong will to defend the country and it has taught us to think and act differently than many other countries in Europe. We have practiced defense since the winter war. In every possible way. And we are ready to defend ourselves if necessary. 🇫🇮🫡
Many comments already point it out, but the finnish 280k is the wartime personnel amount, the actual size of the reserves is 900k, nearly a fifth of the population of Finland because of the conscription model. Greetings from a Finnish reservist, not counted in the 280k but in the 900k.
I like how you bring up the idea of perspective of distance into the discussion. It is indeed very different to call out and act from thousands of miles away like you know how it is like being in Russia's proximity. Imagine subtle coercions of how you will be reprimanded if you behave out of line. Maybe energy will be cut, maybe the threats manifest in more subtle ways, maybe more military bases are set up next to the border, perhaps "the baltics will no longer be nuclear free", which it hasn't been for decades since Kaliningrad already holds nukes. We are kind of used to it. A violation of airspace by a russian military plane? Must be a thursday.
Only 24. feb 2022 wasn't yet another thursday and it kinda shook us all up from a stupor, a dismissive lull we all had gotten used to.
Finland and Sweden's bid to enter Nato is a direct result of Russian aggression, there is no chicken / egg dilemma here. Nato expands by having willing participants join it. Russia expands by imperialism. There is a difference, and Russia would very much love you to miss it.
13:00 there is a video on it but do not know if he survived it.
Well Finland in reality is European artillery power. We have biggest artillery in europe after russia and most accurate one in the world
It's in the first world war. Gone wrong, 1916. When the Tsar was assassinated and Stalin came to power. And first fought, against Hitler. And then had the idea! This is all mine. Greetings from Spakenburg, the Netherlands.
At 6:47. No. It Doesn't. 280k is the operative forces, meaning conscripts who've had their training in the last 5 years, special forces and defence forces staff. The reserves are 700k strong added to that. Most if not all commentators get this wrong, it wouldn't be that hard to google properly and this is why you never trust what channels like Task & Purpose say - they don't actually do research, they google quick facts.
@1:20 not positive what that is but looks like a crow(crew remotely operated weapon). Just a 50cal or auto grenade launcher or some kind of weapon you can use without sticking your head out the top hatch.
Sweden and Finland are long time brothers! We doesnt understand each others. But i dont know if they still do this in Finland, but what i know they studying swedish in school.
Whats comes to icelandic, the swedes can understand a bit. But what they are talking in iceland are like what we talked in sweden 1000 years ago. Really old norse are spoken in Iceland.
Many Finns can understand Swedish well. There is a Swedish TV-channel and Swedish newspapers for the Swedish speaking minority, which lives in mostly coastal area and large cites. They share is around 5,3 % of the population, but in Åland islands their share is over 86 %. Finland officially is bilingual country, so it is studied in schools but for many ordinary Finns they need to actually use the language is small so their ability to speak Swedish is "rusty". Moreover, the Swedish spoken is Finland is a bit different than is Sweden, sounding a little old fashioned dialect with some differencies in vocabulary. Finns, with some knowledge of Swedish can read Danish and Norwegian (if they "pronounce" what they read and pretend they are hearing Swedish) - but understanding spoken Danish and Norwegian not so much.
I am utterly unable to say much anything in Swedish. But then again, I can't speak French either and I live in France these days. I did study Swedish at school (French never), and was horrible at it even then. Imagine someone trying to speak Swedish but managing to say it all and sounding like you were manhandling English. I am a Finn. I had my reasons to not want to learn it. First I hated the teacher, because he was a stuck up rat who told me I could not learn, and telling me that I won't be able to do something does not make me want to even try. I just figured he was not worth my time. And secondly, because it was compulsory. I do think that later it was not for a moment perhaps. But is again or something like that. So I lean on English and if I am in Finland, well - they just have got to speak to me in Finn or English, sry but it has been like 30 years since I had any Swedish. So I could not say anything even poorly. Not that I have anything against people who do speak the language or Sweden - nice lot over all. I just can't say a word in that language. Frankly I got through my high school Swedish test - because of the part to 'understand' the 'spoken tongue'. Except that - I stopped even attempting to listen to the text on the tape entirely, because I realized I knew the topic. And simply, very slowly read through every question and responded to all based on pure knowledge of the actual subject. That part went through with flying colors and I never told the teacher how I did it - he was not worth the knowledge. It literally pay's of to read fully the Tieteen Kuvalehti -magazine during your high school years, because that whole darn test was based on an article from it. And the magazine is in Finn - and those who make our finals do tend to often take topics and subjects for their test questions from somewhere - including that particular magazine.
Jag studerade svenska på gymnasiet men jag tror att jag har glömt allt...
För mig är finlandssvenska en rikare och mer uttrycksfull dialekt än rikssvenska. Ni har behållit många ord vi har bytt till amerikanska. Är rikssvensk.
The F35 is also the reason for Norway's high military budget....
17:00 Me: I wonder if Conner knows about Poland ball/country balls/country humans 🤔
dude ! Not f-22 raptors. We bought f-35 lightning II´s about 60 of them...grrrrrrr 👿 You did get the Canada reference right, we have about 100k lakes.
1:51 Around 500 + i think it was and his name was Simo Häyhä aka white death .
Finnish is a different language branch. Swedish is germanic where as Finnish is Uralic which is in the family with Estonian and Hungarian.
As for the chicken and egg thing, it depends when you're talking about. In response to being asked if Stalin was proud that the Soviets had got to Berlin, he said "Tsar Alexander made it all the way to Paris." which was perceived as threatening. The USSR also promised to hold free and fair elections in the east, and these apparently all chose communist governments that were not at all puppet governments similar to how Russia is acting with regards to the Donbas (As of 30th Sep with their recognition followed by annexation.
Being entirely blunt, both the West and Russians have done bad things and have taken the advantage over the other when they got the chance. Intention is important, the west of all its faults supports democracy unlike Russia.
Love your videos by the way :)
Finnish *is* a whole another animal. It's a Uralic language, and so kind of a language isolate, along with the Samoyedic languages and Estonian (Estonia already being in NATO and across the Gulf of Finland; that's the stronger of the two choke points after accession) . Swedish, Danish, Norse and Icelandic as North Germanic languages are quite a much closer to English than to Finnish. The Nordic culture though is shared, and pretty much everybody over here also wields at least passable English.
12:00 the enemy already know all this. Ivan knows.
Since you are bringin it up.. Over here in Europe the writer Oksana Zabuzjko have gotten a lot of attention for debating/explaining(?) the old relations between Ukraine and Russia in one of her recently released essays "The Longest Journey" (For Western audience..). She said in an interview that we need to go back 300 years to understand what is happening today.. Perhaps that is of interest for you to research..??
The fin snniper you were looking for was simo hayha, and he had 505 killer in a 100 day wow
All military dutys are made in English when communicating to other countries.
In ALL nordic countries.
Thanks bro! This is a bad video, not accurate at all. CZcams is not always the best way to learn facts. But there are some excellent channels by professional military people, like "Combat Arms Channel" hosted by an (active duty) US Marine. He was in Finland in June 2022.
Artillery info is totally wrong. We have produced Tampella 155 mm guns since WW II. And the numbers are wrong as well. Finland has 7 categories of artillery, it totals 1500 pieces. Mortars are in infantry.
5:30. yes he is wrong. Winter up there is totaly frozen.
20:35 The soviet had the number of soldiers and weapons on their side but they were not that advanced while the the US invested in more developed ones that would even out that difference .
Conscripts in Sweden / Finland... get EDUCATED a year or so, they don´t SERVE. Then there are rehersal training now and then, to be moved out of any severe active duty after x number of years and transferred to an easier service.
This one does not have any idea of FDF, war time laws or how total defence works.
Best us sniper got like 160 kills during plenty of years... white death simo was on a totaly other level..
more than ready Russia changed the board or tried to by invading , we changed the players Simo had 505-542 confirmed kills During WWII winterwar 90 days to be exact , without Scope only ironsight Bolt Action , White Death
8o to 120 Million dollars plus $45000 per hour to fly as Gripens are $6000 an hour
CombatBoat90 can also fier RBS15 (Gungnir)
Not only helfier missils...
Amos... Look for CombatBoat90 with Amos on CZcams.
Imagine 25 CombatBoat90 armed to the teeth appears in an archipelago.. One, ore some boats show up but they are really lethal.. and what to do to defend a huge ship when a swarm with lethal two payloads on the boats.
The idea whit a swarm is protected by the swarm.
A big ship with every kind of weapon system just need one hole and everything is gone.
Sweden was outspoken, and didn't have to think about NATO.
Finland was part of Sweden.
About 10% of Finns are native Swedish speaking. Finnish is a compleat different language then old Norse (the language that is the mother language of the other Nordic languages. Yes, Icelanic is more like original Norse, compared to the other languages. So we have problems understanding Icelandic, but it is close enough that we can guess. Swedish, Norwegian and Danish is understandable by each other)
Russia, Putin, threat Sweden and Finland. And yes, Russia took Finland from Sweden 1809. Finland got free when USSR was created.
But yes. Putin didn't want Finland and Sweden in NATO. By threatening Sweden and Finland and said they had veto on our Foreign politics. So THAT was when we changed opinion.
Finnish and Swedish are not related and they are totally different. BUT finns study both swedish and english and swedes study english. So there isn't any problems in communication.
He means F35 not the F22 fighter ,wich can not be sold outside US.
as a swede i understand Norwegian but Danish sounds like they have food on their mouths (i can read danish) and both Icelandic and Finish aren't related to the other Nordic languages so i don't understand it
NATO expansion is wholly dependent on Russian aggression. No nation is forced to join NATO but because Russia has shown aggression they want to be part of that alliance and are free to choose their own alliances.
NATO as such is a defence alliance and nothing else. You'll have to actively attack a NATO nation (which is aggression) for NATO to activate under article 5 so for NATO to be a threat you HAVE TO be the aggressor.
13:00 aight but that right there is not a soviet artillery piece, it's a finnish artillery piece and I can guarantee it stands up to american M777s as well. We do have soviet artillery systems in the stockpiles as well though, so that's not entirely inaccurate. Though I also wouldnt go around saying soviet artillery pieces are inaccurate either.
We don’t count our smallest mortars as part of our artillery force, only our heavy mortars. We have some older soviet artillery but and newer finnish artillery pieces as well. On top of that we have american M270’s quite a lot of them, which is the same system that HIMARS is but on a tracked M2 Bradley chassis and has twice the missile capacity of one HIMARS unit. For self propelled artillery pieces we have old soviet SPG’s byt also 155mm South Korean K9 Thunders.
Also war time strength means 280k that is able to be deployed in a short time. Total trained reserve stregth is 900k. I as a 27 year old man most likely am still part of the 280k. This is not a very well researched video.
Swedish and Finnish are completely different languages, but many Finns either have Swedish as a mother tongue or are required to take it as a second language in school
Still? Has that not been changed?
Poorly motivated? As a Finn i do not recognice that. There is high motivation to protect finland. This is the only reason why whe are applying to nato in the first place.
And our reserve is 900K.
"Vita döden"/"White Death" - Simo Häyhä
1:19 someone proboly answered..... but anyway. That is the old 40mm cv90 prior to the 125 mm upgrade.
Yea.. playground taunt. Finland is the testies. Sweden the dong. Denmark the c**, and Norway the cancer wart.
That Finland "only" got 19k conscripts and that they only serve for a year" is kind of missleading.
Firstly the current conscripts (with a few exceptions) is actually not part of the wartime force. IF there would be war, the conscripts now in, would only sit around until last years conscripts could replace them. I don´t know the details of how it works in Finland. But basically only the last moth of the conscripted education are they considered soldiers.
The conscripts with finished education is reeducated typically for a month, typically 10 years until they are around 40 years of age. (this have been reduced significantly after the cold war, but is ramping up again)
20:40 USA have always been much stronger. But, at least during the 1960 and early 1970, ussr total military strength was unknown and Russian propaganda.had claims of power 3 to 4 times higher than that of USA. Untill sr71 become operational the real scale of ussr military was unknown. Hence most people at the time believed that ussr was more powerful while that was not the case in reality.
Also the idea of swedish and finish neutrality was that attacking those countries would be unnecessary of going after Europe hence not worth it.
But now when Finland and Sweden gives arms to Ukraine, its not really neutral any more.
Russia started expanding in 2023... and nato was formed.in the 1950... so I kind of want to say that russia expanded first
But of cause, that is only true if we call soviet russia and modern.russia the same country.
The issue then is that nato expanded due to soviet russias threat, and then modern russia was threatened by that expansion.
It very much was the soviet staring to make moves. That was even prior to the nazis taking power in Germany.
All of the oss countries was occupied between forming ussr and the start of wwII. That is bastic nation, Belarus, ukraine and so on. Totalt about 15 countries.
All the countries ussr occupied after start of the war was made pupet in stead as part of the peace deal.
Note that baltic nations was invades just month prior to the war.
To be clear.. one expansion is made with violence.. the other is not.
Finnish language is completely different but Swedes speak better English than Americans and and i suspect the Finns do to
that og video is painfully inaccurate and straight false at times... from numbers to everything else. For feels about finnish defense forces check their channel for example this (of course finnish propaganda) czcams.com/video/bTmWCbcYwb8/video.html Battlefield 2020 video on how finnish army would react in case of initial agression.
If war comes to Finland, do not forget expat like Sweden haves 700.000 and many former descended from all around the world, we've an feeling to protecting our fatherland with our life. But we don't do it foolishly. We need to be smart about it, using guerilla tactics. If that happen, I'm sure the entire Finland will think as one. We're nice and calm people, but if someone push us into a corner, what will happen? We will fight back. I'll let the spirit of SISU take over me and I'm willingly to die for my fatherland. I quote an line from the finnish war song "Kauan on kärsitty" (It means in finnish as "Long Have We Suffered"): "If our bodies dies, our souls remain a heritage for our beloved fatherland"
The Soviets were the first to make moves. Nato was created as a response to those moves.
Russia's or the aggression of the Soviet Union existed long before NATO was created in 1949 as a peacekeeping pact, which would create more balance in the world.