My stepbrother told me Finland had the biggest army in Europe.
Finland has only 24000 soldier active military force. It's true that reserve force is 870 000 but this consists of ordinary Finns whom most had their training (lasting usually 6 months) years or decades ago. The system was designed for defensive purposes (deterrence against invasion) and can't really be compared to any active-duty military forces. Finland has also sent it's weapons, money and other resources to Ukraine like the rest of Europe (i.e depleting stocks that take time to fill up), so the army (basically the whole Europe without US joining) is not a realistic threat for Russia, OSIT.
Maybe it is just me noticing, but there seems to be quite a bit of pro-war hype coming out from the Nordic countries lately. Are they worried that their "daddy" will leave them, and trying their best to regain his attention? Or are there factions within the Epstein class who still haven't given up on project Ukraine?
I've also noticed these occasional hype stories by MSM and I was thinking that perhaps one reason is simply the good old propaganda, because claiming how awesome it was to get Sweden and Finland into Nato and projecting this false sense of military success they aim to boost morale, in order that Finns and Swedes don't start to ask questions such as why they didn't get to vote for any of this (as it was always promised).
I have a feeling that there is a lot of dissatisfaction growing inside Finland as the economic situation is going only worse (as the east border has been closed for over 2 years now, the sanctions against Russia has hurt Finland badly) and growing number of people may not be so pleased being part of Natostan (where everything is fake and gay). They may think that fearmongering will keep people under the spell, but seriously, it's been four years of neverending tabloid headlines rambling on how Putin is behind this and that and hiding under our beds, but I doubt it has anymore the desired effect on people - perhaps the opposite.
But this plan to change the Nuclear Energy Act sounds quite worrisome, as there is zero rationale justifying it, and it feels like someone really wants to poke the Bear, or to win a Darwin award. A prime candidate for both is of course president Alexander Stubb, who told reporters on his first day at the office that he considers it important that Finland has nuclear deterrence.
I've probably posted about this earlier in the thread, but in his 2017 autobiography
Stubb wrote: “To the credit of the CIA, it can be said that it has good agents: it immediately sank its teeth into a guy who would later become the Prime Minister of Finland.”
This was in relation to his friendship with Valerie Plame during his time at College of Europe in the 90's, as she was later found out working for the CIA, and Stubb tried to downplay this connection with his comments above.
Stubb also studied at the Furman University during 1989-1993, and writes in his autobiography: "I ended up at Furman because my brother had been an exchange student in a family whose father, Bill Lavery, was a professor of Russian history at Furman."
There is evidence that Lavery had been in contact with Director of CIA Robert Gates (based on
declassified document). Stubb's roommate during his time at the University was Lavery's son Nick.
Maybe these are just coincidences but if I had to guess, Stubb has likely been a CIA stooge long before his political career even started, and probably all the current major Finnish politicians are more or less under the influence of Western intelligence agencies, which would explain how all the main political parties have pushed towards the same common goal (especially during the last 15 years or so) of destroying any and all ties to Russia.
