Andrzej Adam Filip kirjoitti:
> martin <martintg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> You better be seriously thinking about it before Russia sends in the
>> peace keepers:
>>
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-gardels/brzezinski-russias-invasi_b_118029.html
> Joining NATO takes "some" time for all procedures and all
"consultations".
> As you can see it can be very risky period.
> The real question is: Is it the risk *worth* to be taken?
> If you give advises then feel responsible for consequences of them being
> followed. I do not give Finns advises in the issue beyond "be sure you
> want it". They should decide *themselves*.
I believe the threshold for military action against Finland is
significantly higher for a number of reasons:
1) Unlike Georgia or Ukraine Finland is also a member of the EU and
never was a Soviet republic or Warsaw-pact satellite, hence we are not
in their "sphere of interest" in a similar way, and in case of crisis
odds are higher that EU would be forced to intervene if it wants to
avoid to be seen as an organization that turns its back on it's members
2) Our military is significantly stronger than the Georgian army.
3)We also have very few residents here with a Russian pass****t. Most of
our Russian speakers (50 000 or so) are descendants from old, pre-Soviet
era, Russians or "Ingrian"¹ returnees from late 1980s to present.
4) Much of Russia's im****ts go through Finland. The alternative routes
are less appealing to them: Estonia or Poland.
5)Last but not least: we have no territorial claims or border disputes
whatsoever.
¹Ingrian = one of your grandparents once was Ingrian, so they are
Ingrians de jure, de facto Russkies)
--
Anton
