@jouni @Mad Indian @Ray @Razor @Casper @Illusive @apple[MENTION]bhramos[/MENTION]
The outbreak of war in Europe sanctions between the EU and Russia is forcing some European countries to find their way to salvation from the situation. One of the last countries that surprised many, is Finland. Of its population is becoming increasingly common idea of "‹"‹an intimate relationship with the Russian Federation, from integration and ending entering into its composition.
In his article titled "Could be Russian Finland Hong Kong?", Published in the prestigious journal Suomen Kuvalehti, wrote an influential public figure, businessman and lawyer of this country Hannah Krogerus.
From his point of view, it is not only quite possible, but also necessary in economic terms. Finland simply must take the opportunity to get the status with respect to the Russian Federation, like the fact that Hong Kong has to mainland China.
Despite the risk of economic collapse, the current younger generation of Finnish politicians, guided by the interests of a narrow layer of the country, seeking to achieve complete isolation of Finland from Russia, writes Finnish lawyer.
And this opinion is shared by many famous people in this country. Thus, the Finnish MP from the party "True Finns" Juho Eerola stated the need for a military alliance Finland and Russia. He believes it is the only correct one to ensure the security of their country. And his fellow party member Gemma Koskiniemi even offered to join the Russian Federation.
"Russia is our most reliable partner we trust," - said the deputy.
Recall that before the revolution of 1917, Finland was part of the Russian Empire, but had enough and independence - Swedish laws, its own currency and customs.
Another Finnish human rights activist Johan Beckman sure that such a drastic change in attitude occurred during the past year against the background of the EU and NATO actions in which there is simply no future. He believes that the collapse of both units - just a matter of the near future.
On this occasion, his point of view was expressed by the Prime Minister of Finland. Recently, he expressed support for the idea of "‹"‹integration with Russia. According to the same Beckman, this step can be implemented by the country's accession to the Customs Union.
ФинлÑÐ½Ð´Ð¸Ñ Ñ…Ð¾Ñ‡ÐµÑ‚ войти в ÑоÑтав РоÑÑии
understanding neither Russian nor Finnish I had assumed those posters were related to the Soviet Finnish war (as indicated in the map in the 2nd one). the 1st one is on Scandinavian solidarity perhaps?
We are not lapdogs of Russia. Seriously, what lapdogging did we do to Russia?
Exactly why we cant trust US enough to ditch Russia. It makes the relationship with them a bit very unpredictable
Russia is far less likely to be our enemy than US tomorrow or three decades from now.
Tell me what left, we did everything, including brainwashing of Indian forces.We are not lapdogs of Russia. Seriously, what lapdogging did we do to Russia?
BHARAT RAKSHAK MONITOR: Volume 4(4)
For the matter of Indian interests, only and only. I don't care for Russia or even for the US.Exactly why we cant trust US enough to ditch Russia. It makes the relationship with them a bit very unpredictable
Russia is far less likely to be our enemy than US tomorrow or three decades from now.
I speak English. Does that make me a lapdog of England?
Correct.
Even Russia has the power to impose sanctions against the US, the EU, Canada, and Australia, which they did. EU is already feeling the pinch, but they are just not talking about it, because it makes them look foolish. Instead, they are harping on how their sanctions hurt Russia. The fact is, this trading of sanctions has hurt both the sides.
Neutral at what cost! They already lost few of their land in last war, you want them to loose few more in future war, if that happens?
You are taking it in out of context. It has nothing to do with you and me.
My friend, you say what you like to say, but it is fact that US sanctions effects economy.
Finland has been neutral since WWII. How much land have they lost? Do I foresee them losing more land? No. Perhaps you do. Do I want them to lose more land? No. What is the point in talking about imaginary costs? What purpose does it serve other than fear mongering for the purpose of enriching the military-industrial complex?
It is not about you and me, it is about whether a person speaking a language becomes a lapdog.
It is meant for operational reasons. When a bulk of the equipment is of Soviet origin, it makes perfect sense. I'd rather learn Russian and buy their weapons sanctions free, than buy more expensive stuff from the west and compromise the independence of our foreign policy, failing which, the expensive stuff we bought will turn into lemons, as spares and services will be denied by the sanction happy west.
How?
Ask them why not. I have no problem with giving special status to German.
I have no idea what you are trying to say.
Agreed, you did not use the word "lapdog" first. Do you think India is Russia's lapdog? Please clarify, so that we don't go around this who-said-first-who-said-second thingy, which adds no value.
No, I say what I know for a fact.
Yup, let's give up on our food security, let's import solar panels, let's open up our insurance sector. No troubles at all.
Yes, US allies are free, as long as they provide their people as cattle fodder for US invasions the world over, and as long as the ministers of these "free" nations sit and stand to the orders of Washington DC. I think the meaning of "freedom" is very different to the two of us. Do you think it is in India's interest to only buy oil from Saudi Arabia?
There is a lot to worry, unless you address my concerns.
It is good to see Turkey displaying a good amount of independence, but why should India become an ally of anybody?
Ok, keep it India first. Don't turn it into USA first.
19 months before Russians invaded Finland, the Finns had assured Russians that they were committed to policy of neutrality.
It is for Indian establishment and forces only.
If you stay towards US side then no questions about "sanctions".
First tell me what you understand in my post, tell me in your words.How?
Ask them why not. I have no problem with giving special status to German.
I have no idea what you are trying to say.
Agreed, you did not use the word "lapdog" first. Do you think India is Russia's lapdog? Please clarify, so that we don't go around this who-said-first-who-said-second thingy, which adds no value.
No, I say what I know for a fact.
The US keeps repeating about asset freezes of Russian officials. Fact.
There is no Russian official who has asset outside of Russia. Fact.
(There is a Russian law that prohibits any Russian government official to have any kind of asset outside of Russia, because, having so, will compromise their dedication to Russia.)
So tell me, whatever happened to those "frozen" assets? The fact is, while the US spoke about freezing assets, it managed to freeze not a single penny.
Yup, let's give up on our food security, let's import solar panels, let's open up our insurance sector. No troubles at all.
Yes, US allies are free, as long as they provide their people as cattle fodder for US invasions the world over, and as long as the ministers of these "free" nations sit and stand to the orders of Washington DC. I think the meaning of "freedom" is very different to the two of us. Do you think it is in India's interest to only buy oil from Saudi Arabia?
Can you tell me why India refused to send its troops in Afghanistan, at the request of the US? Can a country like Poland refuse the way India did? Do you want Indian soldiers to get deployed and get killed and maimed while cleaning up the mess created by the US? No thank you Sir. The US should rather seek Pakistan as an ally. India should remain neutral.
There is a lot to worry, unless you address my concerns.
It is good to see Turkey displaying a good amount of independence, but why should India become an ally of anybody?
Ok, keep it India first. Don't turn it into USA first.
If you ask me, it was a probably a mistake that Lenin gave Finland independence in 1917, assuming they will become part of NATO. It is good they are neutral so far.
People like to turn a blind eye to events that do not fit their narrative. The land was sieged by Stalin, but prior to that, Lenin granted Finland independence. Very recently, Mikhail Gorbachyov granted sovereignty to 15 Soviet Republics. I understand you don't want to look at the complete picture so that you can generalize about "communist land grab." The very country you are batting for, allied with our land grabbing communist neighbour in 1971, but I suppose we should ignore that?
I know that is your opinion. I am trying to understand why.
In other words, we have to take orders from them to avoid sanctions. Bad idea. India should be free to chose to do business with everyone. Why should India have to stay on US side? Why not neutral?
Absolutely not true. Tell me, who will lease us a nuclear submarine cheaper than Russia? I know you will avoid this question, but still asking.
Also, tell me, who will sell us cryogenic engines cheaper than Russia. I know you will avoid this question too. It totally exists since 1945 till date.
With the US, it is either you are with us or against us. One does not have to be communist to understand that. One simply needs to have some common sense and study the actions of the US since 1945.
Have you been keeping up with the recent US sanctions lately? I think you are grossly misinformed. Moreover, your statement betrays the fact that our cryogenic engine programme was delayed, thanks to the country you are so adamantly defending.
It is vague and overtly generalized. That is all I understand from you post. That is why I asked you to clarify whether you think India is Russia's lapdog.
No, I am asking you to clarify whether you think India is Russia's lapdog. I understand you are at a discomfort to give a direct answer to a direct question.
Finland was part of Swedish empire. After Swedish empire, Finland was with Russians empire for 108 years only.
No need to take orders at all. Pull those two fingers and do what ever you like, as you said earlier, just like Turkey.
Sir, :thumb:Absolutely not true. Tell me, who will lease us a nuclear submarine cheaper than Russia? I know you will avoid this question, but still asking.
That policy was for few cases only and specially the tutti frutti war against terror.
I care for Indian interests only, stay with the US and get better deal for India. That is the point. When ever your interests are on stake, take firm stand on what so ever basis.
Yes, India is Russia's lapdog. Any doubt?
As recently in 2013(.ie UPA 2), americans joined hands with Paki dogs to put pressure on Indian side to withdraw from the Siachen. I am not really sure what the US fanboys here are thinking when they say we can trust US! Suppose we need to wage a war in Pak for our national interests and US does not want it to happen. Can these fanboys guarantee that US wont impose sanctions on us if we do buy critical equipment from them? Seriously?
Dei machi, nee actualla ena da solla vara ?Dude? WTH??
This is a nonsensical reasoning. by the same logic, Britain is not the colonial abuser it once was during the British Raj days and the Indians are living way better in UK than in India and hence Indians should consider joining back the British empire
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Baltic Connector (Finland and Estonia) | Europe and Russia | 2 | |
|
Sweden and Finland to join NATO | Europe and Russia | 37 | |
|
Finland celebrates 100 years of independence | Europe and Russia | 2 | |
|
|
Multiple stabbings in Finland | Europe and Russia | 1 |
