Soviets didn't capture Finland, we were able fend off their huge summer offensive 1944 and even destroy few of their divisions fully. After that Finland had to make peace with Soviet Union, Germany was clearly losing the war. Finland would have no chance whatsoever alone against full might of the Soviet Union. We could make it costly but Finland would've been ruined.
Any serious military attempt to seize Finland would be noticed 2-6 months before the attack could be made. It is just not possible to move all needed manpower and equipment for attack to Finland to the border without anyone noticing, and if you close your borders, its kinda clear message. This means that army has decent time to mobilize and give some extra training. Of course all bridges, roads and such could be mined before any attempt to take them could be made. In example, all finnish bridges and tunnels have holes in their concrete structure, where the explosives will be placed in case they need to be destroyed. I have even heard that there is book which contains all information about all bridges, their locations and amount of explosives needed for their destruction.
Our soldiers in peacekeeping missions get only 1-2 months of extra training before going to peacekeeping missions.
Of course it is possible to make surprise (finnish air defence would have ~20 minutes to react) attack with airforce only without any warning. But still, ground attack would be months away.
And about those pesky IR-thingies. do you people understand that they have very limited capability in forests. IR can be used to see in dark yes, but you can't see through things, such as forest. Thermal imaging can help with that, but mostly, thermal imaging equipment good enough to penetrate thick forest is in satellites, and in some recon planes and finland is very big country to sweep through constantly and accurately enough, to make any diffirence. When ever Finnish forces would be concentrated enough(like counter-attack) to use air force against them effectively, finnish forces would of course use their own air force and SAM power to counter enemy air superiority for small time period, so finnish forces can make their maneuver without full air power in their neck.
And in the end, i'd like to remind that Finland has much more modern air defences that of serbs or iraq. Especially in southern Finland where the BUK M1 units are situated.
And there is even more, i'd much more compare finnish situation to soviet vs. afgans than serbs or iraqis. Afgans were able to fight off soviet air attack with only stingers. While the terrain in Afganistan is very much diffirent than in Finland, when thinking about war, they give the same obstacles, just in diffirent form. I'd even say that when thinking of air defence, Finland is better country to defend than Afganistan. There is no better place to ambush air forces than country with lots of forests and modern air defence systems like BUK M1, Crotale NG and Igla.
What comes to alcoholism, yeah, military personnel drinks like any other worker class dude here. Mostly the stories what i heard in army were urban legends, totally incorrect or just greatly exaggarated. Even my father had heard few of the same stories that go around nowadays, and he was in finnish army 1952. If you ask about the stories from someone who has been in army, lets say 1980 you probably get even more same stories:).
And final part of my long post. I don't know if you have read the studies, but fins have one the highest ratings when they question the citizens will to defence their country against foreign invasion'. Me and most of my friends are ready to take arms if Finland is invaded. I have no will whatsoever to take arms to attack anywhere, or to fight in any other theater than Finland.
So, i'm not forced against my will to defend my own country, my friends aren't, and i think most of fins aren't. Even most of those people who didn't like army and hated it because they though there wouldn't be war (waste of time) would be ready to take arm once they noticed that Finland is under attack. There is small portion of people who don't like to use arms, i accept their choice. There is small portion of people who would be there against their will to defend their country. But so small that they probably wouldn't have any serious input in war anyway, they can always serve elsewhere than in flashpoints.
But mostly, above all, there would be determined finnish army with intention to fight off any invader.
Slashdot Mirror
Soviets didn't capture Finland, we were able fend off their huge summer offensive 1944 and even destroy few of their divisions fully. After that Finland had to make peace with Soviet Union, Germany was clearly losing the war. Finland would have no chance whatsoever alone against full might of the Soviet Union. We could make it costly but Finland would've been ruined.
Just like to address few things.
:).
Any serious military attempt to seize Finland would be noticed 2-6 months before the attack could be made. It is just not possible to move all needed manpower and equipment for attack to Finland to the border without anyone noticing, and if you close your borders, its kinda clear message. This means that army has decent time to mobilize and give some extra training. Of course all bridges, roads and such could be mined before any attempt to take them could be made. In example, all finnish bridges and tunnels have holes in their concrete structure, where the explosives will be placed in case they need to be destroyed. I have even heard that there is book which contains all information about all bridges, their locations and amount of explosives needed for their destruction.
Our soldiers in peacekeeping missions get only 1-2 months of extra training before going to peacekeeping missions.
Of course it is possible to make surprise (finnish air defence would have ~20 minutes to react) attack with airforce only without any warning. But still, ground attack would be months away.
And about those pesky IR-thingies. do you people understand that they have very limited capability in forests. IR can be used to see in dark yes, but you can't see through things, such as forest. Thermal imaging can help with that, but mostly, thermal imaging equipment good enough to penetrate thick forest is in satellites, and in some recon planes and finland is very big country to sweep through constantly and accurately enough, to make any diffirence. When ever Finnish forces would be concentrated enough(like counter-attack) to use air force against them effectively, finnish forces would of course use their own air force and SAM power to counter enemy air superiority for small time period, so finnish forces can make their maneuver without full air power in their neck.
And in the end, i'd like to remind that Finland has much more modern air defences that of serbs or iraq. Especially in southern Finland where the BUK M1 units are situated.
And there is even more, i'd much more compare finnish situation to soviet vs. afgans than serbs or iraqis. Afgans were able to fight off soviet air attack with only stingers. While the terrain in Afganistan is very much diffirent than in Finland, when thinking about war, they give the same obstacles, just in diffirent form. I'd even say that when thinking of air defence, Finland is better country to defend than Afganistan. There is no better place to ambush air forces than country with lots of forests and modern air defence systems like BUK M1, Crotale NG and Igla.
What comes to alcoholism, yeah, military personnel drinks like any other worker class dude here. Mostly the stories what i heard in army were urban legends, totally incorrect or just greatly exaggarated. Even my father had heard few of the same stories that go around nowadays, and he was in finnish army 1952. If you ask about the stories from someone who has been in army, lets say 1980 you probably get even more same stories
And final part of my long post. I don't know if you have read the studies, but fins have one the highest ratings when they question the citizens will to defence their country against foreign invasion'. Me and most of my friends are ready to take arms if Finland is invaded. I have no will whatsoever to take arms to attack anywhere, or to fight in any other theater than Finland.
So, i'm not forced against my will to defend my own country, my friends aren't, and i think most of fins aren't. Even most of those people who didn't like army and hated it because they though there wouldn't be war (waste of time) would be ready to take arm once they noticed that Finland is under attack. There is small portion of people who don't like to use arms, i accept their choice. There is small portion of people who would be there against their will to defend their country. But so small that they probably wouldn't have any serious input in war anyway, they can always serve elsewhere than in flashpoints.
But mostly, above all, there would be determined finnish army with intention to fight off any invader.