NATO will build a massive base in Finland
(www.reuters.com)
Comments (48)
sorted by:
Unlike Ukraine, a NATO base in Finland, considering the Soviet invasion at the start of WWII, makes some sort of historical sense.
Yes, that's why nobody had any plans to build a NATO base in Ukraine.
You're so used to lying, it doesn't even make you flinch anymore, does it.
Show the plans for a NATO base in Ukraine.
You won't because you're a degenerate liar.
I don't have to...because there's NATO country. You have to show how Ukraine would be different.
Silly goose.
As predicted, you are a degenerate liar.
Bravo, you didn't fall into the rhetorical trap I laid. I give you credit for that. You did, however, make yourself look like a idiot. Admittedly, that likely comes easy for you.
Every military base in a NATO country is a NATO base because of the mutual defense pact.
So you admit that there are no plans to build a NATO base un Ukrain
Where my Russkie shills at?
Tell me how his is bad for NATO and good for Russia.
I've read this forum quite a bit and have never seen the kind of pro-Russian spin you constantly assert is prevalent here.
Most of it was posted around the time of the invasion and up to a year afterwards.
Since then, most Russian shills have abandoned this place, including its top mod.
That's very interesting. I was not very active during that time.
Consider that what you saw could have been made overly obvious because it was intended to look like Russian shills in order to strengthen claims that forums like this one are receptive to that messaging and that Russian shills are active in English-speaking venues.
The guy who set up this forum was also the guy shilling for Russia the hardest in the run-up to the invasion.
That's quite interesting. I may do a deep dive into that period of time to see if I come to the same conclusion.
I can help with that.
https://conspiracies.win/p/141ra46FmD/the-february-16th-invasion-that-/c/
https://conspiracies.win/p/141rVRzPoG/head-of-parliamentary-faction-in/c/
https://conspiracies.win/p/141rQpsIC9/if-the-imminent-invasion-farce-i/c/
https://conspiracies.win/p/141rQprkd0/russia-withdraws-troops-from-ukr/c/
https://conspiracies.win/p/141Y9MDQf9/ukraine-president-just-blamed-th/c/
Wow, That was fast.
All five of those posts combined have five comments combined, one of which was the original poster. If it's the Russians, they sure aren't trying very hard.
Is it your view that anything that doesn't support sending money to Ukraine is Russian propaganda?
That's actually thinning NATO defenses elsewhere because NATO has limited resources and they have to protect Finland's 1340km long border now.
Where is it thinning NATO's defenses exactly?
Won't Russia have to protect his border as well?
Russia doesn't have problem protecting its borders or hiring enough troops, NATO is a paper tiger that is falling behind hiring quotas. NATO has limited resources & troops and they have to take those troops from elsewhere to protect Finland's 1340km long border.
And this is why Russia is totally winning in Ukraine, right?
Not really how NATO works. Finland is the one who has to protect Finlands boarder, but if Russia attacks Finland, the rest of the NATO nations will come to Finlands aid, driving the Russians back to where they came from.
Finland has only a very tiny & pathetically weak military and most of the equipment is decades old cold war era junk that probably doesn't even work anymore. USA is forced to open 15 new military bases in Finland and deploy 10s of thousands troops to Finland for Finland's protection.
US troops are there in case Russia decides to create a land bridge to Kaliningrad, by attacking Lithuania or Poland. They are there for the purpose of attack, not defence.