4 ms·

Well, in the article you refers to in link 5 I think between the lines they are talking about russia, I dont think any small country can withstand a attack by a

by msh 9y ago

Well, in the article you refers to in link 5 I think between the lines they are talking about russia, I dont think any small country can withstand a attack by a former super power for very long no matter their army bt it might serve them well to have a good defence for deterance. I dont see who else in the neighborhood would and could attack sweden in all seriousness.

nickpinkston 9y ago
Finland begs to differ: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War
- pm90 9y ago
  In all fairness, that was before the advent of modern weaponry, including precision guided munitions, cruise missiles etc. I highly doubt, for instance, Finnish supply chains would survive a sustained attack by Russia today.
  - nickpinkston 9y ago
    Afghanistan begs to differ :-) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%932014) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80...
    - pm90 9y ago
      The US invaded Afghanistan in a matter of months. What is being questioned here is not the ability of Russia to hold control over Finland, but whether it could quickly topple its Sovereign government, which it couldn't do in the linked war.
      - nickpinkston 9y ago
        They invaded, but that's not "winning". Plenty of people died and the US didn't really accomplish very much on the ground. Karzai has very weak control and his enemies multiply. Vietnam could also be used - they just destroyed us with attrition and a culture that had acceptance of heavy losses. Fancy weapons aren't a panacea - "war is politics by other means" - the people in the end are all that matter.
        pm90 9y ago
        Whoever talked about winning? Do you have a point you want to make or do you just want to have the last word? I have specifically stated that the question was not whether the war was won, but whether an invading military could quickly topple the country and gain control over it. The Vietnam war was never fought as a war of invasion, but rather one of propping up an anti-communist ally. They are not the same.
petre 9y ago
Tell that to Afghanistan. The Russians failed to invade it, and the US has helped the Taliban to that end which cost them another 15 years of war so far. You just need motivated people, just like Finland had in WW2.

by msh 9y ago

nickpinkston 9y ago

Finland begs to differ: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War

pm90 9y ago
In all fairness, that was before the advent of modern weaponry, including precision guided munitions, cruise missiles etc. I highly doubt, for instance, Finnish supply chains would survive a sustained attack by Russia today.
- nickpinkston 9y ago
  Afghanistan begs to differ :-) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%932014) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80...
  - pm90 9y ago
    The US invaded Afghanistan in a matter of months. What is being questioned here is not the ability of Russia to hold control over Finland, but whether it could quickly topple its Sovereign government, which it couldn't do in the linked war.
    - nickpinkston 9y ago
      They invaded, but that's not "winning". Plenty of people died and the US didn't really accomplish very much on the ground. Karzai has very weak control and his enemies multiply. Vietnam could also be used - they just destroyed us with attrition and a culture that had acceptance of heavy losses. Fancy weapons aren't a panacea - "war is politics by other means" - the people in the end are all that matter.
      - pm90 9y ago
        Whoever talked about winning? Do you have a point you want to make or do you just want to have the last word? I have specifically stated that the question was not whether the war was won, but whether an invading military could quickly topple the country and gain control over it. The Vietnam war was never fought as a war of invasion, but rather one of propping up an anti-communist ally. They are not the same.

petre 9y ago

Tell that to Afghanistan. The Russians failed to invade it, and the US has helped the Taliban to that end which cost them another 15 years of war so far. You just need motivated people, just like Finland had in WW2.