> I am talking about getting inside an early warning window and preventing a Russian response. Okay, so they can be in Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania which are a

> I am talking about getting inside an early warning window and preventing a Russian response. Okay, so they can be in Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania which are around the same distance. > HIMARS are not strategic nuclear weapons The point is that Finland is close enough to strike St Petersburg with something old, cheap and commonly available. Can always go fancier than that. No reason why Finland couldn't host nuclear weapons. > Russian has between a 7 to 1, and a 10 to 1 advantage in artillery, and this advantage is growing. Guess will see what happens, but the likelihood of Russia winning this seems very low. > If Ukraine had agreed to be neutral (non-NATO) the war and all this bloodshed would have been avoided. If Russia had agreed to be neutral (stop panicking about NATO) the war and all this bloodshed would have been avoided. Mind you NATO was nearly dead until Russia started this nonsense. It's thanks to them that it's been greatly revitalized. > Won't happen. The Russians are likely going for all the ethnically Russian Oblasts in Ukraine. There won't be ethnically Russian Oblasts in Ukraine soon. War already created a huge loss of population, and if Ukraine manages to regain them they'll use the war as a reason to systematically remove any Russian remains from them. And I think thanks to the war this will be largely non-controversial.