Thanks… wait, wait… hold the horses… I can only take one reading at the time! I had never heard about “Anna’s Archive” as a thing… glad you told me and that I searched it.

Well, I was referring to Post-WWII USSR. Finland did loose 1/3 of its land to Moscow’s ambitions earlier on. However, unlike Ukraine today, Finland discovered what the Soviets wanted from them was to cover a security hole more than just grab plain land mass. Finland gave them that security and no more confrontation ever since and Finland was able to prosper immensely… even during the most expansionary moments and power of the Soviets. All that lesson from the Finnish elders is forgotten now, and instead of neutrality, they choose now to follow Kyiv’s path and head to NATO.

I’ll check that book.

Conscription per se is a healthy thing for a country and individuals alike, as long there is the option of opting for non-military training, that I think most in Europe have that option. But these new policies are not been set in place with that rational in mind!!! The rational, is that there is a drive for war and, due to Europeans not having appetite for it, they need to force people into the service (of course, pairing it with strong policies against any anti-war dissidence!)

How northern Europeans are falling into this scheme is perplexing! A decade ago I would never though Sweden and Finland would have given up on their military neutrality when they have benefit so much from even when the USSR was indeed aggressive an invaded Romania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia and Hungary but now that Russia partially only invaded neighbor Ukraine and because it was about to become a de-facto NATO country and Russia had set that up as a red line for more than a decade (not to mention the 14000 deaths of completely disfranchised 5 million Russian speakers in Ukraine since 2014.)

Even if you believe that Moscow really wanted to invade European Union members, Sweden and Finland would had simply be left alone so it could concentrate in the large powers… short like Germany did in 1930s… now, a hypothetical aggressive Russia would have no other chance than getting rid of Scandinavian posts first to set their fleet free into the Atlantic.

Finland, after promising Moscow a non-NATO alliance, enjoyed a formidable peace and developed a amazing democratic that became the envy of the world… but now considers Moscow far more dangerous than the Moscow of the 1950s… but of course, Israel’s aggressiveness and genocide in Gaza is not enough for the Scandinavians to even bother the Israeli ambassador. Are you really that blind to what is happening today?! The level of propaganda today in the north of Europe must be out of this world!? Nothing is left of the cold-thinking and the right combination of pragmatism + idealism from what Scandinavians used to be known for, nothing!