Here are the
EXTERNAL outcomes from what Poutine did...All in one week...
- Remind NATO of its original raison d'etre
- Got NATO to reorganize its forces
- Got NATO to rethink its budget
- Pushed neutral Finland and Sweden towards NATO
- Ruined Russian civil aviation
- Further ruined Russian economy
- Degrade Russia global image
- Revealed flaws and ineffectiveness of the Russian military
Granted, maybe item 8 is debatable because it may came from Poutine's originally restrained battle plans. But if that is true, then Poutine should have stayed a spy and left warfighting to the generals.
By sheer numerical superiority, Russia will take Ukraine. But Russia needs Ukraine and by 'needs', I mean Ukraine must be as functional a country as soon as possible in order to act as a geopolitical buffer. In this, there is little difference between Iraq and Afghanistan because the US needed both countries to be as functional as soon as possible under US guidance for Afghanistan not becoming a terrorist haven and Iraq not becoming a predatory state. Whether the US succeeded or not, there are plenty of existing discussions already so I will not get into those subjects here. Back in 1991, Desert Storm ground war lasted from Feb 24 to 28. On the 28th, the US declared a cease fire. Prior to the cease fire, Desert Storm air campaign lasted 30 days before the ground war. We do not see anything similar Ukraine. There was no 'shock and awe' but more like 'schlock and awshuck' from the Russian military. But by sheer numerical superiority, Russia will win.
So aside from the list of external outcomes, what can we expect from the coming guerrilla warfare? I do not believe the Ukrainians will be any less motivated than the Iraqi and Afghanistan insurgencies. The difference is that the Ukrainian insurgency will be much better supported in terms of global moral outrage, international finance, and qualitatively superior weapons. When Iraq fell, the ME did not got angry but actually breathed a sigh of relief. With Poutine, it is the opposite. Now tension increased, especially after Poutine made the nuclear alertness comment. Support for the Ukrainian insurgency will be even more assured.
This is 3 hours ago
Finland to discuss joining Nato in wake of Ukraine invasion
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertain...rnational-festival/ar-AAUsHiE?ocid=uxbndlbing
Finnish lawmakers will discuss the possibility of their country joining Nato in response to Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine on Tuesday.
© Jussi Nukari /AP Sanna Marin, Finland's prime minister, announced Helsinki would send weapons to help Ukraine. - Jussi Nukari /AP
The parliament debate is being held the day after an opinion poll showed that a majority of Finns
were in favour of joining the Alliance for the first time.
Finland, which was invaded by the Soviet Union in 1939 and has Europe’s longest border with Russia, avoided taking sides in the Cold War and pursued a policy of non-alignment.
Increasing Russian belligerence,
culminating in the invasion of Ukraine, has led to a landmark shift in attitudes in a country that was long reluctant to join Nato.
“It is very understandable that many Finns have changed or are changing their minds after Russia started waging war on Ukraine,” Sanna Marin, the prime minister, said on Monday.
The parliament debate was triggered after a petition to hold a referendum on Nato membership got 50,000 signatures in less than a week
Mr Putin listed Finland and neighbouring Sweden, which is also non-aligned, as countries that should be barred from Alliance membership as part of his security demands to the West before he invaded Ukraine. Finland insists on its right to apply for Nato membership if it wishes.
The poll by Finnish broadcasting company Yle found that 53 per cent of Finns were now in favour of joining Nato. That increases to 66 per cent if neighbouring Sweden, which is also non-aligned, joins at the same time, which has been mooted.
Some 28 per cent of Finns opposed membership and 19 per cent were unsure in the first opinion poll taken since Russia's invasion of Ukraine. It was carried out over three days, including the day before the invasion.
In a January opinion poll, 30 per cent of Finns were in favour of membership. A poll in December found that only 24 per cent of Finnish citizens were positive towards joining, an increase of 2 per cent from last year, with 51 per cent against membership. In 2017, just 19 per cent of Finns were in favour of joining Nato.
Nato insiders believe any membership process would be relatively quick one because the countries already comply with the many of the standards expected by the 30-nation bloc.
Ms Marin, who did not say if she personally backed joining Nato, said in Brussels that Finland would take the “historic” step of offering Ukraine weapons to help fight off the Russian invasion.
Elina Valtonen is a MP and vice-president of the National Coalition Party, which has supported Nato membership for Finland since 2006 and is in opposition to Ms Marin’s centre-Left Social Democratic Party led coalition.
She told the Telegraph in January, “Finland is closer than it has ever been to applying for Nato membership. For the first time people feel that the aggression that Russia has been executing towards its neighbours [...] also concerns Finland and Sweden.”
At the end of December, Atte Harjanne, the parliamentary head of the Green Party, called on it to reverse its long held stance against Nato membership and actively campaign for Finland to join the alliance.
Meanwhile, Alko, the state-owned monopoly that sells alcohol in Finland, has announced it will stop selling Russian vodka because of Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine.
“The situation in Ukraine is shocking and we have taken it seriously,” Anu Koskinen, a spokeswoman for the group, which offers more than 11,000 products including around 30 Russian products, mostly vodka, told AFP.
