Russia: "We are preparing for preemptive attack on Europe"

[BigBallinStalin]

I love how these military exercises allegedly promote stability and security.


Hey, saxitoxin, my friends and I are going to raid your neighbor's house for practice. During our 15-minute breaks, we're gonna stare you down.

Also, we'll send some Cable TV technicians to check out your place. You know, to make sure the cable works.

We're promoting stability and security, ha ha!

[saxitoxin]

On the eve of these sexercises, in a stunning military provocation the likes of which the world has rarely seen, the Finn's foreign minister has declared he will simply dump his treaty obligations whenever he chooses and direct his war machine against the Russian people again:

According to Finland’s Prime Minister Jyrki Katainen, Finnish NATO membership would not threaten Russian security. Katainen entered the debate during his visit to Washington DC.

”Finland is a free country,” said the PM. ”Both Finns and foreign guests can speak quite freely in our country, but Finland will make decisions on own own defence and security based on our own basis.”

http://yle.fi/uutiset/katainen_enters_l ... te/6168512

But he is bound to this 1950 treaty with the USSR/Russian Federation -

Article 1
In the eventuality of Finland, or the Soviet Union through Finnish territory, becoming the object of an armed attack by Germany or any state allied with the latter, Finland will aggressively fight to repel the attack. Finland agrees to use all its available land, sea, and air forces, and to do so within the frontiers of Finland in accordance with obligations defined in the present agreement and, if necessary, with the assistance of or jointly with, the Soviet Union.

In the cases of aforementioned the Soviet Union will give Finland the help required, the giving of which will be subject to mutual agreement between the Contracting Parties.

Article 4
The High Contracting Parties confirm their pledge, given under Article 3 of the Peace Treaty signed in Paris on February 10, 1947, not to conclude any alliance or join any coalition directed against the other High Contracting Party.

1. If Finland joins NATO how can exactly can it "aggressively" repel an attack by Germany "or any state allied with" it against Russia?
2. Clearly NATO is "directed against" Russia, how can Finland join NATO legally?

[maxfaraday]

On the eve of these sexercises, in a stunning military provocation the likes of which the world has rarely seen, the Finn's foreign minister has declared he will simply dump his treaty obligations whenever he chooses and direct his war machine against the Russian people again:

According to Finland’s Prime Minister Jyrki Katainen, Finnish NATO membership would not threaten Russian security. Katainen entered the debate during his visit to Washington DC.

”Finland is a free country,” said the PM. ”Both Finns and foreign guests can speak quite freely in our country, but Finland will make decisions on own own defence and security based on our own basis.”

http://yle.fi/uutiset/katainen_enters_l ... te/6168512

But he is bound to this 1950 treaty with the USSR/Russian Federation -

Article 1
In the eventuality of Finland, or the Soviet Union through Finnish territory, becoming the object of an armed attack by Germany or any state allied with the latter, Finland will aggressively fight to repel the attack. Finland agrees to use all its available land, sea, and air forces, and to do so within the frontiers of Finland in accordance with obligations defined in the present agreement and, if necessary, with the assistance of or jointly with, the Soviet Union.

In the cases of aforementioned the Soviet Union will give Finland the help required, the giving of which will be subject to mutual agreement between the Contracting Parties.

Article 4
The High Contracting Parties confirm their pledge, given under Article 3 of the Peace Treaty signed in Paris on February 10, 1947, not to conclude any alliance or join any coalition directed against the other High Contracting Party.

1. If Finland joins NATO how can exactly can it "aggressively" repel an attack by Germany "or any state allied with" it against Russia?
2. Clearly NATO is "directed against" Russia, how can Finland join NATO legally?

Flashnews: the "Soviet Union" no longer exists, therefore article 1 means nothing.

[saxitoxin]

On the eve of these sexercises, in a stunning military provocation the likes of which the world has rarely seen, the Finn's foreign minister has declared he will simply dump his treaty obligations whenever he chooses and direct his war machine against the Russian people again:

According to Finland’s Prime Minister Jyrki Katainen, Finnish NATO membership would not threaten Russian security. Katainen entered the debate during his visit to Washington DC.

”Finland is a free country,” said the PM. ”Both Finns and foreign guests can speak quite freely in our country, but Finland will make decisions on own own defence and security based on our own basis.”

http://yle.fi/uutiset/katainen_enters_l ... te/6168512

But he is bound to this 1950 treaty with the USSR/Russian Federation -

Article 1
In the eventuality of Finland, or the Soviet Union through Finnish territory, becoming the object of an armed attack by Germany or any state allied with the latter, Finland will aggressively fight to repel the attack. Finland agrees to use all its available land, sea, and air forces, and to do so within the frontiers of Finland in accordance with obligations defined in the present agreement and, if necessary, with the assistance of or jointly with, the Soviet Union.

In the cases of aforementioned the Soviet Union will give Finland the help required, the giving of which will be subject to mutual agreement between the Contracting Parties.

Article 4
The High Contracting Parties confirm their pledge, given under Article 3 of the Peace Treaty signed in Paris on February 10, 1947, not to conclude any alliance or join any coalition directed against the other High Contracting Party.

1. If Finland joins NATO how can exactly can it "aggressively" repel an attack by Germany "or any state allied with" it against Russia?
2. Clearly NATO is "directed against" Russia, how can Finland join NATO legally?

Flashnews: the "Soviet Union" no longer exists

... except when it's convenient for NATO ... see:

The United States consistently asserts that the successor states emerging from the dissolution of the former Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia are obligated to fulfill the treaty obligations of their predecessor states. The United States bases this duty on the international law of state succession with respect to treaties and on political commitments made during the process of establishing diplomatic relations. - https://litigation-essentials.lexisnexi ... 18a98cbb4a

[huamulan]

It's sad watching these old men attempt to stir up the Cold War all over again. Why can't they just f*ck off to an island in the Pacific and throw rocks at each other there? A healthy portion of Europe's population weren't even alive when the Berlin Wall fell.