Genuine question. I feel like there’s too much division and that people should find common ground. I really don’t like the two-party system in the US either.

  • Tuukka R@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    I don’t think we could implement your suggestion. Our wartime maximum strength is about 700 000 soldiers and our population is around 5 600 000. That means, in wartime, one out of 8 inhabitants will be in different forms of military service. There’s no way we could pay an adequate salary for that many soldiers. And, that number is still a third less than how many soldiers Ukraine has, and Ukraine is just barely able to keep the Russia from advancing.

    I’m not sure why you’re taking Vietnam war as an example, as it’s an offensive war and for example Finland has no plans to do anything like that.

    Our military – numbers are public.

    Yes, but the speed at which one can recruit soldiers in an emergency is not public.

    maintaining offensive and diminishment operations

    This is irrelevant, because most countries do not have any offensive operations to maintain in the first place.

    You may not know what the phrase “proxy war” means, because in this context it’s rather insulting. And I do not think you meant to insult me or others. But do tell, why and how would Finland wage an offensive war?

    Yeah, this is getting a bit off topic, but you’re making wild claims that would really need some clarification.

    • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I’m not sure why you’re taking Vietnam war as an example, as it’s an offensive war and for example Finland has no plans to do anything like that.

      The US instituted a mandatory draft to fight that war.

      one out of 8 inhabitants will be in different forms of military service. There’s no way we could pay an adequate salary for that many soldiers.

      Finland joining NATO is joining offensive military operations to diminish Russia. Finland was much much safer before. That media propaganda is permitted to claim Russia is not defending itself, or has no right to object to demonic supremacist attitude that it needs to be destroyed/divided, and privatized for pittances to US dominated financial interests, is an extreme affront to reality and humanity. Any Finnish media that says anything to the contrary could be nationalized for more pro human pro Finland prosperity mandates, and it is only liquid democracy that has a chance to not allow CIA bribed/threatened politicians to not pillage or suicide Finland for CIA diminishment value. The only threat to Finland exists from joining axis of evil against Russia. Liquid democracy offers chance to appeal to non suicidal/stupid to preserve Finland and citizen prosperity.

      Yes, Finland security does require citizen training in guerilla sniper tactics for self defense. No, that security is destroyed by joining axis of demonism. CIA can compromise every politician and media in your country ultra cheaply. Not possible under liquid democracy.