I have at least some confidence that the system I would protect is better than the one any realistic invader would offer.
The behavior of attackers toward civilian population is another aspect: I want to ensure my family and friends don't get subjected to the same kind of treatment as we have seen from various armies.
While I agree with you, a military force used exclusively for territorial defence is kind of a different animal to militaries used to project force in another country.
I think the reason Finland exists as an independent country today is a result of the theoretical ability to field 250-900k strong decently equipped military force. It is a comparatively expensive solution as we have implemented it, and there is an equality issue in an all male conscription, but as a former conscript and current reservist I don't feel that the elder generations are taking advantage of me in this way. My father and grandfather served in post war FDF and great grandfathers fought in the war.
Even though I'm fine with the system, I do have a few caveats: the FDF currently employs professional military and volunteers in peacekeeping and other international force projection operations. I personally would have a moral objection in operating outside of Finnish borders in all but few situations.
I am happy to expand on the subject if someone has questions.
I agree with the problem, but I also kind of agree with the judge. The point of separation of powers is that the judicial system interprets the will of the legislative. We have had similar cases in Finland , where the law clearly should say one thing and the courts conclude that the law in fact says another thing. Fortunately, this situation occasionally leads the parliament into saying 'well fuck' and changing the law.
I will admit I don't really understand the role of courts making law in the US and other common law countries, so it might be different there.
Technically yes, but in practice the goal is to make the practical arrangements implementing of Article 5 security quarantees possible. There is not much use of NATO support, if alliance forces can't operate in Finland in a practical way.
I am sure there are new operational agreements of similar nature will be made between Finland and Sweden as well as Finland and Estonia. That said, there is already a significant degree of defence cooperation between Finland and Sweden.
Finland is also already part of the british led JEF, and I would be surprised if the Nato framework would not change the nature of that cooperation.
An article which was quite well researched from what I could tell. I had no previos info on the subject, so I can't estimate the accuracy. Worth a read if India's domestic weapons development is your jam.
In Korea, there are these wandering food exploders. You go to them with your own peas, beans, anything dried really and they put them in a heated pressure chamber. After heating, the pressure is rapidly released, which causes the small amount of water remaining in the food to boil off and turns them into a fluffy matrix similar to rice crispies.
The machine makes a sound very similar to a gunshot, so the operatora shout something to let people know.
Rice crispies and some chips are made with a similar process. This also works for dough.
Well, he sounds like a right arsehole.