National defense

Old castles (Moussa Castle in Lebanon) and dogs do little to defend the country against today’s weapons.

Without credible defense, the country is vulnerable. But when it’s credible, no one even tries. It is one way to build peace. Democracy and a decent livelihood for all citizens guarantee peace within the country.

Fighter acquisition plans of Finland

Did you know that some printers have a small chip detected that stops working when, for example, 25,000 copies have been printed! This in mind, when is acquiring these very high priced defense equipment, a couple of things should be considered.

– Are you absolutely sure that the fighters acquired and to be acquired will still work if our administration and the supplier country run into a conflict?

– Does even satellite navigation work, which supports almost everything in the defense to work?

In addition .. There are 200 on-call flights per day from a single U.S. coastal air base. There are several planes in the air at the same time, none of which will land until a new plane has taken its place. This is not the case in Finland. And we couldn’t even afford it. Usually our planes get up to patrol only when necessary. This was also the case in Iraq and Libya. In connection with this, some things to consider.

– How many Iraqi fighter jets rose into the air when an alliance led by the United States and Britain invaded Iraq in 2003 with cruise missiles and stealth aircraft?

– How many Libyan fighter jets rose into the air during the NATO-led 19-20 in March, the Allies struck 110 cruise missiles at 20 Libyan air defense targets. The attack was supported by air strikes on (fading) planes.

– How many planes would have time to take off if a similar attack took place against Finland, from any direction?

The first two questions give the answer to the third… practically none! So at least I would consider building a more effective air defense system. Such that detects all border crossings, including airplanes invisible on the radar. Especially now because due to the pandemic, the state is already having to increase borrowing.

Neutrality or bowing to the West / East?

There are several states in the world that pursue to increase their influence by creating conflicts. These greatest benefit flows to the arms trade, of which Americans alone control about two-thirds. (Means the amount of the Finnish state budget per year.) As a result of these combined effects, refugee flows have also arisen.

The downside to bowing in one direction is that it becomes at the same time the ass show to opposite direction. Would a respectable principle, that does not bow in any direction be possible? Or even worth of thinking?

It should be, because this world really needs impartial peace mediators.

Reijo Lahdenperä

I recommend next

Return back to Climate Secures page

Comments are closed.