Finland joined NATO roughly one year ago in the wake of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

A Russian ambassador had harsh words for Finland on Saturday, warning that the country would retaliate against the new member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) if nuclear weapons were placed on Finnish soil.

Finland is one of the newest European countries to join the military alliance, being officially welcomed into the fold in April 2023. The Nordic nation was spurred to seek membership by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 and its increased threats of aggression against other nations. Sweden is the latest country admitted to NATO for this reason, joining on March 7.

Both nations announced that they were considering applying for membership in May of 2022, only a few months after the start of the Russia-Ukraine war.

Russia has long viewed NATO as an antagonistic force, given the influence of founding members like the United States and the United Kingdom. NATO members are also obliged to provide military aid to other members in the event of an attack, meaning that Russia risks a much larger conflict should it take action against the likes of Finland.

  • bhmnscmm@lemmy.worldEnglish
    7·
    3 months ago

    Has the US/west made any statements or moves towards moving nuclear weapons into Finland? Seems like that would be unnecessary.

    • TransplantedSconie@lemm.eeEnglish
      182·
      3 months ago

      Doesn’t matter. Any nuclear attack on ANY NATO ally is seen as a direct attack on the US/NATO members.

      This is just a dork waving his 3 inch dick.

    • Lorindól@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      8·
      3 months ago

      Finnish legislation strictly forbids storing nukes inside our borders, even transporting them via our territory is a no-no. But laws can be changed.

      Putin’s whining about nuking Finland is ridiculous. Most of the time the prevailing winds here blow to the general eastern direction, detonating a nuke or few above our capital would nicely contaminate both St.Petersburg and the Finnish Gulf right in front of it. And using tactical/strategic nukes against our defences would happen near the Karelian border, which would irradiate Putin’s and his cronies precious dachas located in the stolen Karelia.

      So they most likely won’t be doing that. But on the other hand Russia has clearly demonstrated that their actions are not based on rational thinking, so it remains to be seen.

    • el_bhm@lemm.eeEnglish
      81·
      3 months ago

      Russia has nukes in Belarus and Kaliningrad Oblast.

      Double standards and pussy sabre rattling. All they know is huffing and puffin.

    • Neuromancer@lemm.eeEnglish
      99·
      3 months ago

      We often loan weapons to allies. I have not heard Finland ask for nuclear weapons.

          • jwt@programming.devEnglish
            27·
            3 months ago

            Huh that phrasing is actually a thing? TIL. Not really sure it conveys situation properly though. Like saying you share chlamydia.

            • Neuromancer@lemm.eeEnglish
              79·
              3 months ago

              Yeah it’s a weird thing but it’s a thing. It’s to prevent them from building their own weapons.

                • Neuromancer@lemm.eeEnglish
                  39·
                  3 months ago

                  That’s exactly the reason. The deal is we let them drop the bomb in return they don’t build one. We control the weapon on their land but they get to drop it in a war.

                  • jwt@programming.devEnglish
                    13·
                    3 months ago

                    We control the weapon on their land but they get to drop it in a war.

                    That’s a contradictio in terminis.There’s no way the US lets other counties decide when to drop their nuclear bomb.

                    The real reason of course is the US wants influence, and the countries it wants influence over agree to it to get other shit done.