At least that is the official version of the events.

Nic

This topic is starting to become quite toxic…

What do you mean a race of people?

1. A group of people identified as distinct from other groups because of supposed physical or genetic traits shared by the group. Most biologists and anthropologists do not recognize race as a biologically valid classification, in part because there is more genetic variation within groups than between them.
2. A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution: the Celtic race.
3. A genealogical line; a lineage.
4. Humans considered as a group.
5. Biology
a. A usually geographically isolated population of organisms that differs from other populations of the same species in certain heritable traits: an island race of birds.
b. A breed or strain, as of domestic animals.
6. A distinguishing or characteristic quality, such as the flavor of a wine.

Point 2 or point 4, choose.

The role of the Western media in fomenting Russophobia you do not consider?

No.

Russians might not like it, and i am sure that your government hates it, but there´s this thing called “Free Press” in the West, and if you think that Russia has a “bad press” from the likes of CNN/BBC/Whatever, they can be a lot more agressive with their own governments. Ask Trump, or José Socrates, or Tony Blair, or Maggie Tatcher, or Silvio Berlusconi, or Richard Nixon, etc. If you think that the Western Press is a tool from NATO, the CIA, Western Governments, the Mossad, the Martians, whatever, in order to vilefy Russia (or China, or Mars, etc), wake up, they are pretty much their own bosses, and you can find every type of opinions there. Even Merkell has had more “Adolf Moustaches” than Putin!
And Hell, the Russian Government dont need any help in order to get some awfull press, they are extremely good at it…

Russia began to live better without the “younger brothers”.

GREAT, GOOD, we are getting somewhere!
All of those countries, today are vastly better than they were under the Soviet Union Leadership, thats undeniable, any number that you care to compare between today and the eighties, be that GDP, standard of living, life expectancy, whatever, and the Poles, the Balts, the Hungarians, etc, live better today.
And if the Russians are better by living without the “younger brothers” its a “Win/Win” situation? Maybe, but just maybe there´s a lesson in there?

These countries could remain neutral, they were never threatened.

They were never threatned?!
Tell that to the likes of Imre Nagy and Alexander Dubček…

Now they are under the gun, my congratulations

Dont flatter yourselves.
From 1945 till 1989 those countries along with their Western European oposites lived right under the threat of a massive nuclear Götterdämmerung, conventional armies the size of the ones that fought the IIWW were stationed inside their borders, and their cities had more nuclear weapons pointed at them than what the US and Russia together field today . On top of being on the first line to be transformed on a nuclear waste land, the chaps that lived “East of Berlin”, if they felt slightly “independent” might receive the visit of seven hundred thousand´s “Communist Brothers” driving T55/T62´s…
Thats being “under the gun”.

[QUOTE=paralay;2378027]

If Finland wants to maintain good relations with Russia, then it should not Join an aggressive anti-Russian bloc. If you want to defecate at the front door neighbor, you will get adequate (or any) reaction. Be ready…

The only way that Finland would join NATO is if it feels so threatned by its Eastern neighbour that the majority of its population would agree with it, if that happens, well Russia can only blame itself.
Look at your posts… Loved the bit about “military resolution”…
And while you and the likes of the JSR “Russia Stronq crowd” might not like, Russia wont do nothing against a NATO country except yell a lot and troll the informatic systems of that same country.
And for Christ sake, stop with the “NATO agressive bulls####”, the western European countries are spending 1,8% of their GDP in defense, they are not preparing themselves to march over Moscow.
It hurts that your old “allies” have decided to pass themselves “en masse” to NATO?
Well sorry about that, but the Poles, the Hungarians, the Checks, etc, didnt particulary liked “Soviet friendship”.

In 1938 – 39 years were the Soviet-Finnish talks on the territorial issue.

Finland disagreed. This issue was resolved by military means

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%82%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE-%D1%84%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B9%D0%BD%D0%B0_(1939%E2%80%941940)

Next time i see any Russian in this fórum going ballistic over NATO expansion into the East i’ll send him this post…

10 years in it seems that a Su24 with dumb bombs gets more results than 11000 sorties of western jets including SHs.

Face meets palm

So I suggest keeping the F14A in service would have been the best choice.

Great idea, lets have a platform hugely expensive to maintain, built in the seventies, in the Fleet! Highly useful…

VTOL, speed, altitude and … Lasers…

While we are at it, might has well throw in stealth and have a development program for a decade and a half and 20 billions of development budget. And i want sixteen MK41 VLS on the wings, that new 130 mm gun from Rheinmetal and Choban armour!

Capability creep at Key Publishing?

I´ll get me coat… 😀