You would’ve loved to get French fries instead of the Dutch reach, wouldn’t you?

Unfair how those potatoes are linguistically attributed to the French, no?

When poor people put others in danger and/or exploit things for financial benefit, they go to prison.

Stop giving fines for big companies and actually start putting people in fucking prison.

Bring back the gestapo already.

You forgot the “/s”. Please, it’s important in these times.

Yeah, without paying it, so you save like 10 dollars by not paying for your shit, and then only have to pay 4.80 back in fines.

Idk what labour laws they broke, but companies are always getting away with shit like this, or even if they’re penalised, they’re still left profiting from the crime.

Hell I live in the Nordics with arguably one of the best labour protections in the world and like over half the jobs I’ve done have had the companies try to fuck me over with the compensation. From private people to large companies. Overtime, mandated breaks, whatever it may be.

Fuck capitalism. (Love market economies though.)

Also someone like a proper Sherpa sherpa from the Himalayas can function with oxygen that’s comparable to 7% sea level oxygen.

And there are towns with elevation so high the oxygen is equivalent to 15% sea level oxygen.

So this chart has pretty narrow limits. Sure, the legend does specify “breathe forever unaided”, but someone like a well accustomed sherpa who regularly climbs Mt Everest would have a much wider range than 20-25%

So a magical but injured life is possible, but a magical but non-injured one isn’t?

Cool. Cruel, but cool.

I don’t think you understand how posting hypotheticals on forums works; they get elaborated and “tested” by asking questions or positing premises. Thought experiments, as you seem to be aware of the term at least.

OP used the word exactly.

That means you have exact knowledge of it.

Of course having exact foreknowledge of such a thing would affect your life. Would that effect then affect the thing being the exact time and date? If not, then it’s utter gibberish, because by telling you about it, they’ve already changed history and thus it won’t apply anymore.

If however it won’t affect it, then you’ve gained immortality. You could play Russian roulette as much as you want and never have to fear dying. You can perhaps argue that maybe you survive a shot, but how would that be possible from a large calibre revolver aimed directly at the brainstem?

Again, skipping 95% of the reply, but still you feel the need to answer.

That’s rather weird.

How would Russia attacking Finland “divide Europe”?

Ukraine had no defense cooperation with any country, yet people still think Finland is in a similar situation, and like you, always willfully ignore NORDEFCO and the EU.

Paralysed from the neck down.

Then how am I gonna run the marathon?

So you’re saying you have no free will whatsoever, but despite whatever happens, the prophecy will be true?

That I could never drive an older car pretty much, because it’s easy to kill yourself with one. Much less a motorbike without a helmet.

I can never hold anything sharp which could cut the jugular. Couldn’t manage to go swimming, because diving deep and inhaling would somehow have to fail?

Either the prediction is bullshit, oooor it gives you magical plot armor (unless it’s extremely vague, but that goes against OP’s description),

Please show me where I make just a hint about that, I have not written ANYTHING about the Finish defense capabilities.

Ok:

Finland could be overrun before a decision was made in EU to even do anything.

“Our lacking ability to supply Ukraine without USA”. It’s not about the lack of ability. It’s about Ukraine not being in EU, so direct military aid, and especially troops is harder to send. Our militaries aren’t designed to be overflowing with equipment we can just donate away, so it takes a bit of time to see what can be taken and from where. EU is now, afaik, making seized Russian assets available to Ukraine, and getting money to buy armament with is quite as important as getting armament. Even more so, because with money you can also buy non-armament supplies, which are also needed.

Finland has never trusted Russia. Sweden tried to, a bit, by generously demilitarising Gotland, up until it had to rearm it a few years back because after there was no military there, suddenly Russian tourists of military serving age started “touring” it. Now there’s a permanent base again.

might have a chance to divide both Europe and NATO, and Finland could be such an area to poke.

What are you on about? Do you know how the Winter War and the Continuation War played out? How would Russia attacking Finland “divide” Europe, unless you’re implying that Russia is a part of Europe, because we were more discussing in the context of the European Union, not Europe in general. European Union is very strong and there’s articles that have been agreed to. International politics don’t really work with the “no I’m not gonna, because I don’t wonna” attitude.

You’re severely underestimating Finland’s defenses pre joining NATO. And that (usually American) cockiness is exactly why a lot of people still oppose NATO.

C4 is the easiest for this example. I can definitely manage explosives. You can rather easily make things which blow up.

Let’s make this easier then, I go to the woods and set up a huge fucking boulder on an elaborate pulley system (don’t worry about me finding them, I live in Finland were boulders and rocky surfaces are a plenty. My cousins actually operate a gravel business, so they have lots of proper gear for breaking rocks into smaller rocks, and vehicles to do those things with. So let’s say there’s a pit. I lay a ton of harsh gravel on the bottom of it, a proper few meter layer. Then I take a loader full of massive boulders. And another. And a third one. Place them around the pit. Place myself in the pit, and remotely activate the loaders to drop all those boulders on me. Oh and I didn’t mention, but I put a bed in the pit with me. It’s a bed of extremely sharp knives, covered by a thin cardboard so I don’t get stabbed if I easy myself onto it. On top of that, there’ another bed, upside down, also loaded with insanely sharp swords. All of the boulders will fall into the pit, crushing the bed system, which stabs and slices me into pieces while the boulders to the rest of the work. (The bed frames are soft enough so that they can hold knives, but will be utterly deformed by the boulders so they won’t stay in the way.

Then I’ve also paid for a crazy cousin to empty both barrels of a shotgun to my face with a full metal slug right as the stones start dropping.

But… I’ll survive?

It’s not a binding agreement. It’s based on voluntary cooperation, as is with quite clear letters in the name. But is is most definitely purely for defence cooperation. To challenge that would be silly.

Why’d you skip over 95% of the comment?

Where did you sit your lessons on Finnish military capability, especially in regards to a war with Russia?

Mine were in the Pori Brigade, and Häme Regiment for my special training.

And the EU article is a very clear defence pact.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/glossary/mutual-defence-clause.html

Please, do respond to the other points. I’m interested.

Did you also skip the part where I was completely right about the support numbers? Probably because I actually live here, and you had to quickly just Google something?

I do not think you understand the strategic danger Finland would be in without NATO

Well I’ve sat actual lessons on it in the army, from people who’s literal job is defending this country.

Where are you getting your info from?

The point is that a majority of Finns saw no need of NATO even when we had shittier equipment for our military and no military alliances. Now we’re in NORDEFCO and the EU. We’ve the advantage when defending, especially with our utilisation of our geography and the biggest and most accurate artillery in Europe.

With an arsenal of 700 howitzers, 700 heavy mortars and 100 multiple rocket launchers, Finland has the largest artillery capability in western Europe. Homeland defence willingness against a superior enemy is at 83%, one of the highest rates in Europe.

Nordefco is definitely not a defense pact

What on Earth are you smoking, my man? That’s literally all it is.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_Defence_Cooperation

Just the combined power of the Nordic countries would be pretty significant against Russia. Swedes rule the Baltic Sea, we hold the border with Russia, and Norway holds the North, with tons of cooperation that’s been practiced for decades (Official Finnish Defence Forces channel) .

And if Russia attacked an EU country, every member nation is required to assist?

The Treaty of Lisbon strengthens the solidarity between European Union (EU) Member States in dealing with external threats by introducing a mutual defence clause (Article 42(7) of the Treaty on European Union). This clause provides that if a Member State is the victim of armed aggression on its territory, the other Member States have an obligation to aid and assist it by all the means in their power, in accordance with Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations.

"… by all means in their power. "

That means military aid, troops, for those who can. France, Germany, UK, Poland, everyone.

This is why we can’t send troops to Ukraine, because that could be seen as an aggressive move by the EU against Russia. But if Russia attacked Finland, or any other member of the EU, Russia would be practically declaring war with them all.

Ukraine is a big country, yes, but compared to the entire EU, it’s something Russia dares to challenge.

It wouldn’t dare to challenge the European fucking Union.

It’s amazing you feel you need to mention you are not anti NATO, being anti NATO as an NCO in the Finnish reserves, would be insane now IMO.

How so? A majority of Finnish males are in the reserves, and I remind you that as we saw from the Yle article you linked, before 2022, most Finns were opposed to NATO.

We’re not so authoritarian that we demand people can’t have their own opinions.

~75% of Finnish males go through the service and thus are in the reserves up until they’re 55-65 (NCO’s and officers remain in the reserves 10 years longer.)

It’s alway fun talking to some American who thinks their military equals NATO (one of the reasons NATO wasn’t so popular here) and think they’re some knight in shining armor saving a damsel in distress.

Sorry bruv, but American troops wouldn’t manage shit in Finland.

A group of conscripts from a supply group (ie a group of cooks, basically, who get six months of training) defeated a USMC group in an exercise here in Finland.

https://www.iltalehti.fi/kotimaa/a/65e5530a-2149-41bd-b509-54760c892dfb

Oh fuck that’s paywalled.

https://www.quora.com/Did-the-Finnish-military-just-beat-the-US-Marines-in-Cold-Response

That’s better.

You should be more open to what you don’t know instead of assuming you do.

And what happens if you buy a literal ton of C4, cover yourself in the pile and detonate?

I have to survive somehow, right?

It is dehydration, just a different type.

Losing mainly fluid is known as hypertonic dehydration – or hypernatremia. Losing mainly sodium is known as hypotonic dehydration – or hyponatremia

In that scenario you can’t die of dehydration but you’re going to die of dehydration forcibly. So what’s going to happen?

Youre going to die of dehydration, because you we’re simply unaware that drinking too much flushes the sodium out of your body which is what makes you able to retain enough water to function.

Ironically people in hot environments and drinking a ton of water can end up severely dehydrated (mainly if they don’t eat anything, as food has a sodium and other electrolytes).

Now if you drank mineral water (or sports drinks but they’re rather sugary nowadays) or just added a tiny bit of salt to the water you drink, then it would break the prophecy.

Similarly ironic is that a lot of people who aren’t used to cold environments and get lost in the woods or something usually end up suffering heat stroke, as they’ve only a massively thick puffy jacket and walking still generates heat, which the jacket traps and your body can’t cool down and overheats. (Layers and breathing materials underneath the top layers is good, as then you can open or remove a layer as needed to regulate your body temp.)

For the sake of the topic of the thread, I’d like to know what happens if I’m told I die in 50 years from a heart attack while running a marathon, and after hearing that I jump out of a window, try to blow my brains out or shove a block of C4 up my bowels and blow myself up? I should survive, yes? And in condition to (attempt to) run a marathon?

Because if it’s not locked like that and can be changed then it’s more of a guess than accurate foreknowledge.

In the last few months, yeah, it was more popular than 50/50, that’s why it went through. But even during the first several months of the current Russo–Ukrainian wars, most polls showed it to be pretty even. Until it wasn’t.

Joining NATO was a good thing. I just do have certain reservations about it, and we definitely didn’t need it against Russia.

You’ll notice that September 2022 is several months later than the start of the current Russo-Ukrainian war.

The people who were pro-NATO used a lot of fear mongering or maybe you are naive

Or maybe I’m an NCO in the Finnish reserves and have a better understanding of Finnish military capabilities than you? I’ve sat lessons in which most scenarios of Russia attacking were discussed.

And even without NATO, we weren’t alone. We’re part of NORDEFCO and EU.

So yeah, I’m not naive, but you’re definitely I’ll-informed. Like a lot of people were, which is why the fear mongering worked so well.

Finland used to be under Russia too, so Finland is very likely on the list.

If you’re talking pre Finnish independence, technically, yes, but also, no. We were an autonomous region, the Grand Duchy of Finland.

And yes, of course we’re “on the list”, but unless Russia attacks straight up with nukes, it’s really not a potential threat currently. And hasn’t been since Russia’s “special military operation”.

We had good plans, resources and alliances to deal with a Russian who hadn’t put all their resources towards Ukraine, and we could’ve easily done it without NATO, but after Russia is even weaker and has no resources to send against us, we somehow suddenly require NATO?

Ridiculous. Do you know that the EU also has a mutual defence clause?

That’s why we need to quickly push through the Accession of Ukraine into the European Union.

Again, I’m not anti-NATO, and don’t mind that we joined NATO, at all. It was probably due at some point, and what better point than when Russia is weak and can’t even manage their usual threats. My problem is that the rhetoric that was used to gather support for the notion was entirely fearmongering.

Edit adding this direct quote from the article you linked

"Backing for membership in Yle polls has grown from 53 percent in February to 62 percent in March and 76 percent in May. Before the Russian attack on Ukraine, a majority of Finns had long opposed membership."

Well Finland, really, in this case.

Joining NATO really didn’t change the situation in practice at all.

We’ve had a pretty stable if salty relationship with Russia, since, well… quite a few hundred years since.

The NATO thing has been on the table for 70+ years. I don’t mind it went through, the idea of NATO is great (US just has somewhat too much influence over it for it to be truly a politically neutral defence alliance), but even when it went through, it was about 50/50.

The people who were pro-NATO used a lot of fear mongering about Russia. Even when it was rather clear Russia would not have had the resources and troops to open up a second front.

Just saw that yesterday and so I did too. (think of it that is)

Removed by mod