I except your apologyAlso tbf you didn't make a typo either, you used the wrong tense, again a simple mistake
I except your apologyAlso tbf you didn't make a typo either, you used the wrong tense, again a simple mistake
It's fine mate I'll make an acception for you this one timeI except your apology
It's social media and we're all mailing it in to some degree or another. It's not like we're subjecting our posts to six revisions before putting them out there.
But let's be realistic, neither country in any conceivable scenario was going to be invaded by Russia, so where us the advantage for the people?
This is not a problem for me as I only speak the one. I understand others to greater or lesser degrees, mind, but it would appear that I am hard-wired for this language.Pretty much yup, I also have a habit of forgetting to change language on the keyboard on the PC and only realising half way through a post I'm typing utter gobbledygook
And you can shoot down a Russian fighter with a kids catapult. ( Recent reports allege)M
Haven't both Sweden and Finland both got massive reserves in the army ?.
Sure I read somewhere Finland can call up 9 hundred thousand if they go to war.
The sad reality is a lot of the Brit lads in Iraq were killed by US and British ams left over from the Iran Iraq war. The world really is a mess.I just find it weird as anything that the percieved view on here seems to be "Russians should take out Putin for sending their friends, husbands, brothers and kids to die' - should they put blame on him, yup damned right to do so.
But errrrm, slight thing here, the deaths are being inflicted by Ukranians using NATO weaponry, from troops trained by NATO, and using stategic planning, targetting and guidance provided by NATO.
Now remember the anger when the 'fake' story hit the media about Russian bounties paid on dead us soldiers in Afhganistan, now ask the question will the vast majority of Russians blame the person who started the war or will the blame be directed towards those helping the killing of Russians.
I'm not saying right or wrong, I'm saying ask that very pertinent question.
So take an imaginary example.
If your brother or friend served in Iraq and was killed by an Iraqi who was using a newly supplied Russian anti tank weapon, the person firing it had just returned from training in Moscow how to use it, and your real time location was supplied to him by a Russian military analyst, are you marching with a gun to downing street or Washington to remove Blair or Bush or are you now hating the Russians?
It’s hard to know what to believe, but I’m reading that they’re throwing the new conscripts straight into the mix to replenish losses. Putin and his mates don’t give a crap about their own people.
This?Seen footage doing the rounds of a commander in an enlistment centre supposedly in Irkutsk in eastern Russia being shot.
Mobilisation going to plan then…
This?
Finland still required national service (universal conscription) with eighteen-year-old men receiving training and kept on the reserve list until fifty, I think.M
Haven't both Sweden and Finland both got massive reserves in the army ?.
Sure I read somewhere Finland can call up 9 hundred thousand if they go to war.
Finland still required national service (universal conscription) with eighteen-year-old men receiving training and kept on the reserve list until fifty, I think.
They keep them refreshed and fitness tests and whatnot over the period, so in time of war they could call up to meet their minimum quota.
Let's be honest, I don't think most countries would want to fight Finland in their own backyard, as they know the land, fortify it and have tonnes of artillery.
Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.