Could modern Russian military conquer Scandinavia?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 вер 2024
- This video pits the Russian military against the combined military might of Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Finland. Could the Scandinavian quartet withstand the Russian offensive? What is each country's strongest card? And how would geography influence the outcome? This is a theoretical analysis, without any third party interference. Watch the video to find out how it'd all unfold!
Image elements used in the thumbnail:
Sukhoi Su-30SM in flight 2014 (modified work)
By Alex Beltyukov / CC BY-SA 3.0 GFDL
creativecommon...
Saab JAS 39 Gripen at Kaivopuisto Air Show, June 2017 (modified work)
By Tuomo Salonen / SIMFinnish Aviation Museum / CC BY-SA (creativecommon...)
Music by Matija Malatestinicwww.malatestini...
Go to / binkov if you want to help support our channel. And enjoy the perks such as get access to our videos with no ads, participate in monthly polls deciding which topics we'll make into videos and get early access to various content.
Suggest country pairs you'd like to see in future videos over at our website: www.binkov.com
You can also browse for other Binkov T-Shirts or Binkov merch, via the store at our website, binkov.com/
Subscribe to Binkov's channel for more videos! / binkovsbattlegrounds
Follow Binkov's news on Facebook! / binkovsbattlegrounds
Follow us on Twitter: / commissarbinkov
As a Russian, I would say that if there is any cause for conflict with Scandinavia in the future, we should just settle this over a few hockey games! That's the best way
Hehe, that's good.
Agreed!! 👍
Agreed indeed!
Yes agreed👍🏻
I like you, Mr Mikerov. Fair play.
A year ago I would've believed this. After seeing what Ukraine has been capable of... My money is on Scandinavia.
yeah but that was with outside support
@@xbit_rex that was when russia had more tanks.
@@xbit_rex you don't think Scandinavia would have the same help?
@@sweetbarry no he said they would have no outside help
@@xbit_rex yeah but if this actually happened nato would have joined the war, because of denmark and norway being in nato
The danes would just deposit a field of legos along the frontline and cause devastating casualties
@Goran Oh god
Thanks for the laughs :)
Binkov said no nukes allowed
I thought the Geneva convention banned the use of lego bricks, they are clearly inhumane weapons
Goran yea dropping chemical bombs and indiscriminate bombing is also banned, but it still happens in Syria. These rules don’t mean crap
Q: "Could modern Russian military conquer Scandinavia?"
A: "No."
As a swede I can say that we would fight very hard to the last fin
hahaha, that seems about right.
hahaha, this made my day!
Erik- some wag during our civil war said "I have already lost one cousin to this war, and I stand ready to sacrifice my wife's brother!"
Just as the British would fight to the last Frenchman!
Made my day
Number of tractors in Finland: 479 504, Sweden: 374 299, Norway: 306 869, Denmark: 85 293
I actually laughed.
It can tow all russian tanks and mobile artillery
You never ask a woman her age, a man how much he earns, or a Ukrainian farmer where he got his Russian artillery
@@swedishmake-upgeek5650 or where he hides the rest of his Russian stash!!
Funny, Russians loot stuff from people's homes...a few hundred bucks, maybe?
Ukranian farmers....loot Russian Army....enough for a couple years salary. That must REALLY PISS Putin off....not only does he lose battles....the enemy takes his stuff too!!
@@mason9421 same
As we have seen, Russia cannot defeat anyone. The retired Finland sniper would likely kill them all...
I agree, they would be up against a much more technologically advanced force than Ukraine and even themself, the logistical problems would be even bigger than in Ukraine and the geography is a much bigger problem. Russia would lose the war and Finland might even take back what Russia stole back in 1939! More if Russia didn't agree to a peace deal and paid war damages.
@@mwtrolle how about nukes
@@jailissi3115 The thing with the nukes is, that why would you use them in an offensive war. If one starts a war, there is usually a wargoal to satisfy them. Using a nuke certainly devastates a big area for a long time but you would also cut access to the place you are trying to conquer. It is not a feasible weapon for offensive operations. Also the global backlash would be so big that it could even entail a retaliatory nuke from a nuclear state.
Eh, wars take years, we’re what a few weeks into the current conflict. I doubt Russian has even lost 5% of its total military assets. Russia doesn’t care if it loses 50% as long as it wins.
@Socialist Worker Drone yea and it doesn't seem like they have any of those. Also it seems Russia's strategy was to overthrow ukrainian defensive in the first few days, concer Kiew and install a puppet state. So far they have achieved non of that
"Modern Russian military"? Their tanks are from 1975, their rations are from 1995, and their strategy is from 1915. So no, they are not going to conquer Scandinavia.
If necessary Scandinavia could deploy its numerous metal bands hiding in the woods.
They'd only need to deploy the death metal bands.
😂😂😂
Plays Raubtier and Sabaton.
Russians switch side.
ua-cam.com/video/K5ZV2cmzGSs/v-deo.html
Deploy your Sabatons, your Bloodbaths, your Children of Bodoms, your Mayhems, your Gorgoroths, your Nightwishes, your Amon Amarths, your At the Gates, your Darkthrones, your Dark Funerals etc. etc. ad nauseum.
Im russian, I can confirm, if they played sabaton i would switch sides
If Russia embarrassed itself with Ukrain, imagine with Scandinavia
It depends. Are we talking about a war with Scandinavia or a special military operation
Have they? They are now taking over Donbass and even the defences we have been building for last 8 years are being obliterated. Look at the reports of the ukrainian defence ministry. Every day a new area is being taken by the russians.
they wouldn’t make it across the boarder the terrain is very difficult with a motorized infantry they would be sitting ducks. in the winter war 1939 ten Russians died for one Fin and it would be even worse for them this time if they dared to try it. Finlands air force is much bigger and stronger then Ukraine’s and Russia can’t even control the airspace there. glory to the Ukrainians.
@@jmus6494 hahaha 🤣
you fool! don't underestimate war!
Compared to Ukraine, the Nordic countries are a defender's dream; relatively few roads with vast areas of forests, hills, mountains, marshes and wetlands - perfect for leading armored columns into ambushes.
Yes. And no. There's almost no rocks in Ukraine. Europes corn and wheat box.. When constructing roads in the Nordic we use rocks. Alot of them. And then we pave it. To hold for our haulers (74T legal weight on some roads).
So Rasputsvija to the russian armor ☺
@@vedkorarsvang8193 What russian armor? you mean that reserve scrap heap from the cold war? or the ones currently being towed away by Ukranian farmers?
@@TheGreenguy85
☺ Stena recycling wet dreams.
In my fictive scene it could have been UK panzers on their feets towards Karlstad or Enköping (🙄).. The fact is still that Sweden got more (roads and railroads) with better strenght to hold panzers marsching by their feets or by railroad transport than Ukraine.
However, mainroads are dangerous without air superioty. And the rest of Sweden is raindeers haven. Forest, lakes and swamps..
I got your six in this one ☺
@@vedkorarsvang8193 yeah, atleast ukraine is trying to be environmentally friendly lol
@@johnsmith-de3tl
+1
😅
Well this aged badly.
One should take official russian numbers with a truckload of salt. And never, ever, underestimate the corrosiveness of corruption on a state and its abilities.
Reseeding this video after Russia's invasion of Ukraine, we have to say that those elite paratrooper units and most other spetznaz have been retired recently. Permanently... in Ukraine. With their lack of support, corruption and low morale, Russia would lose in the Nordic states as well. Should Binkov redo this video today?
Useless Russian bullies would not surprise me after Finland in 1939 and Ukraine now. As usual they'd break down, run out of food and fuel, moral and dissertion issues etc. And not to mention the outside help the Scandinavians would have. I think the world would be giving generous weapon donations.
And it’s not like Scandinavia is in lack of weapons, to begin with.
This is what I stated a year ago...
@@jsonkhamn That's right. We all know scandinavia has a massive artillery and compulsory military service, so it should not be underestimated
Well, Norway and Denmark are part of NATO. Therefore Russia would have to deal with NATO, too. What we see now in the Ukraine makes this scenario quite unlikely. Why isn't the scenario that the Scandinavians might conquer Kaliningrad and eliminate the threat from there?
Finnish militarys sole purpose is to stop russian invasion. It has been its main mission since winter war
yeah, russia will just send hungred man to die. i dont want to fight with russians, but i would gladly kick putlers ass right now!
Since the Great Nordic War in the 18th century really.
@@Snobiker13
Nah. Since even before the Long War in the 16th century!
Thats true, but the same goes for Sweden. The only mission have been to stop the Russians. Everything, tactics, weapons etc have been designed for that.
Yes, älä unohda Alpo Marttinen.
We, Nordics, would be just fine. Once Iceland intervenes the balance would tip heavily against Russia.
They're going to use the superior winter to their advantage!
Bro, stop kidding and take a sip of coffee ☕
But why would Iceland intervene? just a question
@@ThisDutchDude It's a joke lmao.
@@dodderythedromedary6890 oh oke
Better question is: Would the Scandinavian counter attack come to an end before the Chinese border or not?
2 years ago i'd disagree but now I completely agree with you.
What fighting experience do scandinavians have? Why can people never be realistic
@@e33d90 Youd be surprised, Norwegians, Danes and Swedes have all been deployed all over the world, even in Afghanistan. Finland has tailored its military *exclusively* to stop a Russian invasion (something the russians failed at horribly last time they tried). Russia would not be able to get far into Finnoscandia, but an invasion of Russia probably wouldn't happen either
@@notlyxuto be fair, the winter war was a remarquable soviet success compared to the current ukrainian war. Only lasted 3 months, allowed to annex the second biggest finnish city.
@@marcbuisson2463 That is true yea. I still wouldnt call it a resounding soviet victory tho. If anything it was a victory militarily, but a diplomatic failure.
I am a Finn, and I would move back home from Switzerland the next day if a war broke out. I don't think im the only one prepared to make it a living hell for anyone attacking my home country.
Should be possible to retake what Russia stole in 1939!
And you would have much trouble they can't move that many troops because they have problems everywhere internally and strategically
You wouldn't be alone
As swede who did the military service, I really wonder how many would show up. So few have any military training since 2000. Trust the finns to sort it out....
@@larsandersson5974 Yes, but the young generation at least knows how to handle a 9mm ;)
Before february 2022: Mighty Russian army would steamroll Finland!
After february 2022: Russia exists only at the mercy of Finland!
Haha LMFAO 🤣
orcs exist not my mercy but by nucs. If they do not have that, no one will play this game any more. Other countries would clean Ukraine from orcs and sent several missiles to moscow and sant peterburg as notice to surrender. 13% of all population lost will not give any options to disobey and accept anything that is told to do would be mandatory for orcs
Facts!
Power of Media
@@Vsevolod2002 on ww2 even Germany cant fight over 2 fronts, why you think ruzzia can now? They have enought human power, but exclude nucs do not have what to offer
This did not age well. At this rate the nordic countries would reach ural mountains.
Like milk - left in the sun..
@@johnfrederiksen5166 If Russia attacks Finland, then after given them a good hiding we should move to offensive and take back Viipuri.
#Lazerpigloop
No... lol
@@jounisuninen Yeah hell no. Its long gone.
As a finnish person i can say that most finnish people would be ready to fight for our country till our last breath. We are really proud of our country. Im pretty sure it has been counted that like 80-90% of finnish population would be ready to fight if a war would happen.
And as an Icelander living in Norway, we would walk over to help our brothers :)
@@arnthorhupfeldt7342 Absolutely, Finland is never going to be alone about this, if anything they will have to deal with cowboy militias raised by charismatic individuals setting off to hunt Russians in the woods...
Actually if I was Russian, id be fucking terrified even being told "ah comrade you going on an excercise near finland today, dont worry nothing will happen :)" at this stage
if woman helped the men and you had some day care sharing set up for kids then that would add millions of people to the military.... woman can drive trucks, be medics, do logistics and even snipers just as good as a man... you dont need to be armour arillery or infantry to be in the military .... even all those anti air systems with computer monitors could be staffed by girls freeing up resources
@@user-tz2ch1im3r that’s exactly what the Lottas were. They were finnish women who helped during ww2 in diff ways. They kept the country running.
Rules: No Nukes for Russia
No Simo Häyä for the Finns
Sounds fair.
lol he is dead
@John R lol
@@truthissacred То ти они говоре
Daniel P true
Scandinavian: "finland, you are not us. You cant join us"
See the russian borders
Scandinavian: "oh nevermind, you actually useful, you can join our grup"
Adam Fauzy Hafiddin the one fucking problem is Russia didn’t wore the right camo, so they will win anyways you muppet
Finland has been Sweden's anti-muscovite shield for some 600~ years, we wouldn't know what to do without them! Maybe try and go for Pomerania again? :'D When Peter the Great took Finland, Sweden basically just panic grabbed Norway like - "Guys help me!" xD
Mr BigCookie still, today Sweden has the largest, most capable, and most technologically advanced military in Scandinavia, discounting the Norwegian F-35s.
@@thereyougoagain1280 Denmark has, although not shown in this video f35's
This is just hypothetical war with do or die situation.
After seeing how Russia is doing in Ukraine, I would say this is an overestimation of russian military.
Yeah but it's going up against 3 other countries
@@Jovan0377 the bots are stong here
Bullshit
The russian active ground forces counts 280.000 before the ukrainian war. They used 190.000 of them in Ukraine
Jovan bogavac. You russians have to beat women in order to feel tough. You guys are bald and short af compared to most nordic men. Stop drinking too much vodka Igor its ruining your brain. The dragon in the movie rocky was a Swede btw lmao
@@Jovan0377 Russia had 950,000 troops in total. But thats TOTAL. Including navy, air force, and ground troops. Total Ground troops is 360,000. And 240,000 of them are in Ukraine right now. So Russians are maxing out.
Finland alone, with one hand tied in the back, would defeat any russian invasion attempt within a week. St Petersburg inhabitants would then have to prepare for an extended Weight Watchers' course, like last time russia tried to mess around with Finland.
I think the more interesting question is “how long would it take for the combined Scandinavian military to capture St. Petersburg?” 😂😂😂. Less than two weeks is my guess.
Nahh invading Russia is a disaster for anyone who tries. They may be a shit show in Ukraine, but Napoleon and Hitler both learned the hardware you don't invade Russia.
@@mezlabor Those were both militaries without the infrastructure or preparation for a drawn out conflict in winter. That is not the case for the nordic states, nor would they be fighting on multiple fronts. Unless they used nukes, Russia would be screwed.
@@cooly2165 its not just the winter though. The Russian soldiers might be garbage now but if they're invaded those people will fight tooth and nail. Every bit as viciously as the Ukrainians.
I have considered accepting the responsibility of taking the mantle of world leadership.
I would probably start with expanding Finland to the Greater Finland and move up from there. After we join Nato, we could absorb Norway and Sweden as independent duchies in the spirit of Helsinki and forging our Nordic brothers and sisters into a single force with diamond focus. After we get this all sorted out, 3-4 days, 2 weeks tops. We would move to liberate Karelia and form the area into an autonomous state, something similar to Åland.
While we would roll over the western russia, we would occupy the historical Kievanrus territories all the way to Ukraine. Once the area would be secured, we would teach the current russians of where the Rus actually came from among with our true heritages (plural), while we would be chatting with Zelensky of Ukraine joining the Greater Finland as a Independent dutchy. I have reserved about a week for these negotiations, but am willing to expand it up to a month if needed.
The rest of russia would be given pretty much free reign on what they want to do, probably would need to help them form their independent nations and governments and to help them integrate and play nice with their friends.
To those wondering "You, and what army?". Well, the army would be only needed to secure any given area for a relatively short time. Mostly we would be using words of power. Depending on the situation. There would certainly be a need for a few 'PERKELE', but nothing we couldn't overcome.
Problems solved, you're welcome.
The only question that is up right now is what title I should use to rule Greater Finland. Titles like "President", "Kaiser", "Tsar" or "King" doesn't really have the right ring to me. I was considering "Khan" for a moment, but it might be considered cultural appropriation. Anyone got a tip for a good title?
- Your's Inso I, the Awesome (insert title here) of Greater Finland
@@cooly2165 well Finlands army is called puolustusvoimat: defenceforces. And we have prepared to stop Russian attack, to be attacking.
Given Russia’s extremely poor, amateurish, and uncoordinated action in Ukraine it would appear Binkov may need to reevaluate Russia’s ability to take and hold enemy territory against a determined and motivated opponent.
The Western Military establishment projected our competence to the other side. It was considered the conventional wisdom until a serious real world test
Russia got a F-
While the Russian army definitely underperformed, the invasion wasn't nearly as bad as western MSM paints it to be. Ukrainians have suffered staggering personnel and technical losses that are completely ignored
@@slavicemperor8279 should we take your word for it?
Whatever the fuck you say, they retreated like pussies from north Ukraine and the only way they have to fight on the East is to level the cities with artillery. They are trying for 40+ days against 3000 troops
In Mariupol.
The invasion is going absolutely horribly.
@@slavicemperor8279 aha sure bot sure.
@@vladraduandrei5227 ,,Everybody who even slightly disagrees with western MSM or questions their narratitve is literally a Russian bot"
Nice try, schizoid.
The nordic countries: WE DONT FIT TOGETHER!
The nordic war begins...
The nordic countries: KALMAR UNION
no one is allowed to shit on the nordics except the nordics.
But the kalmar union is Scandinavian not Nordic
Oh wait this video is Russia versus the Scandinavian countries so it would technically make sense
@@thenorwegiangamerr Kalmar Union included Finland as it was a part of Sweden back then.
@@noidontthinksolol LOL.
New Topic should be :
Are there any planes in Nordic beside Commercial ones?
How crazy this is now. Looking at Russian troops in winter conditions with no radio, no food, no clothes, no fuel, no air control, no command, no advance more then 90km
Pewdiepie: 105+ million troops
Arms manufacturor: Lego
Arsenal and communications: Nokia
Weapon design: IKEA
Oil: Norway
Russia: RUSH B BLYAT
IKEA Gun... What a dream
bofors, bae systems ab, hägglunds?
You’d still need to follow the instructions to put it together
@@bogi2557 Build it you'r self weapon 😂
@@Juhani96 It’s cheap too!
After seeing how Russia is doing in Ukraine I’d say the Finns could beat Russia by themselves. The rest of Scandinavia would still help, though.
Yeap, just silence all the russian voices, join the twitter army and enjoy the destruction. Dont forget to appoint western sided comedian as a head of state tho.
Do not underestimate Soviet military capabilities. Those personnel sent to Ukraine are under-trained and newly recruits. Putin have not sent his elite force yet. He is a manipulator. This is what he want the world sees. A "weak" Soviet military force.
@@awangtaiepalat7308 he’s sent his elites too. And recruited conscripts. He wouldn’t do that if he hadn’t tried sending his best already. Asking others for help makes him look weak in his eyes. Like he can’t do the job with just the Russian army. Remember that the Soviets had to send in a massive army, many times the size of the opponent’s army, to finally be able to beat the Finns in the Finnish winter war.
Even if the soldiers are untrained the generals are not, and they left a whole giant line of tanks close together, leaving them vulnerable and making it difficult to retreat in the case of an attack. I’ve never been in the military. Even I get what a bad idea that is.
This video didn’t age well with Russia. Finland could still defend itself. Soon Finland will be in NATO. Finland would have great air support.
A great many volunteer soldiers from the rest of us northmen as well as economic and supply support would flood into Finland if Russia ever invaded them.
We see eachother as family here in the north. And a lot of us still carry an inborn grudge against Russia. There is no way in hell that we'd leave Finland to fend for itself.
Well, as I was taught in the Finnish defense forces, the purpose of it isn't to win a war (against the most likely aggressor). It's to make a war too costly for an attacker so they wouldn't attack in the first place
Same with the Swedish.
@@GyattBoyCool Acting like a porcupine is a great strategy IMO. Especially if you're a small to middle sized country (at least military-wise) with potential threats with capacities much larger than yours.
@@GyattBoyCool I'm from Norway. My father worked in the Norwegian Army/Navy for a long time. Our strategy against Russia is simple, and two-pronged. 1: Make them over-extend. Allow them a fast approach, goade them on. 2: Run hit-and-run guerrilla tactics, destroy their supply lines, force them to hold every little piece of land and never let them sleep.
3: Hold until NATO arrives.
The Taiwan doctrine, i see.
@@TheSystemaSystem isn’t the Heimvernet practically trained as a guerilla force these days?
This video is absolutely outdated due to current events.
It needs to be redone.
It was outdated already prior. To suggest the Russian Baltic navy would even take on the Swedish navy alone is laughable. Sweden got 7 Gotland and 5 visby.
Visboy have top tear airdefence. And Gotland is probobly one of the best, if not the best submarine in close waters.
US navy spent 2 years improving there sonar until they could detect Gotland. Russia did not
I clicked on this video thinking it was a recent one, but realized it's useless to waste 18 minutes of my time learning about Russian military capabilities we now know doesn't exist (and likely never existed).
the "military superpower" part aged like milk
ALLO This IS TalIbAn hElO USA mIliTarY sOOOPERPOWEEEEr LeTS lEAVE 70 BiLlIon oF tAnks In Afghanistan
@@MorrocanDarijaArab cope
@@MorrocanDarijaArab at least the U.S has 70 billion *WORTH* of tanks.
One point of note: the swedish air force is specifically designed to not need airfields. A dirt road is enough
@Kristian Froelich 130ish to be a bit more accurate. And Sweden does not stand alone. What's the next comparison? China vs Liechtenstein? 🙄
@Kristian Froelich hahaha bro you cant read then?
Kristian Froelich Did you seriously just compare the Gripen to a 262? That’s a fucking stretch to say the least
@Kristian Froelich i am not sure i agree with that. Especially when the defender tends to have the advantage. I say the quality of the pilots is the biggest factor. Like look at what the Israel airforce has achieved with their amazing pilot training against bigger numbers..
@Marcus Hillerström man sweden is kinda cocky for naming an anti-air weaponry named after the main protaganist of a kids book plus didn't they make a land mine called lille skutt.
There is one big thing that is missing from this analysis. The Swedish, the Finnish and the Norwegian armed forces have only one realistic enemy. And they've had it for 60 years. Our entire doctrine is based around stopping the Russians. We know where all the roads are, so we'll mine them. There are valleys that must be crossed, and mountain passes that have to be scaled. We'll turn them into fortresses, réduit national style. The entire point is to make an attempt so painful and costly that they will never try.
As for the numbers, the Norwegian ones are optimistic. One of the four frigates is more or less permanently beached after an accident with an oil tanker, and 7 of the F 35 are in the US for training purposes. A further 4 are stationed on Iceland, but would probably be recalled in time.
They had 5 frigates. They now have 4. The F35s in the US and Iceland are just a flight away.
Yeah. The analysis is correct for the scenario, technically. Given unlimited time and unlimited morale.... Russia would win. Enreality, Russia doesn't have unlimited time and morale.
Russia could win, but as the analysis says it is so pyrhic in nature it isn't worth trying. Specially since there is nothing to gain. What would Russia get for this massive expense of national scale. We are talking hundreds of thousands of dead. they would get piles of rubble, forests and occupation of area inhabited by people who hate them (not currently, but they would for the invasion).
Since not only would Russian artillery pommel everything to rubble.... The national redout would mean scorched Earth, when it is not anymore possible to hold an area. For example Russia would have to fight meter for meter for Helsinki and in the end it would be pile of rubble. There is no bombing out the Finnish defenders out of Helsinki, since it has one of the vastest underground infrastructures in world due to the bedrock allowing it. The urban jaeger troops defending Helsinki are trained to and will go underground immediately and resist from city size underground bunker. One has to either take it meter by meter, starve it out or gas it out.
Any significant plants or industrial facilities would be self destructed before allowing them to fall to Russian hands to prevent them being used for supporting Russian war effort. We are talking most likely to scale of blowing up hydro dams, the flood damage to own population be damned level of scorch. Steel mills, paper mills any industrial factory, blown and burned to ground to deny it to enemy. Since to leave it would be a gain for Russia and a war booty and thus reason to continue the fight for Russia due to the things gained or to be gained.
And most likely there would not be "think of the children and civilians" in Finland. As with WW2, as soon as there is war Finland will call Sweden and say "you gonna take our children to your national readout, cool thanks". After which there would be evacuation most likely via Vaasa to Sweden. After which there is no civilians in Finland. National defence obligation means every citizen is part of war effort. It is totalest of total war. As said for example Helsinki would dig in and would have to be starved out or taken with just staggering losses of most likely finally hand to hand combat.
This is the scenario Finland has been preparing for decades. The question never has been could Russia take us with unlimited time, morale and all national recources. That is always a YES, given the comparison of sized. The real question is "Is it worth the cost to Russia" and "Would the Russian morale hold". Throwing hundred thousand after hundred thousand troops to slaughter to get the rubble of what will be left of Finland is not worth it.
Finlands main economic driver is educated population, engineering, technology and sciende. You can't take that by force. Rest is just lots of forest (Russia has more than they can care for), some minerals (Russia has siberia) and some baltic coast line (Russia has baltic access already). So unless Putin is replaced by raving madman, they won't attack. If he is replaced by raving madman, they will attack for sometime until the conscripts and population on Russian side goes "this is stark raving mad idea and my family has lost all young men" and Russia would domectically be forced to stop way before it runs out of resources.
Russia isn't USSR and even USSR didn't conduct this sized warfare after WWII and WWII was a patriotic war of defense for USSR (which THEN expanded to punishhing raid and conguest). It will be far harden to justify offensive total war of national scale.
Yes Russia has fought in checenia, georgia, Ukraine etc. but those are way smaller affairs and they had strategic goals like Sevastopol. Those are all small skirmishes compared to "throw hundreds of thousands of casualties at taking irrelevant to Russia scandinavian territory for no gain". It would be new afghanistan except closer to home and in modern times of information transfer.
It would be a shitshow on all sides. All it would do is burn casualties in all sides, render cities to rubble and no one would win anything in the end.
@@aritakalo8011 Good analysis. It is indeed safe to say, under any circumstances, Conquest of Finland ( not to even mention rest of the Nordic countries ) would be a very severe pyrrhic victory for Russia.
Ari Takalo that is actually a very good answer. And what I have been saying for years, to my Scandinavian friends. In history in general the defending side had varying advantages to some degree over the attacking side. So the attackers would have to compensate, eighter with higher numbers or resources or some kind of technological, or strategic advantage.
In this particular case of Russia invading Scandinavia, the advantages for the defenders would be great as said. Dose Russia possess sufficient material advantages and resorces to conquer all Scandinavia in a total war? Also yes! But as you mentioned, WW2 was a war of atrition, it was a matter of life and death, the winner takes all and the loser loses all, so both belligerents threw all their weight into battle the axis alliance and the soviets, and the heaviest of the two and the most resourceful won.
In this case and in a scenario of total war ,given the “weight” difference the only possible victor would be Russia, but given the costs involved, it would by far be not worth it, a win for Russia would actually be a lose for them (material and resources would far outweighs the gains) and so it would be a lose for both sides, for Scandinavia perhaps a final one.
So the only resonable posibilities of such a confrontation and ones who would grately help Russia win, would be eighter to have some kind of very spectacular or seminificative gain at stake, for wining the war, that would imedialty help Russia or in the long term, and counter the costs for achieving such a costly victory, but as it was said, it is not the case, neighter material resources or other. And even so this is would not be the best scenarios, as country’s in todays world are more pragmatic, towards the loses rather than expansionists.
The other “best motivation scenario” and most helpful for a Russian win, would be to have the same motivation as in ww2, life or death, eighter take all of Scandinavia or die, is it the Scandinavians or is it the Russians? Like in eighter take all Scandinavian land or kill all combatants. Then yes.
In this absurd theoretical case scenarios then , yes, the Russians would be the clear victors, and victory for them would be guaranteed, no matter how hard or viciously ferocious the Scandinavians would fight it would just make the costs greater for Russia, but could simply note cope with the sheer numbers and mass of resources of any type thrown into conflict.
Honestly, Russia is just about the only reason why Northern, Central and Eastern European countries even maintain armed forces at this point. Poland could probably be conquered by Lithuania if for no other reason that no realistic war scenario in any of these countries does not involve Russia, hence nobody would be prepared for anything different.
"1 military superpower" LMAO. This statement aged like milk...
No, it didn't. Russia has one of the strongest militaries in the world, only outdone by the US and China, perhaps.
@@dukedase7 which is precisely why it isn't a fucking military superpower
@@dukedase7we alm thought russia was nr.2 in the world in terms of military. Then we realised they were only nr.2 in Ukraine, and now they are nr.3 in russia. Their own fkn country💀. I just laugh at this point, some things never change apparantly. Is it genetic for russians to be this bad at war?
16:29 "Eventually Finland would surrender though"
Right here, at this very moment, is where you went completely wrong. The state may surrender, but the nation will keep on fighting from the forests until the very last one is deported to Siberia. And even that may not be enough to stop 'em.
In 1997 Finnish military training some things were emphasized: a) No digging in. It is pointless against massive firepower. Go for the flanks if you are in a unit that is capable. Be on the move b) Once, not if, once things crash the guerrilla war starts. I am a signal guy with radio yet even i got guerrilla training. Artillery was omitted here. Also the air force finland has is meant to provide temporary air cover for reserve to come into play. Once that happens all scenarios are open and the horror ending painted here becomes a real chance plus then some. The occupying forces atrocities and partisan response to that would be second to none. Surrender by a captured gov. speaking forced words into a mic would not mean much at that point.
The real risks to russia at this point would be somewhere else. The amount of forces they tie down here is so massive that i am quite sure CIA & Co have plans on what events to trigger elsewhere as response. WW3 would be surprisingly close as i am sure other countries would not sit idle. Or actually in traditional sense they would but covert action e.g. 'color revolutions' etc. would be on the menu.
@@heikkint The Russian people/lower level leadership, would depose their current leadership (coup). With economic conditions as they are currently in Russia, it would be the lesser of two evils to avoid such a ridiculous adventure...because, there is no way they would be able to hold long term because of endless carnage inflicted on their occupying army...and the punitive sanctions levelled against them...the Russian government would collapse.
@@RoyChartier A scenario on the table no doubt. For me though personally this is hard to predict how this would play out. I get the feel that average russian men especially are pretty jingoistic and when shove turns to push they would revert to 'WW2 mode' and start absorbing damage and dealing it too in a patriotic spirit even if the reasons to go to war were clouded to begin with. It would come down to what morale and motivation they have. I have no clue to be honest how the average russians fighting spirit is built today. What are the building blocks that would make them fight hard or just turn on their own.
As a swede I agree. The finns won't give up even if the state does. No way.. and that goes for the rest of us there after. "The fight is'nt over until the country is liberated".
very romantic movie watchers xD
One Finnish sniper to Russian battalion. "I have you surrounded."
1 russian atomic bomb - by by finland
He is building wall between two Eurasian country.
@@DY-ij3ch yes but these scenarios don't use nukes, only true comparisons between two armies. Russia would win but at very gruesome costs. Many Russian families would be burying sons and fathers killed in the conflict after all is said and done.
And just in case somebody do not know the history of the winter war. It actually happened.
Russian artillery: No u, again
😂 „all Russian soldier are professionals…“
Yea, we are seeing how a professional army got stuck on a 40 mi road, in three lanes, with no supply lane open, while the defenders are mounting counteroffensive measures at will. Sorry, but professional is something else…
They were giving civilians more time to evaquate Kiev
@@Shadeborn Russia literally put mines on the evacuation route. Their logistics are just dogshit and are not capable of an actual war, this youtuber is delusional
@@MrDewwwwwwwwwww Let me guess,,,, news straight out of Kiev.
@@Shadeborn Videos, straight from the people who are trying to flee.
@@MrDewwwwwwwwwww Guess somebody doesn't want anyone to leave
This didn't age well
Russia: i fear no man but that thing
*lego landmines*
Its scares me
Ouch!
And Sweden has Surströmming Bioweapons.
So the Russisn would not dare resort to nukes to overcome The Lego Landmines and the Finns.
very few people nowadays understand that reference
That freak (Finland) is not here, is he? How tf do I take this thing off?!
Russians are no atranger to toy mines
iceland would have made the difference.
It's not against UK, threatening to leave NATO won't work
What about Greenland.
There must be a reason that Trump wanted to buy it?
He dared not risk invasion
@Aaron Barclay Navy
@Aaron Barclay I do believe that was sarcasm on his part.
@@SG003 Actually they were ready to go all the way against UK. They tried to buy more vessels from USA but were denied. Then they held aloft a interest in Mirka class friggates from the sovets but the dispute ended before they bought some from them. They would make a good fighters, no doubt.
Source: ua-cam.com/video/S-FYP2OgBAU/v-deo.html
By looking at how the Ukraine war is going and how VDV failed I'm pretty confident we are more then well prepared for anything they could send here.
No kidding. Russia couldn't conquer a big lunch, let alone Scandinavia lol. Russia is an antiquated, backward paper tiger.
Russians need nothing in scandinavia. What scandinavian country eliminates 3000 theirown sitizens of russian nationality each year for a 8 year? - no one!!! So no reason to conflict🤷♂️
Keep calm & strong!
Son, you know nothing...
Before feb. 24. Russia concentrated approx. 180000 soldiers and entered in Ukraine with 65000 as for military assets, they are not using even 10%, still, it is conflict there are casualties and destroyed vehicles etc. on both sides and ofc Russian army is not perfect no army is...
Russians have total dominance over Ukraine in every term... You heard of destruction of merc's camps in the west of the Ukraine, many fleed home after few hours they thought it is some blog adventure, and there is a lot of information you can get if you search for them...
And this is only military operation not a war, we dont want to imagine and see full scale war of Russia...
God Help us all !!!
paper bear*
Finland actually has closer to 800,000 military reservists that have participated in training during the last 3 years.
+900.000.
This video didn't age well of course but it had some serious flaws back when it was released too. Here are just a few of them:
+ The Nordic armed forces are generally quite a bit stronger than what the video claims both in terms of manpower and equipment.
+ Gender equality may be important here since it effectively doubles the Nordic countries' recruitment potential.
+ Russian law does not allow for conscripts to be deployed outside of Russia. They would be anyway of course but there still are limits to how much Russia could rely on conscripts for an invasion force.
+ The Nordic forces' terrain advantage is far more important than what the video stipulates. This is especially true in winter. All Nordic personel would know full well how to handle sub arctic conditions but only a small part of the Russians would. The rest would be sitting ducks in the snow.
+ The Saab Gripen is not just a "capable" fighter, it's a top modern one, certainly equal to Su-35 and probably the F-35 too.
+ There is no quality analysis of the marine powers. For example all Norwegian, most Swedish and half of the Finnish "missile boats" are not missile boats in the traditional sense at all. The Swedish and Norwegian ones are actually classified as corvettes but they aren't that either. They are a new kind of ultra fast, highly maneuverable and heavily armed stealth ships specially designed for coastal defense. Comparing them to traditional missile boats is a bit like comparing a ww ii battleship to Nelson's HMS Victory. Those ships are almost unique to the Nordic countries, only China and Greece have something similar.
+ The entire armed forces of the Nordic countries are specially designed to repell a Russian invation. It's their one and only purpose.
+ The Nordic countries have huge financial reserves, the Norwegian international pension fund alone is estimated at a value of 1.5 trillion US dollars. This money isn't intended to be used for military purposes of course but if it's a question of saving the nation it sure would be. How much military hardware can you buy for that money?
+ The hundreds of thousands of unguided anti tank/anti vehicle missiles deserve more than a footnote, especially when we keep in mind that Carl Gustav, AT4 and M72 EC are all made in Scandinavia. If necessary every single Nordic soldier can be equipped with enough firepower to temporarily disable a main battle tank or kill any lighter armoured vehicle.
Right. Solid arguments with value and muscles beyond.
Except that Russia use conscripts at this moment in Ukraine. This is a fact. Using uncrypted Open VHF to panzer formations in a language the foe understands is so hilarious 😅
The fact that the ruski panzers can't communicate with the airforce and do simultanious action is also a joke, yet true.
@@vedkorarsvang8193 using conscripts is actually a negative. Below a certain level of competence, more people in battle are actually counter-productive.
@@shooter7a
Agreed. Especially when the roads are few and/or bogged by hundreds of various vehicles. Add, let's say a regiment size of two thousand conscripts with poor military education.
I can small the fear and panic when they're stuck, and ambushed with whatever AT the foe can fire.
Railroad is the only option so far for Mr Putin' on the Fritz.
Raate road and the Rhein pocket all over again 🙄
NLAW's seem quite effective at blowing up Russian vehicles, they're Swedish/British and know as the RB-57 in Sweden aren't they?
@@corleth2868
Correct. Before 2004 we had Bofors (SAAB today) made Bill RBS 56. It was outstanding at the time it was released to AT units in Sweden in 1989-1990. The Bill system was sold after a REMO to the emirat of SA 😑
After seeing how Russia is getting mauled in Ukraine, it would be suicide to attack Scandinavia
@@newb0 Ukraine FTW
Pretty much in every single way it would be harder to invade Scandinavia
@@newb0 Way to squeeze out something entirely opposite to reality. Why do you think Russia would want to negotiate? Because their invasion isn't going anywhere near as great as they expected and they've realized that they're wasting large parts of their armed forces on getting bogged down in a fight which might at best lead them into a perpetual occupation that will gain them nothing while they're wasting away from being axed by sanctions. It's Russia that's desperate for an out by now.
@@newb0 Carpet bombing and shelling is a strategy only used by Russia because they can't afford guided missiles.
Russians can only kill women and children but if they meet soldiers they run away or just give up. At least as prisoners of war they are getting some food. That's more than they got from the Russian army.
And why hit an armoured convoy when it is much easier to just stop them from refueling? That convoy has not gone anywhere in two weeks, they are now just hiding under trees because they are scared of the drones Turkey keeps sending to the Ukrainians.
@@newb0 The convoy is a secondary target that can easily wait.
As long as you can stop them from being effectively resupplied with fuel and munitions, they are nothing but hungry people freezing in metal coffins while sitting somewhere in the countryside. And the temperature out there is currently some -10°C.
A great advantage as a defender with a lot of tactical space is the ability to pick your engagements outside of the central hubs like cities, which you have to defend, at your leisure. And a great concentrated mass of enemy troops, that probably have had time to take up defensive positions and await your coming, is not conductive to a successful ambush. Especially if the troops are suffering heavy attrition due to missing supplies, miserable weather and small scale demoralising hit and run sniper attacks.
And the fact that the convoy is not really moving much and not at least taking up organised positions in front of Kyiv, is very indicative of the Russians having problems with their supplies. Maybe because the Ukrainians keep ambushing them and the Russians are not able to effectively protect them, because all their offensive assets are stuck in a convoy in the middle of nowhere.
To quote General Omar Bradley: "amateurs talk tactics, professionals study logistics"
Estonia: *CaN I InTo NoRdIc* ?
sorry, no
You can into russia but no nordic.
Nooooo
@@swedishboy5649 Svenskene burde vært med i Nato.
Sweden: hehe NO
In light of recent events, I think they'd struggle to conquer Andorra
A year ago: Russian army is to powerfull, they will conquer us in a week.
Now: our farmers will get new machines.
They sure must be afraid of Finnish invasion if 45 % Russian troops are situated close to Finnish border 😅
I speak finland
I dont understand you
Butt 🖕🏻or❤️
Don’t forget about the continuation war my dude
kuu_kettune :3 hän sanoi, että 45 prosenttia Venäjän joukkoista on sijoitettu lähellä suomalaista rajaa
@@jakerad9553 kiitos ;)
kuu_kettune :3 kutos^
Finland has 21 500 active and 900 000 reserve military (around 300 000 can be activated and armed rapidly).
Sweden has 24 000 active and 32 000 reserve.
Norway has 50 000 active and 33 000 reserve.
Denmark has 25 000 active and 63 000 reserve.
The good side, even though the Scandinavian forces are mainly defensive, is that the Scandinavian only need to eliminate one city in Russia - Moscow, to drive down any will for war. The Scandinavians not only have the moral edge, but also have the edge of not being dependant on crazy dictators to drive the army.
If Russia's leaders are killed, that's it for them. If one or two of Scandinavias leaders are eliminated, the fury just grows larger. That's the good thing about living in a state that takes care of you, you love and defend it till the end.
But this all won't matter much longer anymore, when Finland & Sweden join NATO.
lets hope no other country has brought Chinese tires lol
Besides, that Scandinavian airpower would be overwhelming!
@@anthonyfowler9695 maybe Finland, I think the other 3 use western or locally made tires
@@anthonyfowler9695 Finlands Nokian makes the best winter tyres in the world.
Är hemvärnet inräknat i någon av styrkorna? Är civil sedan många år men vill minnas att jag läst att HV är omkring 25000?
Russia's army is a paper tiger.
As a Swede, we used to joke about the Russian coming for Gotland, now Russia is just a joke.
Forget Gotland. Just wait for us norwegians coming to get Jämtland og Härjedalen back ;)
@@Giraf1964 And Sweden just cancelled the union split. ;)
Why? Does Sweden also have nazi troops that would hide behind civilians?
@@Giraf1964 As a Swede from Lapland: Please, keep your promise.
@@Giraf1964 Please do it. That would radically decrease the mosquito problem in Sweden. =)
Everybody gangsta until snow starts speaking finnish
Perkele
@Eric Johnson thanks from finland u made my day
@Eric Johnson Didn't understand a word you said! Speak English please !!
Yea,and sunshine shine all the time in Russia...they dont have snow,got panic when is snowing,u stupid shit
Russia: nobody can take us on winter
Finnish snow: PERKELE!!!!
Everybody gangsta til' the 900 000 reservists show up.
URA in the distances.
URAAAAAA
URAAAAAAA!!!!ZA RODINU!!!!
@@easthulk99 that was about finland...
@@pixelwortel9578 Ouh.
Given Russia's poor performance in the current war, I'm not sure the Russians could win against the state of Rhode Island
Russians might want to avoid Providence.
I'd say they could take the majority of the state. The US Navy would probably object to them trying to get onto Aquidneck Island since that's where the Newport Naval Base is. Fun fact, Aquidneck is the "actual" Rhode Island while the rest of the state is "Providence Plantations". Or at least it was until 2020. But I still call it that to deliberately piss off the type of people that would offend.
Russia:Invades Scandinavia
Denmark: “Deploy the LEGOs”
Sweden: “Send in the Chef”
Norway: “Block them with oil”
Finland: “How many times do we have to teach you this lesson old man!”
Russia: Laugh in unlimited tanks and manpower
@@loma_pl1931 well in winter war it didn't go well.
@@JusoMusic the Soviet Union won though
"Swedish Chef" isnt even a Swedish invention tho.
@@xkomachionozuka3010 true. But I said it didn't go so well
At the moment, the Russians would be hard pressed taking over an uninhabited island, let alone another country.
"Eventually Finland would surrender to Russia". Dude you really dont know the Finnish state of mind whenever shit hits the fan.
I agree, most likely even if a official surrender takes place the Finns would start performing ambushes and making the lives of the russian soldiers a living hell.
What stopped Russia from installing absolute control in Afghanistan then? Surely Russian might dwarfed that of Afghanistan as it does Finland?
@@Akugagi Simple: Geography. VAST difference. Twice the land area, with rugged, rocky mountains, over 7000 meters. Bigger than Texas. 33 million people, many guerrilla warriors. Finland is 5.5 million, mostly middle class and service industry.
Absolutely no comparison. Both brave, smart people. But not the same threat to the Russian Federation.
@@davidsiegel9847 Oh damn, considering they failed to install absolute control in Finland too Im going to have to take that as a compliment!
@@Akugagi Take what you like, as you like. Don't know each other, and the topic is not a contest.
Flawed analysis. The Finns would kick the crap out of the Russians. The Ukraine war has shown that Russian troops are poorly trained, have highly centralized command/control and that corruption within Russia has badly hampered that military hardware. The Ruskies would not have a chance.
Russia:we have an army
Finland: we have 1 sniper who uses a really old gun
and snow
Without a scope.
Russia: **starts sweating vodka**
He is dead btw he died in 2002
@@meisseli73 yeah I know
Given their recent performance I think Russia would struggle to conquer a hearty breakfast at this point
You sure about that? Looks like Kiev is surrounded..
@@BoleDaPole yes
@@BoleDaPole 14 days and still havent take kiev lol
Ukraine has over 60% bigger population, though.
@@seneca983 only sweden have 4x more gdp than ukraine.....imagine add in danmark,norway and finland gdp....we fk russia easy XD
and around 30 millions people live here more or less. we have few troops but modern weapons and tanks,jet flight , trust me bro, we gonna win easy if we have time to add more people from reserve.
Not a word of largest european artillery that Finland has which would be excellent at defending those narrow corridors between lakes.
Second largest artilley* russia has bigger xD
@@tumppu123-h4s well fuck
they dont
@@tumppu123-h4s Yea, well if u count Russia a part of Europe. I suppose they partly are 🤷🏻♂️
I think you meant eu not europe
This video may not have aged as well as others.
I think this video requires a remake. We've seen too much of how well Russia has performed in recent weeks, The remake might consider training, equipment maintenance, leadership quality, planning ability, morale, economic warfare, the importance of logistics and how useful secure communications can be. Merely comparing military inventories isn't sufficient, and doesn't persuade me.
Realistically, Russia wouldn't risk hundreds of thousands of troops in an offensive war.
And Norway is part of nato. They also know Finland isn't a threat since they are neutral.
@@vilzupuupaa4680 when has that ever stopped Russia?
@@kokofan50 has russia ever used nukes in a war? That was another country you know
@@ГеоргийМурзич but only russia has actually threatened to use nukes
@SLOWPOKE RODRIGUEZ Russian doctrine for invading Europe calls for the tactical application of nuclear weapons.
Russia: Invades Finland again.
Simo Häyhä: Are you challenging me
Findland thaws Simo Häyhä
Quite bold of you to assume that Simö even allowed himself to die.
Look up Larry Thorn
Perkele!
Cue tank playing Sabaton.
0:01 "... one military superpower..." LFMAO :)
11:46
Finland alone has 1000+ artillery and Finnish defence strategy is basically fighting retreat that heavily relies on artillery. Trajectory calculation formulas V.P. Nenonen, a Finnish Defence Forces' Inspector of the Artillery, developed are still in use today by all modern artillery.
Finnish ground forces have:
34 2S1 Gvozdika
48 K9 Thunder
471 122 H 63
54 155 K 98
24 152 kanuuna 89
76 130 kanuuna 54
41 MLRS M270
72 RM-70
and 700+ Heavy mortars
As you said yourself, they will have to advance through crammed spaces between lakes and swamps. Why wouldn't Blue side have the cheapest and most effective weapon designed for these situations? You may have missed some since i believe many are listed as Navy weaponry.
I think in some international reporting of weapons Finland hid lot of artillery hiding it under navy or something similar and then in one year's reporting pulled a 1000+ artillery out of thin air.
southern passage between Lake Saimaa and the sea can be defended by a battalion of artillery and anti-tank troops plus mines.. that terrain i totaly unsuitabble to wehicles offroad..
Indeed, and precalculations for fast firing solutions exists for all of Finland. Literally all of it.
a lot of outdated information here :^)
Combining it with wastelands in your country, artilerys can make huge killzones.
I'm not giving an inch to those russians. Perkele!
Wouldn't mind taking a few back from them though. Peeeerkele
@@man4437 of course! Karjala takaisin!
Karelia belongs to Finland!
Better we come to visit peacefully.
@@andrewgusak123ua Finland doesn't belong to Finland anymore :-P
Pewdiepie: lives in sweden
105 million soldiers are ready, and more are coming
They aren't warriors they are 5 years old kids
He lives in Brighton UK
Jesse Viitanen human shields
YeMan are useless
YeMan i know its a joke
Binkov I have a question. Why do you say that Finnish border with Russia is 940 km long? Wikipedia says it's 1300+ km long
So in a nutshell, it's basically perkele Vs cyka blyat with a dash of IKEA, cheap alcohol, Adidas, and Danish choking somewhere along the Lego-mined frontline.
and LEGO
Cover the land with bits of lego and the russian infantry will refuse to advance!
@@MrBigCookieCrumble I believe it would trespass Geneva convention, sir. No man want to go through those sharp, coloured plastic edges with unnecessary suffering.
@@berkaybayarstudent2978 added sir.
Winter war 2: electric boogaloo
I would love to see an updated version of this considering the current Russian and Scandinavian military status, and ongoing Ukrainian war. Russia is extremely over rated in these simulations just based on numbers.
@@Writeous0ne that’s mainly the initial surge that Ukraine seemed unprepared for especially in the south tactically speaking Russia has been beaten hard. With few major achievements since the initial surge
@@banger2998 no that's the narrative which you've been presented via western media.
The reality is that Russia holds 25% of the second largest country in Europe, they've moved slowly village to village to stop insurgency happening. Insurgency was the main reason the US was in the middle east for 20 years and couldn't fully control it because they move so quickly between villages that they don't clear out weapons caches and identify possible insurgents.
The media does not like Russia, the west does not like Russia, therefore you can expect any report on them to be negative.
You can come back to this comment in a few months and i guarantee that most if not all of Donbas will have been "liberated". Russia will set up defensive lines around areas they hold and help the "republics" to rebuild. When Russia become the defender it will be even harder for Ukraine to win any battles because the defender has a 3:1 advantage, Ukraine cant win in defence when they are at full strength, so they won't be able to win in offense with a depleted and untrained army. I wouldnt be surprised if after the Donbas falls it becomes a very inactive war, where Ukraine just basically accept they cant win Donbas back but they also will not officially accept Donbas as republics.
@@Writeous0ne there’s a million different ways to interpret what’s happening in Ukraine I completely disagree with what you’re saying but it’s impossible to knock it of the table.
@@banger2998 They where prepared, its not the first time Russia and Ukraine *lock horns* If you want to have a neutral view check out History Legends channel
@@Writeous0ne the cope is stong with this one
Russia has no chance against Finland, Sweden or Norway. It is not like Ukraine's vast openings but facing forests and swamps. Finland's european largest indirect aircraft came with artillery and rocket launchers and the Finnish Air Force, the Swedish Air Force and Navy and the Norwegian Air Force.
The Nordic countries will also be able to shoot in Moscow, so it would not be very nice for Putin to try to come and visit us.
lol im finnish and we woudnt have a chance
Russians can't even conquer Ukraine, so they would get their ass whooped
Russia is not doing to well in Ukraine either
@@nellateea3238 you’d crush them
@@nellateea3238 Strange of you to think that. You guys can call up to like 700000 reservists with one of the largest artillery units in the world.
This video didn't age well. Also strange it seems to assume Scandinavia wouldn't be able to import anything from NATO, which is obviously false. Supplied by superior weapons and training, a Russian invasion wouldn't last long.
Finland can solo by throwing Nokia 3310 at them
We are gonna shoot them from our artillery pieces
Hahaha!
Finnish soilder: throws 3310 at tank
Tank: explodes
Finnish soilder: picks up Nokia and calls his commander "I got a enemy tank sir"
Nokia 3310 it's great phone. Super stoun
Sweden can solo by throwing surströmming at them
The gotland island has actually been militarized since 2017
Correct! And of course, with Russia in mind.
Och typ all vår militär är centraliserad kring Gotland XD
In fact, it is and we count on our brothers from Sweden to give them a fucking hard time as long as you can hold them back.
Some constructive criticism
The main point is that all the Scandinavian/Nordic militaries are optimised and built around defending against a Russian invasion - _even the civilian infrastructure and roads._
Meanwhile the Russian military is general purpose and not specifically set up to only invade Scandinavia - who look at the Russian inventory and not only buy around the assumption of fighting it, but design their own gear to counter the Russian gear - the Gripen being an example, not only very capable, but *logistically* the best in the world - able to run much higher sortie rates with minimal facilities that are scattered everywhere (even the roads are designed to be runways for _that_ jet), and once the war is on that is a underrated force multiplier.
The Scandinavian militaries and the general population train for such a eventuality and have planned for it.
Part of the Russian Navy could even be considered a health hazard. Meanwhile the Swedes took out a US carrier in wargames.
And Russian forces have done worse than expected on paper in recent military actions in the past few decades in former Soviet regions, that didn't have anywhere near the Scandinavian level of preparation.
It may very well be like _Home Alone_ if Kevin had the bloodlust of _The Good Son._
You underestimate the Russian navy, the northern fleet has nuclear submarines but more importantly, a kirov battle cruiser , with proper support she will destroy all enemy fleets. Blinkov underestimated Russian airpower, especially the helicopters, they will be very hard to deal with. RUSSIAN IFVs are perfect for fighting in Scandinavia as them can swim across water, The VDV can drop with armour aswell. I think blinkov is overestimating the Scandinavian army
@@ivanvoronov3871 the real question is would Russians be willing to wage a unjustified offensive war with no objective other than pure occupation and exploitation?
Ya, they'd be cool with it, what am I saying.
casbott
Next Afghanistan VS Russia 🇷🇺; Considering the fact Afghan people already defeated Soviet Union with an empty hand and we already thirsty to the blood of Russian people. It would be interested to vs braves against godless communism. Also we have in near future to have same Technological army as Russia 🇷🇺. I swear to God this time we will Defeat Russia in Moscow in their soil and once for all we finish this Satanic country .
@@ivanvoronov3871 How would they even enter the baltic sea if they nordics went all out and mined up and blocked the danish inlets with mines?
@@sayeedhusseinsadat3284 shhhh! *they'll hear you*
We knoe the answer now.
The answer is NO.
Finland: “how many times do we have to teach you this lesson, OLD MAN?!”
Marcus Aurelius and before that Sweden owned it for 500 years or so but the only reason that Finland was taken was because of the severe lack of nokias for communications and Ikea for manufactoring
@Marcus Aurelius ok? And? Finland still kicked the shit out of Russia like a lot
@Marcus Aurelius Mfw internet idiots say Finland hasn’t won a war against Russia in 100s of years
When they fought for their independence from the Russians
Not sure why this is relevant considering I never said they win, I just said they kick the shit out of Russians, which they’ve done constantly, they did it in their independence, they did it when they were invaded, they did it when they invaded
@Marcus Aurelius they were fighting 1941-1944 USSR and still kicked ass, small nation is unlikely to beat big nation i Understand but that doesn’t mean they’re not gonna make em pay for it
And ultimately it’s shown by how the USSR agreed to Armistice with Finland and didn’t puppet them unlike literally everyone else
@@looinrims this is not 1940 anymore for the weather being a trouble lol.
You can't go through Finnish forests with tanks. You'll need roads. And you need to rebuild them over and over again as you advance. You can't destroy Finnish artillery, tanks, rocket launchers etc. from air, they are mobile, disperesed and hiding in forests that cover the whole land like a jungle. The whole defense is based on giving unbearable material losses to invader.
Denmark Military be like:
Hey, a war has broke out
Build the Denmark military and of to the rescue !
Every set is sold seperatly !!
Actually, Danish troops are more or less the only Scandinavian troops which can with any degree of reasonability claim to be battle-hardened and experienced.
@@Mark-xh8md Its good that you are proud of your country but that is not true. If we are going in terms of experience and battle-hardened troops all Scandinavian countries have relatively similar amounts of this. But in the end, you can conclude that most Scandinavian soldiers have never seen combat (thankfully). For example, when it comes to Afghanistan, Denmark has had a presence of 760 troops and Norway has had a presence of 500 troops. Sweden also has about 500 troops there (but not actively combatting isis more so on security operations, however, they do get engaged by ISIL and get experience from such engagements) Finland also has a few dozen troops but in a similar situation with Sweden. However, when it comes to airforce Norway has the most experienced airforce of Scandinavia. If you look at Iraq both Norway and Denmark have kept just over/under a 100 troops there, however most the danish forces have been training Iraqi forces whereas Norwegian forces relieved other coalition forces and have been much more actively engaging in combat. All this said the danish forces keep the most active military personnel out of Norway, Sweden and Denmark. But this shouldn't be looked like a dick measuring contest. If a Scandinavian country where to be attacked, all nordic countries would rush to defend them. None of us can truly claim that our troops(meaning the majority or at the very least a large amount of our troops) are experienced or battle hardened. We have been privileged and lucky to avoid such situations.
A man has fallen for a man in Lego city
@@trollpikken6907 - The Danish presence in Afghanistan was in the Hellmand province, where some of the worst of the fighting took place.
And it is only in the past 6-8 years or so that our presence in Iraq was that low-key.
@@trollpikken6907 - And as regards Norway: Yes, we should assist at once! Partly (but not only) because they're NATO allies.
Sweden? Sweden can go write a feminist poem asking the Russians nicely to please leave, and, if that doesn't work, use their secret weapon: Asking them to check their privilegev😂
Tens of thousands of Scandinavian troops?? You obviously do not have a clue that Finns alone mobilize 300.000 troops in 2 days.
Can we eventually see a Chile vs Argentina 1979 video (what if Operacion Soberania actually happened)? Both countries were 1 day away from all out combat. In fact, bad weather cancelled Argentina's planned invasion of Chile's southernmost islands. How would terrain play a role in the conflict? Could Chile hold back what was at the time a very powerful Argentinian army?
-
Or could we see a modern day War of The Pacific (Chile vs Peru and Bolivia?). South America lowkey hasn't seen much content, I think it would be nice to see some fresh new videos covering that region.
Interesting and realistic scenario indeed.
Weeeena idea guaxo👌💯💯💯
Prefer to see Argentina vs Brazil it more of a arena war since both countires share the rio de la plata basin
Argentina is the bigger economy.
Or during the Falkland conflict 1982, Argentina had to have it’s elite mountain troops on the border with chile so that would be a good scenario if chile had invaded whilst the argentine conscripts, airforce and navy were busy getting destroyed by Britain.
I've spent long hours talking about this with my old man. He is a trained Hunter or "Jägare" and served as an officer. His job, if the war came(comes), was(is) to gather some men and get comfy behind enemy lines, wherever they may be, and destroy all infrastructure and supply lines for the enemy. He is trained in guerrilla warfare and know how to teach others how to do it and he is not alone. He is trained to not be seen and he especially emphasizes on attacking when the enemy is exhausted just to instill fear in them knowing they can be attacked at any moment by formidable soldiers. Hunters are ruthless elites and you will not see them coming. Hunters will ensure that the logistics of the enemy will crumble not just by military strength, but by terrorism. You cannot succesfully attack a nation or country without proper supply lines.
It is the duty of the Hunters to never give up and give the enemy hell.
That being said I love russians. You people are crazy and awesome! Just don't listen to the state if they tell you to bring guns here! Lets see who can drink the most instead! :)
Your dad has a good training. Tell him the best wishes and honours from a fellow jäger from Finland.
As person trained to be a Finnish lrrp borderjäger sissi. I can say we have some tricks in our sleeves that will make you not want to come after us to the forrest and not use the roads neighter. We know our woods so well that we are the forrest and when you have go to there after us you will never know where the next deadly ambush will come. I am a Karelian and in my family there has been reconnaissance jägers, spies and sissis (guerilla tactics using soldiers) for over 500 years, so we know how to fight and it is in our blood. We train every year as it goes: sweat spares the blood. I never would like to go to war, but if i have to i will simply do what is necessery to keep my coutry and the people i love free from opression of a nother state. At the end it will be just about you and the guy checking you back and thats it give all you got and no less. We are ready for guerilla war as well, so if we would lose the conventional war we would change to guerilla tactics and do asymmetric warfare untill even the last soldiers of the opressor state would leave us to be free. Sisulla perkele!
Russian people are not bad people they are good people. Most russian i have met i have had so much fun with especially in Viipuri the city we Karelians lost in the war. They have given me ne nick name Crazy Finn and i would say it fits quite well. Its the system that has history of secret police and supressing it's own people that makes Russia so easy to be led and taken over by those who dont respect the people, but steal the money that could make Russia good place for all it's citicens to live and wage war to show that the real enemy is not the supressor within, but some one else from outside russia.
*trained in gorilla warfare
@@oskarimantere1914 It's not gorilla, it's guerilla. There's a difference, one is an animal, the other is a strategy where a small independent group taking part in irregular fighting, typically against larger regular forces.
@@juhatynys4134
The Karelian tradition of jägerscouts was introduced in the Swedish arms by Gustav Vasa in about 1535. The tradition is elder. Teemu Keskisarja has a few pages in his book "death at the Raate road".
I did my service as a "jägare" aswell and should know the game.
My heritage is from Karjala and so is my wifes. My grandfather was a skilled hunter and tracker, but that was the savolax blood's fault ☺
The point is, if there's one. We got not enough ground to bury the enemies.
I'm Russian and hopefully the war will never happen. I respect Finnish people, hope our contries will live in peace. I see common mistake - you are underestimate the opposite side, which can be fatal. Dont get me wrong, but hunter skills sounds not serious, excellent archery, etc.. We have night vision systems, infrared systems, profi army, rockets and so on. The war in 39 was not efficient from USSR mainly because of Stalin repressions caused lack of officers, opposite for Finland it was a lot of luck, you had perfect expirienced exRussian general Mannerheim studied in S.Petersburg best military academy and fighted in many wars for tsar army. But it will not repeated.
Norway's navy would just hit cargo ships on their way over, and shouldn't be counted in.
Yea, but they also share a tripoint border with Finland and Russia, so there's that
ahahaha RIP helge Ingstad
The norwegians would fit AMOS to cargo ships and wreck the russian navy...
Plot twist: Norway would militarize all their oil tankers! Beware frigates
Olav just tell the norwegian navy that the russian ship’s are cargo ships and the russians are done
This video has aged so badly , little did you know . Think you better do a remake 😉
I think you forget a lot of factors. 1. Being a big country Russia can't afford to put all their forces on Scandinavia. At best they can do 50-60% where as the Scandinavians can, since they have very secure borders. 2. Economic power. Russia's economy is a midget. The combined economy of the Scandinavian countries is far bigger. Which means they can easily trade for a shit ton of military equipment. 3. The terrains favours the defenders enormously. 4. Morale. Russian morale is generally bad. Maybe not with the crack troops, but it is with the rank and file.
They don't need to trade for it...they already make it!
One thing I remember clearly from my tour in the military in Norway, was that if Norway was invaded by Russia, we have a brilliant 48h plan to hold the Russians at bay. Why 48 hours? Because that is the response time from Nato forces.
Thank you for this information. I will gladly report it to my generalissimus Vladimir Putin. 📡🇷🇺
@@TheMurtukov I guarantee that all countries in question has contingency plans in case of a war with Russia. But I hardly imagine it would be a surprise to anyone.
Yeah, America stores ALOT of equipment in good old Norway.
Why are you so afraid of Russia I dont understand..
@@GamesOfficialUA-cam Past history and current agression, especially fighter jets entering swedish airspace.
In a real war, Finland and Sweden would be very happy that Norway and Denmark are in NATO.
In a real war, NATO would newer lift a finger to help Finland nor Sweden nor any small country against Russia. This we can learn from history.
@Fresh Beginnings Something being in paper doesn't mean it results to any actions. I really can't see how anyone would be willing to start WW and risk nuclear war just because of Finland and Sweden. This is why we here in Finland maintain strong army and push for Nordic military alliance, the one reason for it is that only one who we can really trust is our selves and other Nordics who are in same position.
@Adolf Stalin Try reading again: "I really can't see how anyone would be willing to start WW and risk nuclear war just because of Finland and Sweden."
@Fresh Beginnings Even our resent history has been full of treaties that were broken or not acted upon, NATO has not been tested yet but few countries in it has grim history of ignoring such obligations so i wouldn't put my trust on them so easily.
Tell me one country that has caved in because of sanctions, even North Korea hasn't, and Russia has long history in not doing business with Western countries, it is just another day for them.
Russian military isn't as huge as it used to be, that is true. But they have means to bolster their army real fast if need be, also they have tons of resources so in times of war, i wouldn't be so stupid as to take Russia lightly.
@@duhni4551 yes NATO wouldnt do anything because NATO dosent want to start ww3 over some small countries :(
More Russians killed in 3 month winter war against Finland than 1 year in ukraine. Finland had a population of 3,8 million. That times Soviet 170millions.
Finland then barely had help and ammunition. Today nordic countries are modern and more advanced than Russia.
Finns: we are neutral.
Also finns: kuns, tänx and rtilleri.
History shows us.
Finland: "We are neutral"
USSR: "But Germany?" (cough cough, Molotov-Ribbentrop)
Finland: "We also have 2 non-aggression treaties with USSR"
USSR: "Oh no! look at that! The finlands attacked us by shelling one of our border-patrols!"
Finland: "Ok, international investigation?"
USSR: "No! Bomber goes BBBRRRRRRR!"
Neutral countries will always be the hardest pressed to defend themselves, since no-one else will
In practice, Finland and Sweden are just as (un)likely to be defended by NATO countries as its actual member states in Eastern Europe. Mostly because their neutrality was forced upon them by Russia, not freely chosen like by Switzerland. Nobody with half a brain cell would ever imagine any other country than Russia attacking them.
Sic vis pacem, para bellum. A large army is how you STAY neutral.
Russia: " _WE HAVE TANKS_ "
Finland: " _We plant more trees_ "
Russia: " _I'm just kidding_ "
Brilliant comment 👏👏👏👏👏
Russia: "WE HAVE TANKS!"
Finland: "We plant more trees!"
Russia: "I'm just kidding."
Finland: "I'm not."
I think atm Russia army would have a hard time with defeating Icelands army.
I don't think they could defeat your penguins.
I think their Ships will never reach iceland...
after seeing how miserably they fail to use their force in Ukraine the answer to the video title is a definite *no* ...
The fact that Norway and Denmark are part of Nato has been left out. Also the power of the Swedish silent submarines.
Sorry but there was reason for it the video was sweden, norway, finland and denmark vs russia
You do realise Russia also has silent subs and has a giant navy bigger than Scandinavia and all of Europe expect UK combined
Also that would give Russia the rights to bring in csto iran Syria and china
No outside interference was one of the rules.
Don't forget they have the ability to lay mines in very congested and important Russian waterways
We all know how Scandinavia Vs Russia is going to go down: a battlefield with Carameldansen blasting from one side and Hardbass from the other side as the Fins wait for the winter.
I agree xd
Fins when russia invades in Summer: *surprised pikachu face*
hehe :D
@@elementalgolem5498 To be fair, attacking Finland in summer would be worse for Russia than the winter, considering their swampy/marshlike terrain, Russia's advances would screech to a halt rather quickly.
@@TheSystemaSystem and Russia is specialized in winter fighting it wasn't actually meant as a tactical addition it was meant as a quick laugh
One thing to keep in mind in a hypothetical invasion scenario is the weak russian economy that regularly risks collapse, even in peacetime.
It would cost tens of billions of dollars everyday for the russians, and this cost would increase exponentially the deeper they advanced as the supplylines would get longer and harder to defend each day to the point where continuing the invasion would bankrupt their entire nation.
Scandinavian forces would not need to worry about this as they are probably the most economically stable nations on the planet to begin with and defending your homeland is not subject to maintaining a net positive budget.
Scandinavian forces would most likely also recieve insane amounts of military equipment, thousands of volunteers and several lend-lease deals while the russians would enjoy insane sanctions and diplomatic isolation.
The casualties would be horrifying for the russians, which in turn would cause their morale to take a nose dive as they would be terrified of marching for miles and miles of deep forest, forced to travel single file on narrow roads, being ambushed constantly by a highly specialized, trained and motivated force equipped with some of the most modern and deadly weapons ever developed like the NLAW.
Considering russia is barely able to keep morale and supply running for 6 days of invading Ukraine, even with total superiority in the air, completely outnumbering the ukrainians in every category on the ground, and having a very short distance to all major strategic targets, a hypothetical invasion of scandinavia would only serve as the perfect bone for putin to choke on.
At this point, it seems like all of Binkov’s Russia videos need to be amended. I’m not someone who trusts that Putin has attacked Ukrainians with all of the conventional forces at his command. I hope he has, as it shows how inept the Russian forces are. My fear is that he will resort to nuclear weapons- and as an American, I have ZERO faith in our current President and vice-president. Biden is inept and totally impotent as a leader- I have many friends in Russia and the former satellites, and they ALL say this wouldn’t be happening if Trump were president…
@@ncrawford1488 right…trump would be clapping at the sidelines, you do realise that trump didn’t agree with nato. It’s funny Americans praising trump, when he was nothing but a wanna be dictator. I’m glad trump isn’t in power now, he’d be arming the Russians to fight the Ukrainians.
@@carlw8072 I'm not a trump supporter and and even I know that's just rhetoric. I would fear we would be at war with Russia if he was in office. I'm sorry but Republicans are in Democrats are two sides of the same coin, they don't care about anyone but themselves. The sooner we all realize that and hold them accountable, the sooner the world can get better.
@@carlw8072 DO YOU HAVE FAMILY IN RUSSIA? I DO, and every single one of them- in-laws who I’ve never met included, feel very strongly that Putin WOULD NOT HAVE DONE THIS IF TRUMP WERE PRESIDENT. What data do you have? Do you have boots on the ground in Russia?!? NO, OF COURSE YOU DON’T. So why the vitriol? Do you simply hate Trump, or are you a leftie who just does what popular media suggests? I don’t think you’re smart enough to come to your own independent conclusions. Like so many on youtube, you are just parroting what you hear…
Also they did not take in acount all the high-tec survailance ground and air equipment that is "secret", also that nammo produses that can reach 150km. and also the highly accurate artellieri ammo that can hit a target dead senter at 40km.
Or the guided wepon`s systems that Russia is not equipped with.
But that would hold the Russians back at Finland and that`s not a interesting video
That didn't age well...