6 Comments
User's avatar
Operational Art Notes's avatar

Moltke always sought economy of force and decisive speed.

Nuclear weapons fulfill precisely that strategic role: they compensate for potential conventional inferiority through a credible threat.

Juuso Eskonmaa's avatar

They would be most significant in peacetime or in a period preceding war to strengthen deterrence. For a small country, this could be a decisive factor.

Operational Art Notes's avatar

What would Von Moltke the Elder say about this? “A state bordering a great power must ensure that any aggression has an immediate and intolerable cost.”

Pricewright's avatar

Nothing, just vocal cursings. So go ahead and good for you. Let them fear. And tell them, you will send nuks back, if Russia sends back land it took in 1939-1940.

Juuso Eskonmaa's avatar

Finland does not hold territorial pretensions toward Russia! But, the times we live in require sober assessments and a steady hand to establish credible deterrence.

Pricewright's avatar

I know, my friend, I know! Finland doesn’t have any territorial claims toward Russia, it is fact. Just for the records, I did not mean that. Finland has been govern by very wise leaders. The History is the witness. And their wisdom pays off. And Finland continues to make some smart strategic moves that earns only respect. Let’s not forget that main deterrence is not even the nukes, but love the people of Finland have toward their land and Lapland Culture, their courage coupled with determination to defend their country. The Winter War of 1939 is the lesson that everyone should emulate.