You have to give it to the Finnish people that they have - what should I say - some institutional knowledge when it comes to Russia.

After all they still have around 200 000 Russian troops at their borders. (6 feet under the ground but still very alive in their memories.)

For anyone who isn't aware:

- The Finnish are the ones who said - as Kremlin sent a million poor troops towards them - we are only a small country, were should we bury them all?

- The "Molotov cocktails" started as a Finnish joke about their practical invention to stop Russian vehicles. Russian diplomat Молотов (Molotov) had started the wittiness by telling that their bombing raids were just friendly Russians dropping suppplies.

That was the USSR under Stalin. Quite different story. Not to forget, Finland was part of the Russian Empire before WW1. Doesn't justify the Russian attacks on Finland, context usually does matter so.

If you read the thread I linked to you'll see that if you think Putin means what he says, Finland is in danger.

Putin is clear that he wants to go back to 1917.

In 1917 Russia ruled in Finland.

Putin is, in many ways, among the most dangerous and skilled world leaders. And the most daring one. That none of his actions have been seriously checked by anyone since he came to power surely didn't help either. If Putin had his way, it would not just be Finland, the Baltics and most of Eastern Europe as well.

IMHO, appeasement never worked with people like Putin (or Bush sen. & jun. or Napoleon,...). Thing is that war seems to be the only alternative. And most don't want that. At least not a shooting war against an opponent that can actually shoot back immediately.

He doesn't really need to grab some land, physically. He only needs a puppet government like in Belarus, that's all. Once he knows he can control a country, he will leave it in peace.

Unfortunately, this means misery for the citizens, and nobody sane wants that. Ukrainians want to have an independent modern country, not to be Kremlin slaves.