"The Finland perspectives were not claims of mine as you imply, but an interesting insight from a Finnish native"
You posted the "Finland perspective" originally, it is what I challenged, I asked you how YOU would define "sufficient" debate if public opinion polls in Finland showing massive support for Nato membership AFTER Putin's unjust and unprovoked invasion and then debate and a vote in the Finnish parliament was considered "little to no internal debate". You deflected and ignored it at first and now it's "it's not my view" and it was just a "scare campaign"? How does that equal little to no internal debate?
The psychological shift wouldn't have anything to do with Putin launching a full scale unjust and unprovoked war on a neighbouring country of Russia, just like Finland is a neighbour and has been the victim of such an unjust and unprovoked invasion in the past now would it?
You have ignored the second claim of yours I challenged. If Nato is such a threat to Russia, why did Putin remove 80%of his forces from the Finnish border AFTER they joined Nato?
I have no interest in your article and it is of zero importance to me and it is nowhere near as important as you think it is.
