Since you're including russian WW2 tanks, you should include viking longboats to our navy.

Scandinavian can't stand up to Russia?? Seriously??? That's what was said about Ukraine! Two and a half years ago!

I doubt that Russia has 12,000 tanks anymore.

Having ZERO aircraft carriers is far superior to having one Admiral Kuznetsov.

VERY poorly researched video, you're too obsessed with raw numbers instead of actual effectiveness and strategic impact. The only aspect where Russia is genuinely ahead is manpower (questionable quality) and nuclear weapons, that's why Nordic countries are NATO members.

At less than 7 minutes in, I have to say the Scandinavians combined military budgets goes to the military. Russia"s budget goes into the black market and pockets of corrupt officials.

Russia has 12K tanks, half of them in pieces in Ukraine, the other half rusting away and unusable.

Orbán and Erdogan, to me, are two-faced. Both are in NATO. Personally, as a native from Hungary, I'm quite pissed off of Orbán.

When you list the aircraft for each country, you use F16 as the background footage of Sweden. This is completely wrong, as Sweden uses their own "Gripen" multirole jets. They look nothing alike.

There are a couple of items missed out. 1) Naval force - what Russia needs are landing crafts; air carriers are quite useless in the Baltic Sea; 2) about half of the defence budget in Russia disappears in corruption; 3) the Finish borderland. A single rail line goes between Murmansk and along the coast down towards the south. That make a military build-up/supply lines difficult. Much of the land between Russia and Finland are lakes and marchland which makes tanks useless; 4) the Nordic countries have more sophisticated hardware and nimbler military used to the local conditions.

War is expensive, and Russia is burning money faster then they can count it. As a Norwegian i see the horror they commit in Ukraine and i don't want that on my doorstep. The thing we in Scandinavia have that Russia does not is a well trained army, and better logistics. Also every combat unit are trained buttom up instead of top down. This makes them able to take command, when command is not given. Also remember an invading force has a huge disadvantage. The invading force must in general have 3 times the force of the enemy to gain any ground. Scandinavia also have 4th and 5th gen planes. F 35 and JAS Gripen witch are considered to be some of the greatest jets in the world. Based on the invasion of Ukraine think about this. Russia failed to gain air superiority against a country with little to no airforce, and Ukraine managed to somehow destroy the Russian navy to such a point that they had to pull back to the Crimean Peninsula. This is very impressive considering Ukraine does not have a Navy. It is also a good indication that the Russian army is extremely mismanaged, undertrained, with bad morale, and few resources.

The Scandinavic countries might have relatively small militaries but they are modern and they have a huge home turf advantage. The territory of the Nordic countries is very defensible not friendly to the movement of armored vehicles. Finland is mostly lakes, woods and swamps, while Sweden and Norway have significant mountain areas and a lot of rivers.

Ukraine has no nuclear weapons, no navy, and all of its armed forces are and were miniscule compared to Russia... Finland alone could resist the Russian military as it is now known to be ... And Russia would be automatically be fighting all of Scandinavia and NATO... So it would lose

Slava Ukraini! 🌻💪From Finland!🇫🇮

Why bring up Russias 2400 aircraft if they have only 700 fighter and multi role which is close to being on par with Scandinavian fighter/multi role. Its not like 1400 helicopters can operate in a contested airspace.

@TheMilitaryShow This is absolutely nonsense. Russia does not have 12.000 main battle tanks. They had about 7.500 at the beginning of the war and have lost about 3.000 in an assessment from the Institute for the Study of War (ISW). They are already resupplying with T-63's from 2023 and T-55's from 2024. Get your facts straight before publishing.

There is a ready term for Scandinavia and Finland and Iceland, the Nordic countries.

Regarding the naval powers you need to remember that a lot of Russia’s ships, including its flagship, was sunk by a country without a navy 🇺🇦 Swedish subs ”sunk” American warships in war games. The Americans had no clue the sub was even there. And American ships are infinitely better than Russian ones

Like where do you pull the military spending numbers?!? You have Sweden 2020 number, Denmark 2014 was closest to 4B but 2020 was 5B, Norway 2020 number and Finland was at 3.3B in 2007 their 2020 number is 4.1B. 2021 Fin 5.9B, Swe 7.9B, Den 5.4B and Nor 8.3B. This hard it was to find the numbers from at least the same year.... Edit:And for Russia you used 2021 number, like wtf...

There is absolutely no chance Russia still have 12000 battle ready tanks. I believe they only have around 6000-9000 left and hardly any of them are modern nor battle ready.

There are many ways to calculate defense spending. Should you include coast guard stuff? How about civilian bomb shelters? The video pegs my country, Sweden, as spending 1.3% but mind you Sweden already meets the 2% NATO target, going by NATO spreadsheets. Also, why the bloody hell would any Nordic country want an aircraft carrier? Especially a Russian one that keeps braking down. We don't aim to project power over blue water distances. We have Gotland, it's right there and hard to sink. In 1975 Sweden's armed forces changed name from Krigsmakten (Armed force) to Försvarsmakten (Defense force), because that's the mission. A mission much cheaper than, say, keeping logistics and what not for an invasion of Iraq. Say what you want about lacking military spending, but the Nordic countries have World leading social trust, which amounts to a willingness to defend each other, low corruption and general effectiveness. Especially Finland and Sweden can boast a lot of civil defense, preparations for preventing landings and a mentality to never ever surrendering. Russia would dominate with artillery, men and vehicles, so the strategy here was to also offer up guerilla tactics with no end in sight. But today they would outright lose the air war even if they bombed all our air bases. The VKS can't even handle Ukraine and would find itself up against F35's from Norway, Finland and Denmark together with 100 dispersed Gripens from Sweden. Armed with a thousand helicopters and that formidable wonder of reliability Admiral Kuznetsov, stationed in Murmansk. Ok bro. On a last note, if Russia attacks Finland it would find itself in war with Sweden no questions aksed and probably Norway and Denmark too. Finland was a part of the same country for over 600 years. There are family ties, history, passport free travelling since 1957 across all the countries - I could go on. These vids made by people from other places just don't get it. There is no attacking Finland INSTEAD of Sweden. Sounds positively deranged to me and I'd dare say to most swedes. 2/10, wouldn't watch again, but I still had to write and give the creator the attention because I figure people might want to know.

These figures for Russia's arsenal are suspect. They sound like the totals on paper before the war and they lost a lot of those since then. In addition, not every piece of kit is actually working. A lot of the kit is broken and used only for parts.

Vikings weren’t very forgiving back in the days with just an axe, imagine one with an arsenal full of deadly rockets

The Russian figures are not correct at all.

The Swedish JAS39 Gripen is designed and built to take out Russian planes. If you do your homework a bit better you will see how well they perform "despite" not being stealth. Besides, the Swedish submarines are also built to take out Russian ships. They are silent and custom made for shallow or deeper waters. The Gotland class submarine has even taken out a US aircraft carrier in a war game that took place outside of the US coast. Even the US Navy was so impressed by its performance that they rented a Swedish sub and its crew for a year to try to understand why it performed so well. Swedish subs are not intended for sailing the big global oceans, they are built to operate in the Baltic sea to take out Russian vessels. It doesn't matter if Russia has aircraft carriers, they will never dare to let them sail in the Baltic sea where they would be sitting ducks waiting to be sunk by the Swedish navy or helicopters based on the "unsinkable aircraft carrier", the Gotland island, with sink bombs. Getting an aircraft carrier into the Baltic sea will also come with maneuverability issues. It's like parking a semi truck with a full length trailer on a bike parking. Good luck with that. Add to that that two NATO countries, Sweden and Denmark, now controls the entrance to the Baltic sea. If Russia for some reason would want to get additional ships to be brought into the Baltic sea (to also be sunk by the Swedish subs :) ), then they first have to pass the Öresund or the Stora Bält passages between Sweden and Denmark. They will be sunk there too. It will become a Russian ship graveyard there. I do agree to that Swedish ground troops is most likely a weakness, but please keep in mind that Sweden depends on conscripts and that number is increasing fast now. Then I must comment the military budgets. Yes, indeed, Russia spends a lot more on their military budget compared to the Nordic countries, but Russia is also a far bigger country and they have to defend their entire country. If they would move their military from the huge area just north of China, you can rely on that China will invade that part of Russia due to the vast amount of natural resources; forests and most of all oil and minerals. Then Russia has to keep the defense towards Alaska/USA and towards the Arctic region, so in reality what looks like an excessive military budget isn't that great anyway. Their only ace is their nukes especially since they are likely operated by drunk Russians who are having one of their hand on the "Launch Nuke" button and the other hand holding a bottle of Vodka. :) Putin made a major mistake to try to invade Ukraine so even IF they would win it, their military has proven to be far weaker than anyone could imagine just a few years ago. Russia's best move now would be to put a bullet in Putin's head and withdraw their forces from Ukraine and blame Putin for the war. That would at least be a diplomatic victory to Russia. It's quite entertaining to see how you think that each vehicle/vessel or person to person is a 1 to 1 relationship. It's not. I DO agree though that the military spend in at least Sweden needs to go beyond the 2.1% of its GDP now (it's not 1.3% as you mentioned in the video). Then finally, why invade Sweden? What is there that is so attractive? Millions of welfare tourists who are loved only by so called feminists? Blonde women? Russia already has a surplus of young women due to the masses of killed men in Ukraine. Especially now after joining NATO there is too little for Russia to gain. They are interest in the Gotland island to invade the Baltic countries Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia, but that is now a NATO island.

You missed the swedish airforce? We do not have dedicated attack or bombers, but that is an offensive role, we only plan on defense, the F35, on paper is an air superiority 5th gen fighter - again on paper the best out there. The F16 and the F18's are fighter/intercepters and the swedish gripen is a gen 4 multi role fighter/intercepter with ground support capability, all fully integrated in the Nato system, it latest iteration also boast electronic warfare suits, bridging the gap somehwat to a gen 5 capable fighter as the F35. Loadout, and battlefield intel/awareness is superior to Russia. Naval power equal, maybe.. Did you see how the swedish gotland class submarine, single handed got passed an american carrier group and sank their carrier, over and over again, never was found in the excersises, to the point that the US leased the entire sub and crew for 2 years to try and come up with a way to beat it.. Also We got the island of Gotland, it is a huge stationary carrier in the baltic sea, you cant sink it either, meanwhile Russian carrier will most likely have to be towed into action..

Russia's performance in Ukraine make these numbers suspect.

are these Russian military count pre or post Ukrainian conflict? Me thinks Russia might be down a few tanks on these numbers....

When are you folks going to recalibrate the whole Russian military equipment thing? Russia is down to less than 7000 tanks and I bet only about 20% are modern. They have also lost thousands of artillery guns and AFVs. You all really should rethink your numbers...

The Norwegian government has just announced an 57 billion USD boost, an 83 % increase in defence spending over the next 12 years. The plan avaits approval in the Parliement.

Did @TheMilitaryShow simply grab pre-Ukraine war numbers for Russia? Not to mention the hardly existent talk of how Russian weapons are under performing in Ukraine... it doesn't seem like a good comparison for many other reasons as well.

12,000 tanks? Seriously doubt it, unless you’re counting dilapidated and half blown up WWII era tanks.

9:24 none of those are in the Baltic Sea though. Germany dominates the Baltic Sea. Second is Sweden. Third is Russia. In number of vessels.

When it comes to the number of tanks and artillery, Russia does not have 12.000 Tanks available to fight nor do they have 18,000 artillery piece in fighting condition. They have thousands of 1950's tanks sitting in their junkyards with seized engines and rust bolts.

Your numbers on Russia are out of date!

I would suggest using 'the Nordic countries' rather than the 'Scandinavian countries' for all intergovernmental connections. Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland and Iceland meet in the Nordic council. Finland must not be used as subset of Scandinavia.

"Can never stand up"? I am sure that the same was said about Finland in the winter war, or Ukraine now.

This video is lazy and presents a very incomplete narrative. Russia is a nation actively at war, and claiming that its military budget "dwarfs" the combined peace-time military budgets of the Nordic countries is very disingenuous. The Nordic countries have a similar GDP to Russia, and they also have a strong defense industrial base. In a total war situation, the military spending would shoot up drastically. These numbers are already outdated, all Nordic countries have committed themselves to spend 2% of GDP on defense in 2024. Also, just looking at equipment numbers means very little. It is very questionable how Russia would manage to utilize its forces in a possible invasion. Look at the marshland of the Finnish-Russian border and compare that to the planes in Ukraine. Russia getting thousands of tanks over the border is a pipe dream. Russia is probably stronger than the combined Nordics, but not by as big of a margin as you claim in this video.

The last time Sweden was close to a war with Russia or USSR was in 1981 and that is also the closest we have been to see a nuclear explosion on European soil by an enemy power as U-137 had Nuclear Torpedos that they had orders to detonate if we tried to storm the Submarine. Luckily the USSR fleet decided to turn back about 5 minutes from the Swedish national Waters and thus the storming operation was stopped. It is also worth noting that the airforce had been given orders to at all cost hold the Border which meant if needed they would be expected to use themselves and the airframe as missiles against the invader. Sweden is currently spending 2.1% of GDP on Defence which hase been increased from the all time low of 0.9% in 2017. Most likely There will be an increase up and above 3-4% GDP soon. Also Sweden preparing for a war against Russia is to us and especially everyione above 25 more back to regularity than something new and worrying. it is good practice to actually look up all airshelters and bunkers just incase. This was regular for us until 2008 when Lumpen was dissolved. infact to us the last 30 years has been the weird times.

1917 and 1991 will return to russia but 100X worst...

...Russian tank in the middle of Sweden--where does it get fuel and ammo from ? .. burning Russian supply trucks ?

Interesting presentation , but I was fascinated by the depth of the intelligent comments ! Finding an intelligent conversation on you tube is an incredible pleasure !

I might be wrong, but isn't Finnish defence budget over 6billion, not 3,3B?

This kind of comparison is nonsense since all 4 countries are NATO members.

There is so much wrong with this video. Saying that these four countries could never withstand a Russian attack is absolute rubbish. The Ukraine conflict has proven that Russia, with all its overwhelming numbers, is not the force we were told to fear. They may have triple the munber of vehicles and planes but 80% or those numbers are cold war era assets. And their tank and IFV stocks will be next to useless invading the forests, lake lands and mountains of Scandinavia. Their airforce has been kept mostly silent by Ukraine, who have none of the capabilities the Nordic countries have and you mentioned an aircraft carrier..... Russia no longer have one. The kuznetsov is done.

Aircraft carriers are not relevant for a war between Russia and the Nordic countries though. In a defensive war, the nordic countries have big advantages and great chokepoints to breakdown a Russian invasion. Just looking at raw military numbers does not tell the full story of such a scenario.

Being nuclear weapon free is the advantage the Nordics have and it is so by design. The entire strategy to fight off a Russian attack will depend on it. The principles is rather easy. If Russia attacks the Nordics the Nordics will escalate the conflicts immediately with conventional means against non civilian infrastructure to such a degree that Russia will have to invoke their doktrin and use a nuclear weapon to "escalate to de-escalate". This is most likely done by Norway and Finland attacking Murmansk while Sweden and Denmark attacks Kaliningrad. Russia simply can't amass enough forces in those regions to actually fight of the entire Nordic offensive navy and air force due to territorial limitations for the Russians and a combination of stealth, speed weapons and geographical advantage for the Nordics. So an initial penetration is more or less guaranteed. The concept is to actually force Russian nuclear forces to respond or Russia will lose essential strategic points. And if Russia predictably responding that way they will drag the entire world into the conflict. With Russia using nuclear weapons against non nuclear weapon states, with less military capacity and actually being the part that initially attacked the Nordics without any valid reason, they would more or less lose any little moral impetus they have among it's own allies. All these states understands the outcome and the implication of opening the Pandoras box of nuclear weapon in a state of the world where many actors have nuclear weapons. If Russia deems they themselves are justified to use them even asymmetrically the world would go into full paranoia mode where nothing is certain anymore. So in the end Nordic allies would be forced to step in during the Russian troop build up try to deter both the Russians and the Nordics from escalating to prevent the scenario from above because they would be dragged into it anyway. So, yeah the Nordic strategy to deter Russia is more or less based on the readiness of absorbing a nuclear strike while being a non nuclear existential threat to Russia. War sure is crazy.

Russia doesn't spend on defense, it spends on offense

Bad backgroud check

some serious overstating of Russia's capabilities here.

A Finn here. Before the full scale war in Ukraine I didn't see a reason to join NATO. The main issue I had was that we still thought that Russia is entity we can reason with and drive to build relationship with. When the attack happened everything changed. I and I believe many other almost feel betrayed by the Russians. You see, in Europe during the EU era we are used to solving issues via diplomacy and trying to eliminate possible destrictions countries have, and in this way build a safer Europe to all. I know, how ideological. I think after the war European nations need to take a deep look at themselves and realize that even though we don't believe in wars and spheres of influence, there still are countries with populist and nationalist leaders who use real politics when related to us. The betrayal what Russia did was that it made us believe that Russia as an entity would change and so we started doing programs together; build energy relianses, infrastructure, open business and remove citizen restrictions and then when the time was right Kremlin shows its true face, that it wipes its ass with the systems we have build our whole continent, and uses these acts of friendship against us underlying the fact that it is not European country but its own egoisitic entity. I'm not sure if even Putin has fully understood what he has done, but making a war to again be "a thing" in Europe and at the same time betraying its neighbours doesn't really give it an escape route from the situation it has found it self in. How can we ever trust Russia again?

Finland almost was able to defeat the combined Soviet Union by itself in 1939-40 Winter War and Finland was nowhere near as prepared for war then as they are now. Technologically and in training the Nordic countries far outclass Russia, they would likely be surrounding Murmansk and near St Petersburg within a month even without the rest of NATO, especially with so much of Russia's forces in Ukraine. The only thing Russia has is nukes, it has long been rumored Sweden had nukes just hours or minutes from completion ready during the cold war, they have the technology to do it very rapidly again. With NATO the Nordic countries will walk over Russia.

Last week Norway announced that it will spend 160 bllion NOK on defence in the next 12 12 years. And increase of about 60 billion from previous plans. The army will increase from just one, to 3 Brigades + a new missile artillieryu batallion. ANd more Combat vehicles, long range precise artillery, new helicopters for the army and the Home Guard wil increase from 4000 to 45000 Train 4600 more conscripts per year, add 13500 soldiers to the reserve, and hire 4600 NCO's, officers and specialists. The Navy will recieve 5 new frigates with maritime ASW helicopters + 10 large and 18 smaller other vessels , and buy one aditional sub from Germany in addition to the 4 on order. The air force will recive long range AA missiles (think Patriot or similar), and double the number of of NASAMS systems. Existing systems will be updated: ANd a general buildup of situational awareness trough drones and satelites

If I am correct, the Nordic countries will soon have around 150 Gripen figthers and around 150 F-35 fighters. That will be more than a handfull for the incompetent Ruzzian air force to deal with. And I am sure the Finnish and Swedish navies quickly will promote the Ruzzian Baltic fleet into a "submarine service".

"Si vis pacem, para bellum ", "If you want peace, prepare for war."

That booklet was also sent to every Swedish household in 2018. One of the messages is "The total war must be met with total defense. We must defend ourselves against whatever attacks and pressures we are exposed to. It is about our freedom and our independence, our existence as an independent nation. Sweden wants to defend itself, can defend itself, and must defend itself! Resistance must be made constantly and in all situations. It depends on you - Your effort, Your determination, Your will to survive. We never give up! Any message that the resistance should be seized will be false"

What is recent history? Russia invaded Finland. It is called the Winter War.

These numbers are mostly based on pre Ukrainian invasion statistics. Russia is on its 3rd year of losing much more equipment than it can produce. If things keep going this way for Russia, it will take them at least a decade before reaching former strength again, and by that time most European countries will be much stronger than they are today.

I'd say we have extremely friendly relations with each other in Scandinavia with a healthy dose of sibling rivalry. Tho just a quick google search on how many times and how long Sweden and Denmark has been at war in the past would surprise many.

Russia having 12000 tanks is the overstatement of the century. Firstly most of these tanks have been standing outside without maintenance for 40 years making them to rustbuckets. Second Russia has lost most of their somewhat modern tanks (T-90, T-80, T-72) and are now down to T-62 and and T-55 variants. Russia have not produced any new tanks - T-90 is just a refurbished T-72, all these tanks are from the Soviet era. Also the Soviet era airforce of Russia have not even gained air superiority in Ukraine - And in this case Russian air crafts would face Gripens and F-35, shredding them to mulch... Really bad video!

A few remarks, concerning the speakers, somewhat "careless", describing of Finns feelings, for Ruzzians: My ethnic group, from Karelian Isthmus, don`t exactly "love", those bastards! Among all other Finns, but especially Karelians. And, it hurt my ears, to be bundled up, with Scandinavians. No hard feeling for "swedes", though. Ok, for the "greater good"= Video. So, as a conclusion: "swedes" can remain calm, "Ruzzians" have to go over Finland, to get to Sweden. And we kicked in their teeth, back in WW", quite a bit. And the other way to Sweden, goes over Finland, partly though Norway, and is scrutinized, and deemed as impossible. So, sleep tight, so far, we`ll quard for You. 😉 What goes for Ruskies Navy, they don`t have all the vessels presented in the video. Only a very small part of those, are "present" in the Baltic. And Ukraine is decommissioning them, as we can see. from a Finn in Diaspora

When comparing armies, you MUST take into aspccount that Russia must spread its military across its entire country meaning Scandinavia will NEVER face all, or even most, of Russia’s military

Nice, all these big numbers for Russia. But how much of all that material is actual ready for action....? How much of that is 50+ years old?

This video is so full of errors that it's not even funny!

I wish the age of military equipment was compared. The nordic countries has better tec. I agree that the nordics are underdogs, but not as dark as it appears

I am from Moose Factory, ON Canada, recently the Canadian Armed Forces were training along side the Norways best of the best.

Did you forget that Russia also has to keep at least some military presence in their eastern front, It will never get to the point that all their military equipment you counted up that Russia has to ever be all in Scandinavia regardless of a war or not and unlike Russia, Scandinavia only has Russia to worry about since rest of neighbors and nearby countries are allies.

It is a bit simplistic to just go by numbers... Number are important but so is how they are used. Swedish weapons and forces are defensive and specialized for our conditions. Russia's are not. Scandinavian weapon systems are modern where Russia's are not. The Swedish air force doctrine equals ten times of Russia's specially with the STRIL 90 and the Meteor...

Slava ukraini 💪

Once again we have a dire prognostication of war for PART of NATO, completely disregarding that these are all NATO member states and that Article 5 of the NATO treaty applies, bringing the military, industrial, and logistical strengths of the rest of NATO. No one in Russian would try this, though that does not mean NATO can ignore what is going on in Ukraine and within Russia itself.

It won't be just the Scandinavian country's fighting putin alone

Norway has those stealth subs. The ones that sunk the Ronald Reagan in war games

I think your numbers are kinda wrong The numbers does not add up when we look at how much they have lost in the war so far... And we add up how much of the stuff they do have that does not work or work at 100% So would wish you would take those number in... And I know even with all that Russia still have much more. But Rememeber Scandinavia still have 10 times better Stuff But still far less to do anything big Btw. Russia do not have a Airrcarft carrier... Its under repair and will mostly stay that way for many years to come So thats why I see it like they dont have one And the ship is a battleship with Aircrafts on. But still suck And whats the point in using Nuclear weapons if you want the LAND! But you can't use it for the next 100 year and even more (; And we dont Dislike Russia. We just dont like Putin! And most of the leaders up to World War 2 And after Slava Ukraini! From Denmark

What good will a Russian aircraft carrier that's not in the Baltic Sea do in the Baltic Sea? Their naval assets are limited to what's already in and around the sea.

12k Tanks? T34?

Uh their navy and air force are shot to shat😂 with no navy Ukraine is dominating the water and denying Russia in the air that’s why they stay within Russia when flying

The defense spending for Sweden is way off. They spend 11.3 billion dollars this year, which is a little bit over 2% of GDP.

Why have we not reinvigorated the "Civil Defense" system or resources in the U.S.? The 1950s and 60s seem to have had a focus on preparing the civil population with knowledge about how to handle their own localized reactions to catastrophic circumstances, while in 2024 there doesn't seem to be anything in place other than the idea that we should just sit and wait for FEMA to come "do something". I'm pretty sure FEMA can't save everyone.

no wars in the close history? winter war?

Difference is Scandinavian gear isn't rusted or cracking at the seams. And their soldiers aren't constantly drunk or molesting each other with foreign objects.

Citizens from Denmark and Sweden and Norway speak almost the same language. Finland's language is very different, and incomprehensible to the citizens of the other countries. But the 4 different countries in Scandinavia stick together and cooperate in many ways beyond the military.

Such nonsense. First, you can’t compare raw numbers of equipment without discussing whether it’s new or old and what state of maintenance it’s in. A T14 Armada turns out to be junk even if it’s 100% fully mission capable. And then a piece of equipment is worthless without a well trained crew to employ it, so even a Leopard 2 isn’t much use without a highly trained crew to operate it, and that T-14 Armada with new recruits inside? Worthless except to be target practice for the Leopard crew. Then, even if you have a good tank (APC, etc.) with a good crew, it’s not effective without a well trained and coordinated combined arms team to work with and protect it, like infantry, ADA, artillery, etc. Lastly, you talked about how big the Russian forces are compared to the Nordic armies, but of course they have 11 time zones to defend and way more borders than the Nordic countries, so of course they have more. What matters is what they might bring to bear in a battle with the Nordic countries and what their logistical lines of resupply are (quite long for the Russians and subject to interdiction as we saw in the beginning of the Ukraine war.) The analysis in this video is on the 3rd grade level. Stick to what you know.

Come'on Pootin we are ready!😊

They've all been part of the Joint Expeditionary Force since 2012.

I believe that Russia would have serious problems ferrying troops and equipment over the Baltic sea. A lot of it would probably end up on the bottom of the Baltic Sea.

Sweden more then 2% gdp in deffens budget

Not much in this video that is correct

The figures of military spending are wrong - In 2024 the Swedish defence budget was increased with 2.5 billion USD, reaching a totalt of 11 billion USD. The budget is set to expand yearly, and reach an expenditure of 17 billion USD by 2030. You also seemed to have missed that Sweden hosts the strongest Nordic air fleet, and boasts one of the stronger export industries in military aircrafts globally? Also weird to continue using the word 'Scandinavian' when there is a correct term - the Nordic countries - which is used more often.

There is one big FLAW in this video: you can not ignore the Baltic Countries including Poland in any view of "Northern Europe". AND you are completely missing the North Atlantic perspective: Greenland, Iceland and The Faroe Islands.

The biggest difference between Sweden and Finland in this regard is that while the Finns have been doomsday prepping for the past eight decades, Swedes had their previous war back in 1809 (which was consequently against Russia and which they lost).

Russias army is incompetent, this is ignored in this vid.

The US and allies would hunt things like Russian tanks and missile defenses like they were rabbit round-ups. The Shock and Awe show would be a tea party versus what offensive and border Russian facilities and forces would see, and Putin knows this too. Even Trump would be hard pressed to wait at all, as his base is still mainly law and order folk, who couldn't abide a Putin, doing as he pleases, to old allies, and countries the US admires.

Sweden has increased it’s military spending to 2.1% of their GDP

Boring outdated statistics

No, Finland isn't Scandinavian no matter what people think about the matter. Just say Nordic countries if you want to include Finland. How hard is that?

Russia has several main battle tanks, including the T-90, T-14 Armata, T-80, and T-72. The T-90 is a third-generation tank with a 125 mm main gun, gunner's thermal sight, and smoke grenade launchers. It also has an upgraded engine, Kontakt-5 explosive reactive armor, and the Shtora infrared anti-tank guided missile jamming system. The T-14 Armata is the latest 5th generation tank, with an unmanned turret, active protection system, and 125 mm smooth per gun. The T-80 is the first Soviet turbine tank, and is still in service in small numbers. The T-72 is a famous Soviet 2nd generation tank, with over 7,000 in storage today.

How many of Russia’s 12,000 tanks are T-55s? I’m sure each tank in the Scandinavian is better than what Russia can muster. Their equipment is some of the best in the world. You have T-90s losing to Bradley’s in Ukraine.

Russia doesn't really have 12,000 tanks. Ukraine has destroyed most of their best ones and most of the rest are more or less egg cartons in two senses; 1) they are vulnerable to the Nordic countries enhanced Leopard2 tanks due to that leading staff in Russia sold vital parts of the newer ones and the rest are WWII and cold war tanks and 2) they are operated by egg heads since those who knew how to operate them died in Ukraine. If Russia would try to invade Finland with ground troops they are up to a major hell due to the many lakes in Finland. Then when it comes to Scandinavia you are wrong. The Scandinavian peninsula consists of Norway and Sweden. When mentioning Scandinavia, Denmark is often included, while Finland is not. Finland is part of the Nordic countries together with Sweden, Norway, Denmark AND Iceland.

Unsubscribing

The rule of thumb is that if Finland has 1/10 of what Russia has, they are roughly at even strength. In the air force, 1/20 is acceptable, it would even out during the first months of battle.