Elerond

You don't necessary need airfields, fighter jets are capable to take off from 200m-300m long straight road and they don't need much more to land. Road fueling and rearming is basic training in Finnish airforce, because expectation is that enemy is capable to destroy our airfields. I don't know what kind training they have done in Ukraine's airforce, but I would except that have trained towards situation where they lose access to their airfields

Joining to Nato needs to change to Finland's constitution so it can't be done in secret

Russia has succeeded to persuade Finns that we need to join to Nato, as support for Nato membership has increased from ~25% to 53% and opposition has decreased to 28%. Also all parties in parliament have now given statements in support of joining to Nato. So now it would be possible that Finland joins to Nato soonish.

EU's energy ministers are currently having meeting about cutting down energy purchases from Russia.

There has been always lot of Finns (I think 6-7 on entire forum)

Fighting when your side does not have air support and other side has, is hellish.

Especially when you don't have your logistics routes set up before hand and try to build them from the fly

For Russian it was unexpected as they had not established supply lines for their troops, which has hindered their progress according to our military intelligence

That is typical war propaganda. It is meant to lower defenders will to fight.

That was what countries did in 1939, they tried to avoid become parties in the war, which is why Finland, Poland, Baltic states did get only promises of help when they were invaded

Oil and gas are sacred, which is why there was constantly flow of oil and gas even worst moments of cold war. Main reason is that once the flow is cut down, there is very high change that it will never again go up

There are contingency plans and actively preparing to invasion by increasing forces and moving them to attack positions

It may increase support for NATO option, but it is unlikely that Finland will join in this decade

Putin's decision to invade was not made abruptly considering that his notification of invasion was recorded three days ago and Russia started moving troops to Ukraine boarders several months ago. And they already made anticipatory plans with Belarus six months ago. They may have alternative plans to achieve their goals only with threats, but clearly Russia has prepared for this route for long time now

Russia wants to demilitarize Ukraine and change Ukraine government and order to achieve that goal they need to have there occupation force that can keep status quo after their invading forces leave. It isn't easy to keep alternate government in hostile country, you can just ask how easy it was for USA in Afghanistan. Resistance doesn't need to be big in order to change governance as soon as occupying forces leave. So in order to Putin to achieve his goal he needs to have total dominance over Ukraine.

In past China has not ever supported letting areas get independence, because it goes against their policy in Taiwan and Tibet. So Russia will have hard time to convince China to give them official support

It seem that Russian troops new home is in Ukraine

Like I said he will help them get independence so that they can join Russia. Meaning that he will use pseudo democracy to annex areas from Ukraine to Russia. It is theatrical performance for Russian to so that he is the great doer opposed by evil west

Russia seems to repeat strategy they used in Crimea. Supporting repel area to get independence from the Ukraine and then letting it to decide that it wants to join in Russia.

Ice cream manufactures also have some explaining to do

You were one that compared Russian Syrian mission to Nato's actions in Libya. So in this case whataboutism come from you

Russia has not seek UN security council's approval on its actions. So I don't see any relevant comparison. It would better to compare Russian's actions to USA's actions in same area. Question was that Nato attacks countries outside its borders and against its own rules, not how justifiable its actions have been.

That quote shows that they had authorization from UN security council to use force in order to protect civilian population. That they did poor job doesn't change fact that they acted with security council's mandate.

Technically NATO has only once attacked country outside of NATO and without approval from UN security council, In Serbia 1999. As in other cases NATO members did attacking outside of NATO and NATO come later on to peace keeping with approval of UN Security Council. Although NATO has couple times participated in air campaigns approved by UN security council In Bosnia 1995 they bombed forces of Army of Republika Srpska who where seen as threat to UN safe zones in Bosnia. In Libya 2011, Nato enforced non-fly zone and bombing camping with approval of UN Security council in order to protect civilians after two Libyan fighter pilots fly their fighter to Malta after Muammar Gaddafi had ordered them to bomb civilian protesters. And Nato participated in counter piracy mission in Red Sea between 2009-2016 to protect ships from Somalian pirates.

There is never good justification for power politics, but Russia is taking opportunity given them discord in west