Talk:Finnish Defence Forces

message: Sentence: "The Finns refused German pressure to join in the siege of Leningrad...", for which there is no reference cited, directly conflicts with the Siege of Leningrad page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad
Statement from Siege of Leningrad:
Both German and Finnish forces had the goal of encircling Leningrad and maintaining the blockade perimeter, thus cutting off all communication with the city and restricting them from getting any food or goods. (6 cited references follow).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevinbercaw (talk • contribs) 13:59, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious 

message: In 2003 there wasn't over thousand peacekeepers in UN operations. Most of them were in NATO operation! ISAF and KFOR are NATO operations, not UN. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.100.116.142 (talk) 11:30, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please sign comments. The constitution of Finland allows only OSCE-, or UN-authorized operations, whether or not they are NATO-led. This is not to be confused with allowing only UN-led operations. --Vuo 15:29, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong information! 

message: The planning requirements outlined in section Total Defence are copied straight from the leaflet mentioned as a reference. This leaflet, however, is an official statement of a Finnish authority (i.e. Finnish Defence Forces) and as such, it is not eligible for copyright. So, IMO, the direct copying of the text is not copyvio. (See :commons:Template:PD-FinlandGov)--MPorciusCato 11:06, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  No copyvio at "Total defence" 

message: Would be nice to have all the Swedish terms along with the Finnish ones, not only försvarsmakten. 85.183.209.79 22:07, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, theoretically, we should always add a Swedish term when giving the Finnish term, Finland being a bilingual country. However, it would make the articles quite burdened with vocabulary, and in my opinion, would give very little to the reader. Most information tat is given about the points in the net is in Finnish, and those few who do want to use Swedish sources can usually find a link to the Swedish text close to the Finnish information, if the source is official. I think there are not many unofficial Swedish-language sources about the Finnish Defence Forces. --MPorciusCato 09:32, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swedish (language, that is) 

message: What's the amount of people in Finland that won't go to the Defence Forces? What's the punishment?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.149.216.233 (talk) 20:43, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you talk about conscription, some 2.600 young men per annum make the claim that they have pressing ethical or religious concerns that prevent them from serving in the military. That's about 5% of the male citizens coming to military age. These persons are not punished but ordered to civilian service instead. The length of the civilian service is (from 2008 onwards) 362 days. If the man refuses the civilian service, he is sentenced to 181 days in prison (or to corresponding amount of days, if he has already served a part of his civilian or military service.) --MPorciusCato (talk) 06:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  How many go to army? 

message: Kurt Leyman and I have somewhat differing opinions on FDF reserve strength. According to this document, the wartime strength of the FDF is 350.000 troops. The reserve strength is a completely different thing: the Finnish Defence Forces reserve encompasses all Finnish males who have completed conscription and have not filled 50 years of age. In addition, it includes all non-active and resererve NCOs and officers below 60 years of age and all non-active colonels and general officers regardless of age. The auxiliary reserve ( includes all males between 17 and 60 years of age who have not completed conscription and are not serving in the military and rank and file members between 50 and 60 years of age. None of these groups is 485.000 strong. --MPorciusCato (talk) 10:04, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reserve strength 

message: The law for unarmed service was changed in 2008. The article's first paragraph stated that the service length is 11 months, which was incorrect. The length is now either 9 or 12 months, more of this here (in Finnish). Anzuhan (talk) 14:29, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Service length and unarmed/weapons-free service 

message: In the summary of the article it is stated that "Finland's defence budget equals about 2 billion euro or 1.4-1.6 percent of the GDP. In international comparisons the defence expenditure is around the 3rd highest in EU." It has a reference which links to an article from Statistics Finland (Tilastokeskus). 
It is said in the article that if indirect costs of the conscripts' lost work would be summed in to the defence expenditure then Finland's defence expenditure would be third highest in EU. It should be noted that this is an estimate made by professor Poutvaara and doctoral student Louhela. There is a great difference between direct defence expenditure and estimate of indirect costs which can be seen from the article's graphs but which is not explicitly put forward in the article.
I think it would be a better approach to find out a new source which compares direct defence expenditure because or at least mention that Finland ranks third only when estimated indirect costs are included to the calculation. Lzmuston (talk) 18:14, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  About defence expenditure 

message: Why does the article (version) have two history sections? --vuo (talk) 23:01, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. The one we have now though is way too long. --Pudeo' 01:04, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: I recently created a gallery section composed of somewhat recent photos of Finnish land, sea and air forces. I'd like to include some photos of Finnish troops during the Winter and Continuation wars. However, before I add them, I'd like to know if anyone objects to me doing so.--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 17:43, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Gallery

message: I am not quite sure what this phrase means. When I Google it I pretty much just get this article. The source is Jane's, but I think the link is outdated because there's nothing about Finland there.
-Phrase "Homeland defence willingness" has been questioned in the same form since the beginning of 1970. The exact question is formulated as:
   If Finland were attacked, should Finns, in your opinion,
   take up arms to defend themselves in all situations,
   even if the outcome seemed uncertain?
About 75-80 % of the people of Finland have answered this question "YES" during the past years.
See Finnish stats for this question: Willingness to defend the country from: http://findikaattori.fi/en/77 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.157.152.223 (talk) 06:58, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Homeland defence willingness"? 

message: Why is the Soviet Union listed as a Foreign supplier? Even if it was in the past, I've seen a lot of Articles of countries whose armies once were armed by the USSR, but don't directly say it in the infobox, for example The people's army of Vietnam article shows only foreign suppliers in modern times, but has a sub-section to when it the Soviet Union existed and supplied the Army and its history in doing so.
In the end, I'm just wondering if the mention of the Soviet Union in the head infobox here was intentional or a mistake.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjpacheco1 (talk • contribs) 13:49, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you guys, I suggest to delete the  soviet flag. AlfaRocket (talk) 11:50, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simple question on Foreign suppliers 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Finnish Defence Forces. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150924132537/http://www.puolustusvoimat.fi/wcm/Erikoissivustot/lippujuhla2011/Suomeksi/Paraatipuheet%20ja%20tervehdykset/Maavoimien_%20komentajan_%20puhe/ to http://www.puolustusvoimat.fi/wcm/Erikoissivustot/lippujuhla2011/Suomeksi/Paraatipuheet%2Bja%2Btervehdykset/Maavoimien_%2Bkomentajan_%2Bpuhe/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:15, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Update: The exemption to military and civil service that was available to those of the Jehovah's Witness faith has been removed from the law.  Their special exemption was found in court to be discriminatory and the benefits had to be granted to others, parliament decided that such exemption for everyone was not desirable so they removed the exemption.  The courts held that refusal from armed service on ethical/religious/conscientious grounds was an accepted practice in many countries but refusal to do alternative unarmed service had no grounds for similar exemption.
As the system now stands all males between 18 and 30 need to do armed service (6, 9 or 12 months, officer candidates stay longer), civilian service (about 12 months) or jail time (about 6 months).  The exceptions that will likely one day be tested in the courts is that the 'self governing' Åland Island residents have not had to perform the service in the coastguard as proposed so far and women have also not had to perform formal armed or civilian service.  Advocates for fairness have proposed for a voluntary system that is not gender or location based.
Finland: Parliament Revokes Law Exempting Jehovah's Witnesses from Mandatory Military Service
Jehovah's Witnesses lose exemption from military service
Idyllic press (talk) 14:10, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jehovah’s Witness update 

message: All 6 have or will be sent to Ukraine. 109.240.36.175 (talk) 15:44, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heavy Mine Breaching vehicles sent to Ukraine 

message: This doesn't seem right but I don't have the knowledge to verify and fix TiddiesTiddiesTiddies (talk) 12:49, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some of the assault weapons listed link to North Korean weapons