Search

Jukka Lepikkö wrote that the traffic safety authorities of nine European countries had approved Tesla's FSD. According to him, Traficom had said in June that it could return to the approval of FSD in Finland after the summer holidays. Lepikkö hinted that there apparently was no urgency in improving traffic safety. #liikenneturvallisuus #Tesla #FSD (translated)

Mario Nawfal wrote that Europe had relied for four years on Ukraine acting as a shield with the United States behind it. According to him, the warning of the former German top general was coming true: Russia was winning, Washington was withdrawing, and Europe was left alone. #Eurooppa #Ukraina #Venäjä #EU #US #RU #DE (translated)

Henri Vanhanen wrote that it was difficult to say whether Germany's Alice Weidel and France's Marine Le Pen were imitators of Donald Trump or sympathizers of Vladimir Putin, and according to him, the difference may not necessarily have mattered for the outcome. He mentioned that Weidel had declared the war in Ukraine a defeat and demanded an end to Germany's support, while Le Pen wanted to limit France's financial support to Ukraine. According to Vanhanen, politicians aiming for power in Europe's large countries had a short-sighted attitude towards Russia, European history, and security. He warned Finland not to assume that the rest of Europe would inevitably follow the same path as Finland. He did not consider the AfD's entry into the German federal government in the coming years to be likely but assessed that the strengthening of political forces like the party would pose serious security policy problems. Vanhanen also wrote that the Kremlin was monitoring Europe's electoral calendars. According to him, Putin would have no reason to rush negotiations if he believed that Ukraine's supporters would be replaced by leaders who were less sympathetic to Ukraine. Vanhanen noted that Europe's center-right parties had not responded in a timely manner to citizens' immigration concerns, which had allowed room for radical alternatives. He viewed the problem not as a demand for stricter immigration policies, but in that these movements were also bringing to power forces that represented admiration for authoritarianism, opposition to Ukraine, and sympathy for Russia. He assessed that decisions about Europe's security would be made both on the battlefields of Ukraine and in European elections, emphasizing that this should also be understood in Finland. https://t.co/3s94O0WUiT #Eurooppa #Politiikka #Turvallisuus (translated)

ProFin wrote that it was no longer about admiration for Putin, but rather that Donald Trump wanted to divide the world into spheres of influence like Putin. He warned that U.S. aid would not come if Putin attacked the next European country, adding that although generals might assure commitment, Trump was not committed. #Trump #Putin #Eurooppa (translated)

Topi Salin wrote that the headline about flying cars represented, in his opinion, Europe's economic suicide and the innovative power of the United States. He criticized the fact that the news highlighted legality and safety, and wondered whether readers would be primarily more interested in the technological novelty itself. Salin sarcastically predicted that Finnish social democrats and academic bourgeoisie opposing Elon Musk would jointly develop such a comprehensive regulatory framework that flying cars would not be seen in Finnish airspace for decades. #Eurooppa #innovaatio #sääntely (translated)

Aleksis Kallio wrote that he found Elon’s actions incomprehensible. According to him, it made him reflect on what is being done in Europe. In Kallio’s opinion, Europe was still stuck in the 20th century, and no one had thought about moving forward. #ElonMusk #Eurooppa #innovaatio (translated)

According to the author, young people had taken to the streets in France, Belgium, Albania, and other European countries. He estimated that this had triggered a defensive reaction among conservatives, rooted in the fear of losing privileges. The author described that the autumn of Europe had begun and that hierarchical power structures had been challenged. #Eurooppa #Nuoret #Mielenosoitus #FR #BE #AL (translated)

The author regarded the speech as good and assessed that the change of president in the United States would not restore the situation to what it was before. According to him, Europe should strengthen itself economically and militarily and be able to respond to the threat from Russia on its own. #Eurooppa #Venäjä #maailmapolitiikka #US #EU #RU (translated)

Henri Vanhanen wrote that he understands Volodymyr Zelensky's frustration with Donald Trump but criticized Europe for not intervening more actively in the negotiations. Vanhanen stated that Ukraine accepted a ceasefire proposed by the United States in the spring of 2025, which Vladimir Putin rejected. According to him, Trump threatened Russia with consequences, invited Putin to Alaska, and continued to seek a deal. Ultimately, according to Vanhanen, Russia's terms for peace were shaped to be acceptable to the Americans, after which Ukraine and European countries had to amend them. Vanhanen compared Putin's negotiation style to the Soviet style, which he associated with Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko: first, a lot is demanded, concessions are rejected, and it is expected that the opposing party will offer more. He assessed that Trump needed a visible agreement more than Putin, which is why, in his opinion, Russia could wait for new initiatives from the United States. Vanhanen criticized Trump for letting Russia's demands influence what Ukraine was pressured to concede. He questioned why Europe had not presented a joint peace proposal with Ukraine or jointly decided how to respond to Russia's next refusal. Vanhanen noted that the United States' influence is undeniable and its participation is necessary, but he believed that Trump should not be given exclusive rights to define the direction of the negotiations. In his opinion, Europe did not need to be ashamed of Trump's lack of historical knowledge or understanding of Russia's negotiating tactics, but Europe's passivity was still harder to defend. https://t.co/qs68FaMyfW #Ukraina #Eurooppa #Trump (translated)

The author described the time as shameful and wrote that Washington was offering frozen assets to Russia as an entry fee to the negotiating table while pressuring Europe to pay. He referred to a World Bank estimate that Ukraine's reconstruction would cost $588 billion and argued that the frozen assets belonged to Ukraine. https://t.co/k8HmJsGh5t #Ukraina #jälleenrakentaminen #politiikka #US #RU #UA #EU (translated)

The author criticized the granting of 800,000 holiday visas to Russians, describing it as absurd, sad, and grotesque. He questioned the legitimacy of the existence of a common system if the Southern European countries did not understand the threat Russia posed to the rest of Europe or took it seriously. #Eurooppa #Venäjä #Politiikka #FI #RU #EU (translated)

According to the author, Zelensky spoke directly and Trump's America was becoming Finlandized. He described an underlying ideological anti-European sentiment, an attacking unidentified peace movement, and seemingly profitable business. The author expressed appreciation for politicians who presented an honest assessment of the situation regardless of the circumstances. #Politiikka #Eurooppa #Zelenski #FI #US (translated)

Henri Vanhanen wrote that NATO's commander for European forces, Alexus Grynkewich, had described the alliance's strategic thinking in preparation for a possible Russian attack without revealing classified operational plans. According to Vanhanen, the speech aimed to convey that an attack on NATO territory would fail, and to reassure Europeans. He noted that the speech did not indicate, in his view, that NATO was anticipating an immediate attack. Vanhanen mentioned that Grynkewich summarized the theory of victory in three phases: the attack would be halted, its advance would be paralyzed, and if necessary, the military system supporting the attack would be broken. According to Vanhanen, this could mean strikes not only against the attacking troops but also against their logistics, command, and other support systems, if necessary, within Russian territory. The goal, in his interpretation, would not be to defeat Russia as a state, but to prevent it from seizing even part of NATO territory and pressuring the alliance to accept the situation. Vanhanen also highlighted from the speech that the plan took into account a situation where U.S. forces would be tied up in another war. He considered this a crucial issue for Europe and referred to the limited military resources of the United States and Trump's Russia policy, which he believed had made Washington's decisions difficult to predict. Vanhanen proposed that alongside NATO's plan, Europe needs its own plan for victory. Its goal would be for European NATO countries to be able to repel and defeat a large-scale conventional Russian attack over the next ten years even without U.S. combat troops. He believed this would require a joint assessment of the shortcomings in European defense, regular exercises without the assumption of U.S. participation, and binding decisions to correct the deficiencies. Vanhanen wrote that the purpose of a credible deterrent would be to make the initiation of war unprofitable for Russia. #Nato #Venäjä #turvallisuus (translated)

The author stated that he was leading trilateral negotiations concerning corporate wallets, which began on the same day. According to him, the wallets would facilitate cross-border dealings for businesses with the public sector and could save companies up to 150 billion a year. He also mentioned that the system should be European and that municipalities should be supported in its implementation. #yritystoiminta #europyhteistyö #julkinensektori #EU (translated)

Arto Koskelo compared the coalition to a person working as a leading expert in an office, who had vegetable lasagna for lunch and dreamed of wine tasting in Italy. He described the character as someone on vacation who had a liberal attitude towards wine and decided to end his writing with an unfinished statement about how right-wing this would be. #kokoomus #politiikka #Eurooppa (translated)

Henri Vanhanen appealed to the President of the Republic and the Council of State to prepare without delay a joint, public and up-to-date security situation assessment for Finns regarding the threats from Russia, preparedness for them, and responses to them. He stated that he had repeatedly proposed such an assessment. Vanhanen wrote that Finland's intelligence services and European authorities had warned about Russia's sabotage and influence operations. According to him, Europe had seen sabotage projects targeting the defense industry, drone disturbances, assassination plans, and serious airspace violations. He added that according to the Security Police, possible sabotage targets had been identified in Finland. Vanhanen believed that serious sabotage or other hostile influence by Russia could also happen in Finland, and in his view, discussion should not be postponed until the first serious strike. He hoped that the assessment would convey the seriousness of the threats, the actions taken to counter them, and citizens' own preparedness measures. Additionally, Vanhanen suggested that the assessment explain Finland's actions together with its allies in serious disturbance situations, as well as the support offered by NATO membership, intelligence cooperation, and joint operational possibilities. He justified his proposal with the need for transparency and trust and expressed his hope that the government leadership would address it without delay. #turvallisuus #suomi #venäjä (translated)