Also ‘if they join Nato’. They do realise the response if they attack Sweden and Finland for joining Nato, right?

If you were living in Moldavia, you should absolutely be. There is no question that Moldavia is next on the list.

This whole thing is actually a very brutal way of finding out how future warfare goes. From an intelligence standpoint, the West has no need to end this war, the longer it drags on, the more one can find out about weapons, old and new, and how efficient they are/will be in the future. The sad thing is the Ukranians are the cannon fodder/losers, no matter which way it goes.

What we learned so far: Drones seem to be an efficient way to fight a war for an unprepared enemy. Less efficient are warships. I have often wondered if aircraft carriers are still worth it. In WW2, they were powerful weapons because they could hide in the vast oceans, and had a reasonable chance to survive an aerial attack. That is no longer true now. The fact is, to sink a $0.1-2billion ship it takes at most $1M of rockets. Even a randon Ukranian rocket sank the Russian commando vessel (with pot luck, probably). So why still build $2b aircrarft carriers?

I don't know about Finland but from what I've read Sweden won't have any guarantees from Nato until we're a full member, so there will be a window during the application process where Russia could attack without risking war with Nato.

I doubt some rockets would hit an American aircraft carrier that easy especially with the gigantic fleet around it prepared to shoot anything from the sky. Now we have supersonic missiles which could change that but I guess there will be also a way in the future to track and shoot down those missiles. 

They’re working on hypersonic missiles now. So far, China has the lead there. 

100+ cheap self-guided rockets fired into a mass of ships at sea level ... guess what happens when the ships open fire...

Nothing but empty threats.

1) Russia shares no land border with Sweden.

2) Ships couldn't start from St. Petersburg since they would need to cross Finland/Estonia sea borders.

3) Russian planes are needed elsewhere and they can't attack from St. Petersburg either without flying over NATO (or Finland) skies.

4) Russia barely has enough troops to keep a stalemate in Ukraine. They can't afford to open a second war theater which is already proven by the fact that they had to give up on Kyiv.

5) The only reasonable way Russia could attack is from Kaliningrad but not only does Russia need to defend the little exclave, it would also be impossible for Russia to resupply any troops, planes, ships or ammo without starting a fight with NATO.

Accusing Poland like that feels like they are preparing (flawed) reasoning ready to try and justify an attack on Poland.

That much was known already to most military analysts.

And it's even worse if Russia mobilizes it's citizens, since they lost too many senior officers to actually lead those into battle - or even train them to some degree.

They do, but apart from France, most countries in the EU have a rather puny army, so they couldn't send much support. However, with most countries in the EU are now increasing their military investments by quite a bit, so in a few years down the line, they could actually send some very substantial support even without the rest of NATO having to do anything.

Even in their current "puny" state, the EU has a powerful collective miltary capacity.  Over a million active personnel and millions of reserves.  And unlike Russia, the EU has the industrial and economic capacity to field their full strength.  A lot of their equipment is also substantially ahead of Russia's.  And unlike Russia, the EU could produce their most cutting edge military equipment en masse if needed.  

And then there's the naval element, which would become important if Russia engaged the EU and the disparity is humiliating for Russia.  The EU collectively has 6 aircraft carriers.  Russia has one. An old and very vulnerable one.  

If Russia initiated a war with tbe EU, it would be suicide.  The disparity in military power is made infinitely worse by the disparity in economic power.  To be blunt, if you remove the nukes from the equation, Russia could hardly be considered a true major power.  The EU, if taken as a whole, is a superpower.  Russia isn't in the same league, in any category, when you really dig into it.