Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Estonia, allies to trigger NATO Article 4

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 613 posts

Re: Estonia, allies to trigger NATO Article 4

#491

Post by ghostwriter »

nickpp wrote: post #290
elric wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed ~200k people. Any target worth nuking, (say Nato HQ) will result in millions of casualties. Urbanization & increased population density have many benefits, but they make for mind-bogglingly disastrous targets of nukes. If there's a choice between nukes raining down and between Putin ruling the world, I'll happily choose the latter. No matter the cost, there cannot be a nucl…

Giving up everything trying to avoid a nuclear war is the surest way to get it. I know, it's counterintuitive, but if you want peace you must be willing to go to war.

> Giving up everything trying to avoid a nuclear war is the surest way to get it.

Nobody is giving up everything, what is given up at the moment is a strip of land in East Europe that could be claimed back via diplomatic arrangements as soon as Putin is gone.

Re: Estonia, allies to trigger NATO Article 4

#492

Post by cm2187 »

masklinn wrote: post #475
masklinn wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason europe uses gas isn’t even electricity, it’s mostly heating and industrial. For instance in france’s energy budget nat gas is almost as large as the entire electricity production . The policy over the last few decades has been to put everyone on gas distribution networks and encourage switching furnaces (from furnace oil, tbf).

For an other example, nat gas accounts for 13% of germany’s electric production (out of about 600TWh). In accounts for nearly 25% of the primary energy mix (out of about 3700TWh). Even assuming all the gas plants are simple cycle peaking plants with horrid efficiency (say 20% which is extremely low even for peaking plants), electricity still would account for about 40% of germany’s nat gas consumption. In reality, mu…

I think in this case the yearly average load might be misleading. On low wind times the reliance on gas can be much higher.

Re: Estonia, allies to trigger NATO Article 4

#493

Post by jdrc »

realcertify wrote: post #490
jdrc wrote: post #453

Would be interesting to hear from any russians in here, because i can't help to think that large majority of russians are complicit to what seems to be a dictator going mad as much as the dictators in his neighborhood (aliyev, khomeini, taliban etc)

You are right about large majority of Russians being complicit, and right when saying "what seems to be a dictator going mad". Because it's not a dictator going mad, in fact Putin has quite clear goals and is quite predictable. He repeatedly was warning the West about the balance of power being skewed in their favor and Russia's interests being neglected since 2007. I'm not going to get into much details, and I feel…

I 'm watching RT to try to understand the russian propaganda, and it seems even the reporters are caught by surprise by the scale of the invasion. What you said does not justify launching a full scale attack against the entirety of ukraine. It does seem like a madman doing mad things thinking this is the 1930s again. As if occupying ukraine would solve the problem you re mentioning...

Re: Estonia, allies to trigger NATO Article 4

#494

Post by Glawen »

cute_boi wrote: post #452
nickpp wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Giving up everything trying to avoid a nuclear war is the surest way to get it. I know, it's counterintuitive, but if you want peace you must be willing to go to war.

The last sentence is an oxymoron. How would there be peace if you go to war?

It is a old Roman adage "Si vis pacem, para bellum" which held true for centuries

Re: Estonia, allies to trigger NATO Article 4

#495

Post by buran77 »

trhway wrote: post #306
rebuilder wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder what that reflects. Sanctions would not be very popular among the Russian population, is this just the regime calming down the populace? Or does it genuinely reflect the calculus here?

Realistically Russia can't occupy any significant part of Ukraine, nor Kiev in particular - tens of millions of pissed-off resisting Ukrainians with many taking up arms (on Ukrainian TV they said that they already give arms to such civilians as former police, and Zelenskiy said that they would give arms to all "willing and capable to defend the country") would shake off any army, and any such occupation attempt would…

I don't think Russia is willing or able to occupy Ukraine. They most likely want to "poison" the region and make the country undesirable in NATO.

No superpower wants the enemy right at their border. The US didn't appreciate Russian missiles being put on Cuban land 60 years ago, Russia certainly doesn't want NATO forces and weaponry being put on Ukrainian land now.

It doesn't take a strategist to see that all superpowers want a buffer and if you take away that buffer spark will fly - whether a blockade or a full out war. I'm certain Europe (EU) saw this outcome the moment Ukraine was considered for joining any Western alliance or union. But different continents have different interests.

Re: Estonia, allies to trigger NATO Article 4

#496

Post by koide »

eej71 wrote: post #405
koide wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you know that the fossil energy sources are also intermittent? No energy plant is ever working 24x7x365. Stop with the fud already. There are real concerns with solar and wind that could be ameliorated with small scale storage, nuclear, geothermal and hydro. But to call them toxic and destabilizing is patently untrue, the destabilizing factor is not renewable energy.

The dream of any kind of small scale storage hinges on mining rare earth elements at a scale that no environmentalist will ever support. The greens will fully reverse course here once it becomes clear what kind of activity is required to make that possible. I call them destablizing because the unjustified attacks on fossil fuels have delivered free countries into the economic hands of despotic regimes.

That the attacks are unjustified is arguable. The problem is not the attacks on them, but the politics. If Europe is still consuming fossil fuels they could still produce them and source it elsewhere and not buy it from Russia.

In addition, without renewables, the situation would be similar as Europe would still have near 100% fossil fuel energy production (except France).

Nuclear could potentially have changed things, but that's not related to the attack of fossil fuels. That's again politics and perception.

I agree than many times the "greens" cause more trouble than solutions, and that, again, is politics.

Re: Estonia, allies to trigger NATO Article 4

#497

Post by ubercore »

ricardobayes wrote: post #448
shawabawa3 wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Finland is in the EU - a much stronger alliance than NATO

I disagree, the EU doesn't have an army. So if Finland is invaded they can send their "thoughts and prayers in these difficult times".

Doesn't the EU have a mutual defense treaty as strong as NATO? That was my understanding. They'd be obligated to help militarily.

Re: Estonia, allies to trigger NATO Article 4

#498

Post by shepardrtc »

realcertify wrote: post #490
jdrc wrote: post #453

Would be interesting to hear from any russians in here, because i can't help to think that large majority of russians are complicit to what seems to be a dictator going mad as much as the dictators in his neighborhood (aliyev, khomeini, taliban etc)

You are right about large majority of Russians being complicit, and right when saying "what seems to be a dictator going mad". Because it's not a dictator going mad, in fact Putin has quite clear goals and is quite predictable. He repeatedly was warning the West about the balance of power being skewed in their favor and Russia's interests being neglected since 2007. I'm not going to get into much details, and I feel…

> He repeatedly was warning the West about the balance of power being skewed in their favor

He had the previous US president wrapped around his finger, and he was able to take Crimea with barely any effort. How is the balance of power skewed in favor of the West?

Re: Estonia, allies to trigger NATO Article 4

#499

Post by ghostwriter »

tremon wrote: post #433
2143 wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> modern army and it was a total massacre You don't get it. Look, nobody has any doubt that USA is very powerful. But that doesn't mean they must annihilate the world. And Russia is no slouch. Diplomacy is the need of the hour. As somebody who lives far far away from Europe and North America (in a country that's supposed to have no skin in this game), I don't want to get killed because Uncle Sam wants to show who's b…

Diplomacy is the need of the hour. Diplomacy was yesterhour's need. It failed, otherwise there wouldn't be Russian troops all over Ukraine right now.

It failed because the US diplomats were too ignorant to take Putin's "red line" demands (Ukraine never getting into NATO) seriously and they discarded any possibility for immediate negotiations on that matter too eagerly.

Re: Estonia, allies to trigger NATO Article 4

#500

Post by southerntofu »

tim333 wrote: post #477
trhway wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Realistically Russia can't occupy any significant part of Ukraine, nor Kiev in particular - tens of millions of pissed-off resisting Ukrainians with many taking up arms (on Ukrainian TV they said that they already give arms to such civilians as former police, and Zelenskiy said that they would give arms to all "willing and capable to defend the country") would shake off any army, and any such occupation attempt would…

They may be thinking of installing another Lukashenko type as president and then leaving.

It's not just Lukashenko though: Kadyrov is another example. It appears Putin has learnt from history of the Russian empire that it cannot survive with a single ruler doing ethnic cleansing from above (like the Empire did with the jews before 1917 or the USSR did with muslims).

So yes Putin has wet dreams about reuniting all territories from the ex-Empire or ex-USSR, but as you pointed out he certainly needs "local men" (strong/macho/authoritarian type) to rule the local communities before an uprising occurs as is the logical conclusion of any colonial occupation.

Post reply on HN