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

Finland or Sweden joining NATO would spark Russian response, Russia warns

tbsnews.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 317 posts

Re: Finland or Sweden joining NATO would spark Russian response, Russia warns

#271

Post by reitanqild »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #32
rhino369 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even worse, when you invade someone who tried to join NATO, was given the same warning, didn't join NATO, and then was invaded anyway. Finland and Sweden should join now while Russia doesn't have the ability to invade (because their forces are busy in Ukraine).

Whether they join or not, Finland and Sweden better beef up their defenses, starting yesterday...

Happy to say it seems Finland started decades ago and never stopped.

Sweden I think is also not to unprepared.

Even Norway (who is a Nato member) seems to be somewhat better prepared than last time there was a dictator on the loose in Europe.

Re: Finland or Sweden joining NATO would spark Russian response, Russia warns

#272

Post by actuator »

SllX wrote: post #130
actuator wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we can't even defend weak from a bully, what's the point of anything; specially when they seem to be asking for help. There are much unjustified and unasked for interventions that have been done even in the recent past. Are all our morals and ideals just for convenience.

This isn’t the goddamned playground with a bigger kid picking on a smaller kid. These are two nations at War and nobody has a defense pact or commitment with Ukraine because the concern was that making that pact would inevitably lead to a Russia-NATO war. Our morals and ideals are not universally shared by our adversaries, and our adversaries include two Nuclear powers with ICBMs. One of them is the instigator in thi…

While we don't have a pact with Ukraine, let us not forget that they gave up their nuclear arsenal in 1994 because they were given security assurances.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Securit...

It is better that they had trusted themselves than nations that will give up on them.

Re: Finland or Sweden joining NATO would spark Russian response, Russia warns

#273

Post by cjblomqvist »

jopsen wrote: post #214
cjblomqvist wrote: post #143

There's a lot of comments about how outrageous the lack of a harsher response (in particular the lack of military action) from the west/NATO/USA is. But, whatabout the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan? Weren't they quite similar (the big difference being that those countries were not close to the US geographically and not really posing a big threat). Why was those invasions ok but not this one? Just to make clear: I…

> But, whatabout the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan? "whatabout" doesn't justify anything else. But I'll play. In both cases, there was a broad coalition. Troops didn't start an invasion without clear demands. Russia lied about their demands, said their troop deployment was for exercises. Until recently they maintained they weren't going to invade. Say what you want about Iraq and Afghanistan, but the intention of…

Whatabout: I see your point, and as stated I'm not in favor of the current situation. My point is I can see similarities to wars started by the US/west - and I believe lots of outrage come from people who supported those efforts. Either I'm missing something (thus the implied question "What's the significant difference?") or I guess it's hypocrisy?

(1) according to Russia (Russian perspective) I'm pretty sure the US (or for that matter Ukraine) is harboring terrorists as well. Now, I'm not fully knowledgeable about all the details in Afghanistan, and sure, the Talibans doesn't seem to be optimal (but neither does the Ukrainian leadership/political situation - it's one of the most corrupt country in Europe?), but aren't there a lot of similarities? What are the significant differences that justified killing (directly or indirectly) many tens of thousands and messing up a country for 20 years, that still makes it valid to have outrage for the current situation? I'm genuinely curious!

(2) I think the other comment put it best. Bush and co lied about the situation (there being WMDs). And is it OK now if Putin regrets his invasion 2028?

PS You do have a good point about there probably being more outrage if there was an intervention!

Re: Finland or Sweden joining NATO would spark Russian response, Russia warns

#274

Post by toxik »

belter wrote: post #256
toxik wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me get this straight, you believe that if Russia invaded northern Europe outright, central and south Europe would not intervene? I guess some topics aren’t great to discuss on HN.

Its two non NATO members. Europe would not do for them what does not do for Ukraine.

You are completely ignorant of the current status and history of Europe. An attempted invasion of Finland and Sweden would be an unambiguous declaration of war on the European Union, there is no other interpretation. China would, no doubt, take such an opportunity to move on its military goals (eg Taiwan). It would mark the beginning of a third world war.

If you don't even believe that the EU would defend its own territory, well, you are just simply insane.

Re: Finland or Sweden joining NATO would spark Russian response, Russia warns

#276

Post by morpheos137 »

sharken wrote: post #23
belter wrote: post #5

As I wrote in another thread today, current EU and US leaders are asleep at the wheel. We have a different dynamic. Talking about sanctions looks almost pathetic. The analogy here is, you live in a community and one of your neighbors just lost it completely and is shooting and shelling another neighbor. Not to raise the hostilities...you scream at him he wont be invited anymore for the Christmas party and you will co…

Yes, this is a very abrupt awakening from the general idea that Corona was handled well and thinking we can do everything. Here is Putin with the might of Russia at his disposal, a very different challenge altogether. As you, i fear that the leaders are not geared towards this kind of conflict at all. I would consider calling Putins bluff by accepting Finland and Sweden as NATO members. But only if the two countries…

Who thinks Corona was handled well? Compare how Europe handled it to China or even Australia or New Zealand.

Re: Finland or Sweden joining NATO would spark Russian response, Russia warns

#277

Post by iostream24 »

pakitan wrote: post #269
iostream24 wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reality is that swift decisive action in a coordinated fashion is the only way to stop an aggressor that suggest that everyone else needs to also lie down and shut up or they will get a thrashing too. Game theory says “on three JUMP HIM!” Multiple entities need to act with force in non economic ways that render collective bullying impossible. Game theory says “gang up now instead of letting your strongest get pic…

> Game theory says “on three JUMP HIM!” Yes, sure. But what you're betting on here is that when Sweden says "on three JUMP HIM!", the rest will follow. And when you have multiple countries now refusing to take Russia out of SWIFT, which is a relatively benign measure, compared to an all-out war, how confident are you that they will come in your defense in case of an actual war against a nuclear power?

> And when you have multiple countries now refusing to take Russia out of SWIFT

Not anymore. It takes a little bit to organize independently run republics, but once things get rolling…

Also, there was this 1994 accord called the Budapest Memorandum…

Mr P bit off more than he can chew, this time.

There will be more NATO…

Just when we thought it was all getting rather irrelevant and dated…

Nothing like a “master strategist “ to galvanize the entire world against him suddenly when he had a substantial reserve of social capital in the leadup to this…

Re: Finland or Sweden joining NATO would spark Russian response, Russia warns

#278

Post by cjbgkagh »

sofixa wrote: post #268
cjbgkagh wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia isn’t there to occupy permanently, they want neutrality in Ukraine’s constitution and there are a number of ways that can happen. They might incorporate the separatist areas as a buffer for the Black Sea.

But they can't dictate Ukraine's constitution and government and expect the locals to fight against that, or at the very least overthrow the lot the second the Russian troops leave.

They’ll take Ukraine’s weapons with them and promise they’ll be back if Ukraine tries to rearm. Ukraine will be left defenseless, but they have EU on one side and Russia on the other. So even without weapons they’ll be safe. It’s not like Russia will let anyone else invade them. Russia will make lifting sanctions as a condition of leaving. I would expect things to go back to normal very quickly.

Re: Finland or Sweden joining NATO would spark Russian response, Russia warns

#279

Post by aaaaaaaaata »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #61
causi wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seven hundred billion dollars a year and we can't even defend the weak unless it looks profitable on the balance sheet. Never have I been more ashamed to be American than I was yesterday.

Preventing a direct America vs. Russia conflict is worth much more than $700B

Unless you're a d fence contractor.

Re: Finland or Sweden joining NATO would spark Russian response, Russia warns

#280

Post by SAI_Peregrinus »

Someone1234 wrote: post #113
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether they join or not, Finland and Sweden better beef up their defenses, starting yesterday...

I agree; I think there was this kind of default assumption (due to MAD) that wars in Northern Europe were mostly over. All these recent events have done is prove that nuclear nations will swallow up non-nuclear nations if they don't have a MAD assurance from an alley. Finland and Sweden should decide themselves what is best, but I only wish the best for both countries and after this I cannot bring myself to believe i…

It's been clear for years now that nuclear weapons are required to be a sovereign nation. Without enough nukes to be a real threat, the nuclear nations will simply take over when they feel it's worth it.
Post reply on HN