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

311–317 of 317 posts

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

#311

Post by CRConrad »

speeder wrote: post #290
svarnypetr wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did not make a reconstruction of the timeline, but weren't the NATO amounts growing only after the Russian troops started growing and doing their larger and larger exercises that seemed worrying (and escalated now into the invasion)?

NATO started growing when Russia was still all kinds of fucked up, with the first phase being in 1997 if I remember correctly.

"Growing" in number of members generally, perhaps. Like, way up in the Baltics and so on.

But:

>>> the amount of NATO weaponry in or near Ukraine.

This was specifically about this conflict.

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

#312

Post by CRConrad »

belter wrote: post #285
toxik wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ter…

Its not a question of being insane. It's different if you can have your boys back in body bags. You forgot this is the second war in European territory after the Yugoslavian wars. For months Sarajevo was being shelled and nothing was done until the US decided it was time to bomb. The Netherlands had a full battalion protecting a Bosnian enclave and let 7000 men be killed in front of their eyes. The Dutch government w…

> You forgot this is the second war in European territory after the Yugoslavian wars.

Yugoslavia wasn't a member of the EU.

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

#313

Post by CRConrad »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #267
travisgriggs wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess I don't understand the "buffer zone" logic. I've read/seen that in a number of places of late. And it just seems like a dodge to me. A while back, our company hired a difficult to cope with person. There was some social awkwardness. And some performance issues. It's a good sized disciplinary group, but his assigned tasks were most similar to mine. Guess who became the "buffer zone"? Me. It was the worst. When…

You see how Russian tanks and troops rolled across the boarder and were at Kyiv in 2 days. That is because there were no buffers. Buffer zone in this context means Russia doesn't want US missiles and nuclear bombers with a 5 minute flight time to Moscow.

> Buffer zone in this context means Russia doesn't want US missiles and nuclear bombers with a 5 minute flight time to Moscow.

So you think it's OK for Russia to invade the (NATO member) Baltic countries, then?

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

#314

Post by CRConrad »

cjbgkagh wrote: post #278
sofixa wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Ukraine will be left defenseless, but they have EU on one side and Russia on the other.

So, exactly like now, then.

> So even without weapons they’ll be safe.

Yeah, because the ongoing war is such a shining example of how safe it is to be a defenseless neighbour to Russia.

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

#315

Post by CRConrad »

mardifoufs wrote: post #223
jopsen wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

The self defense claim for Afghanistan is just as flimsy as Russian claim of self defense in ukraine (they harbour our ennemies/nazis/etc). I'm all for condemning the russian invasion without necessarily bringing up the past but that does not mean you have to literally justify what america did in afghanistan. The only reason why it seems more reasonable to you aren't russian, and you think your team had better intent…

> The self defense claim for Afghanistan is just as flimsy as Russian claim of self defense in ukraine (they harbour our ennemies/nazis/etc).

Aha, so Bin Laden and Al Qaeda weren't hiding in Afghanistan?

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

#316

Post by jessaustin »

CRConrad wrote: post #315
mardifoufs wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The self defense claim for Afghanistan is just as flimsy as Russian claim of self defense in ukraine (they harbour our ennemies/nazis/etc). I'm all for condemning the russian invasion without necessarily bringing up the past but that does not mean you have to literally justify what america did in afghanistan. The only reason why it seems more reasonable to you aren't russian, and you think your team had better intent…

> The self defense claim for Afghanistan is just as flimsy as Russian claim of self defense in ukraine (they harbour our ennemies/nazis/etc). Aha, so Bin Laden and Al Qaeda weren't hiding in Afghanistan?

Not after 2001-12-16, the day when even super-warhawks like CFR admit ObL left for Pakistan. [0] Astute historians will note that the war continued for another two decades.

[0] https://www.cfr.org/timeline/us-war-afghanistan

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

#317

Post by CRConrad »

jessaustin wrote: post #316
CRConrad wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The self defense claim for Afghanistan is just as flimsy as Russian claim of self defense in ukraine (they harbour our ennemies/nazis/etc). Aha, so Bin Laden and Al Qaeda weren't hiding in Afghanistan?

Not after 2001-12-16, the day when even super-warhawks like CFR admit ObL left for Pakistan. [0] Astute historians will note that the war continued for another two decades . [0] https://www.cfr.org/timeline/us-war-afghanistan

Oops!?! TIL, thanks.
Post reply on HN