Finland will seek NATO membership immediately • Hacker News Board

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#581

Post by aiilns » Thu, May 12, 2022, 1:52 PM UTC

kibwen wrote: post #566

aiilns wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Isn't NATO a product of the cold war, meant to stand as an alliance against the USSR? A defense alliance must be, by definition, against someone, be it Russia or China. And isn't it a tool for the US (mainly) to serve their interests & enforce their will around the world? See Kosovo, Afghanistan, Libya. 2) "Allowed" yes, disregarding the sanctions/embargo in place these last 60 years. 3) My geography knowledge is…

> A defense alliance must be, by definition, against someone I'm not sure where you got this idea, but it certainly isn't true.

Then from whom is the alliance defending themselves, if not from those not into the alliance?

For example, a defense alliance that included all nations, would defend against aliens.

I repeat, a defense alliance must be, by definition, protecting the members from external threats. I don't think it's a very difficult concept to grasp.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#582

Post by foobarian » Thu, May 12, 2022, 1:53 PM UTC

shimonabi wrote: post #579

foobarian wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know what bugs me about Croatia. Everyone complains about how terrible it is, politicians are stupid and corrupt, nepotism everywhere, etc etc and please leave somewhere better as soon as you can, but then when you do the tune changes and now it is the nicest place on Earth with natural beauty and beaches and good life and come back as soon as you can. It's a real conundrum.

Croatia has lost 9.25% of its population since 2011.

Guessing that's because of Schengen.

Edit: Not Schengen, that is something more specific; but the Treaty of Accession from 2011?

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#583

Post by wolverine876 » Thu, May 12, 2022, 1:54 PM UTC

tpmx wrote: post #82

Timeline (from Swedish press yesterday - Omni): Today, May 12: Finnish president Niinistö presents his view on the NATO issue. Friday, May 13: A new Swedish security policy analysis is presented in parliament. All 8 parties represented there have collaborated on this. Saturday, May 14: Heads of the Finnish Social Democratic Party meet and decide on the NATO issue. Swedish and Finnish FMs join a NATO meeting in Berlin…

> All 8 parties represented there have collaborated on this.

Imagine a country where one major party doesn't sell itself by obstructing everything.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#584

Post by evo_9 » Thu, May 12, 2022, 1:54 PM UTC

The invasion of the Ukraine has done more to strengthen NATO than anything the West could have ever done on its own.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#585

Post by fsloth » Thu, May 12, 2022, 1:55 PM UTC

belter wrote: post #542

ericmay wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes that appears to be correct. I’m not following what point you are trying to make here.

That is a strange choice to spend 400% your annual overall defense budget on a new unproven system.

There was an open tender with all of the current/next gen western suppliers participating, with analysis comparing the capabilities of Eurofighter, Rafale, F-18 E/F, Jas Gripen, F-35 and their adjunct systems including weapon systems, tactical integration and their capability for several decades.

Finnish air-force is quite professional and skilled in what it does.

As a software geek I presume they spent the money wisely and with sufficient knowledge of what they are doing. Norway has 24 F-35:s in operation so if there were obvious deficiencies those would likely have been heard over the grapevine as nordic forces are quite close.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#586

Post by selimthegrim » Thu, May 12, 2022, 1:55 PM UTC

2Gkashmiri wrote: post #119

spaniard89277 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can see it (am spaniard), and there's definitely propaganda. But ultimately it was Russia who invaded Ucraine and the reasons provided are very vague, at best. The Speech Putin did had some etnonationalism BS and claims of defending the land agains the threat of NATO. In most bordering NATO countries what you have is SAMs (anti-air missiles), and honestly pretty much any NATO country could claim that they feel thre…

thank you. i am not sympathizing with anyone for that matter. i am pointing out what i observe.... you know when america invaded iraq for "WMDs" and they turned out to be nothing and literally nothing happened? "strong anger" does not equate to waging a war against america like its being done against russia. let me ask you, you and me are neither americans nor russians. did the world care when america invaded afghani…

America isn’t annexing those countries.

If I go down the street in Baramulla or Bijbehara (assuming no forces around) and ask what people think about Pak getting involved or not involved in Yemen what do you think they would say? Or about what Saudi Arabia doing? More to the point, do they think BD were traitors for leaving Pak in 1971? Or Muslims can never commit war crimes against other Muslims? Afghans never occupied Kashmir?

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#587

Post by rich_sasha » Thu, May 12, 2022, 1:56 PM UTC

pastacacioepepe wrote: post #525

rich_sasha wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vetos are somewhat overrated. Agents may have the right to veto, but might not have the power to deal with the consequences. Russia has a UN veto and uses it, because they can weather the consequences. Could Hungary piss off all of its allies, trade partners, basically everyone but Russia? Doubtful. Hungary is playing a skillful, if somewhat devious, game of balancing between Russia and the West. But an outright FU t…

And yet Ungary alone is stopping the 6th round of Russia sanctions from the EU. They are not afraid to veto to protect their interests, like any nation should do. It's not a coincidence that von der leyen wants to change the voting system from hunanimity to majority. They don't like to lose, and the rules are fine only as long as they can do what they want. So vetoes have more power than you would let us think.

I think it's been convenient to blame Hungary, but the truth is, plenty of countries are unhappy about banning Russian hydrocarbons, with Germany leading the list. They can weather the consequences of their veto, because there isn't much will to make it happen anyway - i.e. there are no consequences.

I can imagine Finland/Sweden being very different. Who benefits/loses from Finland/Sweden joining? These countries are very well-armed, with large, well-trained armies, so they are a welcome addition for most. Baltic states must be delighted. Germany must be realising that hugging Russia for decades hasn't paid off, but it is in a clinch; its army has had decades of peacetime budgets, while they find themselves on the gas/oil hook. Hungary's own immediate neighbours, Romania and Slovakia at least, are quite wary of Russian threat and will welcome at least a diffusion of Russian targets in the area.

Would there be consequences to ruining the plans of US, Germany, Sweden, Finland, Slovakia and Romania, and many other countries? No doubt, and beyond what Hungary is prepared to pay.

But then what do I know? I'm an armchair strategist.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#588

Post by ericmay » Thu, May 12, 2022, 1:56 PM UTC

belter wrote: post #578

ericmay wrote: post #563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> on a new unproven system. How are you qualifying whether or not this system is proven?

Never seen combat and when trying to do a dogfight with a F16 lost. This was promptly followed by a series of articles from US defense industry stating that nowadays dogfights don't happen anymore, contrarily to what we are seeing in Ukraine, plus arguments that the fight was not fair. The reality is that the fight was not fair for the F16 that was loaded with two external fuel tanks, probably to make sure there was…

> Never seen combat

Can you describe what you mean by this? Are you suggesting that no F-35 has ever been used in combat operations?

> when trying to do a dogfight with a F16 lost

What's your source for this?

> but for me it's telling the fight was not re-staged again...

Be careful, we're getting close to sounding conspiratorial and we want to make sure to avoid that, because we can't have a discussion at that point.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#589

Post by mynameishere » Thu, May 12, 2022, 1:56 PM UTC

serpix wrote: post #109

As a Finnish citizen, reservist this has been a very emotional spring. Both of my grandfathers were in the war with Russia. Both of my grandmothers had to leave and burn their homes in the areas annexed by Russia. Twice. I am 100% for Nato.

Yeah too bad the continuation war didn't work out for you.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#590

Post by CRConrad » Thu, May 12, 2022, 1:58 PM UTC

darkteflon wrote: post #570

herbst wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok I guess? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Ukraine#Situ...

You’re referring to transgressions under Yanukovych? That’s not a great example, since he’s famously a Russian puppet, removed from office in the Maidan Revolution.

> Yanukovych? That’s not a great example, since he’s famously a Russian puppet, removed from office in the Maidan Revolution.

Coup! Coup! Remember, never call it the "Maidan Revolution", it was a coup! Oh, wait, sorry, you're not trying to prove you're a Russian troll, are you? ;-)

But honestly, I've found that's the easiest heuristic, at least on Twitter: Whenever someone talks about the 2014 "coup" (or "Putsch") in Ukraine, they're a Putler RToll (<-- tpyoed that at first, noticed how fitting it was, so capitalised it).