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…
What I don't understand is what Hungary gains from splitting with the rest of the EU and NATO to help Russia. Doesn't seem beneficial to them.
Hungary gets 60% of its oil and 85% of its gas from Russia.
Appeasement worked great with Hitler and Mussolini... Finland is a sovereign nation and has the right to join any defensive union it wants. Interesting with all the down votes, wonder if Russian bots have reach even on HN? The fact is that this is happening, and Sweden is joining too, and I'm glad we are. You need some very twisted Russian logic to see sovereign states joining of their own accord, with majority suppo…
Here is how the US responded to the Solomon Islands military treaty with China (emphasis mine): > If steps are taken to establish a de facto permanent military presence, power-projection capabilities, or a military installation, the delegation noted that the United States would then have significant concerns and respond accordingly . Note that the Solomon Islands is also a sovereign nation, and that it is > 10,000km…
I don't know the situation, but if Solomon Islands are doing this of their own accord, and that's what their population wants then I'm not against that. But then again I'm not American. I understand that there are cases, like with the Cuba Crisis, where the fear was warranted. The Soviet's had a history of invading and occupying other nations. China is mainly a threat to Taiwan, and perhaps historically to Vietnam, but unlikely to seek territorial expansion outside of Taiwan. Yes, the US also has blood on its hands, but nobody can argue that the US has tried to invade in order to occupy and integrate foreign territory in modern times.
> what benefits Orban Orban’s party won reëlection. Orban is popular [1]. We can crib about disinformation and this or that, but holding Hungary accountable for his decisions is perfectly acceptable. [1] https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-viktor-orban-europ...
> reëlection I love the use of the diaeresis.
They are snooty as hell, and I'll forever associate them with The New Yorker[1]. That said, I love them too! Now, if only we could do the same for awry and other words that trip up voracious readers.
You said: >Yes, I do believe that NATO is a war-crime committing, human-rights abusing entity that is bringing much death and destruction and turmoil to the world for the sake of special interests - political and commercial - who stand to gain billions in profit from every single NATO base built. >But, I've been paying attention to NATO's war crimes over the last two decades, as well as the immensely evil crimes agai…
The question was: "do you think any of said war crimes would actually be committed against Russia directly?" And the answer is YES, because NATO has already set a heinous precedent for committing war crimes and crimes against humanity, with seeming impunity, for decades and shows no signs of stopping its criminal war regime. So yes, I did answer the question. You maybe don't like the answer, though. >NATO force Russi…
> yet call for the end of Russia for its invasion of Ukraine
How can Russia pressure and disrupt the process when NATO members are the ones most afraid of Putin? Finland's doing this only because of Russia's actions. I can't imagine anybody vetoing Finland's membership. In fact, the more the merrier^Hstronger.
NATO won't accept members that are entangled in regional conflicts which may turn into wars soon (that's why Ukraine couldn't apply anymore after 2014). So Russia's solution would be to start such a conflict, sooner rather than later.
US said they protect countries who apply for NATO. So attacking Sweden or Finland would bring the US into the conflict.
There is no "application process". NATO is invite only. Best a nation can do is to "start a discussion" with NATO to get invited.
That seems like silly semantics. The "application process" is to express interest and ask for an invite.
> That seems like silly semantics
It adds a lot of nuance actually. They can't say to the public that NATO proactively wants a country to join, as that would sound as an expansionistic move, so what more probably happens is that NATO first reaches out to countries that are considered strategically useful offering them a deal. Then the public is sold the narrative of the free country wanting to join NATO, that generously welcomes them under their protective wing against the evil villains. There is no other way to sell to your electorate joining NATO.
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…
The hungarian leading party (fidesz) has already declared they will not veto Ukrain's adoption to the EU so I personally really doubt they would veto Finland's entry to the NATO. They are playing a double-game (sorry, this probably doesn't make sense in english, it's a hungarian expression): Orban had a famous quote he said to EU leaders "don't listen to what I say, only to what I do", which in practice means alienat…
> "don't listen to what I say, only to what I do",
There is a close enough express in English that it translates. "Do what I say, not what I do", is something parents tell kids when the parents want the kids to behave better than the parents do! For example, if a parent smokes, they may tell their kid "don't smoke, do what I say not what I do."
The Assange affair is certainly disgusting, but does the US have widespread political persecution the way Russia does?
Shall we really rattle off a list of political persecution in the USA? Because, honestly, you can't be so ignorant .. YES: The WEST DOES have political persecution the way Russia does. There is, literally, NO DIFFERENCE. Of course, we don't have evidence of a thousand Russian secret torture sites, like we do for the CIA (thanks Julian, thanks Edward), so there is some validity to the position that in fact the Wests'…
> Because, honestly, you can't be so ignorant .. YES: The WEST DOES have political persecution the way Russia does.
With all due respect which is none, I don't think you personally know someone who was persecuted in some way or another. I do know several. (Assuming you're in the US)
> Of course, we don't have evidence of a thousand Russian secret torture sites