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

Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

presidentti.fi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

921–930 of 1001 posts

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#921

Post by brabel »

mint2 wrote: post #892
brabel wrote: post #811

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is your opinion... if you believe everyone should agree with you on that, then yes, seeking membership on a military alliance whose aim is to keep your country at bay is not a provocation. But can you maybe consider that Putin and most Russians do not share your opinion? Would an American consider that Canada joining a Chinese-led military alliance to defend its members against USA's increased aggression (in Can…

In the two years prior to the war, what addition steps had Ukraine taken to become a nato member? Second, why all the Russian lies about nazis? If nato was a legitimate concern why do they need those lies? If nato was actually a concern, why would they take the step most likely to get Finland and Sweden on board with nato? It seems like many other statements by Russia, nato concerns are lies as well.

> what addition steps had Ukraine taken to become a nato member?

Oh man... now it looks like I am a Russian defender when I have to remind people that Ukraine was constitutionally obliged to seek NATO membership, and announced at the Brussels Summit in 2021 [1] that it would become a member? And that this was the trigger for the Russian mobilisation near the Ukrainian border??

How can people forget basic stuff like that?!?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine%E2%80%93NATO_relations

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#922

Post by eru »

fsloth wrote: post #2

There was some discussion on plausible NATO membership of Finland and Sweden. At that point the disucssion was based on guestimates from media. But now it's official. This is not the NATO membership application, but a statement from the political leadership in Finland that they support and suggest parliament proceeds with the application process with maximum urgency. The President and Prime Minister of Finland have p…

What part of your comment is the quote? (Or is it the whole comment?)

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#923

Post by eru »

jcranberry wrote: post #557
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…

What would be realistic fallout from vetoing their application?

I don't know if one can be kicked out of NATO?

But even if not, in the most extreme case, everyone else could leave NATO and simultaneously join NATO++, which is just NATO without Hungary, but with Finland.

(And because that kind of process is possible in theory, I would suggest that any organisation with a voluntary exit clause might also want to have a clause that allows the unanimous vote by everyone else to expel one member. Maybe..)

This is all speculation about the most extreme consequences. Other commenters wrote more realistic things about trade in weapons being disrupted.

And, of course, you could set up 'NATO++' as an alliance between US, Finland and other willing nations, without shutting down old NATO. Just like Ukraine receives a lot of assistance from NATO countries these days without being in NATO.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#924

Post by brabel »

amrangaye wrote: post #893
brabel wrote: post #811

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is your opinion... if you believe everyone should agree with you on that, then yes, seeking membership on a military alliance whose aim is to keep your country at bay is not a provocation. But can you maybe consider that Putin and most Russians do not share your opinion? Would an American consider that Canada joining a Chinese-led military alliance to defend its members against USA's increased aggression (in Can…

I think the fact that you keep framing this as a matter of “opinion” is revealing in itself. You speak of “provocation” as if it’s equal and commensurate to bombing and invading a country. I really cannot understand people who keep pushing this point. Ukraine decided they might like to join NATO - so therefore Russia has a right to invade and level the country. Please make this make sense to me. The bombs dropping on…

Well you clearly are not trying to understand. You believe opinions don't matter as if your truth was the only truth.

For example.

> You speak of “provocation” as if it’s equal and commensurate to bombing and invading a country

I did not.

> Ukraine decided they might like to join NATO - so therefore Russia has a right to invade and level the country.

No. They made it a high priority [1] to join NATO knowing that Russia would be incredibly hostile to them doing that. Whether or not Russia was right to be that way doesn't really matter. If your bully neighbour tells you they may attack you if you try to join NATO, and you try to join NATO, you know all too well you're taking a giant bet.

> Please make this make sense to me.

Does the above help? Can you understand that your giant neighbour may not think like you do, and therefore may be willing to go to war and destroy their own economy just to stop you from joining what they see, rightfully or not, as an enemy alliance, no matter how much you try to convince them the alliance is not a threat even when it's whole reason to exist is to oppose your giant neighbour?

> The bombs dropping on Ukrainian citizens every night while Russian citizens sleep in peace should tell you enough

What does that have to do with the topic being discussed other than try to appeal to emotion? Anyway, yes, I am horrified to see Ukraine being bombed to the ground and I loathe the Russians for doing that. But I remember they made it extremely clear they were going to do that, and the USA and Ukraine were completely defiant to their demands (again, whether those demands were fair or not is another story)... when you have a gun pointed at your head, even the unfairest of demands should be taken seriously.

> In that case too the US would have no right to invade a sovereign country for making decisions about its own future.

Yes, I agree, but we all know all too well the US would absolutely invade, as it has done time and time again. You willing it wouldn't do that won't change that fact.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine%E2%80%93NATO_relations

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#925

Post by eru »

pessimizer wrote: post #789
jcranberry wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would be realistic fallout from vetoing their application?

In the name of democracy the US would attack Hungary economically, and leverage any dependency that other countries have on the US to force them to also attack Hungary economically or to join them as an official enemy.

I could only see a very mild version of this happening.

More realistically, they could just spin up an alternative alliance between US, Finland and any other willing current NATO member (but excluding Hungary). And over time move more and more importance to this new NATO++, and perhaps even eventually drop out of old NATO.

There's no provisions for kicking countries out of NATO. But everyone else leaving the club is equivalent to kicking one country out.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#926

Post by DocTomoe »

trasz wrote: post #827
DocTomoe wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> NATO is a devensive alliance. I think Serbs may disagree on that. In the end, NATO is the US and it's dependent vassal states. With neighbors like these, I can sympathize with Russia not being too comfortable.

Serbs had a choice - they could have avoided starting a genocide, for example.

You mean that genocide that UN courts later decided wasn't actually a genocide[1]?

Yeah... I guess if you are convinced you're on the side of the good guys(tm), you really can't do wrong.

[1] https://www.upi.com/Archives/2001/09/07/UN-court-rules-no-ge...

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#927

Post by eru »

gsinclair wrote: post #884
sangnoir wrote: post #763

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. 1. https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/the-curse-of-...

They were once coming in English-language publications but now are seen in only The New Yorker, The Economist, and one other. Can anyone recall which?

Interestingly, they seem to survive most in naïve than in words like coöperate.

Co-operate is much more common than na-ive (which I've never seen). But both cooperate and naive seem reasonably well accepted.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#928

Post by DocTomoe »

adrr wrote: post #765
DocTomoe wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-05/u-s-gives...

Would I, as a Finnish or Swedish lawmaker, trust that promise? The US has not won a war in eighty years, and their shoot first, ask questions later approach may ultimately be more destructive than Russians could ever be.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#929

Post by eru »

teknopaul wrote: post #731
rich_sasha wrote: post #606

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The very short answer is that Hungary benefits both from membership in the Western block and from being Putin's friend inside it. So they presumably don't want to go as far as leave, but rather use that as a credible threat for leverage.

If hungry tried to veto, Nato could evict them, then they would be facing Putin on their own. Nobody is Putin's friend. When you join his club he send the military in to make sure it goes his way.

While I appreciate the sentiment, as long as Russia doesn't have a common border with Hungary, he won't be able to send the military. Who's gonna let him through?

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#930

Post by eru »

bonzini wrote: post #830
pastacacioepepe wrote: post #758

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

It's not okay to poison political opponents even if they are just much a piece of sh*t as the poisoner. But if Navalny isn't okay, let's talk instead about Russia poisoning Yushchenko in 2004 with dioxin...

Imagine Biden poisoning Trump for comparison.
Post reply on HN