111–120 of 310 posts
Sweden was an unofficial NATO member anyways. Everybody knew this. They just didn't officially join in order to pretend to be a 'neutral' actor on the world stage, but anyone with a brain should know whose side they are on. In the modern world, there are only 4 independent states - US, china, russia and north korea. Everyone else is a vassal to some degree or another.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they had to choose, NATO would probably rather have Sweden and Finland in and Turkey out. Here's an interesting thread on Finland's strategic importance: https://twitter.com/tomiahonen/status/1525959053490458624
Not at all. If Murmansk's importance causes Finland to be strategic then what about Crimea? Turkey blocks Russia's warm water sea access. Much more important for Turkey to be in NATO than Finland purely on the basis of geography.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
NATO is not just about Russia. To me, suggesting that Sweden is somehow more strategically important than Turkey is foreign policy illiterate. Turkey brings a military ~30x the size of Sweden, they are actively involved in being a buffer for conflicts in the Middle East, and they have an advanced military manufacturing capability that they have used to supply Ukraine and others with military drones. They also have su…
Yes but it's not just about military size, it's about cooperation. There's no point in having a military that's 30x the size of another one if they don't really cooperate with you. > calling things racism is taboo on HN so I will refrain In this case it's because it's just wrong. Sweden is by and large a peaceful, democratic, liberal democracy that has free markets and cooperates with NATO member states on a variety…
Well if it prevents them from cooperating with someone else it might still be worth it.
If you have a neighbour that invades sovereign countries, it makes sense to seek strong allies. This is a direct result of Russia invading Ukraine, it doesn't matter how much Russia complains now.
Russia demanded a neutral (not NATO-affiliated) Ukraine as one of their peace conditions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they had to choose, NATO would probably rather have Sweden and Finland in and Turkey out. Here's an interesting thread on Finland's strategic importance: https://twitter.com/tomiahonen/status/1525959053490458624
NATO is not just about Russia. To me, suggesting that Sweden is somehow more strategically important than Turkey is foreign policy illiterate. Turkey brings a military ~30x the size of Sweden, they are actively involved in being a buffer for conflicts in the Middle East, and they have an advanced military manufacturing capability that they have used to supply Ukraine and others with military drones. They also have su…
If you have a neighbour that invades sovereign countries, it makes sense to seek strong allies. This is a direct result of Russia invading Ukraine, it doesn't matter how much Russia complains now.
Russia demanded a neutral (not NATO-affiliated) Ukraine as one of their peace conditions.
Russia thought it could force the issue, and has had its ass handed back to them .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> South korea is a vassal. A vassal of the US. It has american troops occupying it. North korea is opposite of what south korea is. They have no foreign troop occupying it. That's one of your many misunderstandings. The presence of troops does not imply an occupation. If you mistakenly think it does, then (among other things) you'll be unable to perceive alliances.
> The presence of troops does not imply an occupation. 70 years "presence" of troops does. > If you mistakenly think it does, then (among other things) you'll be unable to perceive alliances. That's a nice way of saying vassalage. If it was china occupying south korea for 70 years, we'd call that occupation. If it was russia occupying south korea for 70 years, we'd call that occupation. Somehow, when we do it, it's a…
The way Sweden and Finland admission process unfolded makes a complete mockery of democracy Rushed, decided behind closed doors, by a small clique of elites, without any semblance of democratic mandate, unconstitutional, no real public debate, no referendum, all in an atmosphere of McCarthy-like media frenzy. Any nuance is instantly brushed aside as Putin's propaganda The polls put the support at ~52% in Sweden and ~…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> doesn't sound like you know what you are talking about Okay? > no idea what an "SS-4" is Sorry, pre coffee. S-400.
okay how would Turkey's s400 purchase be an article 8 violation?
This has been covered in the American refusal to sell Ankara F-35s and ensuing sanctioning of it under CAATSA [1].
In short, no detection system is perfect. And no modern military system is sold without servicing. Letting Russia service an air defence system with the privilege of painting NATO jets, arms and missile defences is a breach of trust. It could be considered, again, pettily, though good luck to those who claims the law is often anything but, “an international engagement in conflict with” Turkey’s NATO obligations.
[1] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/mepo.12628