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

Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

svt.se

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 310 posts

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#181

Post by avl999 »

jmyeet wrote: post #150

So let's recount what Putin has achieved in the last 3 months: 1. Failed to conquer all of Ukraine; 2. Failed to capture Kyiv; 3. Failed to make meaningful gains in the Donbass; 4. Failed to decapitate Ukraine's leadership; 5. Suffered huge casulaties; 6. Done massive damage to the perception of Russia's military (and thus the power it can project); 7. Done more for NATO solidarity than probably anything else in the…

> So Putin has quite literally achieved nothing.

If he achieved "nothing" that would infact be preferable for Russia to the state they are in now. What he did is an equivalent of the manager of your team pulling a couple of all nighters over the weekend to do a "hero-refactor" on your codebase for "improvements" and then deploying it into production only for everyone to discover that the "improved" code has massive performance regressions, worse user experience and is harder to maintain... worse it can't be rolled back easily and the process of rolling it back will be slow and annoying, that is if the manager who made those changes even admits that it should be rolled back in the first place.

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#182

Post by JumpCrisscross »

bayesian_horse wrote: post #90
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> getting rid of a prior member of an alliance undermines the very idea and value of the alliance Not really. It does if one does this after they’re invaded, to evade mutual defence commitments. But acknowledging that there are no longer shared values and providing an off ramp is perfectly fine. Strengthening, even, as it shows heightened resolve to take the commitment seriously.

If any member gets booted out because of ideological differences, no matter the circumstances, other members will necessarily fear the same. This is extremely hard to avoid...

> member gets booted out because of ideological differences, no matter the circumstances, other members will necessarily fear the same

Ejection is a serious thing. Even its deliberation will have the effect you describe.

But anyone pretending NATO is immortal or immutable or above political alignment is naïve. If a member behaves radically differently from the others, will it be politically feasible to send one’s soldiers to their aid in a time of need? If the answer to that question isn’t predictably an unambiguous yes, the treaty should be modified. Leaving Russia to guess whether Estonia is a Britain member or a Hungary member undermines the alliance's deterrence.

These treaties were forged by our parents and grandparents. They’re stronger as living documents than relics.

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#183

Post by moufestaphio »

avl999 wrote: post #181
jmyeet wrote: post #150

So let's recount what Putin has achieved in the last 3 months: 1. Failed to conquer all of Ukraine; 2. Failed to capture Kyiv; 3. Failed to make meaningful gains in the Donbass; 4. Failed to decapitate Ukraine's leadership; 5. Suffered huge casulaties; 6. Done massive damage to the perception of Russia's military (and thus the power it can project); 7. Done more for NATO solidarity than probably anything else in the…

> So Putin has quite literally achieved nothing. If he achieved "nothing" that would infact be preferable for Russia to the state they are in now. What he did is an equivalent of the manager of your team pulling a couple of all nighters over the weekend to do a "hero-refactor" on your codebase for "improvements" and then deploying it into production only for everyone to discover that the "improved" code has massive p…

Sounds oddly specific :D

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#184

Post by rmind »

jmyeet wrote: post #150

So let's recount what Putin has achieved in the last 3 months: 1. Failed to conquer all of Ukraine; 2. Failed to capture Kyiv; 3. Failed to make meaningful gains in the Donbass; 4. Failed to decapitate Ukraine's leadership; 5. Suffered huge casulaties; 6. Done massive damage to the perception of Russia's military (and thus the power it can project); 7. Done more for NATO solidarity than probably anything else in the…

You forgot couple important aspects: he also ruined the Russian economy (the conservative estimate is -12% GDP drop this year). Russian military industry also lost access to the Western high tech (unfortunately, a lot of it has been used in their modern equipment, such as missiles, aircraft, etc). It will take at least a decade for them rebuild the armed forces after the war with Ukraine.

There is indeed a risk of Kremlin using the tactical nuclear weapons. The United States needs to have a very robust strategy for such possibility. However, such use cannot be left without a response. Most likely it would be a military response. No response would set a catastrophic precedent, as it would invite the use of nuclear weapons in pretty much any conflict which involves a nuclear power. Just think about South China Sea, Kashmir conflict, etc. It would also lead to an era of nuclear proliferation, as weaker states would see no other option than to obtain nukes.

I think even the nutcases in Kremlin (or at least the Russian Armed Forces) understand that there would be an unprecedented response.

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#185

Post by osynavets »

jmyeet wrote: post #150

So let's recount what Putin has achieved in the last 3 months: 1. Failed to conquer all of Ukraine; 2. Failed to capture Kyiv; 3. Failed to make meaningful gains in the Donbass; 4. Failed to decapitate Ukraine's leadership; 5. Suffered huge casulaties; 6. Done massive damage to the perception of Russia's military (and thus the power it can project); 7. Done more for NATO solidarity than probably anything else in the…

In my opinion it's destroying Ukraine as a country. Even if it takes years he's ready to keep this thing going until our economy collapses. I mean, you're right, Russia hasn't succeeded in its goals. But if we take a look at Ukraine which will start to struggle economically in near future [1] you can change your opinion.

[1] - https://www.economist.com/europe/it-will-be-hard-for-ukraine...

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#186

Post by matheusmoreira »

ddalex wrote: post #162
cortesoft wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you ask your neighbor to approve your friend list? Well, if my neighbor had nukes pointed at my house, I might at least care what they thought.

And your friends have nukes pointed at the neighbors house - perhaps the neighbour wants to mind his words lest his house be turned in a glassed skate park.

So your friend is willing to risk planetary destruction over a friends list dispute with your neighbor? I'd think thrice before relying on them when such stakes are on the table.

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#187

Post by lazyjones »

tuukkah wrote: post #151
drexlspivey wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Says who? Reports on the peace deal were that Ukraine had agreed to this point. Also “We might get invaded/bombed in the future” is a strictly better outcome than “we are being bombed right now”

So instead of affirming your sovereignity and your ties to the West, you would cut your ties? I think it has proven useful to have those ties when the invasion is on. If it doesn't come to an invasion, Russia kills you slowly with a strong embrace.

Being neutral means having ties with everyone, not just the West. Austria is a good example for this, we decided to be neutral and were between East Bloc and West during the cold war and all related tensions, yet never worried due to strict neutrality and good relations with both sides.

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#188

Post by willturman »

cortesoft wrote: post #125
ddalex wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who the fuck cares what Russia demands. Do you ask your neighbor to approve your friend list ? Russia thought it could force the issue, and has had its ass handed back to them .

> Do you ask your neighbor to approve your friend list? Well, if my neighbor had nukes pointed at my house, I might at least care what they thought.

Reasoning with someone threatening your complete destruction seems like a shaky foundation for productive negotiation.

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#189

Post by xxpor »

tuukkah wrote: post #157
xhevahir wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like a very big and complicated undertaking, both politically and militarily. Turkey has NATO's second-largest army, for one thing.

Perhaps it's more important to have Turkey in NATO than Sweden and Finland, but I honestly don't know. I hear Finland has a strong army and it's useful to have all of the Baltic Sea countries in NATO.

Turkey's location is incredibly important strategically. They control access to the Black Sea.

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#190

Post by macintux »

pydry wrote: post #172
macintux wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with de-escalation is this: what compromise is possible here? Ukraine should just give up its independence and land and ability to seek justice for the horrific war crimes? Russia has the power to de-escalate by withdrawing. Ukraine has the power to de-escalate by ceasing to exist.

Abide by Minsk II, officially cede crimea (according to gallup this is what 80-90% of crimeans want), disband azov and promise never to join NATO. Theres a perfectly clear deescalation path and has been since before the war started. This war was many things but inevitable was never one of them. Deescalation is the last thing NATO or the US wants though.

A lot of words to say “give up their independence”.

And Putin says the Minsk agreements no longer exist.

(Updated to fix autocorrect typo)

Post reply on HN