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

211–220 of 310 posts

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#211

Post by rendang »

_kbh_ wrote: post #60
kome wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turks are trying to establish some diplomatic bridge with Russia; that's very good. Russian aggression in Ukraine is terrible, but I feel the US are not trying to de-escalate anything. They are in full proxy-war mode. This can be very dangerous for Europe. France and Germany also would like to have more diplomacy, just like Turkey. Those countries have to live next to Russia - and maintaining a diplomatic relationshi…

The de-escalation is simple, Russia leaves all parts of Ukraine that is has occupied since 2014. It return they stop losing troops and armour at a rate which will end their armies existence entirely before the end of the year.

UA would appear to be losing troops and materiel rather quickly as well, with a smaller population and economic base.

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#212

Post by rmind »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #199
rmind wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The very concept of a nuclear country being "pushed" (what does that even mean?) to wage a war against a country, which is more than 3x smaller in population and around 5x weaker economically, is simply delusional. Russia attempted to wage a 19th century style conquest : brutal and open territorial grab including the subjugation and repression of the local population.

The military funded think tank that prescribed all of our actions leading up to this point and accurately predicted Russia's responses disagrees with you. No one wants direct nuclear war, but they do want to skirt around the edges and expand their power. The US has been in multiple hot proxy wars with Russia, the biggest being the attempted overthrow of Syria. US leadership from both parties have publicly described U…

Russia didn't invade Ukraine "out of the blue". Russia has been at war with Ukraine since 2014, when it occupied and annexed Crimea, and at the same time orchestrated and instigated covert War in Donbas.

You ramble something incoherent about the RAND paper from 2019. Just to clarify this: yes, it is precisely where the defense research should have spent the money following the Russia's aggression.

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#213

Post by belorn »

notorandit wrote: post #130
fabian2k wrote: post #65

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.

Sweden doesn't neighbour with Russia. Only Finland and Norway!

The relation between Finland and Sweden is such that if Finland would be invaded Sweden would send troops to help. The idea that Finland, Norway and Denmark could be invaded again like in ww2 and Sweden just standing neutral has both ideologically and practically been abandoned.

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#214

Post by tuukkah »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #199
rmind wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The very concept of a nuclear country being "pushed" (what does that even mean?) to wage a war against a country, which is more than 3x smaller in population and around 5x weaker economically, is simply delusional. Russia attempted to wage a 19th century style conquest : brutal and open territorial grab including the subjugation and repression of the local population.

The military funded think tank that prescribed all of our actions leading up to this point and accurately predicted Russia's responses disagrees with you. No one wants direct nuclear war, but they do want to skirt around the edges and expand their power. The US has been in multiple hot proxy wars with Russia, the biggest being the attempted overthrow of Syria. US leadership from both parties have publicly described U…

If we return to where the war started, how did Ukraine first provoke Russia - by hoping to join EU, by existing? Ukraine could have been another non-allied country, but Russia escalated.

Regarding the role of the US and NATO in the conflict: "The interim Yatseniuk Government which came to power initially said, with reference to the country's non-aligned status, that it had no plans to join NATO. However, following the Russian military invasion in Ukraine and parliamentary elections in October 2014, the new government made joining NATO a priority." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine%E2%80%93NATO_relations

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#215

Post by mongol »

notorandit wrote: post #130
fabian2k wrote: post #65

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.

Sweden doesn't neighbour with Russia. Only Finland and Norway!

Nordstream passes Swedish economic zone, for one.

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#216

Post by rmind »

jmyeet wrote: post #205
osynavets wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

You bring up a good point. I've given this some thought. On its face I think it's a reasonable position: if Putin can't have Ukraine, nobody can (not even Ukraine). This is more believable when you consider that oil and gas reserves have been found in Ukraine but it lacks the capital to develop them. Shell was in Crimea prior to the annexation. But this theory has a few problems. 1. The cost of wrecking Ukraine has b…

It is absolutely a loss-loss situation for Russia and Ukraine. However, as long as the West maintains sanctions on Russia and provides a substantial support (both economic and military) to Ukraine, then Russia will not be able to sustain its war effort and pressure on Ukraine.

Europe is finally, for real (albeit slowly and painfully), moving away from the Rusian fossil fuels this time. It will take some time, but it's a tectonic shift.

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#218

Post by giorgosts »

mda wrote: post #194
giorgosts wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also occupy with 40000 soldiers one third of Cyprus, an EU country, thus essentially European territory.

Well isn't this comment completely disingenuous and devoid of context..

When they mutually recognize each others occupied lands as "sovereign states" the context would be pretty obvious. (Turkey to recognize the Russian backed separatists in Ukraine and Russia to recognize the Turkish backed separatists in North Cyprus).

Another point of context to you: Russia's narrative for the invasion of Ukraine is copied word by word from the Turkish invasion of Cyprus in 1974.

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#219

Post by belorn »

karaterobot wrote: post #127

So does everyone here speak Swedish except me, or are we all chatting about an article we can't read? Here's an English article saying the same, just to maintain the illusion. https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/14/europe/sweden-finland-nato-ne...

Occasionally there are HN articles with different articles. Court cases is a common one where often the HN article link to the primary sources and those that can't read dutch, German, Hindi or what have you will just have to auto translate or find a different source. Sometimes a friendly HN comment will post a good secondary source and hopefully it will rise to the top.

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#220

Post by rmind »

theshrike79 wrote: post #166
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…

The worst part is that I can't see a valid "out" for Russia as a country from this. Even if Russians, by some miracle, manage to pry Putin out of power, what then? Will anyone trust any of their leadership? The level of sanctions on Russia is AFAIK unprecedented on a global scale, it's only been months and regular people are already feeling the effects. And if the sanctions go on for a few years, they'll be at Soviet…

Why do you think there should be a "valid" (you mean face-saving?) exit from the war? I would argue that a full military defeat of Russia is a valid end of this war.
Post reply on HN