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

231–240 of 310 posts

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#231

Post by bayesian_horse »

alkonaut wrote: post #177
bayesian_horse wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But NATO can't choose because getting rid of a prior member of an alliance undermines the very idea and value of the alliance.

NATO has no provisions for evicting a member. It would need to form a separate alliance and all the others would join that one and leave NATO. And about the only reason that would conceivably ever happen is if a member grossly violated the values of all the others. Turkey despite being mostly non-democratic isn’t even close I’d imagine.

Formal eviction is not the only option to get rid of someone. The other member states might create circumstances (sanctions...) where Turkey would have to leave NATO "voluntarily".

Another option is if a member state were to commit genocide. In that case the alliance might dissolve and the other members might instead band together and attack that member. Hypothetically speaking.

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#232

Post by lnxg33k1 »

sofixa wrote: post #198
lnxg33k1 wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah what often is missed is that as part of agreement the missiles from Turkey were removed, effectively increasing US security and lowering European one. That's why to me it is being quite concerning the fact that in the current scenario the interests of US establishment are matched by the idea of European interests while it is not like that and can't never be, if anything because you can't really get around geogra…

> effectively increasing US security and lowering European one Not really, there were still missiles in Italy and maybe Germany? It made little real difference to European security. > Zelensky, Johnson and Biden get isolated by Europeans, and countries like Italy (I hope) chose to get out of NATO Russia invading Ukraine, showing that European peace and security aren't as guaranteed and certain as most people thought…

Those were also removed as part of the deal with soviets https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_nuclear_weapons_progra...

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#233

Post by rmind »

jmyeet wrote: post #208
Gravityloss wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Putin has been writing and speaking about this for years. He really thinks Russia should control other Slavic people, and former territories of Russia and Soviet Union etc. And it's not only Putin. Most of the other high ranking officials must have been supporting the attack into Ukraine, otherwise it would not have happened. If it was him alone against everyone else, Putin would simply have been replaced. A large po…

I don't put a lot of stock in the Russian Imperialism ambitions as being a serious factor in this invasion. I just don't think it adds up. I mean even if Putin was saying this, that doesn't mean a lot. The US, for example, says they're spreading democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq, fro example. I believe it's far more likely that Russia actually wanted (wants?) a buffer between it and NATO. They've been warning of this…

You are buying too much into the Russian propaganda. First, it is not NATO which expanded "into" the Baltic States and Eastern Europe. These countries voluntarily applied and their diplomats lobbied very hard to get accepted into NATO, precisely because of Russia's aggressive and militaristic policies. Why do you think that these sovereign European nations actually want to be a "buffer"? Why do you think somebody should have a right to constrain their sovereignty?

Ukraine was not even close to joining NATO, despite all declarations (moreover, Russia firmly prevented it by orchestrating the War in Donbas). With Finland joining NATO, Russia will now have 1340 km border with NATO. What Putin is going to do about that? It was never about NATO. Look at the origins of the Russian-Ukrainian War (it wasn't just 2013, the cracks started as early as 2004). Moscow always had a distorted view of the Ukrainian history and its sovereignty as an independent nation (despite signing treaties and agreements recognizing it).

> For Imperialist ambitions to make sense, Russia would have to either occupy Ukraine on a long term basis or install a puppet regime (eg like Belarus). Both are doomed from the start. The Ukraine is too large to occupy and would be too expensive. The USSR couldn't even maintain a puppet government in Afghanistan (and nor could the US obviously).

This is precisely what they tried to do with this invasion, thinking that if the Ukrainian government gets decapitated, the majority of the Ukrainian population would not resist and cooperate. Kremlin massively miscalculated because they started believing their own propaganda and their intelligence would feed the dictator with the information he wanted to hear rather than reality.

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#235

Post by ddalex »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #229
ddalex wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the neighbour that doesn't like my friends broke into my house repeatedly, stole my last food a couple of times, kidnapped several household members, raped my wife and my kid; and now threatens to burn the whole city down if I don't give up my new friends that protect my house. So yes, lets' burn the city down, why should I live in hell and fear - it's better that no one lives, including the asshole neighbour.

So what? All that is nothing compared to the literal destruction of this planet. Better to let them walk all over you than risk destroying the world everybody lives in. I seriously doubt there is a single person in america willing to accept even the possibility of being utterly annihilated by nuclear fire over some foreign european nation. War against Vietnam or Iraq is one thing, war against Russia is on a completel…

> Better to let them walk all over you than risk destroying the world everybody lives in

It's very easy to ask others to be meek, why don't you offer yourself to Russians to walk them over you? I mean, Russia would be very happy to have Alaska, perhaps you should offer it to them so they don't destroy the world.

> ... doubt there is a single person in america willing to accept ...

Thankfully there are several european nations with independent nuclear capability willing to stand up for Ukraine.

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#236

Post by adolph »

orwin wrote: post #149
adolph wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they aren't then what's the problem? On the other hand, if the PKK is able to fundraise in Sweden and Finland like the IRA used to be able to in the US, then it seems logical for Turkey to use whatever leverage they have to decrease that activity, similar to GB. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1987/03/22/i...

Understand why most people feel this is a slippery slope. If Erdogan says that YPG is the PKK because the YPG politically support the PKK, what's preventing Netanyahu from using the same arguments against its neighbor supporting politically or selling weapons to the Hamas? China attacking India/Nepal for harboring the leader of the Free Tibet movement? You probably it is not the same, but for many, many people it is.…

Has the slope already slipped? As far as I can tell Israel regularly conducts air strikes in Syria with a claim that they are against Hamas targets. The US waged war against Taliban b/c of association with Alqaeda.

I’m ask out of moderate ignorance in that I read the claims of Turkey and that of Sweden and Finland without a mechanism for deducing truth beyond various actors’ assertions.

While it would be optimal if Turkey did wage “Good Friday” peace to the extent that it is possible, it doesn’t seem likely since their position in the triad is that of GB, not the US. The non-NATO Nordics are more similar to the role of the US.

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#237

Post by Consultant32452 »

rmind wrote: post #212
Consultant32452 wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Wait till you find out what the US did leading up to Russia annexing Crimea.

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#238

Post by aaomidi »

dang wrote: post #234

We have profound respect for other languages, but HN is an English-language site and articles here need to be in English. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

With various translation tools getting more and more powerful, is it potentially time to reconsider this policy?

Something along the lines of please do English articles unless you absolutely can't?

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#239

Post by tacon »

rmind wrote: post #220
theshrike79 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

And if the Ukrainians get momentum, they will retake Crimea. Maybe the negotiating point would be to let Russia keep the Sevastopol base?

Re: Sweden to Apply for NATO Membership

#240

Post by pydry »

drakonka wrote: post #209
pydry wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's what 90% of crimeans wanted according to gallup polling. The way I see it the west either fights for empire or we fight for democracy. If we fight for democracy then we respect votes we dont like whose results are independently verified by pollsters we trust. Particularly votes that breach the 90%+ threshold. That would match our principles. In Ukraine neither Kyiv, the west nor Russia fights for democracy thoug…

Do you believe a Gallup poll should dictate a country's borders or serve as justification for a nation being invaded by its neighbor?

No, but I believe referenda should. Ukraine gained its independence that way after all.

The gallup polls simply confirmed that the referendum that was run by Russian troops was more or less free and fair.

I believe this is a good litmus test of peoples belief in democracy as a matter of principle. Belief in democracy means commitment to voting especially when you dont like the result.

It appears a lot of people do not like democracy.

Post reply on HN