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

Finland Becomes a Member of NATO on Tuesday 4 April

presidentti.fi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 218 posts

Re: Finland Becomes a Member of NATO on Tuesday 4 April

#101

Post by khochesh_kushat »

unmole wrote: post #94
IgorPartola wrote: post #47

As a Ukrainian immigrant living in the US the current situation in Ukraine is infuriating. I left Ukraine when I was a teenager nearly a quarter of a century ago and it was obvious to me then that sooner or later Russia would want its breadbasket back and an invasion would happen. How was this not clear to those in power? Zelinsky started the process of trying to get the country’s ducks in a row to be able to join NA…

> Russia would want its breadbasket back and an invasion would happen. In 2019, Russia produced almost 3 times as much wheat as Ukraine. The invasion was launched by a deranged psychopath, let's not pretend Russia in anyways benefited from this.

Russia is 28 times larger than Ukraine. They certainly want to benefit from the resources in Ukraine that they're trying to annex (although I'll admit it certainly doesn't look like they are ever going to achieve their goals and benefit from actually conquering the country as they planned, if that's what you meant.)

Re: Finland Becomes a Member of NATO on Tuesday 4 April

#102

Post by khochesh_kushat »

Animatronio wrote: post #79
IgorPartola wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody is demanding anything of NATO. I am retroactively demanding that the Ukrainian leadership should have rooted out corruption and got Ukraine’s ducks in a row so that it could join NATO. And the whole point of NATO is that most smaller countries do not benefit NATO as much as the alliance benefits them. Yet the cumulative effect is more world peace. Besides, did you not notice the effect the war in Ukraine had o…

[flagged]

By demanding, you mean requesting?

Re: Finland Becomes a Member of NATO on Tuesday 4 April

#103

Post by Animatronio »

ihatepython wrote: post #96
snehk wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, that's just my opinion. Germany's infrastructure was attacked, Sweden said "We're not gonna share our findings with German intelligence". Not sure how there's any situation in which Germany should go to a literal war - no questions asked - should Sweden be attacked if Sweden cannot even share their findings when it comes to an attack on an supposed ally. Would you be willing to help out your neighbor if he told…

Read between the lines. They can't openly say that the US was responsible for Nordstream.

Why couldn't they? If their findings support this theory then they must come forward and say so.

Re: Finland Becomes a Member of NATO on Tuesday 4 April

#104

Post by andrewflnr »

tommiegannert wrote: post #48
alkonaut wrote: post #6

"I must invade a neighboring country to prevent having NATO on my doorstep" - Vladimir Vladimirovich, master strategist "Whoa, if countries are annexed willy nilly then we better join NATO before it happens to us" - Every single one of those doorsteps

> I must invade a neighboring country to prevent having NATO on my doorstep Even without involving Finland, it's worse than that. If he successfully invades and conquers Ukraine, he will certainly have NATO at his doorstep. I doubt this was his real reasoning. Maybe the plan was to take only as much of Ukraine to show that he could , if he wanted to, take the whole. Effectively turning the Ukraine into a no-mans-land…

He won't have NATO next to the part of Russia "that counts", though, twisted logic though that may be. I think the original plan was to set up a puppet state as a buffer, anyway.

Re: Finland Becomes a Member of NATO on Tuesday 4 April

#105

Post by pjc50 »

walkhour wrote: post #10

This is an excellent deal for Finland, whose sovereignty is protected. Is it the same for the US? Do I want an attack against Finland to be considered an attack against the US? An attack against the US can unleash the end of humanity. I find very risky to leave this at the whims of some out of touch Russian dictator.

NATO is the organization set up by the US to look after its interests in Europe. It was Truman's goal that with a sufficiently powerful defensive alliance there would be no such attack in the first place.

https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/history_p...

> Do I want an attack against Finland to be considered an attack against the US?

Lots of people in 1939 said that they didn't want to go to war over Czechslovakia. But of course, once a dictator has successfully annexed one territory without a fight, what does he do next? Annex another one.

The US is arming the fighting in Ukraine so it does not have to fight Russia in Poland.

Re: Finland Becomes a Member of NATO on Tuesday 4 April

#106

Post by freehorse »

IgorPartola wrote: post #47

As a Ukrainian immigrant living in the US the current situation in Ukraine is infuriating. I left Ukraine when I was a teenager nearly a quarter of a century ago and it was obvious to me then that sooner or later Russia would want its breadbasket back and an invasion would happen. How was this not clear to those in power? Zelinsky started the process of trying to get the country’s ducks in a row to be able to join NA…

> And maybe NATO needs a provisional membership process that allows a country to be temporarily considered an ally via a much quicker path so that while it gains full membership it cannot be invaded.

When people mistake a feature for a bug.

Re: Finland Becomes a Member of NATO on Tuesday 4 April

#107

Post by unmole »

khochesh_kushat wrote: post #101
unmole wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Russia would want its breadbasket back and an invasion would happen. In 2019, Russia produced almost 3 times as much wheat as Ukraine. The invasion was launched by a deranged psychopath, let's not pretend Russia in anyways benefited from this.

Russia is 28 times larger than Ukraine. They certainly want to benefit from the resources in Ukraine that they're trying to annex (although I'll admit it certainly doesn't look like they are ever going to achieve their goals and benefit from actually conquering the country as they planned, if that's what you meant.)

The only resource that Russia is running out of is people.

Re: Finland Becomes a Member of NATO on Tuesday 4 April

#108

Post by z3c0 »

rossdavidh wrote: post #78
globalise83 wrote: post #4

Excellent. Very much hope that enough pressure can be applied at all levels to ensure that Sweden is also soon approved by all NATO member states.

My impression is that Turkey does not believe the rest of NATO takes the threat to it from some Kurdish organizations seriously. I have no access to unbiased data to say whether there is any actual significant threat to Turkey's security from Kurdish groups in Sweden, but it does appear that Turkey actually believes this to be a problem. The main risk here is that, now that Finland is a member of NATO, it is not clea…

While I've seen it reported as of late that fear over Kurdish groups is Turkey's official stance on holding back on voting Sweden in, the original reason given by Erdogan was over an isolated incident where a far-right anti-Islamist burned a Quran[1]. Pretty par for Erdogan's course, but I expect he's likely trying to double-down on appealing to his conservative voter-base for the upcoming election. With this matter of Sweden joining NATO, the outcome of this election has pretty grand implications on the global theater.

Add this spicy bit of news from today seems to indicate that Erdogan realizes what is at stake[2]

[1]: https://apnews.com/article/nato-politics-sweden-government-t...

[2]: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/turkey-elections-erdogan-...

Re: Finland Becomes a Member of NATO on Tuesday 4 April

#109

Post by unmole »

bshipp wrote: post #71
causi wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was never about NATO. It's about the Bessarabian Gap and the Black Sea. Putin wants the potential invasion routes into Russia.

No one was ever going to invade a country with ICBMs. The invasion occurred because of Ukraine's movement toward the EU which, eventually, would curtail the ability of Putin and the oligarchs to swindle Russias oil and gas wealth through rampant price fixing and kick-backs. Everything else was rhetoric.

> The invasion occurred because of Ukraine's movement toward the EU

What meaningful move did Ukraine make towards joining EU to trigger an invasion?

Re: Finland Becomes a Member of NATO on Tuesday 4 April

#110

Post by lesuorac »

causi wrote: post #65
alkonaut wrote: post #6

"I must invade a neighboring country to prevent having NATO on my doorstep" - Vladimir Vladimirovich, master strategist "Whoa, if countries are annexed willy nilly then we better join NATO before it happens to us" - Every single one of those doorsteps

It was never about NATO. It's about the Bessarabian Gap and the Black Sea. Putin wants the potential invasion routes into Russia.

Whose invading through the Bessarabian Gap or the Black Sea?

Egypt?

- USA is just going to come across either Alaska, the North Pole, or EU allies' military bases.

- UA/Finland/etc are going through their land borders.

- Rest of EU is going to have a problem without sending troops through their neighbors. (And using the Black sea is just a huge detour ...)

- China would use its land border.

Post reply on HN