221–230 of 738 posts
This is great news and NATO benefits hugely from this. I have to hand it to putin for bringing further solidarity across Europe and NATO.
[flagged]
The same reason that within NATO, German troops are forward deployed to Lithuania and not vice versa; it doesn't contribute to defensive strategy to backward-deploy forces from the countries closer to the large conventional threat to the ones farther from it.
Putin is yet another fabulous counterexample for the anti-democracy crowd. He spent hundreds of thousands of Russian lives, hundreds of billions, tons of military hardware, and incurred sanctions to earn... a massive increase in the strength and prestige of one of his (again supposed) major adversaries. Not only is NATO growing but the EU is ramping up its own domestic military industries. Absolutely massive own-goal. Even if he "wins" in Ukraine to some extent it's a strategic net loss at this point.
Starting to wonder if China is going to do the same thing with Taiwan: invade and set gigantic amounts of money on fire and implode their economy. Even if they "win" the damage might far exceed the gain.
This is great news and NATO benefits hugely from this. I have to hand it to putin for bringing further solidarity across Europe and NATO.
Don't forget he also raised awareness for Europe's dependency on Russian fossil fuels and accelerated there move to green energy across the world. What a guy!
Serious question, what does this change? NATO gets a bit more revenue from Swedish taxpayers? So what?
Sweden joining means they have lost the Baltic Sea as the only entrance is now controlled by two NATO countries. Finland Joining has helped lock down the Baltic sea but most importantly is a staging ground for cutting logistics to the largest military complex on the Kola peninsula. This war is not just about Russias energy politics, it's also very much about their need for more maritime access. THis map shows where R…
So, I was hoping to solicit your opinion on where you think Kaliningrad will be in a couple of years? (Say 5)
It probably won't be called "Koningsberg", but would you say it's probable it will become independent? Part of Lithuania, Poland? Or will it remain firmly Russian and (economically) isolated?
Curious to hear your thoughts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A bigger alliance is harder to defeat in war. Also, a bigger alliance requires each member to contribute fewer troops to manage a common defense. Sweden is a fairly wealthy country that can contribute the required amount to NATO. Sweden's ports are beneficial in a potential Arctic conflict. Finally, Sweden does not bring any new potential conflicts/enemies with it.
I understand what you say is true in theory, but does this mean the US will deploy fewer troops in NATO theaters, in practice?
The fact that Ukraine hasn't been easy for him makes it less likely that Putin will attempt that, but it's clearly been on his mind.
Just in time for Trump to do the rug pull he agreed with Putin back in 2018, when they met in Helsinki and Trump took care to even destroy translator’s notes. If he wins the election, NATO is toast and Putin has carte blanche over East Europe.
[flagged]
Secondly, he's a lying sack of shit.
Third. Don't be a useful idiot.
It would be nice if EU seek independency from US eventually.
Does Europe want to project force around the world? If so, why? It's much more cost-efficient to let the US taxpayer foot the majority of the bill for navigable seas.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does NATO benefit?
Sweden has a pretty advanced and self-sufficient defense industry for its size. Examples: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_JAS_39_Gripen https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stridsvagn_103 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_Launched_Small_Diamet... PS: Not sure why parent is getting down voted for asking a neutral question. Curiosity!
Phrasing of that question is a classic bait for flame wars.