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

Sweden Is a NATO Member

government.se

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 738 posts

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#251

Post by roamerz »

MaxPengwing wrote: post #96
pphysch wrote: post #18

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…

>a naval blocade of Russia is very very easy and would completely render their navy's impotent.

I think that may be okay in theory but is a bit of an over simplification for any real life scenario that deals with the wildcard dictator of Russia. Nothing is very very easy.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#252

Post by ipython »

lumb63 wrote: post #146
RecycledEle wrote: post #24

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.

But also, a bigger alliance creates a larger amount of territory to defend. For example if the US were to leave NATO, they miss out on all the benefits that European NATO members provide, but also would not need to defend Europe, which is where any war involving NATO members is likely to happen. It seems to me that the US gains very little from being in NATO.

That’s silly to say considering the one and only time article five was invoked was by the USA after 9/11.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#253

Post by unnouinceput »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #241
dragonwriter wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU is independent of the US. There's a difference between alliance and dependency (and EU isn't coextensive with European NATO, but they are pretty close.)

In most ways yes, but militarily there's definitely some dependence on the US. A lot of European militaries were found to have relatively bare cupboards when the time to donate things to Ukraine came. Germany's Army Chief straight up said the army wasn't capable of fulfilling its mission. (And yeah the US struggled with artillery shells too, the difference is that the US has so much airpower it had a legit reason to…

Military it's inter-dependency, that' why we're allies. The whole point of an ally is to be inter-dependency of one another. I, for one, as a citizen of a NATO country, I am very happy with this arrangement.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#255

Post by dragonwriter »

jajko wrote: post #135
pphysch wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sweden and Finland have been in the EU for almost 30 years. Sweden joining NATO does not really change the geopolitics of the Baltic.

EU is economical/societal effort (or war prevention), NATO is military (and doesn't prevent members from fighting, ie Greece vs Turkey). Ever heard of actual EU army? Doesn't exist out there in the world, maybe on paper.

> Ever heard of actual EU army?

Well, there's Eurocorps for the last few decades, but that's not an army, just a corps-level HQ unit under which component-state forces can be slotted.

OTOH, that's not a particularly poor model for a fairly loose multi-state federation.

On the other other hand, its not actually an EU force, its a force of a particular group of EU states that is made available to both the EU and NATO, and has conducted operations on behalf of each.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#256

Post by krippe »

bilekas wrote: post #4

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.

It's crazy how there wasn't really ANY desire to join NATO before Russia showed, once again, that you can not trust them. The full scale of Ukraine really was the straw that broke the camel's back.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#257

Post by dylan604 »

KingOfCoders wrote: post #127
dylan604 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the view of the US public on NATO can be seen in any US TV series or Hollywood film - it does not exist. I wouldn't say it doesn't exist. To me, it's always more of that "we'll let you guys muck about until it's totally obvious you're not going to fix it, then we'll ride in to save the day" attitude. Not saying that's accurate, but that's how it's portrayed by Hollywood

What Hollywood film that involves the US military does include NATO militaries? Rewatching SG-1, and of course it's US only.

Other than WWII films, I can't think of any Hollywood that actively promotes NATO in anything other than a joke. Even the more common cop shows, once an investigation goes international and INTERPOL has to be brought it, it's always a big sigh as if "oh boy, here's where the wheels fall off the bus" as the member agencies that make up INTERPOL are definitely looked down upon.

The flip side of this is watching European shows, and they all feel like US law enforcement is just a bunch of gung ho gun toting cowboys. Neither view is entirely accurate, nor are they inaccurate as they are just stereotypes

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#258

Post by lawn »

nostrebored wrote: post #192

I get that we've decided 'NATO Good' now -- but are people really so sure that it's sphere of influence is geopolitically stabilizing? I don't see how it could be. If I were Russia, or an ally of Russia, an expansionist NATO would be galvanizing for me and would accelerate a counterbalance alliance. Creating a potentially entrenched conflict in countries that have surface-to-surface access to Moscow would be in my be…

You do realize that Russia invading a peaceful country that was turning more towards democracy and away from dictatorships like Russia is what pushed Sweden and Finland into NATO, in fear of Russia invading and terror bombing them?

Not protecting yourself, and letting Russia do whatever they want, is what countries did to Nazi Germany for years. Have we learned nothing from history?

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#259

Post by Duwensatzaj »

nostrebored wrote: post #192

I get that we've decided 'NATO Good' now -- but are people really so sure that it's sphere of influence is geopolitically stabilizing? I don't see how it could be. If I were Russia, or an ally of Russia, an expansionist NATO would be galvanizing for me and would accelerate a counterbalance alliance. Creating a potentially entrenched conflict in countries that have surface-to-surface access to Moscow would be in my be…

> counterbalance alliance

Russia had that in CSTO.

After Russia ignored Armenia’s request for help, it’s worthless.

And Russia has already created entrenched conflicts in a number of countries for exactly that reason.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#260

Post by ProjectArcturis »

safgasCVS wrote: post #125

Lemme be the guy who farts in the elevator. Sweden has managed to avoid entangling itself in military conflicts around the world for centuries and by joining NATO it’s got itself security but at the expense of potentially involving itself in conflicts regardless if Swedes want to be involved or not. Anyways it seems popular in Sweden but the naive lefty in me still thinks it’s a shame at the collective high-fiving

Why should we celebrate neutrality in the face of evil? Surely Sweden would be more proud of its history if it had fought against the Nazis rather than helping them. WW2 would have been shorter as well.
Post reply on HN