Sweden Is a NATO Member • Hacker News Board

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#381

Post by Fatalist_ma » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 6:55 PM UTC

miroljub wrote: post #198

pclmulqdq wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All indications suggest that Russia also wants Odessa and the rest of the black sea coastline, which would probably never be acceptable even with NATO membership.

[flagged]

Acoordinto Gallup, October 2023: 31% want Ukraine to negotiate to end the war as soon as possible. https://news.gallup.com/poll/512258/ukrainians-stand-behind-...

According to NDI(Movember 2023): 42% say that Ukraine should engage in negotiations, but 84% do not find it acceptable to end the war if it means letting Russia have the territory it controls currently. Even if Russia leaves all territory occupied since the 2022 invasion, 73% won't agree to such peace deal, they want pre-2014 borders. https://www.ndi.org/publications/opportunities-and-challenge...

If there are any newer poll results, please share.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#382

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 6:55 PM UTC

joecool1029 wrote: post #295

klipt wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Things are looking up for NATO! Except the part where Trump said he'd pull the US out of NATO if elected.

> Except the part where Trump said he'd pull the US out of NATO if elected. Congress blocked his ability to do that without their approval: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/12/16/... EDIT: since other commenters don't know, yes it was signed into law, Sec 1250A of the 2024 NDAA: >The President shall not suspend, terminate, denounce, or withdraw the United States from the North Atlantic Treaty, do…

They made it illegal for him to do so, but Trump has made it clear that he does not view himself as accountable to the law, especially for any acts while President, so...

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#383

Post by The_Colonel » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 6:55 PM UTC

asveikau wrote: post #225

ttymck wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand what you say is true in theory, but does this mean the US will deploy fewer troops in NATO theaters, in practice?

IMO it's still not certain NATO will hold together if Putin decides to attack the Baltic states or Poland. Many NATO countries will have sizeable factions of their electorate saying to not get involved. 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.

I think Putin would not invade Poland, it's just as strong or even stronger than Ukraine, with less corruption, better economy and defense treaties.

Baltics have always been the biggest risk. They are very small population-wise and can be "easily" cut off (Suwalki gap). But the addition of Sweden and Finland to the alliance will significantly improve the defense posture (airfields, maritime logistics).

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#384

Post by eduction » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 6:55 PM UTC

Log_out_ wrote: post #314

somenameforme wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's effectively impossible to invade a country that has nuclear weapons. There might be small scale border skirmishes, but large scale organized invasions are essentially a nonstarter. The main purpose of conventional weaponry, for nuclear nations, is to invade non-nuclear nations, or to engage in proxy skirmishes to try to expand one's geopolitical power. We're rapidly approaching a century with 0 major and unrestr…

Which is why everyone bordering any empire currently looks for nukes or nuke eqivalents,as the American reliability falls apart. Must be fun to work at the iaa nowadays.

I’m not sure we’d have these new NATO members if American reliability were actually so bad.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#385

Post by luuurker » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 6:56 PM UTC

tharmas wrote: post #247

apercu wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine that the actual truth to the situation is far more complicated than either of us understand and that NATO provides substantial benefits to the United States.

[flagged]

NATO is obsolete for whom? And have you seen the numbers of visually confirmed destroyed equipment and the drone shots of dead Russians, because that makes Afghanistan look good in comparison.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#386

Post by fifilura » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 6:56 PM UTC

somenameforme wrote: post #231

solardev wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the OP, but in context, the US is a huge part of NATO's overall defense (and offense/force projection) capabilities. The EU on its own would have a harder time defending itself against aggression.

It's effectively impossible to invade a country that has nuclear weapons. There might be small scale border skirmishes, but large scale organized invasions are essentially a nonstarter. The main purpose of conventional weaponry, for nuclear nations, is to invade non-nuclear nations, or to engage in proxy skirmishes to try to expand one's geopolitical power. We're rapidly approaching a century with 0 major and unrestr…

This could be a good place to Post a reminder that in 1995, Ukraine agreed to hand over all its nuclear weapons to Russia in return of a promise to not threaten or use military force against Ukraine.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#387

Post by enterprise_cog » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 6:57 PM UTC

cko wrote: post #359

unnouinceput wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't, at least officially, Hitler the guy that killed Hitler? Or that was the joke and it flew over my head?

I don't mean to kill the joke further but I think Hitler was already a dead man walking before Hitler killed Hitler, so I think his enemies (Allied Forces plus Russians) deserve most of the credit.

The Soviet Union was part of the allied forces.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#388

Post by gpderetta » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 6:57 PM UTC

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.

The treaty of Lisbon has a mutual defence clause.

Membership of NATO also guarantees help from US and other non-EU NATO members of course.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#389

Post by AnimalMuppet » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 6:57 PM UTC

Georgelemental wrote: post #174

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He (and/or his people) have talked a lot about annexing at least part of Poland. Less sure about the Baltics, but I think there's been some yapping about them too. So, yeah, if you listen to what he and his people say, his motivations are not in doubt...

> He (and/or his people) have talked a lot about annexing at least part of Poland. Do you have a source?

Not offhand, no. I'm going by memory from remarks by... might have been Medvedev, might have been the defense chief or somebody like that. Not officially Putin, but pretty close to a Putin mouthpiece. This would have been within the last two or three months.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#390

Post by u320 » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 6:57 PM UTC

ianburrell wrote: post #308

sspiff wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The parent comment is referring to the US pressuring all European NATO members to abandon plans to acquire Saab or Dassault jets in favour of its own F35.

The F-35 is better and cheaper than Gripen or Rafale. Everyone who can buy F-35 is doing so. There were countries that switched when allowed to buy F-35. The Gripen's problem is that it is expensive for a light fighter. The other problem is that uses an American engine and US can control export. There aren't many countries that can't buy F-35 but can buy Gripen. Brazil is the big one. The French Rafale is having more…

Sweden's problem is that we insist on only selling to the "good guys" (for domestic policy reasons), but everyone who is considered a good guy (e.g. Norway) is already in the F-35 program. So we sell to no-so-good-but-not-terrible guys like Brazil, South Africa, Hungary and Thailand.