571–580 of 738 posts
One thing that isn't mentioned a lot in connection to this: Sweden and Denmark has a VERY violent history. Hundreds of years of wars. It is said to be the worst conflict in all of human history. Now we are allied and committed to defend each other. That's a huge thing for peace.
By who?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have many Serbian friends going for holidays in Croatia. Unthinkable 30 years ago. So maybe, in 50 years from now, Russia will join NATO, too?
> So maybe, in 50 years from now, Russia will join NATO, too? Probably not. Russian history for the last several hundred years is a series of kings, emperors, and dictators. Massacres and purges. The entire peasantry was only freed from slavery 150 years ago. Being ruled by hereditary monarchs and dictators for so long has fundamentally changed Russian culture to be vastly different from the West. IMO it would take a…
Here's hoping this means they can send Gripen, finally.
To ukraine? I thought the idea was that Ukrainian pilots would be trained on f16s instead because the stockpiles of those are many times bigger?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While Secretary General, Ismay is also credited as having been the first person to say that the purpose of NATO was "to keep the Soviet Union out, the Americans in, and the Germans down," a saying that has since become a common way to describe the dynamics of NATO
the irony is that NATO is pushing Germany to aggressively and quickly re-arm if NATO wants America in then they need to do something about an angry orange political candidate...
On top of that, there's inflation and the value-added tax, which mean that, once all the extra costs have been covered, only about €50 to €70 billion will be left over to spend on actual hardware. "The longer you have this money sit around somewhere, the longer factors like inflation and interest payments have to eat away at this pile," Loss said.[0]
There has been some criticism from European allies, and within Germany, that so many big orders have been placed in the United States.
Depriving local industry. And of what use is this anyway. Why on earth would Germany need ballistic missile defense etc.
>quickly
Two years in, the entire West still cannot outproduce Russia. Let alone Russia plus friends. For the most part, dependable large orders—necessary for expansion—aren’t coming. Overall, deindustrialization is only accelerating.
Italy just ordered 132 L2s for 2027–2037. Pathetic timeframe. These tanks will be obsolete by then.
>NATO wants America in
There is no NATO without the US. Something could conceivably carry the same name but it would not be the same thing. NATO is and has always been an instrument of American control over Europe.
>angry orange political candidate
Remember when Trump ordered a reduction of the occupation force in Germany (35k then)? Well, Serious People got Very Nervous and the military stalled the order. In fact, the generals were in a state of barely concealed mutiny then. And now there’s 50k.
So, rest assured: Germany will be Kept Down for the foreseeable future.
[0]: https://www.dw.com/en/what-happened-to-the-german-militarys-...
Being a NATO member gives a nation more security than nuclear weapons, effectively. Nuclear states can and HAVE gone to wars - but no one wants to mess with the devastating conventional power of NATO. After the recent gutting, Russia has a few dozen SU-34s that can fly. NATO has thousands of planes.
It also just got a lot more Gripens.
Being a NATO member gives a nation more security than nuclear weapons, effectively. Nuclear states can and HAVE gone to wars - but no one wants to mess with the devastating conventional power of NATO. After the recent gutting, Russia has a few dozen SU-34s that can fly. NATO has thousands of planes.
You mean US has. And someone like Trump may decide to not engage in conflict as part of NATO.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
[flagged]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenia%E2%80%93Azerbaijan_bor...
This is actually very significant, this time NATO expands to the west, and who knows where next. I wonder what was the debate in Sweden all this time (beyond the waiting for some dictators to give them the final approval)
There was almost no debate. The elite made it a fait accompli and labeled nay sayers as traitors. There is this major pretend that they have popular backing of joining NATO eventhough the sentiment against it is really strong. There was some demands for a referendum, but it was shut down in fear of "fake news" etc.
https://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/statistik-efter-amne/demo...
Being a NATO member gives a nation more security than nuclear weapons, effectively. Nuclear states can and HAVE gone to wars - but no one wants to mess with the devastating conventional power of NATO. After the recent gutting, Russia has a few dozen SU-34s that can fly. NATO has thousands of planes.
> NATO has thousands of planes. You mean US has. And someone like Trump may decide to not engage in conflict as part of NATO.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This comment really illustrates the hollowness of the "NATO expanded too aggressively" claim. In the US, only wingnuts and "useful idiots" (really the same group) are repeating this talking point.
Mearshiemer got quite a favourable hearing on HN https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30559136
Even people pretty forgiving of his essays acknowledge he's habitually at odds with basic facts and history.
Not a wingnut, per se, but on the same spectrum of people divorced from reality. It's too bad as well, because US foreign policy is deserving of more scrutiny than it gets, and it gets a fair amount.