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

641–650 of 738 posts

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#641

Post by FirmwareBurner »

red-iron-pine wrote: post #553
FirmwareBurner wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correction: NLAWs are only Swedish designed(SAAB defense) but are production of Thales(a French company) manufactured in Belfast, Northern Ireland(UK), using warheads made by a subsidiary of SAAB in Switzerland. Yes, I'm fun at parties.

The UK was heavily involved in the NLAW development too, IIRC. Not just made in NI but the UK provided a lot of the initial funding along with SAAB. and boy howdy do those NLAWs work.

>and boy howdy do those NLAWs work.

I know. I'm always in pain when my NLAWS come to visit.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#642

Post by 4h53n »

yencabulator wrote: post #479
ProjectArcturis wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment really illustrates the hollowness of the "NATO expanded too aggressively" claim. NATO didn't force any of these ex-Soviet countries to join. They ran to join NATO as soon as they could. They'd experienced living with the Russian boot on their neck, and they were eager to join a collective security organization to prevent it from ever happening again.

I have a different perspective. If NATO hadn't expanded to Turkey , Sweden and Finland would have had a much easier time not being blackmailed. NATO expanding to essentially-dictatorship countries was too eager. And yes, I understand Turkey's geographical position giving it power over sea routes, and why that was desirable to NATO. But choosing to include a fickle ruler in a unanimous-decisions-only organization is j…

Turkey brings more value to NATO then Sweden and Finland combined. It has a standing army (2nd biggest after US in NATO) with combat experience, defense sector with proven capabilities. Not to mention 11th economy in the world by GDP PPP and growing.

It's better for Turkey and NATO, that Turkey is in NATO. I would say it's far more important than Sweden or Finland being in NATO.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#643

Post by rainworld »

shrimp_emoji wrote: post #598
red-iron-pine wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Germany will be dead in 50 years by demographic suicide anyway. (Like China, conveniently.)

As opposed to what, the United States of Guatemala? It’s more or less the same story everywhere in the developed world. At least China’s not seeking to replace their extant populations with foreigners.

Really strange seeing people (often gleefully) parrot these talking points, unaware of their own malaise.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#644

Post by Vilian »

JacobiX wrote: post #638
przyszlem wrote: post #635

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not true, NATO is a defensive pact. Only russian propaganda says differently

I think that NATO was founded after World War II, largely due to British efforts to contain the Soviet Union and its influence in Europe ?

true, but nothing there say that russia cat't apply to join

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#645

Post by Vilian »

rainworld wrote: post #574
red-iron-pine wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

>aggressively and quickly re-arm 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 fro…

two years in of what? only russia is in war economy, you say like every one is spending as much effort on this as russia, drink less propaganda

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#646

Post by Vilian »

baxtr wrote: post #495
hnarn wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So maybe, in 50 years from now, Russia will join NATO, too? While not technically impossible, practically this is very hard to see. Unless Russia becomes a market liberal, well functioning democracy, it will not happen -- and what are the odds of that? Russia had the chance after the collapse of the Soviet Union, instead it devolved into a plutocracy and what is essentially a one-party state in anything but name. R…

Interesting take. What do you think we will see in Europe the next 5-15 years?

my bet is also explained here https://youtu.be/YJVUGecCXv0

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#647

Post by Vilian »

riku_iki wrote: post #576
renegade-otter wrote: post #108

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.

no, other counteies also bought planes, and produce them too

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#648

Post by ifyoubuildit »

dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #474
ifyoubuildit wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, a marriage is unequal if one party has more strength, money, guns, technology, etc. Actual equality is a really rare thing in nature. Someone always has more, whether they are currently using that against the other party or not. I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure the US is still the leading superpower by quite a margin. It may not be brought up explicitly in negotiations, but that fact is always there. Maybe I'm…

OK I'll spell it out: they're friendly nations who respect each others sovereignty. Actual power is irrelevant because it's not used. Claims to the contrary tend to be political and sometimes conspiracy theories motivated by animus. A reasonable person would readily agree they're friendly nations. The US doesn't threaten or intimidate the EU or vica versa (Trump is an aberration). To further make the point: NATO memb…

> A reasonable person would readily agree they're friendly nations.

Sure (although a reasonable person might quibble that the EU is not a nation). It's just that friendly nations doesn't mean what you think it means.

Relevant terms are things like "realpolitik" and "realism". Basically, countries don't do things out of the good of their hearts, because they don't have hearts, they're not people.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#649

Post by miroljub »

Fatalist_ma wrote: post #381
miroljub wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[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…

Kyiv's institute of Sociology had a more recent poll and published a Press Release on 21.02.2024

https://kiis.com.ua/?lang=eng&cat=reports&id=1372&page=2

Have a look at the Graph 9 and 10 about their openness to negotiations.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#650

Post by miroljub »

The_Colonel wrote: post #449
miroljub wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean the USA will launch nuclear missiles on Moscow in case Russia launches a missile on Stockholm? NATO or not, I have my doubts here. Does anyone believe any sane US president would risk a destruction of the USA to revenge / protect Sweden?

Likely not on Moscow, but on some city similar in size to Stockholm. It's of course unclear what would happen, but I don't think Russian strategy can rely on US not responding.

What city? Striking any city on Russian soil will provoke a full on retaliation of the USA.

Equivalent retaliation would be targeting a city of some of the Russian allies, but it's not possible since Russia doesn't have allies ;)

Post reply on HN