Live data from Hacker News

Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

nato.int

101–110 of 521 posts

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#101

Finland got de-Finlandized at last. Which is what the expansion of NATO was always about. NATO isn't a threat to Russia itself - if Russia seriously feared NATO aggression, it wouldn't voluntarily demilitarize its NATO borders during the past 13 months. NATO expansion just neutralizes Russian ability to force its will upon its neighbors through threat of aggression (or in case like Ukraine through the use of aggressi…

[flagged]

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia invaded under pretext of "we are afraid of NATO". NATO in Ukraine wasn’t a pretext it was (part of) the text. People in the West really seem to think Russia invaded to satisfy some vague desire for evil and villainy. People in the West really seem to think NATO and the EU being in a (proxy) war now with Russia over Ukraine disproves Russian concerns. It prevents Russia from attacking Finland Which was never go…

This is what all the smart people said about Ukraine prior to the invasion, that it was impossible and would never happen.

[flagged]

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#104
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many NATO countries has Russia attacked in the history of NATO? How many non-NATO countries? Moreover, Finland’s military and diplomatic bureaucracy was already well-integrated into NATO, so there isn’t a _lot_ of additional organization (at least as far as these things go).

These questions are irrelevant. The tactical significance of Finland to Russia is small compared to the resources required to invade it as is. Due to bad cost/benefit ratio it is therefore unlikely for Russia to attack Finland. But now that Finland is part of NATO it has to bear the cost when some other country gets attacked. It's a bad deal.

Exactly one[0] NATO country has ever been attacked and that wasn’t even in Europe but in the Falkland Islands. Being a member state is a pretty good bet on not being invaded.

[0] not counting non-nation state terrorist attacks on various members

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#105
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

They've been trying for ~13months already and haven't done so, why do you think they could do it now? Especially after losing 150,000+ soldiers (dead and/or wounded), and thousands of tanks and other armored vehicles? They've lost tens of thousands of troops and dozens/hundreds of vehicles just trying to take one town since August (Bakhmut).

Fog of war. You can't know what is happening. The only numbers I believe is the additional cost in $ and € the western taxpayer is burdened with. Because that is guaranteed.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#106

Finland got de-Finlandized at last. Which is what the expansion of NATO was always about. NATO isn't a threat to Russia itself - if Russia seriously feared NATO aggression, it wouldn't voluntarily demilitarize its NATO borders during the past 13 months. NATO expansion just neutralizes Russian ability to force its will upon its neighbors through threat of aggression (or in case like Ukraine through the use of aggressi…

I don't buy the idea that it was a mistake for NATO to allow former Soviet bloc countries to join, because it would supposedly encroach on Russia's sphere of influence or increase tensions with Russia. Spheres of influence are gained through economic muscle and cultural power now, not force of arms.

No-one who has visited the Baltics (specifically Lithuania, my experience in the others is less extensive and less recent) could argue with a straight face that they were better off remaining under a Russian sphere of influence than as part of the European Union and the western world at large.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading about what the Soviet Union did in countries like Estonia and Ukraine is pretty harrowing stuff. Wanting to join NATO for protection after is completely understandable and denying them because it would upset their former (and present) abuser is a shameful thought.

Very true. Though it's good to remember the Soviet Union did even worse things to Russia.

It's true, since the October Revolution the Soviets didn't actually serve their people

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#108

Finland got de-Finlandized at last. Which is what the expansion of NATO was always about. NATO isn't a threat to Russia itself - if Russia seriously feared NATO aggression, it wouldn't voluntarily demilitarize its NATO borders during the past 13 months. NATO expansion just neutralizes Russian ability to force its will upon its neighbors through threat of aggression (or in case like Ukraine through the use of aggressi…

[flagged]

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what all the smart people said about Ukraine prior to the invasion, that it was impossible and would never happen.

[flagged]

More just that he wouldn't be so stupid. People just listed all the reasons it was a dumb, short-sighted idea. Which, turns out they were right, except about how stupid Russian leadership was. They seem to have honestly believed it would be a three day war, that Ukrainians were going to welcome them as liberators, and that they actually had all the equipment that they did on paper.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#110
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't it be much more effective theater if they actually succeeded? Why pretend to be incompetent?

[flagged]

Russia is the one getting ruined over this war. You really think they do this on purpose? Western economies also suffer to some degree, but at the same time have also great benefits from it.
Post reply on HN