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

Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

nato.int

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 521 posts

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#231

Post by andreygrehov »

alkonaut wrote: post #191
andreygrehov wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> I find it weird and a direct provocation, Listen Andrey. Russia has invaded its neighboring countries repeatedly during recent history. I think that's more than enough to explain why anyone near Russia would like to be in a defensive pact. I also don't think anyone should be concerned whether Russia finds that "weird" or "a provocation". At all. > the ambitions are not different from the ambitions of Russia The amb…

Which countries had Russia invaded prior to the conflict that began early 2007?

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#232

Post by pjc50 »

itsoktocry wrote: post #192
motohagiography wrote: post #6

[flagged]

This comment has been downvoted into oblivion. Why? It asks an honest question and provides some realpolitik judgement on how Russia could react. What is the issue?

No, it asks a nonsensical question from bizarre premises and provides an unreal assessment that Russia might invade the Balkans when all its available conventional forces are tied up in Ukraine.

There's no obligation to engage in bad takes. Just downvote and move on.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#233

Post by happymellon »

rainworld wrote: post #58
watwut wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Because Finland joining NATO is direct response to Russia attacking Ukraine. The snub makes sense for two reasons: - Russia invaded under pretext of "we are afraid of NATO". - It prevents Russia from attacking Finland. They are less likely to attack NATO members and more likely to attack countries outside of the aliance.

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…

> NATO in Ukraine wasn’t a pretext it was (part of) the text.

I thought it was because of Nazis in Ukraine.

They just keep changing the message once they get bored and don't even try.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#234

Post by actionfromafar »

foverzar wrote: post #207
mantas wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do we have to put up with Russia's expansions due to „grievances“ that some other expansions were denied or questioned? It's funny how Russia always pretend to be a victim when it's the aggressor. God forbid someone endangers „rightfully conquested“ territories :D

> Why put up with Russia expansion Why put up with NATO expansion? Russia's expansion is also totally defensive! wink-wink > It's funny how Russia always pretend to be a victim It's ironic how Russia is always assumed to be a passive unresponsive corpse with no concerns or perspective and memory of its own. I wonder if it's even hypothetically possible for people to try to fairly grasp that perspective, otherwise Eur…

I never assumed Russia was a passive unresponsive corpse with no concerns or perspective and memory of its own.

In fact, I am very concerned about its death-worshipping perspective and distorted memory.

You still have to stand up to a bully, or you encourage them. A strategic mistake was not putting severe sanctions on Russia in 2014 when they annexed Crimea.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#235

Post by watwut »

ghiculescu wrote: post #198
tokai wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Many are legitimate comments No they are not. Almost all[0] are the classic Russo-apologist talking points. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almost_all

I disagree. Here’s some examples. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35439104 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35439349

The first one does not even mean anything.

As for second one, I would much rather be in western block then in the BRICS block. Better living standards, less violence, better everything.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#236

Post by nemo44x »

goalieca wrote: post #135
andreygrehov wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Wouldn't it be smarter to actually listen to what Russia is trying to say? Russia says a lot of things, often contradictory, but what really speaks is their actions. Invading Ukraine wasn’t about denazification, or nato threat, or anything except naked imperialism.

There has been a civil war of Ukraine and Pro-Russia separatists in the East for 10 years now. It's not a black and white thing and although I think Russia's approach the last year has been despicable (invading and destroying lives and property in areas where there isn't a dispute between people), it isn't like it was all peace and love in the eastern areas of Ukraine.

I think it's important to bring nuance to these things and not just use a lazy label like "imperialism" to describe what's going on, even if imperialism maybe does play a part too.

Even dismissing the Nazi stuff - yes Russia has overblown it, but there were literal pro-Nazi military units of Ukraine fighting in that civil war that terrorized pro-Russian citizens.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#237

Post by DeusExMachina »

tokai wrote: post #142
DeusExMachina wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Do you really think NATO has attack numerous countries? Or are you lying on purpose?

No NATO country was attacked when they bombed Yugoslavia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_bombing_of_Yugoslavia

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#238

Post by Convolutional »

waihtis wrote: post #177

This is as much a defense policy decision as it is an economic one. Hard for us to get foreign investment living next to a dictatorial warstate unless there's some risk mitigation in place. Not that I don't trust the FDF, pound-for-pound one of the better military organizations out there. (and a happy member of it myself.)

[flagged]

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#239

Post by asynchronous »

yeahwhatever10 wrote: post #226
INTPenis wrote: post #157

As a Swede this makes me happy, partially because Finland shares a lot of their border with Russia and can now feel safe knowing they have the might of 30 nations behind them, but also because we're now surrounded by NATO countries. So no need for us to join, right? Right?! Let's remain neutral and a free haven for political dissidents and potential refugees of the future, right?!!

Is that how NATO is spoken about in Europe, that it is the might of 30 nations and not just the US?

Genuinely curious about this as well

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#240

Post by nathanlied »

Izkata wrote: post #205
nathanlied wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem there is that you (and Putin) are viewing NATO's expansion as a curtailing of "Russia's sovereignty". Doing this probably means you take the view that the Spheres of Influence concept was correct: big blocs (Russia, China, US, EU) have an area of political/military/ideological influence that extends past their physical borders, and any other country exerting influence over the countries within those bound…

> and Putin Yes, that's the entire point of comments like this: You can't discount his viewpoint when trying to figure out Russia's next actions.

I'm not saying we should discount Putin's viewpoint and others like him, it is after all one of the very few tools we've got to analyse what he'll do. But just because we acknowledge Putin's viewpoint doesn't mean we agree with him, or that we should allow him to act unchallenged. It is his viewpoint that Ukraine is not a real nation without Russia, and thus has no right to making their own choices for their own country. It is our (including Ukraine's) viewpoint that Ukraine is an independent and sovereign nation with the right to enter economic and military alliances if it so desires. And what's happening in Ukraine at the moment is the result of the clash of those viewpoints. Ukrainians are dying for their nation, and the West is assisting Ukraine while hoping Putin isn't too far gone to just press the button.

Putin said that Russia does not need a world if Russia is not in it. The West is saying they're not okay with a militaristic expansionist nuclear-threatening Russia in the world. I tend to agree with the West's viewpoint, even knowing what may ultimately come from it.

Post reply on HN