261–270 of 521 posts
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]
> Russia could have rolled into Finland in 1945
Unlikely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't that what the G7 is? The G7 isn't very important, neither is BRICS. There's just a lot of Americans that want to see America fail because other people have different views than them.
Its not that, its more the general feeling of an american decline and an obsession on knowing how it will end. Doomer feelings are growing more prevalent as out population becomes more divided and our monetary situation grows worse. Many americans feel that our "American Empire" that dominated world politics is losing ground fast and there is a need to cope by being "smart" and swearing you know how it will happen. I…
I'm not a geopolitical expert by any means, but if there was a time to make a move against the US, this would be it for sure.
I mean, by the looks of it, the Western doesn't "feel" that hopeful. Just look at the US alone:
- Patriotism is on an all time low (per NYT);
- Social divide is on an all time high;
- Highest inflation in +30 years;
- Afghanistan's debacle;
- Proxy war with Russia got the American people basically divided between spending that money at home and striking a deal between RU & UA. vs helping Ukraine defeating Russia;
- US culture is getting a pushback from other countries (mainly in the African continent) that think the US is trying to impose their morals upon them (it's not that far fetched if you think about it). This is affecting US relations with those countries to the extent that they prefer to align with US "frenemies" instead of the US per se;
- US foreign policies pushing together countries that were/are still enemies, bringing forward the old saying `the enemy of my enemy is my "friend"`.
This decade will be really interesting, to say the least.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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?
Uh, if you have to go back 15 years to find a point where a country isn't invading it's neighbors its going to be super understandable that in the past 15 years countries have wanted to join a defense alliance.
Keep in mind, the USSR only collapsed in 1991 so the question you're asking is what aggressive actions has Russia done in the first 26 years of it's existence to make other countries scared of it.
Of which you have Chechnya (~1999), Georgia (~2008), Ukraine (~2014).
Great step for the West and civilized nations! Countries with similar civilized values should not be naïve and be ready to stand up to barbarians including being aggressive when needed, and yes, EXPAND! And certainly the West should not be ashamed for standing for its values and what is right, otherwise there is a wide range of ambitious nations who think that their way is unique and the only way to deal with others…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which countries had Russia invaded prior to the conflict that began early 2007?
Finland, twice. My grand-grandfather got grenade shrapnel from Russians pouring over the border to murder men, rape women, and steal children.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their actions speak pretty loudly. I’m asking, what is Russia trying to say?
> I’m asking, what is Russia trying to say? Stop the expansion. Watch the video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQ58Yv6kP44
That doesn't sound like it's a message worth listening to.
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?
It's already bad for us in Poland to not have nukes and capability to nuke Moscov at will. We were developing nukes in 80s but guy got assasinated (either RU or US).
So, this is mostly a US-centric forum, but I wonder what is the take on this from the perspective of a Finnish person. Is there any controversy or concerns of becoming a foothold for future conflicts? This whole thing has been dragging on for sometime now, had the opinions shifted over time?
Well the PM who nursed this just lost the election. But I suspect most Fins agree with the decision.
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).
Of course, this would be very expensive to bring back their army from all around the world. They would lose all strategic positions they have, and would probably still suffer great loses... But they could (maybe) conquer that single country, or relevant parts of it.
Just, would it be worth?