Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO • Hacker News Board

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#41

Post by sprash » Tue, Apr 04, 2023, 1:40 PM UTC

throwaway894345 wrote: post #21

sprash wrote: post #8

[flagged]

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.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#42

Post by mcphage » Tue, Apr 04, 2023, 1:40 PM UTC

sprash wrote: post #24

madspindel wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia would never attack Ukraine if it was part of Nato.

[flagged]

> Russia could also take over all of Ukraine in about a week.

I think that qualifies for a great big [Citation Needed].

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#43

Post by selfmodruntime » Tue, Apr 04, 2023, 1:40 PM UTC

rainworld wrote: post #5

[flagged]

Imagine joining a defense union when your neighbor declares war on another neighbor. The audacity!

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#44

Post by thehappypm » Tue, Apr 04, 2023, 1:42 PM UTC

sprash wrote: post #41

throwaway894345 wrote: post #21

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.

Russia literally invaded Finland last century

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#45

Post by mcphage » Tue, Apr 04, 2023, 1:43 PM UTC

motohagiography wrote: post #6

[flagged]

> that mitigates its sovereignty

What do you mean by Russian sovereignty in this sentence? What does it include?

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#46

Post by gambiting » Tue, Apr 04, 2023, 1:43 PM UTC

morkalork wrote: post #26

GalenErso wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

Everything that Russia is doing now it has done to countries like Poland in the past. That's why when we see news about Russia shipping Ukrainian kids to Russia to be "integrated" it makes our blood literally boil - it was the fate of many Polish families as well, my own relatives have stories of their loved ones having to walk back from Syberia after being sent there for "integration".

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#47

Post by tokai » Tue, Apr 04, 2023, 1:43 PM UTC

29athrowaway wrote: post #31

[flagged]

>BRICS surpassed the G7 in terms of GDP

Maybe. Its hard to be sure when autocratic countries lie about their economic data.

edit: for those two with their "everybody lies and are awful" argument (one of the oldest and most beloved Russian tactics whataboutism). You will properly not get it if you don't already understand it - but issues with accuracy has nothing to with doctoring all your numbers to keep the gravy train going. Transparent liberal countries can have issues too, but compared to authoritarian ones the issues a trivial.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#48

Post by sprash » Tue, Apr 04, 2023, 1:43 PM UTC

sebzim4500 wrote: post #34

sprash wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

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

[flagged]

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#49

Post by mcphage » Tue, Apr 04, 2023, 1:44 PM UTC

anonymousab wrote: post #39

khuey wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nuclear weapons can't take and hold territory.

Turning it into a barren wasteland makes it easier to take or hold with disposable conscripts.

Is Russia low on land? Are they running out, that depopulating several nations and holding their territory with conscripts makes strategic sense?

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#50

Post by torbica » Tue, Apr 04, 2023, 1:46 PM UTC

The_Colonel wrote: post #4

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]