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

491–500 of 521 posts

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#491

Post by sahinyanlik »

red-iron-pine wrote: post #402
tephra wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most important reasons IMHO are (1) domestic election and (2) wanting to get a hold of some F-16s for their air force.

Which the US would have been willing to give... if they didn't cozy up to the Russians for S-300 and S-400s. They also wanted F-35s, not just F-16s. That's not one to sell unless you're 100% confident they won't copy it for their own domestic production, or sell it to, say, the Russians. And modern Turkey is looking a little shaky in that regard (no, not an earthquake joke).

So you are telling Turkey bought s-400 out of nowhere? US never become true ally of Turkey. And your F-35s reasoning is not right as well. From the beginning Turkey is a part of alliance. But now they afraid Turkey to sell f-35 to Russia?

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#492

Post by foverzar »

The_Colonel wrote: post #432
foverzar wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm pretty fucking relieved the nightmare is over. Ouch. Genuinely hate to be the bearer of bad news, but everything I know about politics (especially from Russian perspective) tells me that this is only the beginning and uncorking of a potential conflict. I assume, you do not expect that NATO membership would put Finland into a direct hot confrontation with Russia, thus turning into a kind of a self-fulfilling pro…

> I assume, you do not expect that NATO membership would put Finland into a direct hot confrontation with Russia, thus turning into a kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy? Neutrality is no protection against aggression. Vienna was famously one of the first targets for Soviet nuclear strike.

> Vienna was famously one of the first targets for Soviet nuclear strike.

According to your link in the other thread, that is assuming it was "ruthlessly" occupied by NATO.

In any case, the "end the game for everyone button" example seems like a poor choice. How did Austria actually fare during the Cold War? I honestly don't know too much about Austrian-Soviet relationships except for a few trade deals.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#493

Post by foverzar »

scottLobster wrote: post #114
29athrowaway wrote: post #31

[flagged]

China and Russia have terminal age demographics and HATE each other, Brazil helps define "middle income trap" for nations, South Africa is small, Saudi Arabia and Iran HATE each other, Argentina is the posterchild for rampant inflation, and India can't compensate for all of this. Never mind that none of these nations, particularly the export-driven ones, can long survive economically without access to Western markets…

> China and Russia HATE each other

That is definitely 100% untrue, I have enough empirical evidence that there are no practical solid grounds for that claim.

> Saudi Arabia and Iran HATE each other

They've recently reestablished political relations, did they? Don't know much about their day-to-day feelings, but there is a clear political will towards predictable coexistence.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#494

Post by foverzar »

danaris wrote: post #383
kypro wrote: post #314

Why have so many comments been flagged here?

Since the start of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, there have been a significant number of commenters here who have, for whatever reasons, advanced opinions that align very closely with Russian propaganda. Some of these seem very reasonable—things like "shouldn't we try to push for peace?" "Should we really be arming the people of another country?"—and others might seem reasonable if you don't know a lot about the rece…

> and others might seem reasonable if you don't know a lot about the recent history and politics of the region—like "the main reason Russia invaded was because they were scared of Ukraine joining NATO".

Eh, I live in the region and feel like this is a (somewhat) fair point, though somewhat misquoted and misrepresented (not in the least that there is no really ever a single specific reason for war, but rather a cascade of them). Not implying that war isn't a disaster or whatever.

Anyhoo...

> there have been a significant number of commenters here who have, for whatever reasons, advanced opinions that align very closely with Russian propaganda.

"Russian propaganda" is merely aligned to the perspective of a huge-enough chunk of the it & engineering world, just as well as "Western propaganda" is.

I think a lot of people are just very bad at articulating their points so that they don't sound like shallow slogans or whatever, but I don't suppose it's fair to label them as propagandists. Most are just sharing their perspectives, however they may be. Pity that forums like that aren't really suitable for people sharing different and opposing views, which should be pretty natural state of things in times like these.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#495

Post by foverzar »

go13 wrote: post #272
sbaiddn wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You speak of civilized nations, but very generally. I'll ask my friend from Donetsk for the list.

I have a friend from Donetsk too who grew up there, don't worry. He was making molotov's cocktail when there was a threat that russia would capture Kyiv.

> He was making molotov's cocktail when there was a threat that russia would capture Kyiv.

Oh please don't pose.

People don't make fancy distinguished name awful reeking dangerous incendiary so far from the frontline. Their whole memorability comes from their immediate production efficiency, when you don't care about anything else and need a weapon like RIGHT now. People who don't joke around are occupied with a completely different set of things.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#496

Post by koonsolo »

foverzar wrote: post #489
koonsolo wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, and in the end that's the only thing that matters: power. We in the western world can be very happy that democracies represent the biggest power. Anyone who doesn't agree is free to emigrate or happily live in a dictatorship of course.

> Exactly, and in the end that's the only thing that matters: power. > democracies represent the biggest power. > Anyone who doesn't agree is free to emigrate or happily live in a dictatorship of course. Eh, but that's the point: a bunch of countries with a shady history of global power dynamics (genocidal colonialism, fascism, etc) that now declared its current political establishment as a universal virtue, all whil…

First up, which countries is Europe invading?

Secondly, here are the values of the european union: respect for human dignity and human rights, freedom, democracy, equality and the rule of law. Can you tell me which values you don't agree with?

Hungary is part of EU with all benefits and responsibilities. If they don't align with these values then they get penalized, simple as that.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#497

Post by foverzar »

dralley wrote: post #461
foverzar wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm pretty fucking relieved the nightmare is over. Ouch. Genuinely hate to be the bearer of bad news, but everything I know about politics (especially from Russian perspective) tells me that this is only the beginning and uncorking of a potential conflict. I assume, you do not expect that NATO membership would put Finland into a direct hot confrontation with Russia, thus turning into a kind of a self-fulfilling pro…

>I assume, you do not expect that NATO membership would put Finland into a direct hot confrontation with Russia, thus turning into a kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy? Moldova, invaded (1990) and occupied. Georgia, invaded (2008) and occupied. Ukraine, invaded (2014, 2022) and occupied. Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland: Not invaded, not occupied.

> Moldova, invaded (1990) and occupied

> Moldova, independence from the Soviet Union (27 August 1991), constitution adopted (29 July 1994)

I genuinely wonder what is the source of that list. I assume "invasion" of 1990 is the Transnistria War?

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#498

Post by sgjohnson »

andreygrehov wrote: post #241
kklimonda wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that NATO is a defensive alliance, I don't see how such a rule would make much sense. Can you spell that rule out, and link to the official document?

Yes, I will try to find it.

Any luck in finding the source?

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#499

Post by skissane »

tim333 wrote: post #433
foverzar wrote: post #301

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 It was a mistake for NATO to do it without Russia. It's not a matter of "influence", but a matter of military risks and perceived threats. If there was a political will towards pushing Russia to NATO any similar to wh…

NATO was formed basically as a club for democratic states to defend themselves from aggressive dictatorships, in practice mostly Russia. Unless Russia adopts democracy and human rights it's a bit impractical for it to work with or join NATO.

> NATO was formed basically as a club for democratic states to defend themselves from aggressive dictatorships

One of NATO’s founding members was Portugal - under the Salazar dictatorship. Both Greece and Turkey went through periods of military dictatorship while NATO members-did NATO have any problem with that? The idea that NATO was formed to be a “club for democratic states” ignores its own history

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#500

Post by sgjohnson »

andreygrehov wrote: post #476
joseph_grobbles wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"you can only join NATO if your membership is not a threat to your border countries" This is, of course, complete nonsense. It is as much a fact as the oft-cited claim that NATO promised not to expand (another lie that is true only to rubes). NATO has a requirement that you settle any ongoing border disputes before ascension: If you have a simmering feud with a neighbor country about who owns a pile of rocks, it's su…

> This is, of course, complete nonsense. This is not a complete nonsense simply from the fact that if a joining country has conflicts with a bordering country, then such a member would trigger the "attack on one shall be considered an attack on all". > Putin has sent tens of thousands of Russians into a meat grinder, ego-driven war that has zero outcome that isn't negative for Russia for decades to come. I agree that…

> I agree that this war is stupid, but it could've been avoid entirely had the US conducted a constructive dialog with Russia.

Stop smoking Kremlin's propaganda. The war has got NOTHING to do with NATO or the US whatsoever. It's 100% over resources. Russia simply wants to deny Ukraine the oil and natural gas rich regions of the Donbas and Black Sea.

Russia is a gas station pretending to be a country. They simply couldn't allow competition, lest Europe might choose a different supplier for their energy needs.

> The root of that something are the ambitions of NATO. Some countries simply do not want NATO to be around. And I don't get why it's so hard to understand that.

Ah yes, and this would be the reason why Russia is bullying their non-NATO neighbors and wouldn't dare to touch a NATO member state.

And yes, it was obviously NATO that forced Russia to invade Georgia in 2008 or Ukraine in 2014.

In 2014 Ukrainians simply made the democratic choice to get rid of their Russian-puppet tyrant and elect a pro-European president.

Post reply on HN