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

501–510 of 521 posts

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#501

Post by hypertele-Xii »

philistine wrote: post #480
hypertele-Xii wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was born when the Soviet Union fell. All my childhood I watched media like James Bond and played games like Command & Conquer about Russian invasion, saw my extended family suffer the generational trauma of war, and being male, am forced by threat of imprisonment to personally accept social responsibility for sacrificing my life defending our country from Russian invasion, I'm pretty fucking relieved the nightmare…

I think you forgot the only Bond movies who dealt with direct Soviet threats were : - From Russia With Love (Rosa Klebb secretly works for SPECTRE but is a KGB operative so let's count it) - Octopussy (vilain's a defector) - The Living Daylights (defector also) It's in Goldeneye that is created the idea that James Bond constantly fought the Soviets. I don't fault you for thinking that it's an easy thing to illustrate…

I didn't forget anything. The Command & Conquer series has other themes too. Doesn't invalidate my point.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#502

Post by riialist »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #484
908B64B197 wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ukraine is going to be an incredible opportunity for the west in the coming decades. Young, educated, motivated population with western values and a strong will for democracy and freedom. An economy that can only grow and prosper. And unlike Syrian and Afghan "refugees", there's a strong desire from Ukrainian refugees to return and rebuild.

Real question: Why did you write Syrian and Afghan refugees with double quotes? In English slang, this is used to imply so-called status -- lesser or fake. Their countries were destroyed by war, and they again have repressive dictatorships. Their need to escape to a safer places seems real to me. Also, if Syria or Afghanistan graduated to democratic, free countries, I am sure many, many refugees would want to return…

Yes I agree with the previous comment. I volunteered to teach Finnish to the refugees during the last "refugee-crisis" Finland faced, when Russia opened it borders and "dumped" Central Asian asylum seekers here the year 2015. Obviously some of the young guys from Syria were just taking a fun tour. Most of these folks got the ticket back to their starting point, and accepted it.

But there were many who really wanted to learn the local language, and even if the life at the "asylum seekers centers" was not luxury, they were grateful that they had a place to stay where there was no immediate risk of death.

Some of these people had their families with them, though most of them were young, healthy males, since this segment is most likely to survive the trip. E.g. riding a bicycle in the -30 C/-22 Fahrenheit for 50 kilometres was one common way to entry Finland during this episode.

And regarding Afghanistan, for many, there is not much to be rebuilt. The country was first run over my Soviet army, then the US revenge. The minorities like Hazara have been persecuted during all the previous regimes. These people have no place to go back to.The people I know have instead build careers here, and are vocal against fundamentalist Islam.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#503

Post by carlosjobim »

lazide wrote: post #490
carlosjobim wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stalin and most other dictators bring their own power structures. The capital city is just that. As an example, some roman dictators/emperors never even went to Rome, but still had strong power structures. And just because it has to be pointed out, Stalin didn't do his reign of terror from the Kremlin in Moscow, but from his dacha in Kuntsevo. Hitler also spent most of his reign of terror from Wolfsschanze and Obersa…

Stalin used (and took over) Lenin’s power base, and built up more as time went on. He didn’t ‘bring his own’. Even despite all the purges, for instance, the Red Army was there before and after him. The NKVD, KGB, MDB all had predecessor agencies (some back to the Tsars even, but the NKVD was first formed in 1917). And Kuntsevo is in Moscow . Literally. And if you’re asserting that Hitler didn’t need, or use, the Wehr…

> And Kuntsevo is in Moscow. Literally.

Yes it is, but it's not in the Kremlin, where the official seat is.

Both Stalin and Hitler were independent of their capital cities for conducting their rule. Dictators and emperors are not mere symbolic heads of state, and their network of people means much more than where they sit to conduct their business. This network is not necessarily connected to the capital.

I think we're maybe debating semantics, but I strongly disagree with the idea that the capital cities are more influential than the dictators and emperors. As in my example of Roman emperors who hardly even went to Rome.

Politics is much more about abstract human connections, than brick and stone buildings. We are a very mobile species after all.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#504

Post by red-iron-pine »

User23 wrote: post #22
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.

> Spheres of influence are gained through economic muscle and cultural power now, not force of arms. Amusingly, that status quo is enforced via the USA’s supposed overwhelming force of arms. Which in turn suggests your analysis is deeply deficient in its consideration of higher order effects.

Which, apparently, matter.

See also: Georgia, Armenia vs. Azerbaijan, Belorussian & Kazakh internal protests and revolts, or Ukraine c. 2014.

Russian arms have been used on or by all of those countries. In the case of Armenia, support meant they kicked he shit out of the Azeris before... and not the case now, where Russian can't or won't help them, but the Turks are backing the Azeris.

Force of arms has made a big difference for all of the states around Russia. And not necessarily in a good way.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#505

Post by foverzar »

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

This is a historically inaccurate slogan.

> Unless Russia adopts democracy and human rights it's a bit impractical for it to work with or join NATO.

Are we still talking about 1990s-2000s? Russia was no less democratic and adoptive of human rights than other ex-Soviet states pushed to NATO. Do you actually consider 2004 Georgia to be more in line with western view of human rights and democracy then 2004 Russia, really?

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#506

Post by andreygrehov »

sgjohnson wrote: post #498
andreygrehov wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I will try to find it.

Any luck in finding the source?

Yes.

NATO members states, as members of the OSCE, are expected to adhere to the OSCE's Code of Conduct on Politico-Military Aspects of Security.

The 3rd aspect of the document says, quote:

  3. They remain convinced that security is indivisible and that the security of each of them is inseparably linked to the security of all others. *They will not strengthen their security at the expense of the security of other States. They will pursue their own security interests in conformity with the common effort to strengthen security and stability in the CSCE area and beyond.*
Here is the official document: https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/5/7/41355.pdf

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#507

Post by riialist »

kreeben wrote: post #28
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…

>> just Hah, yeah, that's not a big deal at all, neutralizing Russian ability to force its will upon its neighbors, through threats of aggression. Like, who's scared of Russia these days? They're just empty threats. I'd like totally bet my life on it, just empty threats. EDIT: /s

Yes, we in Finland are not scared. But it is only rational to ally with forces that can protect our sovereignty. I would not bet my life on it, as I live in a country which has the longest border with Russia after Ukraine.

In my view, to say that Russia’s actions are just empty threats is an undervaluation of the price the Ukrainian people and military are paying now. Whole cities have been wiped out of existence, and both the military and civilian population have faced extensive casualties as Russia has resorted to “brute force” attacks, showering bombs wherever in Ukrainian land.

We in Finland have been building bomb shelters for the population that can withstand even nuclear attacks, and we have universal male conscription and voluntary female drafting. About 80% of Finnish male citizens complete the service, which makes Finland have military resources unlike any other European country. This tradition is more than a hundred years old. If someone wonders why, just search for the term “The Great Wrath.”

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#508

Post by dralley »

carlosjobim wrote: post #487
dralley wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Yes, and for the same reasons they are invading Ukraine now! They feared German attacks through Finland and decided it was better to invade first, just as they fear American attacks through Ukraine and decided to invade first. Next you'll argue that they feared German attacks through Poland, and that's why they invaded Poland alongside the Germans.

Of course yes. The Soviets and the Nazis were preparing for war with each other long before they jointly attacked Poland. This is a widely known historical fact. Stalin wasn't ready for the war with Germany just yet and bought some time. Invading Poland gave him a buffer zone, instead of having the Germans closer. As for the Finno-Russian war in WWII, just take a look at the map and see how close Finland is to Russia…

Russia has nukes, they don't need to invade other countries for land buffers, and excusing that behavior (much less the rape, torture, murder of civilians, etc.) is appalling.

Moreover it doesn't even mesh with Putin's own stated rationale for the war, which doesn't have much to do with NATO at all.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#509

Post by dralley »

foverzar wrote: post #497
dralley wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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?

Yes.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#510

Post by carlosjobim »

dralley wrote: post #508
carlosjobim wrote: post #487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course yes. The Soviets and the Nazis were preparing for war with each other long before they jointly attacked Poland. This is a widely known historical fact. Stalin wasn't ready for the war with Germany just yet and bought some time. Invading Poland gave him a buffer zone, instead of having the Germans closer. As for the Finno-Russian war in WWII, just take a look at the map and see how close Finland is to Russia…

Russia has nukes, they don't need to invade other countries for land buffers, and excusing that behavior (much less the rape, torture, murder of civilians, etc.) is appalling. Moreover it doesn't even mesh with Putin's own stated rationale for the war, which doesn't have much to do with NATO at all.

Your way of expressing yourself is disgusting. I haven't excused any of those horrible things, so don't accuse me of that. There is a real person here on the other side of the screen.

I don't support war. Understanding why war happens and why it happened in the past is not excusing anything. There must be room for deeper debate and exchange than "I hate the enemy!".

Putin fears American anti-air missiles that neutralizes the threat of Russian nukes. He has been saying that since he came to power. If he believes those kind of missile systems are coming to his doorstep, he will try to stop it - using any rationale.

Post reply on HN