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

511–520 of 521 posts

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#511

Post by dralley »

carlosjobim wrote: post #510
dralley wrote: post #508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 neutral…

>Putin fears American anti-air missiles that neutralizes the threat of Russian nukes.

The trajectory of ICBMs crosses over the North Pole, and most of Russia's launch facilities are too far North or East for Ukraine to be remotely relevant to intercepting them.

It is a garbage, nonsensical excuse. And there is no reason to admit that into evidence while rejecting the idea that Putin's constant chauvanistic refrains about how Russians and Ukrainians are one people, that Ukrainians are just "little Russians" who've been convinced they're something different by the evil West, an idea which he has been pushing for years, have anything to do with the invasion.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#512

Post by sgjohnson »

andreygrehov wrote: post #506
sgjohnson wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 State…

OSCE has got nothing to do with NATO whatsoever.

FYI, Russia is also a member of OSCE.

At this point I'm convinced you're either trolling or so high on Kremlin's propaganda that you're beyond saving.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#513

Post by athrowaw »

koonsolo wrote: post #496
foverzar wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

> First up, which countries is Europe invading?

I don't know about right now, but not long ago UK forces were in Syria, that Syria government never asked for. Should we call it invading? If not, what's your definition of invading?

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#514

Post by andreygrehov »

sgjohnson wrote: post #512
andreygrehov wrote: post #506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 State…

OSCE has got nothing to do with NATO whatsoever. FYI, Russia is also a member of OSCE. At this point I'm convinced you're either trolling or so high on Kremlin's propaganda that you're beyond saving.

My god... All the EU states and all NATO states also participate in the OSCE.

Is there no world in your head where someone other than Russia does something wrong?

I live in the US for 10+ years and give zero shits about Russian / US / Ukrainian propaganda. There are rules and I'm not seeing "good" (according to conventional wisdom) countries following these rules. But who cares, right? The United States is like the biggest, most powerful country in the whole world, hands down. And if you think we're living in a unipolar kind of world, what you're saying is that we're the only major player on the global stage. And what that means? With all that crazy amount of power we've got, we can pretty much go out and do all sorts of wild and reckless stuff, and the crazy part is, it doesn't come back to bite us in any. major. way.

There is an argument going around saying that the way Putin's been acting kinda shows that it was a smart move to try and get NATO to grow eastward and bring in countries like Ukraine and Georgia. But, what's really interesting is that before the Ukrainian crisis happened, the US didn't have any reason to believe that Putin was acting all aggressive. And there's nothing showing that the US was considering making NATO bigger just to keep the Russians in check. We just didn't see Russia as being all pushy and aggressive. But then, when the Ukrainian crisis kicked off on February 22 2014, that's when the US changed its mind. That's when the US decided, "Hey, Russia is being aggressive". And the US started thinking Russia wanted to make itself bigger, like a "greater Russia" or something. This change in perception occurred post facto.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#515

Post by ml83 »

dralley wrote: post #509
foverzar wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

do you know that Moldova was "invaded" by Russians and Ukrainians together?

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#516

Post by Tommstein »

sahinyanlik wrote: post #491
red-iron-pine wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

> So you are telling Turkey bought s-400 out of nowhere?

No, from Russia.

> But now they afraid Turkey to sell f-35 to Russia?

No, they're afraid of what Russia's S-400 that Turkey bought might covertly reveal to Russia about the F-35.

Turkey had the choice between the F-35 and the S-400. It chose the S-400 instead of the F-35. It has no one to blame for that decision but Turkey.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#517

Post by koonsolo »

athrowaw wrote: post #513
koonsolo wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> First up, which countries is Europe invading? I don't know about right now, but not long ago UK forces were in Syria, that Syria government never asked for. Should we call it invading? If not, what's your definition of invading?

Invading is claiming it as your country and handing out passports. That or installing a non-democratic dictatorship and subdue the local population.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#518

Post by dudek1337 »

relaxing wrote: post #466
machiaweliczny wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If US backs from NATO expect nukes in every country. 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).

> We were developing nukes in 80s but guy got assasinated (either RU or US). Link? I’d love to read that story.

Found this, you'd need to translate: https://www.focus.pl/artykul/cala-prawda-o-programie-jadrowy...

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#519

Post by athrowaw »

koonsolo wrote: post #517
athrowaw wrote: post #513

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First up, which countries is Europe invading? I don't know about right now, but not long ago UK forces were in Syria, that Syria government never asked for. Should we call it invading? If not, what's your definition of invading?

Invading is claiming it as your country and handing out passports. That or installing a non-democratic dictatorship and subdue the local population.

> Invading is claiming it as your country and handing out passports.

That's more or less definition for annexing, not invading.

> That or installing a non-democratic dictatorship and subdue the local population.

That's a regime change or may be a coup.

Re: Finland becomes the 31st member of NATO

#520

Post by riialist »

sensanaty wrote: post #403
kreeben wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> 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

I'm in genuine shock that this obvious sarcasm needed an edit to add the /s

Sorry for failing to understand the sarcasm and taking your comment personally. During the Cold War plenty of the "Western" countries were truly afraid of the Communist powers, and we in the between were afraid of being bombed to dust in a nuclear war between the USA and the USSR.

Also,I felt your comment was not nice towards all the minorities and "divergents" in the Russia and elsewhere. Just Google Grozny, Aleppo, or Anna Politkovskaya if you want to know why your comment could have been interpreted as something else than just a joke.

Post reply on HN