Sweden Is a NATO Member • Hacker News Board

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#541

Post by saalweachter » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 9:24 PM UTC

Mountain_Skies wrote: post #9

bilekas wrote: post #4

This is great news and NATO benefits hugely from this. I have to hand it to putin for bringing further solidarity across Europe and NATO.

How does NATO benefit?

NATO is two things.

A defense pact, in case shit hits the fan.

A deterrence, to make war too difficult to undertake.

Adding additional countries around the edge of NATO does two things for the countries currently in the pact, even if they aren't economic or military powerhouses. First, those countries are less likely to be attacked, and not having your neighbors be embroiled in war is good. Germany is much happier if there is no land war going on next door in Poland, bombs occasionally falling on the wrong side of the border, civilian refugees looking to them for safety.

Second, adding someone else to the pact puts someone else on the front lines to test the defense provided by the pact, if shit hits the fan. Sure, if Russia wanted to, they could try to bypass Poland on the way to Germany, but practically speaking with Poland in NATO, Germany will get to see how NATO responds to an invasion of Poland, rather than finding out how they respond to an invasion of Germany. Poland, likewise, would be much happier seeing how NATO responded to the invasion of Ukraine-the-NATO-member, rather than watching the invasion of Ukraine and wondering how NATO will respond to the invasion of Poland if Ukraine falls.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#542

Post by orwin » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 9:25 PM UTC

tga_d wrote: post #496

yencabulator wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a different perspective. If NATO hadn't expanded to Turkey , Sweden and Finland would have had a much easier time not being blackmailed. NATO expanding to essentially-dictatorship countries was too eager. And yes, I understand Turkey's geographical position giving it power over sea routes, and why that was desirable to NATO. But choosing to include a fickle ruler in a unanimous-decisions-only organization is j…

To be clear, Turkey has been undergoing pretty decisive democratic backsliding since the mid 2000s. It was added to NATO at the same time as Greece, and at that time, Turkey was the more democratic of the two countries (see, e.g., the electoral democracy index for 1952 on https://v-dem.net/data_analysis/CountryGraph/ ). edit: note if you're trying to find Turkey by searching on that site, it uses the endonym Türkiye

Türkiye is probably the first western country to not secure its demographic dividends, with maybe Greece (hard to say because the EU mess things up with free movement of people and stuff). It did not fail hopefully, but the infrastructure gains are small compared to even ex-USSR countries. I fear the same is happening in slow motion in India (we'll see in 15 years i guess).

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#543

Post by red-iron-pine » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 9:26 PM UTC

eduction wrote: post #290

RecycledEle wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A bigger alliance is harder to defeat in war. Also, a bigger alliance requires each member to contribute fewer troops to manage a common defense. Sweden is a fairly wealthy country that can contribute the required amount to NATO. Sweden's ports are beneficial in a potential Arctic conflict. Finally, Sweden does not bring any new potential conflicts/enemies with it.

>Sweden's ports are beneficial in a potential Arctic conflict How? Norway (long a member) has Arctic ports, Sweden does not touch the Arctic.

Indeed. Plus Finland is already in the club, and they're def. on the arctic.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#544

Post by vajdagabor » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 9:26 PM UTC

t0bia_s wrote: post #516

vajdagabor wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, people supported them, but that is because democracy was hacked. Hungary is not a democracy anymore (it's a hibrid regime[1]). The biggest issue is that the majority of the media is controlled by the government. Also they own jurisdiction and have been gradually rewritten the constitution. Most people who support this regime do that because they believe the propaganda. Many people I know have been bitterly trying…

Or maybe people just agree with this politics. Clearly, you and your source of information don't.

Do you mean, some people just consciously agree with being used and lied to and their taxes being stolen so that the leaders can be richer and more powerful while schooling, health care and economy is in decay? I don't think so.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#545

Post by Paradigma11 » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 9:27 PM UTC

chasd00 wrote: post #417

fifilura wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This could be a good place to Post a reminder that in 1995, Ukraine agreed to hand over all its nuclear weapons to Russia in return of a promise to not threaten or use military force against Ukraine. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum

Ukraine had the weapons but no means to use them. Russia had the keys.

Sure, the Ukrainians would have needed some months to refit those weapons.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#546

Post by xpl » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 9:29 PM UTC

rixrax wrote: post #501

xpl wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Watch the recent Tucker Carlson's interview with Putin. There is a literally 2 hours long historical lecture from Putin, explaining in great detail why (to his opinion) Ukraine doesn't and shouldn't exist as a sovereign state and "in fact" never was, since the beginning of the history, LMAO. This is what really concerns him, if you listen. In his reality, Ukraine is a Russian province, not an independent state. He go…

>> He goes as far as justifying Hitler's attack on Poland And why wouldn't he. We should not forget that it was russians and nazi's that started the world war 2[0][1]. It's just that the rusians got lucky, and Germany bore all the guilt. Since then, russians of course have been actively trying to rewrite history. My grandfather fought russia and later its ideology in battles across the world. I did forget for a while…

And just recently Putin said that Belgium "owes its existence to Russia":

https://meduza.io/en/feature/2024/03/07/in-his-latest-pseudo...

Rewriting history is pretty much real — there is a head of Ministry of Culture in Russia that openly states that "our history books for students should serve the national interests" (and he is a co-author of those books), implying that the truth can be manipulated to indoctrinate young people.

> NEVER trust a russian

P.S. I am myself Russian — not saying you should trust me... (just kidding). Its just not every Russian out there likes what Russia does.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#547

Post by yourapostasy » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 9:32 PM UTC

miroljub wrote: post #156

MilStdJunkie wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surprised I had to scroll down to see this. Collective defense means expanded nuclear umbrella from the nuke powers in NATO. TFCMA/WP/Russian doctrine has always allowed a free hand for local commanders to use tactical weapons - a very tempting option to deal with Sweden[1] in the event of a Baltic/Kaliningrad land grab. Admission to NATO is a barrier to that, since the West doesn't exactly believe in small bites whe…

You mean the USA will launch nuclear missiles on Moscow in case Russia launches a missile on Stockholm? NATO or not, I have my doubts here. Does anyone believe any sane US president would risk a destruction of the USA to revenge / protect Sweden?

Strategic reaction doesn’t necessarily mean a capital atomic strike. It can be a range of responses that have been off the table during the Ukraine war so far. Switching the entire economic output to a wartime posture for example, is just as strategic.

I think it is in Russian elites’ and Putin’s self interest to continue the status quo and grind down the West in Ukraine, plunder it, and leave the long-term consequences to Russia in someone else’s hands. I’m doubtful they’ll actually use atomics unless the walls are violently closing in. Even China backed way off when Putin loosely waved around nuclear rhetoric in the opening months of the war, and asked in nervous diplomatic speak, “chill, broseph”.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#548

Post by esarbe » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 9:33 PM UTC

Georgelemental wrote: post #498

esarbe wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because repeating Russian lies automatically makes you a useful idiot. It comes with the territory.

Wait, first you claimed Putin said many times that he wants to conquer eastern Europe, and now you say the Russians are (falsely) claiming they don't want to conquer eastern Europe, and that I am repeating this lie of theirs. Which is it? Do they claim to want to conquer eastern Europe, or not?

Putin is not lying when he fabricates historic claims and of howls about how Russia has been victimized - this delusion is his honest believe. But Russians lie when they say that they don't want to attack any other countries. Just how Putin lied when they said that they are not going to violently attack Ukraine.

However; strategic ambiguity is part of Russian hybrid warfare. Just see how it went in Ukraine.

First they said they don't have any interest in Ukraine, that Ukraine is sovereign. Then the Russians invade Crimea, while claiming that the "green men" are not Russian soldiers. Then they tacitly admit that some Russian soldiers might have been involved. Then they brag about how they took Crimea.

Same same in the Donbas.

Meanwhile Putin is playing the victim card and making claims on all and every territory that once was the Rus' dominion, even though the "Russian Federation" itself has little to do with the Rus' of Kyiv or Ruritania or Galicia.

All the while his mouthpieces are both threatening the whole of Europe with nuclear fire and "de-nazification".

I don't what Russia is aiming at. In my eyes the whole country has gone mad with a fatal case of imperial delusion that will only end with the nation itself, similar to how the 3rd Reich only died with Nazi Germany.

What I do know is that anyone repeating any Russian claims is an imperialistic useful idiot.

My advise - don't be a useful idiot.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#549

Post by The_Colonel » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 9:34 PM UTC

AlGrothendieck wrote: post #472

The_Colonel wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before war in Georgia, Putin had a pretty good image in the West. Back then Putin was nowhere near bad as in the recent years. Power corrupts, long time rulers get crazier with time...

[flagged]

Hello, dear account dedicating all their two posts to repeating Russian talking points.

Georgia was indeed dumb enough to let themselves get provoked to fire the first rounds. It's very strange though that the peace loving defensive-only Russian forces ended up permanently occupying even more Georgian territory than before the war. That's the Russian history, Russia never attacks, it only defends itself, by advancing and annexing enemy territory.

Re: Sweden Is a NATO Member

#550

Post by hnarn » Thu, Mar 07, 2024, 9:35 PM UTC

xpl wrote: post #462

baxtr wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have many Serbian friends going for holidays in Croatia. Unthinkable 30 years ago. So maybe, in 50 years from now, Russia will join NATO, too?

Russia had in fact expressed desire to join NATO in Putin's early days as a president. Apparently he wanted to fast-track, so it might have hurt his ego somehow, when he was told that Russia is no special. https://web.archive.org/web/20240228155601/https://www.thegu... George Robertson, a former Labour defence secretary who led Nato between 1999 and 2003, said Putin made it clear at their first meeting that he wanted…

You don’t need to be an expert on Russian foreign policy to conclude from nothing but that final quote that Russia (rather, Putin) never had any serious desire to join Nato in the first place.

Putins views on Russia may have been more widely broadcasted recently because of Carlsons interview, but don’t be fooled; they were no different 24 years ago.