Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

presidentti.fi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 1001 posts

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#611

Post by darkteflon »

fsloth wrote: post #406
pelario wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Finnish political system was infiltrated by Russian assets (willing or just useful fools) for decades [0] I just read the whole [0] reference, and I could not find anything related to your claim. Can you give specific examples ? Or can you explain how the article supports your claim ?

It's complex and what I write here is open for argumentations. Briefly put, insidious interactions over decades groomed certain individuals in power to promote agendas pleasing to Moscow and to stop from forwarding agendas that would have been displeasing. Who, exactly? Well, that's the thing - we don't know but can only guess - but this effect was quite visible in Finland for decades. I know this sounds a bit nutty…

You’ve contributed loads of great comments to this thread. Thanks for taking the time.

Very happy to see you guys joining NATO.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#612

Post by CRConrad »

mynameishere wrote: post #589
serpix wrote: post #109

As a Finnish citizen, reservist this has been a very emotional spring. Both of my grandfathers were in the war with Russia. Both of my grandmothers had to leave and burn their homes in the areas annexed by Russia. Twice. I am 100% for Nato.

Yeah too bad the continuation war didn't work out for you.

> Yeah too bad the continuation war didn't work out for you.

Oh, it pretty much did. Sure, there was a Carelia Oblast or something up in the Northwest of the Russian Socialist Soviet Republic -- but never a Finnish Socialist Soviet Republic.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#613

Post by throwawaymanbot »

andruby wrote: post #85
M2Ys4U wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>However, adding new members requires unanimous consent from all existing members, so it's not guaranteed to be smooth sailing. I highly doubt that any of NATO's members will veto an application from Finland (or Sweden).

How about Hungary and it's seemingly pro-Russian leader, Orban? They could vote against.

No post body was provided.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#614

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

CRConrad wrote: post #359
klibertp wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, I'm not American, and don't care that much. I was referring to this part: > I'm just tired of the USA paying for everything when we don't have the money. Which seems to be one of the things that made the previous President the President.

Funny thing is, the USA isn't "paying for everything". The people who whine about NATO members "not paying enough" seem to think all the other NATO countries have got rid of their armies and are defended only by US troops permanently stationed there. That's not how it works: They all have their own defense forces. Trump was whining that those are not big enough (and he was probably even [at least mainly] right there)…

> "But until that happens, this "missing money" doesn't actually come out of any US budget; it's just not being spent at all."

That's like saying a 4WD SUV, which is much heavier because it can in theory go off road at any time, doesn't burn any extra fuel if you never take it off road. Maintaining the capability to send a huge expeditionary force to Europe at any time is mind-bendingly expensive.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#615

Post by nradov »

fallingknife wrote: post #596
rich_sasha wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vetos are somewhat overrated. Agents may have the right to veto, but might not have the power to deal with the consequences. Russia has a UN veto and uses it, because they can weather the consequences. Could Hungary piss off all of its allies, trade partners, basically everyone but Russia? Doubtful. Hungary is playing a skillful, if somewhat devious, game of balancing between Russia and the West. But an outright FU t…

What I don't understand is what Hungary gains from splitting with the rest of the EU and NATO to help Russia. Doesn't seem beneficial to them.

It's more about Hungarian domestic politics. The Orban administration has alienated much of the EU leadership, and is (arguably) in violation of the EU treaties. So they're looking to Russia as a backup option, and as an implicit threat to the EU over having their funding cut off.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#616

Post by kasey_junk »

2Gkashmiri wrote: post #46
golergka wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So what plan, exactly? That's a question on everyone's mind about this whole invasion. I guess I should have said “idiotic justification as portrayed by Russian propaganda” instead of “plan”.

i am not an american, nor russian. i come from a third world country far from this drama. to me, "russian propaganda" is the same as "american propaganda" which demonizes the other and calls their version as the "ultimate truth". don't americans/west see their media/actions as what it is, propaganda aganinst russia? blocking RT across america/EU is seen as protecting free speech but god forbid if russia reciprocates…

RT is not blocked in the US. I read it this morning.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#617

Post by suture »

MomoXenosaga wrote: post #536
suture wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m an American. For many decades the idea that the U.S. props up the rest of world at the expense of focusing on our people has been a strong one. It was very strong going into the 80s but has becomes less so since then. It is still used from time to time galvanize right leaning people. There is a strong isolationist bent within the U.S. too. I do believe Trump was correct to criticize the lack of defense spending b…

European countries will only spend money on defense when they calculate it as a necessity. During the cold war the Netherlands had a tank division stationed in Germany waiting for the Red Army to invade. And I want to emphasize DEFENSE. Not "invade other countries in trillion dollar regime change operations". It was US Congress that signed off on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

I support an imperial retreat by the U.S. I strongly disagree with the the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and our policies against Iran, and our support for numerous brutual regimes. Unchecked power is dangerous and it’s time for the U.S. to engage is isolationism once again. The EU will need to learn to either strengthen federalism and defend itself or remain reliant of the U.S. military tit. I prefer the former option.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#618

Post by mcv »

refurb wrote: post #562
mcv wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think anyone is disputing that the US was wrong in Vietnam. And in Iraq (the second time at least) for that matter. Yet I often see people use these examples where the US was clearly wrong as reasons why Russia should be permitted to invade Ukraine.

The argument isn't "we should let Russia invade Ukraine". The argument is "if the US could be so wrong about the best path forward in Vietnam and Iraq, why are we so sure we're right about Ukraine"? Instead of viewing everything from a US/Western European/NATO lens, take a step back and ask "If I were Russia how would I view this?". The idea is that if not expanding NATO stops Russia from invading Eastern European co…

So do you agree that letting Russia invade Ukraine is wrong?

Like I said, the US was wrong to invade Vietnam and Iraq, and Russia is just as wrong to invade Ukraine.

> take a step back and ask "If I were Russia how would I view this?"

As a big mistake. Russia is not getting anything out of this that's going to help Russia in any way. Russia has made itself the enemy of everybody around them. They've completely alienated all Ukrainians, nearly half of which used to be friendly towards Russia.

> The idea is that if not expanding NATO stops Russia from invading Eastern European countries

"Expanding NATO" is the wrong way to look at this. NATO doesn't expand itself, it accepts new members who apply to join NATO. NATO hasn't conquered anyone. Membership is entirely voluntary.

NATO membership has shown itself to be the best protection against Russian aggression; Georgia and Ukraine have been invaded, but Estonia has not. Refusing membership to Estonia in a faint hope that Russia would not attack is a dangerous game to play with an entire country.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#619

Post by tigershark »

lnxg33k1 wrote: post #385
is_true wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need NATO because you are already a member. Ask Ukrainian civilians whether they would prefer to be part of NATO right now.

Quoted post unavailable.

It’s absolutely false. Proof: Putin already invaded Crimea 8 years ago. It’s shameful how some Italians are bamboozled by Putin online propaganda.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#620

Post by CRConrad »

H8crilA wrote: post #236
noselasd wrote: post #20

Title is not quite right, this seems to be the President and Prime Minister recommending to the parliament that Finland should join NATO. The final decision is not made.

It is so obviously going to happen ... Not to mention that Sweden, with it's pretty impressive capabilities for such a small country (the Grippen, for example), has long ago figured out that they really cannot do this on their own. There has been a good amount of technology transfer in their military technology for a few decades.

"Gripen", only one p. (Pronounced ~"Greepen" in English, and means "Griff[i|o]n". "Grippen", OTOH, is German for "flus", the plural of an illness.)
Post reply on HN