Finland will seek NATO membership immediately • Hacker News Board

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#851

Post by kn0where » Thu, May 12, 2022, 7:42 PM UTC

shreyshnaccount wrote: post #751

Regic wrote: post #729

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hungarian leading party (fidesz) has already declared they will not veto Ukrain's adoption to the EU so I personally really doubt they would veto Finland's entry to the NATO. They are playing a double-game (sorry, this probably doesn't make sense in english, it's a hungarian expression): Orban had a famous quote he said to EU leaders "don't listen to what I say, only to what I do", which in practice means alienat…

To stray from the topic, the double game phrase does make sense to me, possibly because it's also a Hindi phrase

I think the English equivalent is "playing both sides of the fence." Double game makes intuitive sense too though.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#852

Post by agapon » Thu, May 12, 2022, 7:48 PM UTC

yakak wrote: post #706

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #688

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> plenty of countries are unhappy about banning Russian hydrocarbons But only one is blocking.

It only takes one party to block and there is shame in blocking, why would another country admit that they would have blocked if not for the vote of that shameless Hungarian?

Simple: there will a lot of focus on persuading that single country to change its position. And once persuaded (or "persuaded") it will be too late (and ridiculous) for the "secret supporters" to voice their opposition.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#853

Post by naavis » Thu, May 12, 2022, 7:51 PM UTC

csomar wrote: post #228

formerly_proven wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only in a technical sense obviously, not in any way that actually matters.

St Petersburg is less than 100 miles away. But yeah most of the rest of the border is useless, given its nature.

St. Petersburg is already less than 100 miles from Estonia, which is a NATO country.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#854

Post by maratc » Thu, May 12, 2022, 7:54 PM UTC

mrits wrote: post #850

mordnis wrote: post #794

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder what do you think would happen if Russia, for example, nuked Helsinki? You think USA would nuke Russia and risk getting San Francisco burned to the ground? I personally find it rather unlikely. I'm not trying to be pro-Russian here, but I just don't see how provoking the second largest nuclear force is a good idea.

Without a doubt NATO would release every single nuke needed to make sure Russia can't launch another missile. We'd take tremendous damage and introduce a possibility of nuclear winter, but we aren't going to sit around and wonder what other targets Russia has in mind. So yeah, we'd blast them back before the first nukes even landed.

Interesting. And what would be your suggestions on the nuclear missiles that are based on Russian submarines that are wandering somewhere in the ocean?

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#855

Post by agapon » Thu, May 12, 2022, 7:56 PM UTC

MomoXenosaga wrote: post #520

sorokod wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a proxy war between Russia and NATO That is not how people of Ukraine see this.

Was the American war of independence in 1776 a proxy war between England and France? Probably. But it doesn't change the fact that the colonies wanted to be free.

I'd add that there is continuum of options to provide support to a party of a war: from zero support to joining the war in full force as an ally. At which point the support amounts to a proxy war is up to a debate.

Also, I think that it does matter who started the war. Those who are fighting, those who provide support or neither of them (that is, the other party of the war).

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#856

Post by agapon » Thu, May 12, 2022, 7:59 PM UTC

xdennis wrote: post #351

KptMarchewa wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would NATO ships do there? "Balancing" would only make sense if NATO was directly a part of the conflict.

Romania and Bulgaria only have access to the Black Sea. My understanding is that if a Romanian warship goes to a military exercise in the Mediterranean, then it won't be allowed to return, just like Russian ships can't.

Read about Montreux Convention. Ships are allowed to return to their home ports.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#857

Post by jacquesm » Thu, May 12, 2022, 8:01 PM UTC

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #816

jacquesm wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In principle nothing, but in practice NATO has shown considerable restraint so far and I see no reason why they would suddenly and catastrophically deviate from that. So unless Russia uses nuclear weapons first - which they have threatened now multiple times - I do not see this or any other conflict NATO is involved in escalate to nuclear. NATO has never publicly committed to a NFU policy because that would weaken th…

Russia also has not committed to a NFU policy. In fact, they have explicitly stated that, if Russia's survival is threatened (such as, you're rolling tanks over their border), then nukes are in play. Of course, the problem is that Putin has a very expansive idea of "what threatens Russia"...

Putins ideas of what threatens Russia are not rooted in reality.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#858

Post by agapon » Thu, May 12, 2022, 8:06 PM UTC

weberer wrote: post #571

catchmilk wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an old article (22/2). Ever since, he has several times refused to back the EU on sanctions and instead adopted a very selfish/nationalist stance. He went as far as to declare Zelensky an opponent after winning the election[0]. Hungary is on the wrong side of the conflict at this point in history. [0] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60977917

Hungary has backed all sanctions against Russia except oil, which Hungary relies too heavily on. So far, Hungary has accepted 700,000 refugees from Ukraine. There's really no evidence that he supports Russia's invasion, or that he would veto Finland and Sweden's application to NATO. It really seems like some people here don't like him due to unrelated policy reasons and just want to drum up negative sentiment.

At the same time, Hungary did not allow transfer of military aid to Ukraine thorough or over its territory. Not speaking of providing any military aid of its own.

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#859

Post by watwut » Thu, May 12, 2022, 8:07 PM UTC

maratc wrote: post #834

tyleo wrote: post #684

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think folks wanted to maintain that wise policy. Even in the days leading up to the war Ukraine dismissed the fact that Russia would attack as fear mongering. The problem is that Russia has now proven themselves an untrustable party. "Keep the status quo and we won't attack," they say but now they are attacking Ukraine anyways. What do you do if you are Finland? You want to make peace, you want to maintain nonaggre…

> "Keep the status quo and we won't attack," they say but now they are attacking Ukraine anyways. This does not fit my understanding. In my understanding, Ukraine doubles down on NATO membership, and Russia attacks. Am I missing something? Somewhere between 2014 and 2022 Ukraine denounced its NATO aspirations? In no way I condone the Russian attack, but I also can't see how they're "untrustable".

In what way did Ukraine doubled down? What exact step made it more likely?

Re: Finland will seek NATO membership immediately

#860

Post by Kim_Bruning » Thu, May 12, 2022, 8:11 PM UTC

Kiro wrote: post #776

ssl232 wrote: post #712

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct, I rarely bother to start debates on topics I know will be controversial here any more. This one being an exception I now slightly regret. HN used to be able to debate without emotion but in the past few years it's more or less disappeared. I am still open to having my mind changed but we rarely get far enough before the downvote brigade find these threads.

The comment I linked is from 2008. This is nothing new. You also might want to have a look at the guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > Please don't post comments saying that HN is turning into Reddit. It's a semi-noob illusion, as old as the hills. > Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, bots, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usuall…

Did you mean to quote:

"Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. "

And I typically agree with that, except in this instance I decided to make a brief comment, because I disagreed with you somewhat strongly.

There's nothing in the actual guidelines about downvoting for disagreement; though the balance of the HN guidelines seem to be in favor of commenting in reply to a thoughtful comment. "Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. " ... and ... "Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something. "

What can be less thoughtful, substantive, or deep than a naked downvote?