7 ms·

As far as I know, no Scandinavian country has joined NATO recently. Yes, there are discussions in Sweden, and even more in Finland, but that is not the same as

As far as I know, no Scandinavian country has joined NATO recently. Yes, there are discussions in Sweden, and even more in Finland, but that is not the same as actually applying for a membership. Such things take time. And I am not quite so sure about Ukraine being already lost.

baq 5y ago
I understand that and you’re of course right. This has been perhaps unwarranted hyperbole on my part. The fact is though, this topic was basically inexistent in any public discourse anywhere and as good as unthinkable. It isn’t anymore and that in itself is a tectonic shift.
celticninja 5y ago
Sweden and Finland are on approved list to join, they literally just have to put in the paperwork.
phire 5y ago
Sweden and Finland essentially have a pact, that they will both join or not join NATO together.
- morpheos137 5y ago
  - m348e912 5y ago
    Sorry that you're being downvoted for an unpopular take. Here is an interesting article from an economic forecaster, Martin Armstrong, that underlines some of the dirty dealings that lead us to where we are with this conflict. https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/russia/the-real-backdrop-nobody-will-discuss/ https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/russia... *PS can someone please upvote so HN isn't a constant echo-chamber PPS well that went well
    - kmonsen 5y ago
      There a lots of these articles now on why it is really the west's fault for not giving Putin whatever he wanted. This is deeply disrespectful to the Ukrainian people fighting a defensive war against a brutal dictator that kills his own people without second thoughts. When you see a bully walking around the classroom punching other kids we should not think wait we must look at both sides of the story. I am sure the bully needs and deserves help, but right now lets address the kids getting punched. Neither NATO nor EU has tried to force countries to join, in fact they often reject applications. They exists because the US is willing to provide security guarantees to smaller countries without interfering in their domestic agenda. For example Norway just joined the anti-nuclear weapon group as an observer. The US was not a fan at all, but did not try to block it.
      - raxxorrax 5y ago
        The involvement of the west was questionable. Ukraine had a revolution that purged a pro-Russian government. The west should never have been involved after the government changed. Because now the obvious accusation is that it facilitated that change and some leaked info from the Bush government could very well hint at that as they wanted to influence who would become part of a new government. That would not be unusual for the US, on the contrary it is pretty much by the playbook of facilitated regime changes. And such influence is certainly not in the interest of the people that primarily rose up against corruption.
    - penultimatename 5y ago
      This reads more like an unsourced, conspiratorial rant than an educated analysis of NATO expansion. He managed to hit: - Netflix won't host his movie that is a one-sided defence of his $700M fraud conviction, equates it to cancel culture - The Clintons are to blame - The Clintons wanted to "take over" Russia after the fall of the USSR - NATO isn't a defensive alliance because it "moves in aggressive ways" - The emergence of the LPR and DPR was totally just a self determined act and had nothing to do with a Russian invasion Repeating Putin talking points and engaging in whataboutism doesn't make for a meaningful analysis.

baq 5y ago

I understand that and you’re of course right. This has been perhaps unwarranted hyperbole on my part. The fact is though, this topic was basically inexistent in any public discourse anywhere and as good as unthinkable. It isn’t anymore and that in itself is a tectonic shift.

celticninja 5y ago

Sweden and Finland are on approved list to join, they literally just have to put in the paperwork.

phire 5y ago

Sweden and Finland essentially have a pact, that they will both join or not join NATO together.

morpheos137 5y ago
- m348e912 5y ago
  Sorry that you're being downvoted for an unpopular take. Here is an interesting article from an economic forecaster, Martin Armstrong, that underlines some of the dirty dealings that lead us to where we are with this conflict. https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/russia/the-real-backdrop-nobody-will-discuss/ https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/russia... *PS can someone please upvote so HN isn't a constant echo-chamber PPS well that went well
  - kmonsen 5y ago
    There a lots of these articles now on why it is really the west's fault for not giving Putin whatever he wanted. This is deeply disrespectful to the Ukrainian people fighting a defensive war against a brutal dictator that kills his own people without second thoughts. When you see a bully walking around the classroom punching other kids we should not think wait we must look at both sides of the story. I am sure the bully needs and deserves help, but right now lets address the kids getting punched. Neither NATO nor EU has tried to force countries to join, in fact they often reject applications. They exists because the US is willing to provide security guarantees to smaller countries without interfering in their domestic agenda. For example Norway just joined the anti-nuclear weapon group as an observer. The US was not a fan at all, but did not try to block it.
    - raxxorrax 5y ago
      The involvement of the west was questionable. Ukraine had a revolution that purged a pro-Russian government. The west should never have been involved after the government changed. Because now the obvious accusation is that it facilitated that change and some leaked info from the Bush government could very well hint at that as they wanted to influence who would become part of a new government. That would not be unusual for the US, on the contrary it is pretty much by the playbook of facilitated regime changes. And such influence is certainly not in the interest of the people that primarily rose up against corruption.
  - penultimatename 5y ago
    This reads more like an unsourced, conspiratorial rant than an educated analysis of NATO expansion. He managed to hit: - Netflix won't host his movie that is a one-sided defence of his $700M fraud conviction, equates it to cancel culture - The Clintons are to blame - The Clintons wanted to "take over" Russia after the fall of the USSR - NATO isn't a defensive alliance because it "moves in aggressive ways" - The emergence of the LPR and DPR was totally just a self determined act and had nothing to do with a Russian invasion Repeating Putin talking points and engaging in whataboutism doesn't make for a meaningful analysis.