3 ms·

> Okay well the Chinese model of silently building up the capabilities to do that is one way to approach the issue. Sure, but you also can't help chaotic, rand

> Okay well the Chinese model of silently building up the capabilities to do that is one way to approach the issue. Sure, but you also can't help chaotic, random events taking place that make any potential plans to do that go up in smoke. The alternative in this specific issue (i.e. not standing up to Russia) is likely just further dependency on oil/natural gas from Russia and eventually just being outright colonized because you are so dependent that you can't resist. Dropping off even at a high cost protects Estonian sovereignty.

jgilias 4y ago
If it was _just_ getting colonized, that's one thing. The alternative for Baltics is not that benign. See Mariupol, Buchi, Irpin, etc, etc, etc...
- vogre 4y ago
  Why not see Armenia or even modern Georgia, who don't use aggressive rhetorics on Russia, don't deploy NATO weapons and feel okay?
  - ericmay 4y ago
    Mainly because in the case of Estonia, for example, they don't use aggressive rhetoric toward Russia but are threatened anyway. Finland has continuously been threatened during this time despite 70+ years of balancing both the Soviet Union and NATO and while more culturally compatible with NATO they spent a lot of effort to be friendly and neutral with the USSR. Georgia was invaded in 2008 [1]. > don't deploy NATO weapons and feel okay? Estonia and other countries near Russia historically didn't really have a ton of NATO weapons deployments specifically because NATO wasn't intent on aggravating Russia. Training exercises from time to time because they're allies but that's about it. Troop buildups and weapons deployments have strictly been in response to the war in Ukraine which was launched by Russia. Sovereign states have the right under international law (law that Russia signed by the way) to choose their own defense arrangements and conduct their own affairs. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War
  - Mvandenbergh 4y ago
    In the case of Georgia, that must be a definition of "feel ok" that I've not encountered before.

jgilias 4y ago

If it was _just_ getting colonized, that's one thing. The alternative for Baltics is not that benign. See Mariupol, Buchi, Irpin, etc, etc, etc...

vogre 4y ago
Why not see Armenia or even modern Georgia, who don't use aggressive rhetorics on Russia, don't deploy NATO weapons and feel okay?
- ericmay 4y ago
  Mainly because in the case of Estonia, for example, they don't use aggressive rhetoric toward Russia but are threatened anyway. Finland has continuously been threatened during this time despite 70+ years of balancing both the Soviet Union and NATO and while more culturally compatible with NATO they spent a lot of effort to be friendly and neutral with the USSR. Georgia was invaded in 2008 [1]. > don't deploy NATO weapons and feel okay? Estonia and other countries near Russia historically didn't really have a ton of NATO weapons deployments specifically because NATO wasn't intent on aggravating Russia. Training exercises from time to time because they're allies but that's about it. Troop buildups and weapons deployments have strictly been in response to the war in Ukraine which was launched by Russia. Sovereign states have the right under international law (law that Russia signed by the way) to choose their own defense arrangements and conduct their own affairs. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War
- Mvandenbergh 4y ago
  In the case of Georgia, that must be a definition of "feel ok" that I've not encountered before.