10 ms·

President: Finland Will Join NATO by July – Yle Uutiset

20 points by voisin 4y ago

sorokod 4y ago
A reminder of the scale of self harm the "special military operation" is.
- purututu 4y ago
  In these days of civilization which country and which cross-country organizations are _not_ running "special military operations"??
  - sorokod 4y ago
    "specifically military operation" was the name the Russian Federation used when it was hoping for quick and glorious little war. RF is using it now because it dares not call it what it really is as it has all sorts of unpleasant implication. Are you really asking which countries are at war in Europe at the moment?
    - purututu 4y ago
      That wasn't the point of my message.
    - gus_massa 4y ago
      > Are you really asking which countries are at war in Europe at the moment? Perhaps it was a worldwide question, not only Europe. Also war has become too formal and require a lot of paperwork, so countries have been using weird names while bombing other countries. I guess the GP didn't care about the exact name.
      - sorokod 4y ago
        Perhaps, but then the question makes no sense when the context is the strengthening of NATO which is against the interests of the RF.
        purututu 4y ago
        For me it does make tones of sense as I, as a European, have understood that NATO is not a peace bringing organization. They _are_ interested and motivated by war. NATO is not my friend.
        gus_massa 4y ago
        NATO is a "If you don't want to be invaded by the Soviet Union, hire a friend with nuclear weapons." organization. There are some interesting questions like how much in the entry and annual fee to keep the friendship.
        purututu 4y ago
        you are putting NATO in a very nice light, which to my eyes it doesn't deserve. there are many example for it of breaking international laws, i.e. in Cosovo. it helps breaking down the world in black and white to understand complex matters, but I wouldn't exactly paint the NATO white.
        sorokod 4y ago
        Finland and Sweden are keen to join Nato. What is their motivation in your opinion?
        purututu 4y ago
        I'd love to know the reason why they want to join! I would assume through some sort of pressure, but I am only guessing now.
        gus_massa 4y ago
        I don't discard pressure because Americans do that all the time. Anyway, for Finland, they lost 9% of their territory in 1940 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War and they may be afraid of other invasion. For Sweden I have no idea. But after playing a Risk-like game with ships for too many years while I was young, I think that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotland is a nice place.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
goodSteveramos 4y ago
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/1/30/erdogan-says-turkey-may-accept-finland-in-nato-but-not-sweden https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/1/30/erdogan-says-turkey... This is non-news. Turkey is holding up Sweden and Finland for nonsense reasons. Probably some kind of behind the scenes politics going on. Finland saying they ‘think’ it will happen means nothing.
- webmobdev 4y ago
  The real "nonsense" is their claim that they want to join the NATO. It's just posturing and they do not want to join NATO and give up their "neutrality". If Sweden was serious about it, the Swedish government wouldn't have allowed the Quran burning incident to happen knowing it would cause genuine outrage among the Turkish (who have a large population of muslims). Finland is also trying to weasel itself out by saying that it will join NATO only if Sweden joins it.
  - NicoJuicy 4y ago
    You heard about the Quran incident, but aren't aware of the Russians behind it?
    - NicoJuicy 4y ago
      Or that Finland discussed joining NATO without Sweden? https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/finland-discuss-nato-ratification-that-may-leave-sweden-behind-2023-02-10/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/finland-discuss-nato-ra... I mean, you're seems unknowing ( and that's very lightly put). Since Finland and Sweden very clearly applied NATO membership together and now Finland actually wants to join NATO without Sweden because of Turkey. You're timeline of things is way off. What are the news sources you're following for this opinion? I'm really curious.
      - webmobdev 4y ago
        Or rather, you only read western propaganda, while I read both western, Russian & Chinese propaganda too to get the whole picture. Finland is considering joining NATO without Sweden. Their political process is yet to put forward a concrete decision on this matter. The Finnish Prime Minister is pushing the idea of Finland joining NATO without Sweden as they have a Parliamentary election in April this year. Obviously the opposition wouldn't like the government to benefit from that so they aren't sure if they should support this. There are some reasonable objections to this idea from other Finnish politicians (who consider the matter on the merit of the subject than from opportunistic politics) because without Sweden in NATO, Finland will have to spend more for the defence of the Baltics. Militarily too, in case NATO needs to, Finland cannot effectively block the Gulf of Finland if the Swedes are not on board (and if they are not in NATO, and remain "neutral", they are highly unlikely to participate in any such military endeavour). As for the "Russians behind the Quran burning in Sweden" idea, that may be true. And yet that doesn't in any way matter to what I pointed out - the Swedes were very well aware that the Quran burning had been planned, and yet they didn't do anything to prevent it. Which means they allowed it with a deliberate intention to sabotage the process - either because they were pressured by the EU to announce they would join NATO to rattle Russia or they do not want to join NATO or because they aren't willing to accept the conditions imposed on them by Turkey (who wants them to end support for "terrorists" and hand many of them over to Turkey). (This is a conclusion purely drawn by me - Unlike Finland, which has around 75% support now for joining NATO, only 60% of Swedens are in favour of joining NATO. So perhaps Swedish politicians think they can handle the backlash if Sweden is unable to join NATO. Especially if they can use Islamophobia and blame Turkey.) We'll know for sure about Finland only between April to July of this year.
sashenka 4y ago
[dead]

20 points by voisin 4y ago

sorokod 4y ago

A reminder of the scale of self harm the "special military operation" is.

purututu 4y ago
In these days of civilization which country and which cross-country organizations are _not_ running "special military operations"??
- sorokod 4y ago
  "specifically military operation" was the name the Russian Federation used when it was hoping for quick and glorious little war. RF is using it now because it dares not call it what it really is as it has all sorts of unpleasant implication. Are you really asking which countries are at war in Europe at the moment?
  - purututu 4y ago
    That wasn't the point of my message.
  - gus_massa 4y ago
    > Are you really asking which countries are at war in Europe at the moment? Perhaps it was a worldwide question, not only Europe. Also war has become too formal and require a lot of paperwork, so countries have been using weird names while bombing other countries. I guess the GP didn't care about the exact name.
    - sorokod 4y ago
      Perhaps, but then the question makes no sense when the context is the strengthening of NATO which is against the interests of the RF.
      - purututu 4y ago
        For me it does make tones of sense as I, as a European, have understood that NATO is not a peace bringing organization. They _are_ interested and motivated by war. NATO is not my friend.
        gus_massa 4y ago
        NATO is a "If you don't want to be invaded by the Soviet Union, hire a friend with nuclear weapons." organization. There are some interesting questions like how much in the entry and annual fee to keep the friendship.
        purututu 4y ago
        you are putting NATO in a very nice light, which to my eyes it doesn't deserve. there are many example for it of breaking international laws, i.e. in Cosovo. it helps breaking down the world in black and white to understand complex matters, but I wouldn't exactly paint the NATO white.
        sorokod 4y ago
        Finland and Sweden are keen to join Nato. What is their motivation in your opinion?
        purututu 4y ago
        I'd love to know the reason why they want to join! I would assume through some sort of pressure, but I am only guessing now.
        gus_massa 4y ago
        I don't discard pressure because Americans do that all the time. Anyway, for Finland, they lost 9% of their territory in 1940 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War and they may be afraid of other invasion. For Sweden I have no idea. But after playing a Risk-like game with ships for too many years while I was young, I think that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotland is a nice place.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

goodSteveramos 4y ago

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/1/30/erdogan-says-turkey-may-accept-finland-in-nato-but-not-sweden https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/1/30/erdogan-says-turkey... This is non-news. Turkey is holding up Sweden and Finland for nonsense reasons. Probably some kind of behind the scenes politics going on. Finland saying they ‘think’ it will happen means nothing.

webmobdev 4y ago
The real "nonsense" is their claim that they want to join the NATO. It's just posturing and they do not want to join NATO and give up their "neutrality". If Sweden was serious about it, the Swedish government wouldn't have allowed the Quran burning incident to happen knowing it would cause genuine outrage among the Turkish (who have a large population of muslims). Finland is also trying to weasel itself out by saying that it will join NATO only if Sweden joins it.
- NicoJuicy 4y ago
  You heard about the Quran incident, but aren't aware of the Russians behind it?
  - NicoJuicy 4y ago
    Or that Finland discussed joining NATO without Sweden? https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/finland-discuss-nato-ratification-that-may-leave-sweden-behind-2023-02-10/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/finland-discuss-nato-ra... I mean, you're seems unknowing ( and that's very lightly put). Since Finland and Sweden very clearly applied NATO membership together and now Finland actually wants to join NATO without Sweden because of Turkey. You're timeline of things is way off. What are the news sources you're following for this opinion? I'm really curious.
    - webmobdev 4y ago
      Or rather, you only read western propaganda, while I read both western, Russian & Chinese propaganda too to get the whole picture. Finland is considering joining NATO without Sweden. Their political process is yet to put forward a concrete decision on this matter. The Finnish Prime Minister is pushing the idea of Finland joining NATO without Sweden as they have a Parliamentary election in April this year. Obviously the opposition wouldn't like the government to benefit from that so they aren't sure if they should support this. There are some reasonable objections to this idea from other Finnish politicians (who consider the matter on the merit of the subject than from opportunistic politics) because without Sweden in NATO, Finland will have to spend more for the defence of the Baltics. Militarily too, in case NATO needs to, Finland cannot effectively block the Gulf of Finland if the Swedes are not on board (and if they are not in NATO, and remain "neutral", they are highly unlikely to participate in any such military endeavour). As for the "Russians behind the Quran burning in Sweden" idea, that may be true. And yet that doesn't in any way matter to what I pointed out - the Swedes were very well aware that the Quran burning had been planned, and yet they didn't do anything to prevent it. Which means they allowed it with a deliberate intention to sabotage the process - either because they were pressured by the EU to announce they would join NATO to rattle Russia or they do not want to join NATO or because they aren't willing to accept the conditions imposed on them by Turkey (who wants them to end support for "terrorists" and hand many of them over to Turkey). (This is a conclusion purely drawn by me - Unlike Finland, which has around 75% support now for joining NATO, only 60% of Swedens are in favour of joining NATO. So perhaps Swedish politicians think they can handle the backlash if Sweden is unable to join NATO. Especially if they can use Islamophobia and blame Turkey.) We'll know for sure about Finland only between April to July of this year.

sashenka 4y ago

[dead]