Ukraine wants in to NATO

[Flopper]

Huh? What are those military contribution requirements? I believe Finland is considered militarily superior to Estonia and according to this link it's not really close. I can't think of a single "requirement" that Finland doesn't meet to join NATO.

Compare Finland vs Estonia War 2022 🛡Military-Firepower - WikiVia

Compare Estonia vs Finland by the military and firepower 🛡. Which country is stronger in 2024?

via.wiki

They probable are considering they about 4 times the size of Estonia with a much higher GDP
The military requirement of NATO is 2% of GDP going to defends. Estonia is only 5 countries that have meet that requirement.

 

[HappyJoy]

They probable are considering they about 4 times the size of Estonia with a much higher GDP
The military requirement of NATO is 2% of GDP going to defends. Estonia is only 5 countries that have meet that requirement.

So, to be clear a country with a higher GDP and a better military doesn't meet NATO requirements!?

To be clear Finland is pretty competitive with current NATO members hitting 1.96% this year. I understand if you think they shouldn't be a member due to their border, but I'm not sure why we have to make up other reasons.

 

[Flopper]

Populations have been disarmed before. No doubt there will be no peace until that happens. Much depends on what lines Putin wants to draw. How much will he annex into Russia? I guess we'll see.

what happens after the war in Ukraine depends a lot on the number of Russians supporters that exist in the Ukraine. If Putin is true to his word and recognizes the new separatist nation of Russian separatists, there will be significantly less Russian supporters in the Ukraine. That could be bad new for a Russian puppet running the country.

 

[Rambunctious]

Only a fraction of the population has fled. Every building that has both combatants and non-combatants are using human shields. That's on Zelensky. He mobilized them, armed them, then sent them to civilian dwelling with the expectation of fighting. He did not give them uniforms, organize them into units, or quarter them separate from innocent civilians. The intent was to turn the cities into meat grinders that every inch is paid in blood. The Russians have no obligation to do so. Regardless of if they are the aggressor or not.

We do not look kindly on any one else that uses human shields, why is this different? It's sickening to see how fast and easy it is for people to blindly accept double standards and hypocrisy because the media tells them to.

A "Human Shield" only works if the innocents are visible to the interested parties and they aren't...these people are in their homes watching CNN probably and boom.... you have zero proof that the Ukrainians are knowingly using human shield's.... army's that utilize human shields usually use buildings for weapons storage...we know that's not the case by the aftermath of each target...or they are using buildings for anti-aircraft weapons and targeting...we also know that's untrue...
And if you ever run across a world history book...take a look at Russia's other past invasions...this is what they do...they demoralize the enemy by killing anyone and everyone until a surrender is signed....

 

[Rambunctious]

Only a fraction of the population has fled. Every building that has both combatants and non-combatants are using human shields. That's on Zelensky. He mobilized them, armed them, then sent them to civilian dwelling with the expectation of fighting. He did not give them uniforms, organize them into units, or quarter them separate from innocent civilians. The intent was to turn the cities into meat grinders that every inch is paid in blood. The Russians have no obligation to do so. Regardless of if they are the aggressor or not.

We do not look kindly on any one else that uses human shields, why is this different? It's sickening to see how fast and easy it is for people to blindly accept double standards and hypocrisy because the media tells them to.

Russia has just bombed a nuke plant...Putin has no conscience...it would be suicide to block targets with humans when Rusia is firing at you.... that only works on nations that care about innocent human life...

 

[Flopper]

So, to be clear a country with a higher GDP and a better military doesn't meet NATO requirements!?

To be clear Finland is pretty competitive with current NATO members hitting 1.96% this year. I understand if you think they shouldn't be a member due to their border, but I'm not sure why we have to make up other reasons.

No, a country has to pledge to spend 2% of their GDP on defense. One of the things NATO considers is whether new members will be able meet the requirement.

The main impediment to Finland joining NATO is Finland itself. It has a significant financial investment in maintaining a good relationship with Russia, treaties the go back up to 60 years, cross border investments, and 15% of Finnish export going to Russia. Unlike most of the NATO countries, there are no Russian missiles aimed at their country and they would like to keep it that way. Finland probably has a much better relationship with Russia than the US has with Mexico and I think they would like to keep it that way also.

 

[Rambunctious]

War crimes are being ignored by the world again and we have a senile coward as a president being led by IVY league dumbasses....
Innocents are being killed and now a nuke plant is blown up...war crimes....

 

[Rogue AI]

A "Human Shield" only works if the innocents are visible to the interested parties and they aren't...these people are in their homes watching CNN probably and boom.... you have zero proof that the Ukrainians are knowingly using human shield's.... army's that utilize human shields usually use buildings for weapons storage...we know that's not the case by the aftermath of each target...or they are using buildings for anti-aircraft weapons and targeting...we also know that's untrue...
And if you ever run across a world history book...take a look at Russia's other past invasions...this is what they do...they demoralize the enemy by killing anyone and everyone until a surrender is signed....

Ukraine is actively mixing it's combants and civilians in their cities. That's the same premise. No mental gymnastics changes that.

Russia does what everyone has done for thousands of years, break their enemy's will to fight. That is how you end an insurgency before it begins. You might want to check how the US fought when we actually won wars.

 

[Flopper]

How much of Ukraine could Putin reasonably expect to occupy?

Ukraine is about same size as Afghanistan and their occupation there didn't work to well. Two thirds of the population of Ukraine live in rural areas are small towns. Small cities, towns and villages pepper the plains and mountainous areas with only about half dozen cites with population of over a million.

 

[HappyJoy]

No, a country has to pledge to spend 2% of their GDP on defense. One of the things NATO considers is whether new members will be able meet the requirement.

That's not true. Currently not all members of NATO contribute 2%. Some have pledged, some do but it's not a requirement. And for a country that is only off by .04% before even joining that's not disqualifying.

The main impediment to Finland joining NATO is Finland itself.

So, now we're backing away from Finland not meeting these made up requirements to Finland doesn't want to. Except recent polling shows that their citizens are in favor and their government is going to be debating the issue. I'm not saying what side they will come down on but to say there is no interest simply isn't true.

Neutral Finns and Swedes reconsider idea of NATO membership

A change in public opinion in steadfastly neutral Finland and Sweden has taken place since Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

www.npr.org

It has a significant financial investment in maintaining a good relationship with Russia, treaties the go back up to 60 years, cross border investments, and 15% of Finnish export going to Russia. Unlike most of the NATO countries, there are no Russian missiles aimed at their country and they would like to keep it that way. Finland probably has a much better relationship with Russia than the US has with Mexico and I think they would like to keep it that way also.

Everyone in Europe, especially a country like Germany has a financial incentive to maintain relations with Russia. Have you not been paying attention to how current events are impacting that?

There are probably no nuclear missiles aimed at Estonia either but they joined. Same with Latvia, same with Denmark and I don't Iceland. A lot of countries in NATO are not directly a threat to Russia, even in Russia's eyes.

Finland probably has a much better relationship with Russia than the US does with Mexico? Is Mexico openly questioning entering to a pact with Russia? No. Anyway, Finland (and Sweden) has broken from it's tradition of remaining neutral and is supplying Ukraine with support. If Finland was super concerned about it they would stay out...like Mexico is

I get it, you don't want Finland to be in NATO, but making shit up isn't helping your argument.

 

[Flopper]

That's not true. Currently not all members of NATO contribute 2%. Some have pledged, some do but it's not a requirement. And for a country that is only off by .04% before even joining that's not disqualifying.



So, now we're backing away from Finland not meeting these made up requirements to Finland doesn't want to. Except recent polling shows that their citizens are in favor and their government is going to be debating the issue. I'm not saying what side they will come down on but to say there is no interest simply isn't true.

Neutral Finns and Swedes reconsider idea of NATO membership

A change in public opinion in steadfastly neutral Finland and Sweden has taken place since Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

www.npr.org

Everyone in Europe, especially a country like Germany has a financial incentive to maintain relations with Russia. Have you not been paying attention to how current events are impacting that?

There are probably no nuclear missiles aimed at Estonia either but they joined. Same with Latvia, same with Denmark and I don't Iceland. A lot of countries in NATO are not directly a threat to Russia, even in Russia's eyes.

Finland probably has a much better relationship with Russia than the US does with Mexico? Is Mexico openly questioning entering to a pact with Russia? No. Anyway, Finland (and Sweden) has broken from it's tradition of remaining neutral and is supplying Ukraine with support. If Finland was super concerned about it they would stay out...like Mexico is

I get it, you don't want Finland to be in NATO, but making shit up isn't helping your argument.

First, I did not say NATO members pay the 2%. I said new members pledge to pay it. Pay attention.

I don't care what Finland does in regard to NATO. What I am saying is it makes no sense whatsoever for them to joint NATO and create an adversarial relationship with Russia where none exist now. What exactly would they gain from from a NATO membership? Unlike Ukraine they have a long and good relationship with Russia. There has not been any confrontation with the Russians in over 80 years.

At this point in time, I seriously doubt NATO nor the US would welcome Finland into NATO. Putin has shown he is willing to go to war to stop a NATO expansion. What is most important is not to box in Putin so he feels he has no choice but to attack NATO.

 

[Rigby5]

Actually I have a low opinion of the Ukraine.
Historically they are a combination of the corrupt Polish aristocracy, and the Zaporizhian Cossacks.
They not only sided with Hitler in WWII, but ran the death camps.
In 2012, the World Court also ruled against them for stealing $20 billion of oil and gas from the Russian pipelines. Joining NATO would have been like Soviet nukes in Cuba. Russia had little choice in my opinion.
The Ukraine should have paid their debt by giving up Donetsk and Crimea.
But THEY cut off negotiations instead.
I see little hope for their continued existence anymore.

 

[HappyJoy]

First, I did not say NATO members pay the 2%. I said new members pledge to pay it. Pay attention.

I am. Is this a requirement to enter NATO? Great time to provide a link. This is what NATO says:

FAQ

www.nato.int

Q: What are the conditions for joining NATO? Which countries are eligible?​

A: NATO has an open door policy with regard to enlargement. Any European country in a position to further the principles of the Washington Treaty and contribute to security in the Euro-Atlantic area can become a member of the Alliance at the invitation of the North Atlantic Council.​

​

Countries aspiring for NATO membership are also expected to meet certain political, economic and military goals in order to ensure that they will become contributors to Alliance security as well as beneficiaries of it.​

​

NATO's Membership Action Plan (MAP) is designed to assist aspirant partner countries in their preparations by providing a framework which enables NATO to channel assistance and practical support to them on all aspects of NATO membership.​

​

For more information, please see: NATO enlargement​

Looks like all they have to do is contribute to security in their area. Well, since Finland spends more than most countries as a percentage of GDP on defense then I guess they are passed that hurdle.

I don't care what Finland does in regard to NATO.

Really? You were just telling me that they weren't interested in joining NATO, now you don't seem to care what Finland thinks. Weird. I really wish you'd stick to an argument.

What I am saying is it makes no sense whatsoever for them to joint NATO and create an adversarial relationship with Russia where none exist now.

Oh, now were speaking for Finland. It would seem to me that Finland would continue to not supply one side with aide as they usually do. That's not the case now, they are openly helping Ukraine and have expressed interest in the possibility of joining NATO. You don't seem to be able to accommodate this new information.

What exactly would they gain from from a NATO membership?

Peace on their continent.

Unlike Ukraine they have a long and good relationship with Russia. There has not been any confrontation with the Russians in over 80 years.

Again, they chose sides and it wasn't Russia.

 

[Rigby5]

I am. Is this a requirement to enter NATO? Great time to provide a link. This is what NATO says:

FAQ

www.nato.int

Q: What are the conditions for joining NATO? Which countries are eligible?​

A: NATO has an open door policy with regard to enlargement. Any European country in a position to further the principles of the Washington Treaty and contribute to security in the Euro-Atlantic area can become a member of the Alliance at the invitation of the North Atlantic Council.​

​

Countries aspiring for NATO membership are also expected to meet certain political, economic and military goals in order to ensure that they will become contributors to Alliance security as well as beneficiaries of it.​

​

NATO's Membership Action Plan (MAP) is designed to assist aspirant partner countries in their preparations by providing a framework which enables NATO to channel assistance and practical support to them on all aspects of NATO membership.​

​

For more information, please see: NATO enlargement​

Looks like all they have to do is contribute to security in their area. Well, since Finland spends more than most countries as a percentage of GDP on defense then I guess they are passed that hurdle.



Really? You were just telling me that they weren't interested in joining NATO, now you don't seem to care what Finland thinks. Weird. I really wish you'd stick to an argument.



Oh, now were speaking for Finland. It would seem to me that Finland would continue to not supply one side with aide as they usually do. That's not the case now, they are openly helping Ukraine and have expressed interest in the possibility of joining NATO. You don't seem to be able to accommodate this new information.



Peace on their continent.

Again, they chose sides and it wasn't Russia.

Any country bordering Russia is strategic to Russia, and just like with the US Monroe Doctrine, Russia has a valid strategic interest in preventing NATO membership on their border.
It would be like Soviet nukes in Cuba.
It is not going to happen.
Remember, Russia lost 39 million people in WWII, and they are never going to let something like that from ever happening again.

 

[HappyJoy]

Any country bordering Russia is strategic to Russia, and just like with the Monroe Doctrine, Russia has a valid strategic interest in preventing NATO membership on their border.
It would be like Soviet nukes in Cuba.
It is not going to happen.
Remember, Russia lost 39 million people in WWII, and they are never going to let something like that from ever happening again.

Hey, guess what Putin apologist. Russia doesn't write the rules for NATO. There are already NATO countries that border Russia so you missed that train.

Also, NATO does not equal Nazis and the douche in Moscow knows that.

Whether it were to ever happen or not I do not know, but I'm not interested in your weird fucked up views of the world.

 

[Rigby5]

Hey, guess what Putin apologist. Russia doesn't write the rules for NATO. There are already NATO countries that border Russia so you missed that train.

Also, NATO does not equal Nazis and the douche in Moscow knows that.

Whether it were to ever happen or not I do not know, but I'm not interested in your weird fucked up views of the world.

Who cares about rules?
I am saying that just like the US blockaded Cuba over nukes too close, so will Russia.
They would be idiots not to.

And yes, NATO does equal Nazi, since NATO has been illegally invading countries like Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, etc.

And no, Finland has not joined NATO.
Poland has, but with the agreement that no nukes.

 

[AntonToo]

If you want a nuclear war....sure let them into NATO


If you don't want a nuclear war .....don't. As simple as that.

Yep, remember the nuclear war that happened when countries on Russian border named Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania joined NATO?

It's just going to happen agai...oh wait.

 

[Rigby5]

Yep, remember the nuclear war that happened when countries on Russian border named Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania joined NATO?

It's just go to happen agai...oh wait.

Good point.
I was unaware they had joined.

 

[HappyJoy]

Who cares about rules?
I am saying that just like the US blockaded Cuba over nukes too close, so will Russia.
They would be idiots not to.

They look like idiots right now.

And yes, NATO does equal Nazi, since NATO has been illegally invading countries like Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, etc.

And Russia doesn't? Anyway, nobody is perfect but I can guarantee you democracies tend to treat others better than authoritarian regimes.

And no, Finland has not joined NATO.

Nobody said they did.

Poland has, but with the agreement that no nukes.

Who is talking about nukes? Christ with the constant goal posts. Anyway, Poland isn't the only NATO country bordering Russia.

Also. maybe Poland and Ukraine and other countries have the right not to live next to Russia with nukes. Why do you overlook their views in favor of Putin's?

 

[Rigby5]

And Russia doesn't? Anyway, nobody is perfect but I can guarantee you democracies tend to treat others better than authoritarian regimes.

No, the US is about the most authoritarian country in the world.
A real democracy does not need or want that much military, and we also have the largest % imprisoned in the world.
We have tons of illegal legislation, like the War on Drugs, mandated sentences, asset forfeiture, no-knock-warrants, etc., that are used to destroy political dissent. And the 2 parties that are allowed are totally fake.
We have slaughtered millions of innocents who never harmed us at all.