If Sweden and Finland join NATO, Russia will literally go nuclear
- Thread starter YouSayPotato
- Start date
They're already nuclear. Placing nuclear weapons closer to Finland is only an idle threat...
Yeah, I don't get this threat because it's not like they are not reach of Russia's weapons now, and I'm not sure you can trust Russia on the location of weapons anyways, so who's to say they don't already have short range in the area. If anything this stresses why they do need to join.
That's the key issue. This invasion of Ukraine is irrational. So why tweak this madman by bringing Finland and Sweden into NATO now?
The event that started this war was NATO expansion to bring in Ukraine. On Nov. 10, 2021, the Biden administration and Ukraine signed a Charter on Strategic Partnership which asserted America’s support for Ukraine's right to pursue membership into NATO. Putin immediately began planning the invasion of Ukraine. This was reported by the Wall Street Journal months ago. No other newspapers carried the story because it implies that the war is due to yet another blunder by the Biden administration.
Putin had put the world on notice that he will not allow NATO membership for Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, Finland or Sweden, all of which are in varying states of applying for membership. Both Finland and Sweden have had ample opportunity to join NATO over the past 70 years. Both opted for 'neutrality' instead which is code for getting the benefits of NATO without paying their dues. I say we should wait until Russia has a new leader before we allow them to join NATO.
NATO was an excuse to invade Ukraine. Putin has wanted to pull the Ukraine back in for a long time as he wants their resources and ports. To me, the question is whether he would've invaded had they already joined NATO as the counter response would've been much different.
What Putin says doesn't always reflect what his intentions and desires are.
That is not correct. Putin had warned against Ukraine joining NATO for years:
Putin
More Putin
Yet more Putin
WE, as the USA, shouldn't dictate to others how they choose to defend their country.
Free and democratic countries want our help in defending themselves from a murderous, socialist dictator. You're saying the leader of the free world should say no? Why? Doesn't that just enable him? Do we let Putin set the terms here? Doesn't additional members make NATO even stronger?
Of course he did, because if they did join, he wouldn't be able to take them over as easy.
Putin only respects one thing, strength and sometimes, you have to be ready to call his bluff. That's why he waited until Trump was out of office, he knew Trump would be willing to call his bluff.
1. We aren't dictating to any other nation how they choose to defend themselves. Your comment makes no sense.
2. "Free and democratic countries want our help in defending themselves from a murderous, socialist dictator. You're saying the leader of the free world should say no?" Bob, that's already happened. Weeks ago Biden announced that he will not be sending US troops to Ukraine.
3. "Doesn't additional members make NATO even stronger?" Adding additional members to NATO at this time doesn’t strengthen Europe, it further destabilizes the continent. As I said before, Sweden and Finland have had three fourths of a century to join NATO to include throughout the 40-year Cold War. They refused. They thought they could enjoy the security that NATO provides without paying into it. The NATO members have no obligation to bring them in now that they are getting nervous about Russian aggression. Right now, the situation is too volatile to risk provoking Putin into WWIII.
I don't know what the hell is going on, but I agree with Bob.
By us bowing to Russia's demands, we are in fact dictating how other nations should choose to defend themselves. You entire premise is about satisfying Putin by leaving countries dangling to defend themselves. Putin has shown exactly why he wants it that way with his invasion of Ukraine. Now his lack of success there so far may help prevent his actions going forward, but also shows why it's important for countries to be allied and ready to defend against actors such as him.
Find me a source where Trump ever criticized Putin. He simply won't do it. I don't understand why either?
Because Trump was smart enough to know who you can poke and who not to. He also was usually careful to not criticize Kim Jong-Um because unstable people can be unpredictable. Doesn't mean you are not standing up to them, just that you are more careful with your words than people when talking about people who's only power is in their own minds, those people are fun to poke and egg on.
So you bow down and behave obsequiously to our enemies? I just don't buy it. BTW it didn't work to well with Kim Jung Un as nothing has changed with him.
No, both waited until there was a change in our presidency to start acting up again. They know Biden isn't about to actually do anything. He can't even scold them because he can't string two sentences together.
Well, it appears Biden has roped a dope Putin into a complete disaster in Ukraine; hopefully it's the end of him and leads to his downfall which I think we both agree would be fabulous for the world and our country.
I’m sorry, Bill, but this is not correct. Biden didn’t do anything but embolden Putin with his idiotic policies. He signed off on the Nordstream 2 deal prior to all this going down in Ukraine, for instance.
Look, your argument is simply nonsense. We are not bowing to Russia's demands. We are not dictating how other nations should choose to defend themselves. There is nothing to debate when your talking points are gibberish.
We have three distinctly different types of countries here:
(1) Former Warsaw Pact nations that are now members of NATO. These include Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania and East Germany. They all actively pursued NATO membership when the Berlin Wall came down.
(2) Prior to 1991, Ukraine didn't exist as a nation. It was part of the Soviet Union.
(3) Countries that should have joined NATO but opted for 'neutrality': Sweden, Finland, Switzerland, Czech Republic.
With that background, I think we can all see why Ukraine joining NATO is such a point of contention. Look at the turf they have already conceded:
Now is not the time to further destabilize the Russia-NATO interface. Putin has already rattled his nuclear saber at the suggestion that Finland and Sweden may join NATO. Let’s not play ‘chicken’ with him and call his bluff.
Does it matter what Russia wants regarding Ukraine? They have always treated it like complete crap ever since the Russian revolution perhaps in part because it remained loyal to the Czar. Stalin took away all the private farmland and then starved about 4 million people to death even though there was sufficient food to have feed them.Look, your argument is simply nonsense. We are not bowing to Russia's demands. We are not dictating how other nations should choose to defend themselves. There is nothing to debate when your talking points are gibberish.
We have three distinctly different types of countries here:
(1) Former Warsaw Pact nations that are now members of NATO. These include Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania and East Germany. They all actively pursued NATO membership when the Berlin Wall came down.
(2) Prior to 1991, Ukraine didn't exist as a nation. It was part of the Soviet Union.
(3) Countries that should have joined NATO but opted for 'neutrality': Sweden, Finland, Switzerland, Czech Republic.
With that background, I think we can all see why Ukraine joining NATO is such a point of contention. Look at the turf they have already conceded:
Now is not the time to further destabilize the Russia-NATO interface. Putin has already rattled his nuclear saber at the suggestion that Finland and Sweden may join NATO. Let’s not play ‘chicken’ with him and call his bluff.
When Putin talks about the Nazification of Ukraine there were a lot of Ukrainians who supported Germany because of the atrocities that the Soviet Union foisted on the them and thought they might fare better under Germany but unfortunately for Ukraine Hitler was no better. It appears to me Putin is doing what Trump said getting a lot of real estate on the cheap, which has turned out to be no bargain for him.
Russia along with the US guaranteed Ukrainian independence in 1991 when it agreed to give up its nuclear weapons. I say screw Russia and Putin the people in that country don't want to be a part of Russia and they should have the right to continue to exist as its own country and not have Russia and Putin stealing all of its resources.
Last edited:
Bill, I don't disagree with anything that you have said. Nonetheless, back to the issue that this thread is about, this is not the time for Finland and Sweden to join NATO. The door has been open to them for 70+ years and they opted to hold hands and sing Kumbaya instead. Now they're getting nervous but that is not a reason to further destabilize the region.
I'm all in favor of more military and humanitarian aid to Ukraine but bear in mind that Biden assured Putin on Day One that we won't be sending any troops in, so Putin doesn't need to worry about that.
I agree this probably isn't the best time to be poking the bear. Putin's army is already spread pretty thin so it might work out to be the best time for Finland and Sweden in the short term as long it remains a conventional war which is the rub. Sweden and Finland will have to weigh whether the risk is worth the reward but a lot of people think that our Senate would vote against them joining NATO as they need a 2/3 majority in that body for it to be approved.
I wonder what Russia would do if the Belarussians, the Georgians, or the Chechen's started to rebel? That would keep old Vlad busy. I would not think Russia would be very popular in those countries.
Who GAF what Putin wants. Ukraine is it's own sovereign country. Should the US invade Mexico if it joined a mutual defense alliance with Russia?
Mexico does not have 6,000 nuclear warheads with functional delivery systems and it has not joined a mutual defense alliance with Russia. Let's limit this discussion to the real world, OK?
Here you go Bill.....
April 8, 2018, 11:54 AM EDT / Updated April 8, 2018, 5:15 PM EDT
By Phil McCausland
President Donald Trump on Sunday strongly condemned what he described in tweets as a "mindless CHEMICAL attack in Syria" that allegedly left women and children dead.
He laid the blame squarely at the feet of Russian President Vladimir Putin, Russia and Iran for backing resident Bashar al-Assad, who he called an "animal." Trump also warned, "Big price to pay."
"Open area immediately for medical help and verification. Another humanitarian disaster for no reason whatsoever. SICK!"
Clear now?
LOL, so a sovereign country can't determine its own fate? You seem to be forgetting that little detail about how the Soviet Union controlled them for 40 plus years, along with the role Yanukovych played as a pawn for Putin. The Ukrainian people don't want Russian rule. They don't want a puppet like the Belarussian dictator. They want to be part of the EU.
Again, who is Putin to decide Ukraine's fate? If Putin and Russia acted in good faith, none of these countries would have wanted to join NATO...
Well that’s one but I think his criticism was more directed at Assad than Putin but at least there was some hint of censor.
Last edited:
We absolutely are dictating to them. You can't join our alliance and make yourself safer because we are afraid of how Russia will react. What sign does that send to fledgling democracies? What signal does that send to Putin? Yet another instance in history of the US changing course, putting it's interests above others to their detriment.
Already happened? We said no to sending NATO troops to Ukraine because they aren't in the alliance and doing so unilaterally would bring the nuclear option into play. But we're not talking about Ukraine, talking about Sweden and Finland. New game,vand we're not talking about sending in troops. You're trying to conflate two completely different issues. Again, free democracies are asking for our help by allowing them into our alliance........and they are NOT currently under attack from Russia. That's the huge difference. This is a preemptive move. It's likely it would help us avoid the NEXT Ukraine. Get it?
What you seem to be ignoring is that Putin is the aggressor here.......and in the Crimea and Georgia. His intentions are clear going forward. Who's the one poking the bear here? (Not Russian bear). Who's the one initiating the conflict? Who is doing the destabilizing?
Your side keeps talking about showing weakness. Denying NATO membership to Finland and Sweden because of the fear of Russian reaction is showing the ultimate weakness on our part.
You should probably reacquaint yourself with the policies toward the USSR by an old school republican in the early '80s........that actually worked.
We are not dictating anything. It is a decision that will be made by Finland and Sweden. Here, read it for yourself: " Finland’s president has warned that applying for Nato membership would carry a “major risk” of escalation in Europe as the Nordic country explores ways to improve its security set-up after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine."
Finland into NATO
“If Sweden would choose to file an application to NATO in this situation it would further destabilize this part of Europe,” Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson said at a press briefing on Tuesday.
Sweden into NATO
The weakness of the EU and the pandering to Putin by Germany and France for cheap energy is what lead to this fiasco in the first place, especially after Georgia and Crimea. Not taking a stand against Russia for that incursion was what lead to Ukraine being invaded. It had nothing to do with NATO membership. Showing further weakness by not joining NATO, when its clearly obvious that Finland and Sweden should do so as a rebuke to Russia, would be a huge mistake on their part.
The other piece that's equally disturbing is Germany already backpedaling from their original stance that they would spend 2% of their GDP on defense. Germany wants cheap energy so badly that its willing to further destabilize Europe. The Europeans just never seem to learn when it comes to war...
Trump says what Trump needs to say to SOUND tough. It's utterly mind boggling to me that people STILL believe in this toxic human being.
Yes, because the current strategy is working so well...
Sit around and watch while thousands of civilians die. Oh, but wait, we called Putin a war criminal and waited until after he invaded to start weak sanctions. That will certainly scare him enough to change his approach, right?
The issue isn't " . . .showing weakness . . ." The issue is whether you want to risk escalating this localized war into a WWIII or into a nuclear conflict just so that NATO can show some moxie.
"Russia has repeatedly warned both countries against joining Nato and would see any such move as a provocation. The Kremlin spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, has said that if Finland and Sweden entered Nato, Russia would have to “rebalance the situation” with its own measures."
Sweden and Finland
Ok.
You say nothing about how Russia would perceive our refusal of Finland and Sweden, you say nothing about the complete failure of leadership we would demonstrate should we refuse their entry. You say nothing about Russia's clear intent to continue these types of actions.
We are obviously not telling them what they are going to do. But you are promoting the notion that we tell them what they can't do. They can't join NATO, a defense organization of like minded, free market, democracies, that would help protect them from Russia......and organization that was created FOR THAT VERY PURPOSE. They can't join because we are afraid of how Russia will respond. Again, handling a military action from Russia is one of the reasons NATO was created.
You say nothing about how Russia would perceive our refusal of Finland and Sweden, you say nothing about the complete failure of leadership we would demonstrate should we refuse their entry. You say nothing about Russia's clear intent to continue these types of actions.
What are they going to "rebalance"?
1) They can't win a conventional World War with the West. And they know that.
2) If they're willing to use nukes or start WW3 because Finland and Sweden joined NATO, they're eventually going to make another demand or move if Finland and Sweden don't.
You really need to brush up on the history of World War II. Appeasements to Hitler by the UK and France only emboldened him more. You don't project strength by continuing to stifle the will of independent countries like the UK did to Poland in WWII.
So are you proposing that the answer is for the US to go to war with Russia?
Not necessarily. But until the EU makes it untenable for the Russian war machine to continue, by quickly (and I mean within the next year or two quickly) take Russian oil and gas out of the picture, nothing will change.
Germany is already backpedaling. None of the other EU members are will to ban Russian oil. They're fully complicit in this. And Biden would rather kowtow to the EU than doing something actually meaningful...
Latest posts
-
-
-
That is a LOT of money and potential voters!- Latest: TwinDegrees2
-
