Finland says debate on NATO membership 'will change' after Russian invasion

Lol @ blaming the US because Russia is invading Ukraine.

Everybody has to have a boogeyman.

 

You don't have to inform me of the situation. I made it clear, that I had not been saying that there was no reason for concern. Somehow, you have either misread me, or do not care much about accurate representation of fact, IMO. ANY country, just saying they would examine their options, is not legitimately described as, "bone chilling." If, in fact, your point is that it is understood that these words, coming from Russia, as a matter of course, are taken as a threat, well then, that would mean, there is no need to explain it, as you did (or as did the article). On top of that, "bone-chilling," is an especially evocative description, if all you want to imply, is that, though the words sounded innocuous, there was good reason to regard them with concern, or to take them "very seriously," then bone-chilling is an inappropriately hyperbolic term, to use.

An equally big problem with describing it this way is, for example, hearing that description, I was expecting some overtly ominous words, of which there were none. So what if, in the future, Russia, in another statement jumps from we will evaluate our options, to something like, "that would be a mistake by (country X), which might preclude their descendents even being around, in order to regret it." How are you gonna characterize that statement, to reflect the difference between it, and the earlier, "bone-chilling," statement? Obviously, the later statement would be several orders of magnitude, more "blood- curdling," than the first one, but the original author hasn't left much head room, for intensification; therefore, people who'd read what had constituted bone-chilling, in the past, can be expected to use that same yardstick, in assuming, from that next headline, the meaning of whatever adjective is chosen. In other words, whoever chose that term, was shooting their load, way too soon.

 

Lol ... someone not able to see all facts which cause the war ... but only able to shout and blame Russia AND as usual is the US of course innocent etc.

Some people love hypocrisy!

 

So. Poland, OUR ally, is justified in fearing Russian aggression, but we are not, even though Russia just invaded a soverign independent nation?

The issues Russia has related to Russian perception have all just been justified.

 

One could argue that our assistance in weapons holds up to the agreement and I’ve said that before. But being they are being threatened by a signing super power I believe it calls for a stronger stance. It also shows we are chickens to back a country that gave up their nukes for peace. No one will ever do it again. If I hear a single person try and advertise denuclearization after this they’re going to get an earful from me.

North Korea will use this as an example of why they won’t, Iran will use this as an example of why they should get them, and this will give more of a reason for countries who don’t have them to get them.

It’s not the American way to run from a dictator

 

Denuclearization is over. No country that has nukes is ever going to give them up again, but that's because of the Libya lesson. Ghaddafi tried to come in from the cold, opened up his nuclear program, pay restitution, and he got bombed and a most undignified death for his trouble. So the lesson for all tin-pot dictators is that you can never get off the list, and your only real protection is a nuclear program.

Don't you think Ukraine regrets giving up it's nukes now?

 

It is the result of Putin's aggression.

 

NATO hasn't done any recruiting. Nor has it done anything aggressive. It has accepted the applications of several countries for membership.

 

Damned good thing for the Baltics, too. Putler probably would have gone in there as well to "save the ethnic Russians" from a "genocide" by now otherwise.

 

He may still want to do that. It won't end well for him.

 

He knows better than to touch NATO. Even now, he knows better.

 

Then NATO is fulfilling its mission. Good news.

 

Aha, NATO is very peaceful. Tell this BS somewhere else.
Not true. Macedonia: 1993, Yugoslavia: 1999; Iraq: 2003; Lybia: 2011.

 

Please, tell me what kind of agression Putin did in 2004 when NATO missiles were placed in Poland, which had joined NATO? In this case I can revert everything and say that Putin actions now is in the response of NATO aggression.

 

Poland has all the reasons in the world to seek an alliance against Russian aggression. The partitions of Poland in the 18th century, the creation of the Imperial Russian Grand Duchy of Warsaw in the 19th century, the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and Katyn massacre in the 20th century. Putin acts as if Russia had a right to those actions.

 

Common, in 20 century it is not Russia who first attacked Poland in WW1, and WW2. If we go to 19 сеntury, 1812 it was Poland which attacked Russia together with French army and not vice versa.

 

The USSR enabled the Nazi invasion of Poland via the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, and joined the invasion as an ally of the Nazis. There was no Poland at the start of WW1. In the 19th century Poland of course favored France over Russia; France had not partitioned Poland.

 

Germany, future NATO country first attacked Poland, then USSR crossed the border. So Poland should in the first place afraid of Germany according to this than Russia. By the way, USSR saved not only a lot of people from concentration camps in Poland, but also managed to save such beautiful city as Krakow, which was mined by Germans and was supposed to be destroyed. But people have bad memory for good things.
By the way, what Polish army did near Moscow 1612?

 

Pathetic revisionist pablum…

 

You are saying these things were started by NATO out of choice? If so you are incorrect. Incidentally, you have to separate NATO from NATO members. NATO was not involved in Iraq or Libya. Some NATO members were.

 

Too bad they have thrown away all that goodwill, and are now the villains of planet earth. I doubt even most Russians support Putin's actions.

 

I see, you have no arguments. Revisionists are now in the US and Ukraine.

 

NATO was used to attack Afghanistan for 20 years, to place a puppet regime and alter the culture.
So the protection is just like them peace forces from Russia in Ukraine.

 

I would say many do not support, including me.

 

Well, there is always a choice to do something or not to do. The driving force in NATO is US. US was involved in all these conflicts, therefore this is for the most part like NATO was involved.