Finland Becomes a Member of NATO on Tuesday 4 April

Re:Finland Becomes a Member of NATO on Tuesday 4 April by Animatronio on Monday April 03, 2023 @10:41AM (#35424402)

Yes, but only technically. What matters is the advanced weapons system each of these countries has on its territory. Think Aegis Ashore and the likes of that. Otherwise, they're just empty land (from a military viewpoint).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Finland Becomes a Member of NATO on Tuesday 4 April by khochesh_kushat on Monday April 03, 2023 @10:53AM (#35424634)

If we free ourselves of the bounds of what is technically true, then we can justify nearly anything. I'm not sure it's a productive line of reasoning.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Finland Becomes a Member of NATO on Tuesday 4 April by Animatronio on Monday April 03, 2023 @10:59AM (#35424751)

What are you trying to say here? Technically true is still true, so we should take it into account when making a decision.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Finland Becomes a Member of NATO on Tuesday 4 April by khochesh_kushat on Monday April 03, 2023 @11:01AM (#35424798)

That we should take into account that NATO is already 'at their doorstep', regardless of which weapon systems are where, since they can be deployed anywhere later.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Finland Becomes a Member of NATO on Tuesday 4 April by Animatronio on Monday April 03, 2023 @11:12AM (#35425027)

Then you'll have no problem explaining this:

https://www.anews.com.tr/world/2023/03/26/poland-nuclear-arm...

while also this:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/05/poland-us-nucl...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Finland Becomes a Member of NATO on Tuesday 4 April by khochesh_kushat on Monday April 03, 2023 @11:21AM (#35425214)

I'm not sure what part you are asking me to explain to you? They seem relatively self-explanatory.

[ Parent | on HN ]