Posted on 04/15/2022 2:07:44 PM PDT by algore
The prime ministers of Sweden and Finland, Magdalena Andersson and Sanna Marin, both signaled Wednesday that they will likely be applying for membership in NATO.
The “prospect” is most “welcome,” says The Washington Post: “Finland and Sweden Should Join NATO.”
The editorial was titled “A Way to Punish Putin.”
Before joining the rejoicing in NATO capitals, we might inspect what NATO membership for these two Nordic nations would mean for the United States.
Finland is a nation the size of Germany, but with a population only 4% of that of Russia and a border with Russia that is 830 miles long.
Should Finland join NATO, the United States, under Article 5 of the NATO treaty, would be obligated to go to war with the world’s largest nuclear power to retrieve Finnish lands that an enraged Russia might grab.
Moscow has already indicated that, should Sweden and Finland join NATO, Russia will introduce new nuclear weapons into the Baltic region.
Why is it wise for us to formally agree, in perpetuity, as NATO is a permanent alliance, to go to war with Russia, for Finland?
Given the war in Ukraine and concomitant crisis in Eastern Europe, it is understandable why Stockholm and Helsinki would seek greater security beneath the U.S. nuclear umbrella.
why would we voluntarily agree to give Sweden and Finland these war guarantees? Why would we commit to go to war with Putin’s Russia, a war that could, and likely would, escalate to the use of tactical nuclear weapons, especially if Russia were losing?
Finland was neutral during the Cold War. Sweden has been neutral since the Napoleonic wars of the early 19th century.
How did we suffer from their neutrality?
In Helsinki and Stockholm, the benefit of a U.S.-NATO commitment to go to war for Finland or Sweden is understandable.
But how does it benefit our country, the USA, to be obligated to go to war with a nation that commands the world’s largest stockpile of nuclear weapons — over some quarrel in the Baltic Sea or Gulf of Finland that does not affect us?
I went to Sweden in the mid 80s, it was kinda nice. I went to Seattle in the mid 80s, it was kinda nice.
Today both are places I probably would not go without a really good reason.
Warm water port?
It would be cheaper and make more sense just to get out of NATO. We have more than enough problems here in America.
I can see that Putin might want that, certainly it has been a goal.
Russia needs a warm water port to have a well rounded economy like China or America pretend to.
Russia has been fighting for this since oh gosh maybe the 1600s with The first Warm Water Port Tzar, Peter I ?
They want to join because of the mad dog killer Putin.
Perhaps it is because Russia feels threatened by NATO.
I know, crazy, right?
So they want to join up with Biden and his invisible friend ?
I guess people have been looking to invisible friends for longer than Russia has been looking for a warm water port, so ok ?
Finland doesn’t have any warm-water ports.
Not Biden..NATO.
Toss Finland aside but keep their sardines.
Yeah, why not?
Those are the American deep state’s new borders - not TX and AZ
“Why is it wise for us to formally agree, in perpetuity, as NATO is a permanent alliance, to go to war with Russia, for Finland?”
If Russia doesn’t attack Finland or any other NATO member then there won’t be a reason to go to war. Amazing how that works!
“Perhaps it is because Russia feels threatened by NATO.”
Antifa and BLM feel threatened by the police.
And for the same reasons.
actually global warming is warming the the arctic ocean. There is an increasing amount of shipping traffic that passes from the orient through the bering sea across the arctic ocean and then down into europe or russia.
That’s a shorter/cheaper route than through the panama canal.
They produce great Formula 1 drivers and hockey players.
“Finland doesn’t have any warm-water ports.”
Include the Baltic States—next on block.
Kaliningrad seaport is the gravy.
“It would be cheaper and make more sense just to get out of NATO.”
I agree. The European states should take responsibility for their own defense.
Today both are places I probably would not go without a really good reason.”
How many of us would return to the place we had left?
‘Not even sure I’d return to Hawaii...!
“The European states should take responsibility for their own defense.”
Then our military can return to pre-WWII readiness.
/
Putin is spreading his troops thin. I wonder what would happen if all those countries he’s invaded were to attack Russia at the same time?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.