this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2023
62 points (98.4% liked)
worldnews
4851 readers
1 users here now
Rules:
-
Be civil. Disagreements happen, that does not give you the right to personally insult each other.
-
No racism or bigotry.
-
Posts from sources that aren't known to be incredibly biased for either side of the spectrum are preferred. If this is not an option, you may post from whatever source you have as long as it is relevant to this community.
-
Post titles should be the same as the article title.
-
No spam, self-promotion, or trolling.
Instance-wide rules always apply.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
As a Swede (who is opposed to a NATO membership) - I must say what a shit show this has been and an embarrassment for NATO.
I get that if you're in a military alliance together, you need to not hate eachother but when every country need to ratify your membership it opens up for this kind of situation where a single country can hold an application hostage and try to get whatever they want because they simply don't like democracy.
I think it's very reactionary. A decision like this should be taken through a public referendum and not in panic over Ukraine being invaded.
In addition, I think it's valuable with neutral countries rather than moving towards a world order where every country is either on USA's or Russia's side.
I dont think it was panic over ukraine. It was realization that international law and agreements means jack shit to putin. It was realization that the russian army is as brutal as they were in ww2. It was realization that an attack from russia is a real possibility.
Besides, sweden was only neutral on paper.
Sweden should have been one of the founding members of nato, but we decided to stay ”neutral” because of finland.
I do think however, that now that finland is a member, there is really no rush to get in. Let erdo-dog do his whatever this is and get in when the dust settles.