Comments by "peabase" (@peabase) on "Why Erdogan is still blocking Sweden's NATO bid | DW News" video.

@soreeyez The "excuse" for Finland joining NATO? In one word, Ukraine. Are you slow on the uptake?
7
@andrewcroft7995 There's a lot of trans-shipment between Sweden and Finland for geographical reasons alone. Russia could plant a submarine in Swedish waters to threaten the sea lane. With its limited resources and because of the shallow nature of the Baltic Sea, the Swedish navy might not locate the sub. NATO can't yet freely operate in Swedish waters, or lacks the means to do so effectively. It's crucial that Sweden gets in on the game, or capabilities will always be lacking to some extent.
5
@_Twink In terms of military kit, Sweden has a credible air force and navy, but both lack manpower. Ten years ago, Russia simulated a nuclear strike against Stockholm with two strategic bombers. Because of "staffing issues", Sweden couldn't get its excellent fighters up, because the pilots needed their kip. Finally, Denmark had pity on their dozy neighbour and sent up fighters to see the Russians off.
4
@emirefe5452 Turkey would very much like to buy new F-16s and upgrade its existing ones. Domestic production is no short-term solution, and it remains doubtful if it will satisfy Turkey's long-term needs either. Turkey has had its fair share of problems with indigenous weapons systems. Some successes, too, but glaring gaps remain.
3
@FA-rn1nc Yes, Sweden turned out to be a fine neutral party in the Cold War, because earlier, Finland had stopped the marauding Soviet hordes well short of the Swedish border. If not for Finland, Sweden could've made a fine Warsaw Pact member.
3
@RyzenShanks So, you decided to rephrase your earlier comment without adding anything new to the conversation. I think we're done.
2
@studentstudent5044 I suppose I could ask my Swedish fellow veterans from Lebanon and Kosovo. Oh yes, they've told me already. The Swedish military struggles with a chronic manpower shortage. One of my close friends, a recently retired lieutenant-colonel, once reminisced about international exercises they were hosting. They weren't paid for overtime, so out of embarrassment, he did unpaid volunteer work after hours. Sweden being Sweden, he had to be extra careful because of health insurance coverage. My friend also told about a brilliant former classmate, who deservedly made the big jump from colonel to general officer. The new brigadier apologised to all the others for accepting the promotion, because he felt he was betraying them. The bitterness was all theirs. Sweden has better soldiers than it deserves.
2
@RyzenShanks In essence, what you're proposing is that once again, Finland protects Sweden against Russia. "Finlands sak är vår" (the Finnish cause is ours) is a cliché that Swedes like to repeat, but I believe there's some weariness in Finland with regard to pulling Sweden's chestnuts out of the fire. In Denmark, it's an often-heard joke that Swedes fight to the last Finn.
1
@RyzenShanks Sweden needs to join NATO as a full member to get all the membership benefits. As a hang-around member, Sweden is not included in NATO's decision-making bodies, and it can't benefit from NATO's shared capabilities, where members complement one another. As full NATO members, Sweden's Nordic neighbours get more bang for their buck (no pun intended).
1
@studentstudent5044 Sweden may have the largest population of all the Nordic countries, but its armed forces are the weakest. It comes natural to the Finns to maintain a credible defence, and the Norwegians and Danes maintained theirs, too, if only because of their NATO commitments. Sweden, on the other hand, clearly neglected its defence. Mind you, against the odds Sweden managed to retain a professional cadre, but you'll find that they're the fiercest critics of the sad state of affairs that Sweden brought onto itself.
1