Comments by "Emanon" (@Emanon...) on "Are Sweden and Finland About to Join NATO? - TLDR News" video.

@mcr2356 Yep. Bay of pigs incident. Look it up. And then there were the innumerable times they tried assassinating Castro... Not exactly angels
10
@ben5056 I agree. NATO now. But EU is a much more complex entity and we need a slow and calm integration process to make it as painless and successful as possible for everyone.
2
It really wouldn't matter either way, as Denmark is a member of NATO and lockstep with US foreign policy. Even when they shouldn't always be.
2
Well, you can also argue that the US and NATO are willing to defend Europe "to the last Ukrainian"...
1
@ben5056 I agree. But there were numerous cautionary tales: Georgia, Crimea, Chechnya, Belarus, Dependence on Russian gas and the economic and political ramifications, Syria. I'm glad that the political establishment have finally come to their senses, but as usual it's an overreaction now with bloated military expenditures the next 10 years and increasingly hostile language that does nothing to deescalate the current situation.
1
@ben5056 They've not by a longshot earned EU membership. And I for one won't have another possible "Visegrad 5th column" joining their ranks until they have a proven record of liberal democratic values and cracking down on corruption. I've yet to see how Ukraine treats women, disabled, LGBT and people of colour (well, that part was actually loud and clear during the evacuations). Ukraine is simply not ready. Yet.
1
@ben5056 Well Hungary and Poland are exactly the reason why no one should be fast tracked into a union largely based in consensus decisions. Safeguards should be in place. But now we're in a situation where 2 countries are causing stagnation, division and a constitutional crisis without any remedies for this save them leaving the union - which will never happen. They're of course the worst examples but we're not far of from wannabe little dictators in Slovenia, Slovakia, Romania or Bulgaria either...
1
Not quite on topic, but important nonetheless: Why spend 2% of GDP yearly on defence, when 1,5% is more than enough to ensure the safety of Europe? Unless you're a weapon manufactoring country, defence spending is a effectively a money sink. Aside from personnel jobs, it doesn't produce value, quickly devaluates and the opportunity cost of military vs. civilian spending (health, education, infrastrucure... hell, even tax breaks if that's your fancy) are never accounted for. NATO spends 1,2 trillion $ as of 2021, increasing dramatically in 2022. If the US chooses to spend 4% of GDP on defence, that's on them. I really don't see the point of throwing away billions of Dollars/Euros for a plus-extra-max defence, when a strong integrated defence will suffice. Russian Nukes being what they are, 1,5% of GDP is more than enough to deal with conventional conflicts - even against Russia.
1