mmm__donuts
mmm__donuts t1_j6nftxv wrote
Reply to comment by REOreddit in Haavisto: Finland has patience to wait for Nato membership — with Sweden. by parandroidfinn
If NATO decided to intervene in Ukraine, would Sweden be willing to take the risk of participating in the fighting even after NATO wouldn't have them? What if the war was over Russia's invasion of Turkey? If Finland is in NATO, there are a whole bunch of reasons they might end up at war with Russia besides an attack on Finland, and mutual defense pacts don't cover those.
mmm__donuts t1_j6l597f wrote
Reply to comment by REOreddit in Haavisto: Finland has patience to wait for Nato membership — with Sweden. by parandroidfinn
Your question is getting a lot of hate for some reason, but it's a good one.
My answer: because being in NATO makes it possible that Finland will be pulled into a war with Russia. This most likely cause would be if the Ukraine conflict escalates. And in that case, being in NATO without Sweden means being at war with a country with which Finland shares a massive land border and not having the support of the powerful and nearby Swedish navy and air force.
Look at the choice from Finland's point of view: Being in NATO protects Finland to the extent that they expect Russia to attack Finland and puts Finland in danger to the extent that they expect a NATO-Russia war to happen over something else. Given the damage it has suffered in Ukraine, Russia isn't going to have the strength to attack Finland for years. It's far more likely that NATO will end up at war with Russia as a result of something happening in Ukraine than it is that Russia will invade Finland soon. So, it makes sense for them to wait for Sweden so that Sweden's NATO membership can ameliorate the risk of being drawn into a war with Russia.
mmm__donuts t1_iy5m4u5 wrote
Reply to comment by tito333 in Britain says Russia likely removing nuclear warheads from missiles and firing at Ukraine by Koeny1
I can't get through the paywall, but the blurb for the source you linked mentions warheads, not missiles. Additionally, when someone says "nuclear missiles" they almost always mean ICBMs, not cruise missiles.
mmm__donuts t1_ixzkeol wrote
Reply to comment by tito333 in Britain says Russia likely removing nuclear warheads from missiles and firing at Ukraine by Koeny1
Yes. I was asking about cruise missiles, not ICBMs.
mmm__donuts t1_ixx2ny8 wrote
Reply to comment by Ceratisa in Britain says Russia likely removing nuclear warheads from missiles and firing at Ukraine by Koeny1
I'm still confused. Are you saying that we can make those guesses quickly enough to make decisions about what to shoot down and what to ignore based on an estimate of whether the payload is nuclear?
mmm__donuts t1_ixwh7hq wrote
Reply to comment by Ceratisa in Britain says Russia likely removing nuclear warheads from missiles and firing at Ukraine by Koeny1
Cool. TIL. Is it possible to differentiate the nuclear-capable version of a cruise missile from its conventional counterpart based on these satellite or radar data? Or was the guy I responded to originally incorrect?
mmm__donuts t1_ixw68j4 wrote
Reply to comment by Ceratisa in Britain says Russia likely removing nuclear warheads from missiles and firing at Ukraine by Koeny1
>Cruise missiles are a common platform for nuclear capable delivery
Yes. They're the one being referred to in this article. My question was whether it is possible to calculate their target from their launch trajectory since being able to change direction in flight is kind of the defining feature of a cruise missile.
mmm__donuts t1_ixw5y4w wrote
Reply to comment by tito333 in Britain says Russia likely removing nuclear warheads from missiles and firing at Ukraine by Koeny1
Do they generally store the nuclear-capable cruise missiles with the warheads attached? I imagine that makes the security a lot more complicated.
mmm__donuts t1_ixw5o5b wrote
Reply to comment by Ceratisa in Britain says Russia likely removing nuclear warheads from missiles and firing at Ukraine by Koeny1
>We calculate launch angle/trajectory using sophisticated algorithms to determine their destination.
For a cruise missile?
mmm__donuts t1_ixvykrn wrote
Reply to comment by Bankful in Britain says Russia likely removing nuclear warheads from missiles and firing at Ukraine by Koeny1
Is it possible to tell a nuclear-capable cruise missile from a conventional one on radar? That seems like it would be difficult to do.
mmm__donuts t1_j6nseuo wrote
Reply to comment by REOreddit in Haavisto: Finland has patience to wait for Nato membership — with Sweden. by parandroidfinn
>If NATO attacks Russia without Russia attacking them first, I wouldn't expect any help from any country outside of NATO, but of course any country could join the war if they wanted.
And Finland would be one of the most exposed countries in NATO should that happen without Sweden being a member. It's a good reason for them to wait.
>If Finland ends up in a war with Russia for other reasons than self defense, any help from Sweden would depend on the circumstances, and the potential threat to Sweden. Yes, I agree that mutual defense pacts don't cover every eventuality, but I don't see a problem with that. Otherwise you are bound to blindly follow any stupid decisions from your allies.
Being in NATO vastly increases the chances of a war for reasons other than self defense. As you point out, that's the risk of joining any alliance. Being in NATO without Sweden makes that war much more difficult for Finland to fight.
>Having said that, if Russia were to attack Turkey, that would be such a crazy move that no country in Europe would be safe, and it would probably be in Sweden's interest to intervene, at least to defend Finland, if not in a more active role.
Sweden's military isn't going to be the deciding factor in that war. It makes far more sense for them to hold back and let other people do the fighting.