Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Skybird
Cant comment on finland, since it is a foreign planet for me, but Sweden - as tchocky said, they get along well with their past polsicy, so - WHY? It is stupoid to desire membership for an orgnaization that on paper is strong, but in reality is split, and weak. There are lessons to be learned from Afghanistan on how NATO allowed itself getting lured into something that was not it's business at all - and then even failed to act decisevly on that commitment, no matter how stupid it was to join the show. and as the saying goes: too many cooks spoil the meal, and there are already far too many cooks in NATO . - Instead of increasing membership numbers in NATO (and the EU) - we should consider to fire half of the crews again. both organization are weak and unable to act strongly in foreign policies, and the united voice of Europe - is more a concert of selfish egoistic interests that get appeased time and again. - because they have accepted too many members. Lets have a (small) organization of core states, and a greater (more lose) association of periheral states. Dreaming I do, I know. But it would be a reasonable thing to do like this. right now, the status quo seems to do more bad than good.
|
Swedish general said few years back that they can afford to cut their defence forces because Finland cant.
A nice dream would be a Baltic-Nordic union and defence pact, but without nuclear deterrent it wouldnt work, economically it could do fine.