The Baltics are NATO members. No matter what they do, it won’t be “the same strategy.”

And while we’re at it, here are the NATO members or aspirants:

Here’s a breakdown of the former USSR states that are now NATO members or are actively considering NATO membership:

Former USSR States That Are NATO Members

These countries joined NATO after gaining independence from the Soviet Union:

1. Estonia

• Joined NATO: 2004

• Strong NATO ally with significant defense investments.

2. Latvia

• Joined NATO: 2004

• Works closely with NATO on Baltic security.

3. Lithuania

• Joined NATO: 2004

• Actively contributes to NATO missions.

4. Poland

• Although not a USSR republic, it was part of the Warsaw Pact (Soviet-aligned).

• Joined NATO: 1999.

Former USSR States Considering or Applying for NATO Membership

1. Ukraine

• Officially applied for NATO membership in 2022.

• Has intensified cooperation with NATO since Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014.

2. Georgia

• Has declared aspirations to join NATO since 2008.

• NATO has an ongoing partnership with Georgia, but membership has been delayed due to territorial disputes (Abkhazia and South Ossetia).

3. Moldova (Debate, but no formal application)

• While officially neutral, there are internal discussions about strengthening ties with NATO due to regional threats.

• No formal application has been made yet.

Key Context

• NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia remains controversial, partly due to ongoing conflicts with Russia and territorial disputes.

• Other former USSR states, like Belarus and the Central Asian countries, are either neutral or aligned with Russia.

Let me know if you’d like a deeper dive into any of these countries!

That seemed like a good task for AI so here’s what got back:

The former USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) included 15 republics, many of which became independent countries after its dissolution in 1991. Here’s a list of former Soviet states that are not NATO members or actively applying for NATO membership (as of now):

1. Belarus

• A close ally of Russia, with strong political, military, and economic ties to Moscow.

• No indications of pursuing NATO membership.

2. Moldova

• Officially neutral according to its constitution.

• While there is some public debate about closer ties with NATO, it has not formally applied for membership.

3. Armenia

• Member of the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO).

• While cooperating with NATO on some levels, it is not pursuing membership.

4. Azerbaijan

• Maintains a policy of balanced diplomacy between Russia, NATO, and other powers.

• No NATO membership aspirations have been officially declared.

5. Uzbekistan

• Pursues a policy of neutrality.

• Not a member or applicant of NATO.

6. Turkmenistan

• Officially neutral (recognized by the UN in 1995).

• No NATO ties or aspirations.

7. Tajikistan

• Member of the CSTO, closely aligned with Russia.

• Not pursuing NATO membership.

8. Kyrgyzstan

• Also a member of the CSTO.

• No active NATO membership aspirations.

These countries generally maintain neutrality or align more closely with Russia and its sphere of influence, either through treaties like the CSTO or their foreign policies. Let me know if you’d like more specific information about any of them!

Bold stance. Better to bring about world war 3 than let Russia consume its neighbors? I’ll have to sit with that one for a bit.

I grew up with the USSR so maybe I’m not quite ready to throw all earthly civilization into the fire to prevent 20% of that empire from being restored.

I’m with you 100%. The Twitter product has always been a clunky pile of bullshit for me. But somehow it became the default public space and choice of celebrities, etc and I think that has been 98% of its appeal.

His dad knew it was time to let the babe magnet go. He’d become a father and started a family - the babe magnet was no longer appropriate. It’s even less so when he is 60-70 and can’t even put it to use if he tried.

That’s true, I am not deeply educated there. Any info you would impart on the topic? Does Russia have some perpetual hardon for controlling Ukraine which will never go down?

Basically. Trump’s election signals the end of robust support for Ukraine (if it can even be called that). So Putin is absolutely charged right now and 1/3 could be the best deal Ukraine is going to get. It’s a travesty, but there it is.

I just hope that Putin takes the cue and ends his ridiculous imperialistic drive. His early bloodless annexation of Crimea clearly encouraged broader action, but this war has been an expensive flop for him and I can’t really see him coming back from it to try for more. Unless there is some other neighbor who’s outlying 1/3 he would like to pay a very dear price for.

More likely his prize is concessions on NATO expansion.

Can they even accomplish the logistics of this? I wouldn’t be surprised if only 60,000 make it and they arrive starving.

No doubt. But this is about the options still left on the table.

You make a good point. When a small number of people complain loudly but most people don’t care, I’m not sure that’s “controversy.” The majority don’t care but this accessory is for the minority who do, and they hate it, so yeah “hated” would not be overstating it :)

Your post points to the answer.

If people’s absolute essentials could be guaranteed: housing, healthcare, education, and food, then all the “advantages” would only affect the bonus region above that where wealth and privilege reside.

The problem is that it’s very possible for those life essentials to be threatened because other people have wealth and privilege.

If there was just a floor on this damn thing we could stop talking about all this. But American culture dictates that that floor must be squarely below the point of dignity and deprivation, so that people don’t get comfortable. Because we can’t have that. Ever. Because it’s a moral hazard to the soul. Unless you’re born rich. Then you can have comfort for free, and there’s magically no moral hazard to your soul somehow.

I bought my first home half with money I’d saved by working, and half with some money I inherited from my grandparents. I was also able to buy with only 10% down because it was 2005, leading up to the sub-prime mortgage scandal, and they were giving out mortgages very easily.

Fast forward some years.

I reluctantly rented my place out for a couple of years because I needed to move myself and the mortgage was underwater following the 2006 crash caused by all those sub prime mortgages. I rented to a nice couple and although I gave them a very attractive rent and treated them as well as possible, there was no question that their rent money got me through that housing crisis and eventually allowed me to sell at a significant profit instead of losing my ass.

When I sold, I offered my renters a deal to move out. They took it, and said that they were buying their own place as they had inherited a small amount recently.

For me this was a perfect example of how, just because my grandparents died a few years before theirs, I was their landlord and not the other way around. I got protection for my investment on their dollar. And once they too got the benefit of inheritance, they were able to graduate to the next level themselves.

Years later I’ve remained a homeowner and am sitting on multiple millions in equity from all the appreciation during that time. My remaining mortgage payments are about 1/3 of what it would cost to rent the same home. My wife’s younger siblings, by contrast, can’t even afford to buy under any circumstances because the market is so high. And of course lending standards are much more strict now.

For me this is a perfect example of generational advantage. Here I am sitting pretty just because I’m 10 years older than them, while they have to move out of state just to get a start.

Anyone who thinks this is a fair and equal opportunity economy is a damn fool. As long as you are competing against people who have advantages you don’t, it doesn’t matter whether your theoretical opportunities are equal. You’re going to lose and wind up in servitude of those who won.

Heh yeah wouldn’t that be a hoot if your ISP offered you a laptop at $5-800 discount for signing up?

I guess this is where we fall down for having near zero competition in the home ISP space. There are multiple wireless companies competing for our business but few Americans have much choice in their broadband. FCC corruption aside, it’s just easier for multiple companies to stand up cell towers than for multiple companies to rip up your street to lay fiber.

Might be yeah. Some of it is getting people in the door who then buy another model. Some of it is getting new people into the ecosystem. Their MacOS business is tiny compared to iOS these days. I scratch my head a lot wondering what they’ll do with it long term.

It’s really, really needed badly in this situation /s

Perhaps there are levels of crowding in China that are unlike anything I see on a daily basis. This could be part of it.

The knife attack killed 8 and injured 17 more. A physically capable person going nuts in a dense crowd… it’s conceivable.

But you’re right these are tragic figures.

Age of “unprosecutable rape” is more like it.

I wish some entrepreneur had instead created an amazing fucking Mastodon instance and put all that marketing and engineering dollar into the platform. But you can’t own Mastodon so you can’t ever sell Mastodon so those types of folks will never invest in Mastodon. We could just say “fuck ‘em” but they have done a serious job of monopolizing the time of all the talented people who know how to make something like this go.

Surely that could never happen again though! /s