Oh fuck off Russia, just fuck right off.
Of course it would...Poland is part of NATO, and the other member states are treaty bound to come to Poland's defense if attacked.usmarine wrote:
All the Georgia/Russia threads have been about the US for the most part. Just for a second, lets talk about Europe. What would happen if Russia attacked Poland with air strikes or something like that? That would be the start of a WW imo.
---------------------
"tensions rose after a top Russian general warned that Poland had exposed itself to attack by striking a missile defense deal with the United States."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26216434/
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
No radar station for Poland...only the missiles.Kmarion wrote:
Poland should respond with overwhelming force. Now that they've got a radar station and ten missiles nothing can stop them.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
The way he talks about Poland/his heritage/genes he's probably praying that they're wiped off the face of the earth, wat an emo amiriteblademaster wrote:
where is David.P he needs to state his opinion for his countrymen
Also Poland = NATO + EU, if Ivan did anything to Polak we'd have to respond. Although I didn't see NATO helping us out when Argentina invaded, the faggots.
Lol, the Falklands.
I don't think anyone in NATO really saw Argentina as a threat to your military.
I don't think anyone in NATO really saw Argentina as a threat to your military.
Last edited by nukchebi0 (2008-08-16 03:27:16)
If I were Poland I'd try to keep both sides happy. So on the one hand we have the US, who are obviously pressuring me to install the missile defense system. On the other hand we have Russia who say they're gonna be pissed if we do. Tbh I'd be more afraid of Russia, what with them being close neighbors 'n all, and all that energy dependence.usmarine wrote:
yupLotta_Drool wrote:
by interesting I assume you mean stupid.usmarine wrote:
interesting.
Please explain how that is stupid.
ƒ³
Because the West are far more likely to be of some actual help to Poland, rather than just using intimidation tactics.oug wrote:
If I were Poland I'd try to keep both sides happy. So on the one hand we have the US, who are obviously pressuring me to install the missile defense system. On the other hand we have Russia who say they're gonna be pissed if we do. Tbh I'd be more afraid of Russia, what with them being close neighbors 'n all, and all that energy dependence.usmarine wrote:
yupLotta_Drool wrote:
by interesting I assume you mean stupid.
Please explain how that is stupid.
The Russians are being complete pricks, looks like they're sliding back into their old ways and looks like they're being steered that way by Putin.
Maybe that's true, I don't know. But in this case, I believe they have a right to be mad about the missiles. First off, regardless of what Russia thinks, no European nation should install US missiles. The explanation is ludicrous. They are clearly targeting Russia and we all know it. So imho their reaction is no more "illegitimate" and intimidating than the US's.Bertster7 wrote:
Because the West are far more likely to be of some actual help to Poland, rather than just using intimidation tactics.
The Russians are being complete pricks, looks like they're sliding back into their old ways and looks like they're being steered that way by Putin.
ƒ³
QFT. Whilst I don't blame them on responding to Gerorgia, in the end it was complete overkill.Bertster7 wrote:
The Russians are being complete pricks, looks like they're sliding back into their old ways and looks like they're being steered that way by Putin.
Russia need bringing back down to earth.
Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known.
Why should no European nation, voluntarily and in return for numerous benefits, not install missile systems for one of their close, and most important militarily, allies? I assume you point to the ABMT, which is fair enough. It would've made a lot of sense, and avoided a lot of problems, for Bush to bring the Russians in on this project as Reagan suggested with SDI - this would've satisfied the terms of the treaty, rather than the US unilaterally withdrawing from it, which was something I opposed. Though with Russias increasingly belligerent behaviour it may well have been the right move to make.oug wrote:
Maybe that's true, I don't know. But in this case, I believe they have a right to be mad about the missiles. First off, regardless of what Russia thinks, no European nation should install US missiles. The explanation is ludicrous. They are clearly targeting Russia and we all know it. So imho their reaction is no more "illegitimate" and intimidating than the US's.Bertster7 wrote:
Because the West are far more likely to be of some actual help to Poland, rather than just using intimidation tactics.
The Russians are being complete pricks, looks like they're sliding back into their old ways and looks like they're being steered that way by Putin.
If you consider threatening, even in a veiled manner, a country with nuclear annihilation is even comparable to the actions of the US regarding this matter, then we will simply have to disagree.
Let's not jump to conclusions just yet. The Georgians' atrocities are just now beginning to see the light in the west. The Russians knew about the skinning and the slaughtering before we did... (not trying to justify anything but... we all know how these things go)KILLSWITCH wrote:
QFT. Whilst I don't blame them on responding to Gerorgia, in the end it was complete overkill.
Russia need bringing back down to earth.
ƒ³
You know the answer to that.Bertster7 wrote:
Why should no European nation, voluntarily and in return for numerous benefits, not install missile systems for one of their close, and most important militarily, allies?
The US would never do that, no matter what the Russians' behavior might have been.Bertster7 wrote:
I assume you point to the ABMT, which is fair enough. It would've made a lot of sense, and avoided a lot of problems, for Bush to bring the Russians in on this project as Reagan suggested with SDI - this would've satisfied the terms of the treaty, rather than the US unilaterally withdrawing from it, which was something I opposed. Though with Russias increasingly belligerent behaviour it may well have been the right move to make.
I'm not making that comparison. Besides, the threats came after the agreement had been made.Bertster7 wrote:
If you consider threatening, even in a veiled manner, a country with nuclear annihilation is even comparable to the actions of the US regarding this matter, then we will simply have to disagree.
If I'm honest, I believe the US did not just offer benefits to Poland. I think they used other forms of persuasion as well. Otherwise it really makes no sense to disturb Russia that much over some fucking benefits. But still, Poland should have known what the Russians' reaction would be, and based on that they should never have agreed to sign the deal. I mean, fuck, didn't they see what happened to Cuba? Why should this be any different?
ƒ³
Things the Russians themselves are quite used to doing in the same situation and so are in little position to criticise. Brutal clampdown on a break away region, is how the Georgians behaved any worse than the Russians behave in Grozny?oug wrote:
Let's not jump to conclusions just yet. The Georgians' atrocities are just now beginning to see the light in the west. The Russians knew about the skinning and the slaughtering before we did... (not trying to justify anything but... we all know how these things go)KILLSWITCH wrote:
QFT. Whilst I don't blame them on responding to Gerorgia, in the end it was complete overkill.
Russia need bringing back down to earth.
I know an answer for that.oug wrote:
You know the answer to that.Bertster7 wrote:
Why should no European nation, voluntarily and in return for numerous benefits, not install missile systems for one of their close, and most important militarily, allies?
I also think the carrot is a better approach than the stick.
They've proposed it in the past.oug wrote:
The US would never do that, no matter what the Russians' behavior might have been.Bertster7 wrote:
I assume you point to the ABMT, which is fair enough. It would've made a lot of sense, and avoided a lot of problems, for Bush to bring the Russians in on this project as Reagan suggested with SDI - this would've satisfied the terms of the treaty, rather than the US unilaterally withdrawing from it, which was something I opposed. Though with Russias increasingly belligerent behaviour it may well have been the right move to make.
You make a good example of Cuba, but Cuba wasn't in the EU or NATO. Poland will be fine. They've long ago picked their allegiances and to shift them now in response to bullying from Russia would be silly.oug wrote:
I'm not making that comparison. Besides, the threats came after the agreement had been made.Bertster7 wrote:
If you consider threatening, even in a veiled manner, a country with nuclear annihilation is even comparable to the actions of the US regarding this matter, then we will simply have to disagree.
If I'm honest, I believe the US did not just offer benefits to Poland. I think they used other forms of persuasion as well. Otherwise it really makes no sense to disturb Russia that much over some fucking benefits. But still, Poland should have known what the Russians' reaction would be, and based on that they should never have agreed to sign the deal. I mean, fuck, didn't they see what happened to Cuba? Why should this be any different?
What the Russians have done in the past is no excuse for what the Georgians did now. Two wrongs don't make a right etc. But I see your point.Bertster7 wrote:
Things the Russians themselves are quite used to doing in the same situation and so are in little position to criticise. Brutal clampdown on a break away region, is how the Georgians behaved any worse than the Russians behave in Grozny?
Neither the carrot nor the stick are good for Poland, that's my point. I don't really care whose facade is more user-friendly atm, I'm only interested in results. The US has no business putting missiles in Poland, no matter what they're for.Bertster7 wrote:
I also think the carrot is a better approach than the stick.
I'm not saying shift allegiances, just be more careful about decisions like that. Just because they're in the NATO doesn't mean they have agreed to do whatever the US tells them to do. In fact, NATO as a whole should have agreed not to put missiles there due to the situation created with Russia. But of course we all know who controls NATO... As for the bullying, it only came in response to that decision, let's not forget.Bertster7 wrote:
You make a good example of Cuba, but Cuba wasn't in the EU or NATO. Poland will be fine. They've long ago picked their allegiances and to shift them now in response to bullying from Russia would be silly.
ƒ³
I'd say that's for the Poles to decide.oug wrote:
Neither the carrot nor the stick are good for Poland, that's my point. I don't really care whose facade is more user-friendly atm, I'm only interested in results. The US has no business putting missiles in Poland, no matter what they're for.Bertster7 wrote:
I also think the carrot is a better approach than the stick.
I'm sure Poland knew the implications of their decision. The decision was theirs to make and no one elses.oug wrote:
I'm not saying shift allegiances, just be more careful about decisions like that. Just because they're in the NATO doesn't mean they have agreed to do whatever the US tells them to do. In fact, NATO as a whole should have agreed not to put missiles there due to the situation created with Russia. But of course we all know who controls NATO... As for the bullying, it only came in response to that decision, let's not forget.Bertster7 wrote:
You make a good example of Cuba, but Cuba wasn't in the EU or NATO. Poland will be fine. They've long ago picked their allegiances and to shift them now in response to bullying from Russia would be silly.
As for who controls NATO, no one does directly. The idea that NATO is a puppet organisation for the US (which is what you seem to be suggesting) when it such powerful members who often do not back the US in military matters, is evidence enough of that.
It's not even like this missile defence program is likely to work against Russias more sophisticated MIRV based missiles. It very much seems to be aimed at smaller "rogue" states.
Quite so. That doesn't mean we can't criticize that decision.Bertster7 wrote:
I'd say that's for the Poles to decide.
Poland is not a powerful member though...Bertster7 wrote:
I'm sure Poland knew the implications of their decision. The decision was theirs to make and no one elses.
As for who controls NATO, no one does directly. The idea that NATO is a puppet organisation for the US (which is what you seem to be suggesting) when it such powerful members who often do not back the US in military matters, is evidence enough of that.
It's not even like this missile defence program is likely to work against Russias more sophisticated MIRV based missiles. It very much seems to be aimed at smaller "rogue" states.
As for the effectiveness of the missiles, it's good enough for me that the Russians are worried. And either way, it's basically a matter of principle.
ƒ³
I'm pretty sure Poland agreed to this partially because they don't want to get invaded by Russia. It's happened before.
Hmm Poland had everything it needed to be assured it won't be invaded when it joined NATO in '99, like others have said. 10 missiles (not even a radar station) is really gonna stop Russia, it's more of a political move by the US than an actual tactical military oneTurquoise wrote:
I'm pretty sure Poland agreed to this partially because they don't want to get invaded by Russia. It's happened before.
I don't think anything will happen to be honest, all this does is further cool relations between Russia and the West. I'm sure Russia will be aiming their missiles at Poland but I do not think they will be firing them anytime soon. I can't believe so many people seem to be surprised by this reaction to be honest...I guess we can do a comparison when Russia station nukes on Cuba.
What Russia mean when they say they'll strike Poland is that in the event of a Nuclear Exchange between the US and Russia, that Poland will also be attacked. Because it houses ABM's. They're not saying that they'll strike Poland as soon as the ABM is installed.
They're just telling Poland that they're not going to be spared if a Nuclear War breaks out. Which, I suppose, makes sense. Then again who would be spared during a Nuclear Exchange. Maybe all the African countries and Australia
damn kangaroos
They're just telling Poland that they're not going to be spared if a Nuclear War breaks out. Which, I suppose, makes sense. Then again who would be spared during a Nuclear Exchange. Maybe all the African countries and Australia
damn kangaroos
im gonna detonate a nuke in aussie if shit breaks out.Mek-Stizzle wrote:
What Russia mean when they say they'll strike Poland is that in the event of a Nuclear Exchange between the US and Russia, that Poland will also be attacked. Because it houses ABM's. They're not saying that they'll strike Poland as soon as the ABM is installed.
They're just telling Poland that they're not going to be spared if a Nuclear War breaks out. Which, I suppose, makes sense. Then again who would be spared during a Nuclear Exchange. Maybe all the African countries and Australia
damn kangaroos
just so they don't feel left out
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
I'm not surprised, but I'm glad we made this move.Braddock wrote:
I don't think anything will happen to be honest, all this does is further cool relations between Russia and the West. I'm sure Russia will be aiming their missiles at Poland but I do not think they will be firing them anytime soon. I can't believe so many people seem to be surprised by this reaction to be honest...I guess we can do a comparison when Russia station nukes on Cuba.
And Mek, while what you said about NATO is partially true, for Poland to position itself more closely to the U.S. in a direct sense makes it that much less likely for Russia to attack them... unless Putin is suicidal.
I can understand why Americans would be happy, you will have a missile shield which will either increase your security against countries like or Iran or possibly be of some logistical use in the event of a conflict with Russia and instead of endangering the US homeland in any way it just places Europe in the firing line...there's no real downside for the US.Turquoise wrote:
I'm not surprised, but I'm glad we made this move.Braddock wrote:
I don't think anything will happen to be honest, all this does is further cool relations between Russia and the West. I'm sure Russia will be aiming their missiles at Poland but I do not think they will be firing them anytime soon. I can't believe so many people seem to be surprised by this reaction to be honest...I guess we can do a comparison when Russia station nukes on Cuba.
And Mek, while what you said about NATO is partially true, for Poland to position itself more closely to the U.S. in a direct sense makes it that much less likely for Russia to attack them... unless Putin is suicidal.
Weren't Poland already a member of NATO, no?
Well, I'll agree that Europe is in the firing line. It's kind of too late to change that though.