Poland`s aid to Ukraine if Russia invades - part 8

You do? Well, not to their face you don't, four-star general would eat a little ... like for a snack. Who the hell do you think you are? Know your place.

Damn, keyboard warriors.
Why do you even butt in when you have nothing to add but your senseless buzz. Go and look for some Russian and do what you are best at.

I see that you got my brilliant point just right...


Maybe it would...Maybe not...The US sent 10 million troops to Kuwait to stop babies from being thrown out of incubators. And that oil thing...


Yes, I would if given an oppo. I wrote to McCain to get cancer and die for his midnight vote to support Obamacare. He did.

@Novichok

You know how everybody and their mom, say that Putin is an idiot for rejuvenating NATO just as it was about to die?

They quote Macron, saying "NATO is brain dead", or do retrospectives on the Trump years and his constant humiliation of NATO...

I wonder, is it really revived, or is it some kind of pre-death convulsion?

The original problem of an "organization in search of a mission" is still there. Building modern Russia up into such a reason, seems farcical. If anything, the very existence of NATO feeds a negative feedback loop which forces various Russias, Chinas, and Irans to coordinate.

If tomorrow, Russia loses the war, and Putin is ousted and replaced by some globo-homo loving liberal - would NATO cease to exist?

That's short-term...Long-term, it's positive feedback. Add one more country to NATO, Russia responds, another country added to NATO, Russia responds with a counteroffensive causing another country added to NATO...


Nio. They would just spend less and wither slowly. British Ministry of Colonies continued past the last one. This is how bureaucracies die...slowly...because the parasites are never fired. They have to retire and die.

The world has become smaller, not more peaceful, so no!

The matter of the "military stick", and the question whose ones is bigger, has become important again...so to threw it away is just illogical!

Macron's quotation stems from the time the West thought he had won an "eternal" peace, after the end of the longstanding main enemy, the Communist Bloc! It was an shortsighted error (Germany fell into that trap too)...

This isn't some old kitchen pot you can still find uses for.

A big military stick, which has no reason for existence, eventually finds itself a reason.

Ignoring the elephant in the room, China?

Can you list me how many times China invaded Europe over the last 5,000 years?

I think Germany invaded China as recently as under the Kaiser Wilhelm.

It's a global world now, the wars will be global too, with more modern technology than foot soldiers...not invaded capitals will prove your victory anymore! ;)

In the upcoming power struggles for influence and resources it's also about connections, cooperation, infrastructure....and yes, also the number of possible and real allies, or at least not-enemies.

And NATO is all about that! It's mission grows only bigger instead of vanishing, that's why it's hard to believe any US gov will really throw it all in the bin!

That'd be better gotten by negotiating something that allows Russia to maintain Crimea and the Donbas. To the Russians, Crimea is an existential matter.

Ukraine in NATO is a bad idea in my opinion. It only continues the exacerbation of Russia's natural insecurity-not to mention the responsibilities of securing an unstable country.

Why not just strengthen the Eastern flank of NATO and keep Ukraine neutral-it would serve a much more secure buffer that way, IMO?

@Bobko

It's not about China invading western countries, but about China setting the global table

Well, NATO's no help in that.

For that, you need more of Google, Microsoft, Meta and Amazon.

Compared to what those guys can do, the invasion of Ukraine is small peanuts. At least in the present.

NATO in Ukraine would be as aggressive as Russia in Mexico. Russia will never allow this nonsense.

Those dumb mongols and their junk...

Is that the one the Uk's shot down with small arms ?

@Novichok
I think it is absolutely moronic to call an American, a majority of them, who wants to take care of American problems and US citizens first, an isolationist. Not once have I said Americans dont want to help other countries or people. I have simply stated the fact that a majority of Americans want the US to take care of itself and its people before taking care of Ukraine. Every poll, even the left wing polls, supports this. Ukraine is not part of the United States, never will be, and the US needs to focus on itself and its own problems. Thats not isolationism, that is called being responsible.

The US wil leave NATO is not a far fetched idea. Trump was going to pull out, he said so publicly. Trump or Kennedy if elected will pull out and they will not give Ukraine another dollar. Why? Because thats what the people want. The people in power or "elites" as some have called them are nothing but corporate thieves. They take lobbyist money like no others. They are insider traders, and need to keep the MIC pumping so they can profit. They vast majority of Americans dont own stocks, or have investments. 90% of Americans dont have $1000 in emergency money to fall back on. And here we have Europeans telling those people that it is their responsibility to fund Ukraine? That defies logic and sounds more like crack heads telling their parents that mom and dad need to buy their crack for them instead of pay ing their mortgage.

Ukraine was told how and where to attack the Russian defenses. Yet they spent hundreds of millions, and a few thousand Ukraine lives fighting for a village that had little strategic value instead of puching to cut off Crimea. Had they done as they were told, then if they failed, the US would be to blame and would be morally obligated to continue to fund Ukraines efforts. Thats not what happened, and the US has zero obligation to fund Ukraine. Where are all the EU member countries on this? Why arent individual countries doing more outside of EU proposed funding? The answer is that they are taking care of their own needs first. And that is exactly what the US is being criticized for by PF posters? Wake TF up. Pot meet kettle.

How dare they question the military know how of the mighty US, especially after it's stunning victory over the Taliban in Afghanista...... oh.....

@mafketis
You mean the US defeeting the Taliban and leaving and then the Taliban taking over again? Dont want to listen to the guy paying the bills, then dont ask him to pay the bills. Thats how life works in the real world.

Surely this can't be true! O_O

hint: If the Taliban could take over again.... they were not defeated.... there is a case to be made for US achieving some goals in Afghanistan but the butt ugly fleeing and arming the Taliban is not one of them....

Supposedly putain watched the calamitous US withdrawal many, many times before deciding to invade Ukraine

Donbas is not that important. However, Crimea is the key here. If we were to pinpoint a geographical point on the map that is vital from a geopolitical point of view that would be Crimea. Continuation of that war would be pointless if, at the end of it, Russia would regain Crimea.

For me, that war would be victorious if Ukraine would get Crimea back.
They can even lose Kharkiv in the process, it wouldn't matter.
---------


I'm not saying they should be included. I don't think there is a political will to take Ukraine in.
--


The best way to cure Russian insecurity issues is to put them out of Europe for good. They insecurity issues lol, you mean their imperial ambitions and primitive ways of projecting their power onto neighboring countries.

The very support of the Ukrainian war against Russian intrusion is to prevent it. In other words, to give them a mighty slap on their greedy grasping hand.

------
Why not just strengthen the Eastern flank of NATO
Why not indeed, that will take decades and would mean big financial investment and aid, not unlike what Israel is getting and I don't think the US is ready for it.

They try to play the issue by making Germany and the EU take that mantle while leaving Poland (a border NATO state) out in the cold.

The trick here is that Germany is not ready, not with the current crew that is ruling there. Not to mention they are not able to pull it out at the moment and even IF they would change their attitude they need at least a decade to make it work.

They (the ruling class in Germany) think that way, If we are to take their mantle from the US in this part of the world (Europe), we may as well do without the US presence in Europe. All we need is a nuke ( not that difficult) and an American army leaving Europe for good.

That would allow us to make a deal with Russia and we can make a play as the EU a new big player on par with the US and China and Russia.

It is all very nice and dandy but that would leave Poland as a vassal state and a colony of German. It may sound not so bad for some but Germany has proven to be very bad at being a world power, which would mean Poland would F economically.

All in all, I don't think that Germany has the know-how, talent, and grit to pull it off. It means there is a good chance they will fail and the EU become Russia's vassal state which is what Russians hoped all along in their long-term plan, as they need it to conter balance China.

Germany's ego will just bring us down (Poland) for some piper dream.

At that time the Baltic states would be gone and Poland would be marginalized.

Yes. russian "security concerns" can be best be summarized as "OMG!!!!! They're making it harder for us to invade!!!!! We're not safe!!!!!!"

the bigger problem is that most European political classes are dead in the water, no new ideas, no solutions and only devotion to unworkable or outdated policies...

Germany Merkel's overlong and overly disaster filled tenure and the German establishment's insane devotion to unworkable policies (whether economic, environmental or social or international) means the country means it's going to be wiped out in the next elections or they'll try to be outlaw AfD and cause a lot of disruption that way.

France is..... France..... it will hobble along and no one will be very happy about it and the only real question is just how badly their Islamic friendly migration policies (was it De Gaulle that saw the Islamic world as a counterweight to Washington's power?) will blow up in their face.... they have a large mostly non-assimilated muslim sub-population that doesn't do any better there than they do in their own countries which is no way to run a first world economy

UK is just not interested in Europe, never has been and has it's own problems with addlebrained policies, with a completely deracinated capital city, they have yet to meet a neoliberal policy they haven't fallen madly in love with and followed into the abyss....

Several iterations of the Russian state collapsed while waiting for the inevitable fall of the West. :-D
NATO seems to really trigger you Ruskies folk. That's just another reason to keep it around.

Of course, thanks to Russia's recent actions currently more than 95% of Poles support our NATO membership, so screech all you like. The Alliance is staying here for good.

@Torq
fortune.com/recommends/banking/57-percent-of-americans-cant-afford-a-1000-emergency-expense/ This does not account for unemployed people, homeless people, or students. Shocking I know. Maybe not 90% but at least 70%.

@mafketis
Hint, President Trump negotiated with the Taliban for the withdraw of US troops. There was never a plan to indefinitely occupy Afghanistan. So, Bin Laden is dead, and the world is safer. Better things to do with US $ than spend it in a place where the US was not wanted.

NATO will exist, just not with the US carrying the heavy loads. If Russia invades Europe, then the US can decide if its worth getting involved, and not because of some agreement that is not only out dated, but not useful for anyone other than Europe. How many years did all the other NATO countries refuse to fund their military to NATO standards? If Russia was such a big threat, why didnt any European countries other than Poland recognize it? Merkel was as good as being a KGB agent. France is nothing more than a Russian perfume supplier. Both countries laid down with Vlad and if not for the US would still be laying down with him. They werent going to do anything for Ukraine until the US put on some pressure.

Beyond shocking. How can such a rich country have such poor citizens? Mind boggles.

@Torq
Loans are more easily obtained, adventure type of culture in a reckless fashion remains also to this day. Klondike wasn't built with riches, it digged out riches with poor and hungry hands

Ok, so why US was in panic in 1962, once Soviet missiles suddenly appear on Cuba? (After NATO missiles with comparable range suddenly appear in Turkey, of course...) US was so deeply concerned that this missiles will make it harder to invade to Cuba?

Once there is chances (and prepared infrastructure) in neighbouring countries for SUDDEN appearance of weapons that can hit main industrial centers in Russia within minutes - we will be deeply concerned. So deeply, so political world map may somewhat change if our concerns will be ignored. Just like it was with ukraine.

@Torq
Hollywood portrays an unreal and not even close to realistic life in the US to the rest of the world. Lots of people living paycheck to paycheck. People are envious and jealous of other people who are successful and feel they deserve to have the same things as those successful people so they go in debt. Old saying is that poor people stay broke trying to look rich and rich people stay rich by looking poor. I laugh a lot here in Poland at everyone wearing these designer clothes with huge logo's on them, as they get into their Dacia. People with money never need to show they have money. I have Polish friends that simply cannot comprehend how I went 20 years without a vacation working 16 hours a day while building my companies. That is the only way to make it in the US. Everything is competitive. If you cant compete, you will not be successful unless you inherit money. Most Poles would be shocked at how hard it is.

Did he also negotiate arming them to teeth in the process?

You're missing an important detail here - those missiles appeared there even though the Soviet Union and Cuba weren't in an official military alliance. So, a country doesn't have to be in an official military alliance with your enemy in order to be a threat.

At the same time countries just being part of a military alliance isn't any automatic threat by default. You can be in NATO and not have any American bases or missiles, or whatever, on your territory, if the US for some reason doesn't want to put them in your country. I think that if the US wanted to and a non-NATO country agreed, the US would put whatever it deemed necessary, including nukes (if the situation was serious enough) in a given country - they could simply make some bilateral agreement or alliance or whatever with the said country, like with Sweden, for example:

reuters.com/world/us-sweden-sign-defence-cooperation-agreement-2023-12-06/

So, instead of obsessing over this or that country being part of NATO, it would be better for RuSSia to create good relations with its neighbours and the US (that's what would be good for RuSSia's security long-term), because if the US one day sees RuSSia as a real threat, it won't matter which countries are part of NATO, but which countries view RuSSia as a serious threat, imho. And RuSSia is working hard to make sure that it's neighbours see RuSSia as a serious threat.

Btw, in my opinion RuSSia is in reality its worst enemy. You want to be feared, as if you forgot that if you're feared then those around you will want protection from you. And that means the US presence in the region. In my honest opinion RuSSia is simply retarded. I can't even comprehend this retardation. There's something suicidal about it.