If Poland is attacked by Russia will N.A.T.O help defend Poland or not?

Ha! We've been there twice in Moscow no less! But yeah currently they're just too big.


Its not a question of working double time but available technologies, you can work triple time and you wont create a plasma rifle anytime soon.


The immidiate future of this project is the new general standard for rich countries like Germany and elite frontline units for poorer countries like Poland.


That wouldnt be that expensive, we're not Iran we've got all neccesary technologies here and as for resources we could buy them from China or India (if we got really redneck about getting nukes) but its still loads of money that'd have to come from somewhere.


Where will you get money for them though? (i'm disregarding political implications).


And we did it! True in the end they kicked us out but only because we (our king) lost interest, we even made our kings royal brat a Tzar and had their Tzar become a monk:)))

Come on, if Pakistan with GDP of $167.6 billion can afford their own nukes
and Israel with GDP of $201.4 billion can afford them, then Poland with $667.9
billion GDP (2008 est.) can find some money as well if need be.

One example our future unit of german/polish soldiers will need to guard against enemies:

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8337735.stm

We need to replace or purchase more of:

Frigates.
Corvettes.
85% of main battle tanks.
Infantry fighting vehicles.
Self propelled artillery.
Self propelled rocket artillery.
Personal weapons.
45% of fighter jets.
Attack helicopters.
Transport helicopters.
4x4 utility transport.
Combat vests.
Self propelled AA systems.
Tank shells.
UAVs.
Modern fighter jets.
More AT modern AT weapons.

Thats only selected examples, theres dozens more.

We're basically transitioning from a soviet era army to a modern military and while we're centuries ahead any other country in ex Soviet Europe we're still going to be paying through the nose for about 20 years before we get a truly modern army, where will you get additional money for those 20-30 nukes and assorted stuff?


Except that the level of life of an average Pakistani citizen is what it is and their army is not exactly top notch.

As for Israel its being pumped with US help and offsets.
[quote=Bratwurst Boy]One example our future unit of german/polish soldiers will need to guard against enemies:

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8337735.stm
rulen.com/kkk/kkkflag2.jpg

Join european task force in Africa (couldnt help it) :))

I guess it's a question of priorities. If the nuclear program was considered necessary,
then it would have to receive the priority over most of those conventional forces
programmes.

Whether it would be more advantageous for Poland to have a very modern army with
no nuclear weapons or a less modern one with some nukes is open for discussion.
In my opinion, the army as we have today backed up with 20-30 modern nuclear
warheads would have more deterrent effect on any aggressor than a modern one,
without nukes but as I said it's open for discussion.

Those priorities are already chosen, we're already paying for stuff like F-16s and Patria AMVs, if we chose to finance nukes now, apart from the political chaos that would start we'd lose a LOT of money that we dont really have and when you have nukes they need to be maintained and housed, warhead carriers are not cheap either.

One other thing that i'm not happy at all about would be a nuclear reactor, Ukraine lost a huge patch of its country, i wouldnt like any of our major cities to start glowing.

We're still going to have to go nuclear as far as energy but there's safer reactors that dont allow for enriching Uranium.

Eben Belarus is capable of attacking and defeating Poland.Anyway these scenarios will never take place unlsess Poland uses polish minority to cause unrest in Belarus.(only some bang head US chief can promote such a scenario).

It's probably a question of technical culture and safety procedures - the risk is not
that high with modern nuclear reactors. There's no ideal solution apparently, but
apart from all the cost (both political and economic) the acquiring of nuclear weapons
would give our army enough deterrent factor to assure the safety of our country in
the foreseeable future.

I dont know what would happen first, Belarussian army running out of fuel, out of ammo or getting owned by Poles, possibly all three.

At a whooping 1/3rd of Ukrainian GDP (Ukrainians are estimated to have 400-500 tanks operational) Belarussian army is running around on vodka and foul language.


But the risk of losing several voivodships is still there, imagine losing Lower Silesia or Greater/Lesser Poland, it'd fvck up our economy back to stoneage.


Well improving our army will also give us a deterrent factor without the added risk of becoming a shiny glass desert.

Belarus has better tanks than Poland and plenty of oil.

just buy the nukes from north Korea, maybe they give us a deal buy two get third free.

Marek:"If Poland will be attacked by Russia will N.A.T.O help defend Poland or just look the other way? by finding some excuse and blaming Poland for the aggression."

Oh, I suspect the west will have a meeting, maybe in Teheran, or Yalta or Potsdam and then decide Polands fate.

And plenty of spare parts and plenty of everything and it pays for them with the revenue from its carrot goldmines.

Also no Belarus doesnt have any tanks better then Polish ones, their primary tank is a T-72B which is inferior to Polish PT-91 and their best tank is T-80 which is severely inferior to Polish 2A4s.

That is if Belarus has more then 300 running ones.

Belarus has at least 1500 tanks and better missiles than Poland.

Sigh Ok Southern, Belarus has at least 1500 tanks and better missiles then Poland, now go away:)

If Poland would have been attacked by Russia NATO would helped Poland issuing noble declaration in Poland defense.

Bealrus is pennyless...most of their money goes on trying to sort out the problems that Chernobyl created.....they could not afford to fill all those tanks up with fuel and ammo and go fight anybody....not for long anyways...

telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/poland/6480227/Russia -simulates-nuclear-attack-on-Poland.html

Don't know how much Denmark or Norway would go, but IF Great Britain goes there is a large chance they would also go. Unless it's ruled by commies at that time -.-

All this talk about tanks, soldiers, etc is pointless. Future wars will be fought in 2 ways:

Do you people honestly think that the ruskies are going to send their drunk soldiers pushing their tanks over the border into poland??? Hell no, the'll launch 2 nucs and poland is done like dinner.

Secondly, in the event of an attack on poland, no nato country would dare send any of their soldiers to poland. W. europeaners would not want to die for poland and politicians would not want to risk losing power over such a decision.

At best they would send supplies (food, ammo, etc.) and intelligence.

Do you really think a german will be willing to risk his/her life for poland?????????? dream on!!

Like i said above, they'll provide some help and if it doesn't work, they will work out some kind of peace deal.

Only if they too are interested in becoming steaks!


Well...alone because we are immediate neighbours to any threat....you can bet on it!


Peace deal??? What peace deal! Another Iron Curtain through Europe? Never!

We are talking here about a densely populated and developed area not some remote backyard like Canada who nobody cares about...

PolishCanuck,....what the hell do you know about anything? You're from Canada.

You apparently know nothing of radiation poisoning, fallout, environmental contamination, or anything else associated with the detonation of nuclear weapons. This is all aside from the simple fact that IF Russia would ever be so retarded as to do such a thing,...the worldwide repercussions would leave the entirety of populated Russia one massive, nightmarish firestorm, killing her population almost absolutely. The US and UK (at least) strategies for nuclear war is the use of many smaller nukes spread over populated areas, rather than one very large bomb making up the same yield tonnage. The reason being to maximize the resulting inferno, creating entire landscapes of firestorms which would destroy everything and everyone, leaving absolute death in their wake. The goal: Total Annihilation of the Civilian Population

Why do you think that there have never been any tactical nuclear weapons ever used against another nation? And no land wars waged against nations bearing nuclear weapons since their creation and proliferation? This stuff is to be feared.

I suggest that you call it "Ziolkowski" after the father of Russian aerospace engineering of Polish origins. ;)


We didn't win it and we'll never win. Neither the US will in Afghanistan or Iraq. Muslim lunatics with their geeeee-had are never ending story. :)


Keep dreaming! :)

Nothing a few nukes can't fix :))

But seriously, if this highly unlikely event would take place, NATO would back up PL. Russia would not only be attacking a NATO member, but also a EU member. I don't think this will ever happen; not only because there is absolutely no reason for Russia to do so in a militairy sense, but also -and mainly- it would lose all economic income it has from dealing with the EU and NATO members. In short, I don't think the Russians will be so stupid to do so.

>^..^<

M-G (tiens)

EU is not a military alliance and NATO does not guarantee any help.

It basically fails to specify what kind of help NATO is supposed to give, for example the security council may decide that Poland requires three crates of bananas and a pat on the back and thats what we get according to NATO charter.

Given that during WW2 West was supposed to engage with all available forces and it did not (sorry declaring the war and then going back to sleep doesnt count) its no guarantee at all.


And that is the problem with stupid people, instead of having you euthanized like they did in Sparta society lets you bloody morons grow up, come to this here board and **** me off with stupid posts.

If Russia cuts of gas Europe freezes in one winter, we can't embargo sh*t as far as Russia is concerned, this is also why there wont be any war and why there wouldnt be any significant help for Poland but such a scenario is unrealistic for now.

Euthanasia is first word that coming to my mind in this thread

But, some says euthanasia can be understand as help

Despite having vastly superior battlefield technologies available to them NATO forces are presently having a tough enough time defeating irregular Taliban forces! Superior military technology or access to large quantities of sophisticated weapons doesn't always equate to victory over a more lightly armed but more determined and motivated foe!

In any case what on earth does Poland possibly have that todays Russia would ever concievably want to aquire by force of arms, that it could not just go out and buy up?

With all this talk about more and more weapons and defending Polish soil from Foreign Invader's,but by signing the Lisbon treaty Poland signed away their nation without a shot,the new federal Goverment of the German-French Alliance own's europe now.

I know how popular i am going to be now.

How do you think you defeat a lone civilian with bombs strapped to his body, determined to kill himself and to blow the next market place full of families up to heaven too?

Especially if you are supposed to support the current native government instead of using all your equipment and clean the whole place once and for all?

Such wars aren't winnable for nobody!
But that says nothing about the weakness/strenghts of the NATO troops in case of an attack.
I really doubt that a real dangerous attack comes from a lone Taliban with bombs strapped to his body (even as he probably will kill a few people).


You would be even more popular if you would bring some facts to support your rather mysty blatherings!

Easy look it up yourself,it is called the Lisbon Treaty.