will be ruthlessly ripped (without the use of lubrication).
Similar to 1939? When the government ran to the border ahead of its own squealing?
Kanja, you seem like a smart man, but there's something you don't fully understand about nuclear weapons. They don't give any guarantees by themselves. In order for it to serve as a guarantee, it must:
1. Be maintained in good condition which is expensive even for a developed country. ( Does Poland have radiation-chemical plants capable of reprocessing plutonium and its own reactor with constant tritium production?),
2. Have adequate means of delivery, which will pass anti-air defences and will not be shut down by a single command from abroad, if a strike against someone would contradict the geopolitical plans of the suppliers of the means of delivery.
3. Have the determination and political will to use it and be held responsible for it. I wasn't joking about responsibility.
4. Be prepared for a nuclear response, after which the Poles will need a new place to live for approx. 300 years (~10 half-lives of 90Sr). The Russians, for example, have the Siberian taiga in reserve to house survivors, but what does Poland have?