The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / News  % width posts: 222

THE ARMY OF POLAND - THE REALITY


rychlik 41 | 373
3 Apr 2010 #1
I apologize if this has been asked before but....

1- How strong is Poland's army as of today? Could they handle an attack on their territory (ex. Germany, Belarus. I know Russia would obviously be a problem.) I know this might be hard to answer because we do not have access to classified military information but if someone has educated guesses, then post here.

2- Why the hell doesn't Poland have mandatory conscription anymore?! What do they expect to do if there was a conflict? Use weekend warriors? Are there actual benefits to having a professional army?

Discuss.
plk123 8 | 4,150
3 Apr 2010 #2
1-

czechs or slovaks or ukrainians.. yeah.. gerries or russkies = blitzkrieg2

2-

i agree.. not really for professional soldiers only.. this breaths lack of patritism or at least pride in your country.
OP rychlik 41 | 373
3 Apr 2010 #3
The Gerries would today still be a threat? I was hoping otherwise. What the hell's wrong with Polska?
As for non conscription, I just hope they know what they are doing. I would like to know that Poland is safe because they can actually protect themselves, not because the guy in the neighborhood is nice enough not to attack at the moment. Can NATO be really trusted in a serious conflict?
jwojcie 2 | 763
3 Apr 2010 #4
Ad 1. you can start here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Armed_Forces

Ad 2. Professional army has pros and cons. In my opinion core professional army is better option than conscription. Quality of professional soldier is way better than conscripts.

But in the same time, I think it should be mixed with some kind of National Guard. Which is actually happening right now. This type of forces is currently being created, in the beginning only 10000, and only previous soldiers can sign up. Probably after assesment of usability and costs in next years size of this forces will grow.

To sum things up, Polish army can bite, but certainly in case of similar situation like WWII would be destroyed again. But there is no point to be neurotic, Polish geopolitical position is fantastic now if we compare it to previous few hundred years... We of course could have army like North Korea or Nuclear program like Iran, but both examples aren't attractive or needed.
plk123 8 | 4,150
3 Apr 2010 #5
Can NATO be really trusted in a serious conflict?

not really if it;s between members.

The Gerries would today still be a threat?

i didn't say the are but you really can't trust the germans, man.. look at the history.. there hasn't been a century in polish history that PL and D didn't have some kind of a conflict.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
3 Apr 2010 #6
Poland has many reserves that could be called up. Of course, it would depend who the invader would be but Polish troops are very well trained.

Poland abandoned conscription in Nov 2008 and with good reason, rychlik. Too many tried to duck it and then you get demotivated troops. Britain has had a volunteer army for a long time and hasn't done so badly.

Threat assessments show minimal risk so Poland need not worry. Do you envisage some flare-ups in the near future? I don't.

There are benefits, yes, but an army can be costly to maintain and there are other priorities for the Polish government.
jeden - | 226
3 Apr 2010 #7
1) Proffessional army is better and cheaper than conscription.

This is wise choice but I think that every man in Poland should be educated with shooting.

there is no reason to attack Poland, we are peacfull nation wchich can be also very bothersome for invaders.;)
plk123 8 | 4,150
3 Apr 2010 #8
1) Proffessional army is better and cheaper than conscription.

that's arguable but what conscription does is ties the politician hands a bit.. with all pro armed forces, the government can abuse their power so much easier as sending young people in harms way doesn't involve EVERY mother in the country. tis' the major problem in the usa right now. do you seriously think that usa would be in iraq and afghanistan if there was a draft?? i highly doubt it. tis the lesson from vietnam.
TheOther 6 | 3,821
3 Apr 2010 #9
there hasn't been a century in polish history that PL and D didn't have some kind of a conflict

Between 1772 and 1918 everything was peaceful ... :)
jeden - | 226
3 Apr 2010 #10
IMHO Country has to have possibility to send quickly army where is it needed.

The proffessional army is better ( what is proved) better organized, cheaper, therefore have better weapons.

Conscrptions has higher morals when defend fatherland. But is not disciplined like proffessinal army.

The solution ---create proffessional army using Poles. Nota as USA do with BlackWater.

BTW Poland lived with Germany for some centuries peacfully
king polkagamon
4 Apr 2010 #11
Poland's army significance is only as a means to press Lukachenko in Belarus.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
4 Apr 2010 #12
Press him for what?
plk123 8 | 4,150
4 Apr 2010 #13
Between 1772 and 1918 everything was peaceful ... :)

not really.... most of the disturbances were with the russkies but it wasn't all peachy the pruss or hung/aust either. and you probably really meant 1775 or you need to crack a book on PL history.

BTW Poland lived with Germany for some centuries peacfully

not really.. there has always been threats or some kind of issues.. never really fully peaceful coexistence.
TheOther 6 | 3,821
4 Apr 2010 #14
you probably really meant 1775 or you need to crack a book on PL history

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Partition_of_Poland
Sire Brenshar 1 | 61
4 Apr 2010 #15
probably really meant 1775 or you need to crack a book on PL history.

You probably meant 1795 or you need to crack a book on Polish history>
z_darius 14 | 3,968
4 Apr 2010 #16
/wiki/First_Partition_of_Poland

That explains the date of the first partition of Poland but it still offers no proof that everything was peaceful between Germans and Poles during partitions. In fact it was not.

Some examples:

- Uprising in 1794
- Early 1830 - the policy of Germanization is picking up and Polish is forbidden in schools and administration.
- Uprising of 1846
- 1863 - Prussia and Russia sign a pack of co-operation in their fight against Poles rising yet again (Powstanie Styczniowe, i.e. the January Uprising of 1963-64

- 1871 Bismarck intensifies the policy of Germanization
- 1885 the process of "rugi pruskie" begins - expulsion of Poles from Eastern Prussian provinces who did not have German citizenship.
- 1894 HAKATA created (although the name was adopted later) for the purpose of further limiting Polish culture and language in the eastern parts of Prussia.
- The strikes in Wrzesnia, 1901-1902. Poles protested against the removal of the Polish language from the religious education and against severe corporal punishments inflicted on Polish children who dared to speak their native language. Poles were punished with fines and jail terms

There. That's how peaceful it was.

As for the Polish army, I never saw anything wrong with knowing how to pull a trigger or throw a grenade properly. Heck, a lot of kids who served in tank divisions at least could learn how to drive a tractor with a flare ;)
plk123 8 | 4,150
4 Apr 2010 #17
You probably meant 1795 or you need to crack a book on Polish history>

lol.. good point. just checking and am glad to see someone is paying attention. :D :D
PLAT 1 | 23
4 Apr 2010 #18
Past 100 years, every Polish government (apart from Peoples republic Poland) is so ignorant about the security of Poland....
we are between two historical mighty nations. One we are seriously annoyign constantly by the Polish gov't sticking their noses where not needed, as for the other we are on their Eastern provinces, as soon as a right wing government goes to power in this country then we shall expect conflict for those territories; people have no clue whatsoever how much this land to the east of the Oder/Odra really means to these people.

every person regardless of gender 17 years of age should serve 2 years mandatory, wether they are planning to study later or live in another EU country but hold Polish citizenship.... this would weed out all the people who dont give a rats arse about their 'fatherland'.

Seriously; hasn't history taught us enough????? There is other countries out there who didnt experience so much ****, occupation and other things but they have strong Loyal understanding to serve their country just in case, we experienced all those partitions and bad times and still are oblivious to the fact that for example 1 year from now Poland might be wiped off of the world's map once again..... which time would it be this time?
TheOther 6 | 3,821
4 Apr 2010 #19
There. That's how peaceful it was.

Well, the so-called uprisings: weren't they more like isolated incidences in a handful of cities? At least the ones in Prussia during the partitions?
jeden - | 226
4 Apr 2010 #20
Well, the so-called uprisings: weren't they more like isolated incidences in a handful of cities?

hahaa

In comparison with all of this uprising, the Seccession War was an incident.
TheOther 6 | 3,821
4 Apr 2010 #21
You're right. I was thinking about the ones in 1846 and 1848 when I posted.
jeden - | 226
4 Apr 2010 #22
I was thinking about the ones in 1846 and 1848 when I posted

agree
ScottK
4 Apr 2010 #23
Yes, there are benefits from having a volunteer military. Let's start with freedom of choice.
In my humble opinion, a "society" (there are really only individuals) that uses force is not worth fighting for.
LIDLJUGEND 2 | 34
4 Apr 2010 #24
I think we should take in concideration that no democratic republic throughout history has ever waged war against another. And since Poland is a member of both NATO and the European Union there is no direct threat to it's sovereignty.
convex 20 | 3,978
4 Apr 2010 #25
Israel isn't a republic? Russia?
Bratwurst Boy 6 | 10,586
4 Apr 2010 #26
"....against each other" was the important point.

You can't call the former PLO now HAMAS state or the Arab theocracies/kingdoms democracies.

Russia? More authoritarian than fully democratic...
thebear45 1 | 67
4 Apr 2010 #27
we can send our kalishnikovs to poland if they need them, lol
shopgirl 6 | 928
4 Apr 2010 #28
Russia will never be democratic as long as Putin draws breath.
And who knows, maybe he will be able to control Medevev from beyond the grave.
Rasputin would be so proud.
convex 20 | 3,978
4 Apr 2010 #29
You can't call the former PLO now HAMAS state or the Arab theocracies/kingdoms democracies.

The elections in Gaza were deemed fair...granted that was under occupation...but I digress. I mean Lebanon in my post.

Regarding Russia...far more democratic than authoritarian...not to say there aren't problems, but seriously.
Bratwurst Boy 6 | 10,586
4 Apr 2010 #30
Regarding Russia...far more democratic than authoritarian...not to say there aren't problems, but seriously.

I have my doubts...the press freedom is nearly non-existent...journalists get threatened and murdered...the approval quote of Putin...er...Medvedev is enormous (maybe the Russians like the style who knows).

Various aspects of the contemporary press freedom situation are criticized by multiple international organisations. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] According to International Press Institute, the Russian laws, bureaucratic regulations and politically motivated criminal investigations have forced the press into self-censorship.[1] [8] According to International Press Institute, Russia is the most dangerous European country for journalists.[9][1] According to Human Rights Watch, the Russian government control over civil society through selective implementation of the law, restriction and censure.[4]

In 2009 Reporters Without Borders ranked Russia 153th out of 175 in the Press Freedom Index.

There is no free forming of opinion, hence free choice of parties and programs, hence democracy without a free press!


Home / News / THE ARMY OF POLAND - THE REALITY
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.