The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / News  % width posts: 404

US to deploy Patriot missiles to Poland


celinski 31 | 1,258
1 Mar 2009  #1
USA names Russia as possiable threats.

US to deploy Patriot missiles to Poland
The US will deploy a Patriot missile battery in Poland to bolster its defences against possible threats by Russia.

Speaking after a meeting with the US secretary of state Hilary Clinton in Washington, Poland's foreign minister, Radek Sikorski, said that America would place the missiles in line with an agreement penned between the two nations last summer, adding that the deployment would be "initially as temporary measure and later on a permanent basis".

Concern has mounted in Warsaw that American backtracking over the missile shield might bolster Russian attempts to interfere in a part of the world it once controlled, while at the same time exposing Poland to some form of retribution from a Kremlin angry with Polish willingness to host the missile shield.

Poland hopes that the Patriot battery, which will involve the first deployment of foreign troops on Polish soil since the end of the Cold War, should be operative by 2012.

telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/poland/4838465/US-to- deploy-Patriot-missiles-to-Poland.html
plk123 8 | 4,150
1 Mar 2009  #2
The US will deploy a Patriot missile battery in Poland to bolster its defences against possible threats by Russia.

this will backfire on PL..
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
1 Mar 2009  #3
Care to justify?
Seanus 15 | 19,706
1 Mar 2009  #4
Exactly, what utter garbage!! Russia's invasion of Georgia? Excuse me, that was a set-up and Saakashvili attacked first. He badly miscalculated and this has been acknowledged by many commentators.
Randal 1 | 577
1 Mar 2009  #5
This is likely just a stepped down ploy by Obama as an alternative to the missile shield program he is against. All show...
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
1 Mar 2009  #6
Exactly, what utter garbage!! Russia's invasion of Georgia? Excuse me, that was a set-up and Saakashvili attacked first. He badly miscalculated and this has been acknowledged by many commentators.

I hope thats sarcasm Sean, while i completely agree that Saakashvili fucked up Russia did use his fuck up as a pretext and thats dangerous because they've seen world wont rase a finger so the next excuse might be far lighter.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
1 Mar 2009  #7
Sorry Sokrates, I find many Poles to be biased on this issue. I liked watching the Georgian national team when they had super football players like Kinkladze, Kaladze and Ketsbaia, to name but 3. I also like some Russian things. I'm neutral.

Pretext? No, they acted and they left. The world was caught in its own opportunistic lie. No sarcasm there, sorry.
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
1 Mar 2009  #8
Well i'm not biased on this issue, lord knows there's enough bias in me but i think you know on which issues :)

Pretext? No, they acted and they left

Nope, they're still very much there.

The world was caught in its own opportunistic lie. No sarcasm there, sorry.

The fact is that Abchazja and Osetia are closely related with Georgia and while they didnt want to be parts of Georgia they definitely didnt want big brother to help them, of course Russia didnt ask them since it wanted to block a potential pipeline and its troops are stationing there despite official withdrawal.
OP celinski 31 | 1,258
1 Mar 2009  #9
What says you?
Grzegorz_ 51 | 6,163
1 Mar 2009  #10
This is likely just a stepped down ploy by Obama as an alternative to the missile shield program he is against.

True... One battery, what a joke.
OP celinski 31 | 1,258
1 Mar 2009  #11
This explains what Poland wants.

Poland Looks Beyond U.S. Missile-Defense Shield, Sikorski Says

Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski said his country is most interested in U.S. pledges in the agreement he signed last year in the face of Russian opposition, including an American garrison with Patriot interceptor missiles. The two sides also agreed to act jointly on military and non-military threats.

bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601100&sid=aSAMgE650A2M
Randal 1 | 577
1 Mar 2009  #12
I do not believe this is part of a larger effort. I suspect this may prove to be the entire effort.
Watch as in the near future Obama tries to paint this pathetic stunt showing as a good and adequate alternative to the grander missile shield program deal between Bush and Poland

Obama is an anti-military Leftist, determined to undo things his predecessors did in this area and is already making noises about becoming friendly -“reestablishing relations”- with Iran and Russia …at the expense of our friends who count on our protection…
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
1 Mar 2009  #13
Obama is an anti-military Leftist, determined to undo things his predecessors did in this area and is already making noises about becoming friendly -“reestablishing relations”- with Iran and Russia …at the expense of our friends who count on our protection…

You mistake US presidents with people who make actual decisions, Bush for example was a redneck who needed a red and blue diagram not to smear shit over his ass while wiping, there's advisors and people behind the face who make the decisions, presidents in US are little more than faces.

I do not believe this is part of a larger effort. I suspect this may prove to be the entire effort.

In this particular case yes, however i believe that US will invest quite a lot into Poland in the immidiate future.

reestablishing relations”- with Iran

Iran was (despite constant stream of merry bullshit by Ahmedejinah) never against US in any but purely demonstrative way.

and Russia …

USA is not interested in dialogue of equals with a potential rival so stop deluding yourself, Americans will give Russia the finger at every step of the way.

…at the expense of our friends who count on our protection…

There's a polish saying, "if you cant count, count on yourself" US of A is a selfish bitch and rightly so, thats the way diplomacy works but i do believe that all of the above is implausible, USA has significant political gains in making Poland strong and is likely to invest in it, if not? Well thats US loss really.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
1 Mar 2009  #14
Obama was the great hope and, on this matter at least, has done what needed to be done. Putin is very willing to enter into constructive dialogue with him. The missile shield was a provocative measure and is really not needed.

Protection from what, zee Germans? ;) ;) (Pulls a Jason Statham/Turkish face)
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
1 Mar 2009  #15
The missile shield was a provocative measure and is really not needed.

Actually you see it in completely wrong context, its not protection, its a gesture, a signal if you will.
Randal 1 | 577
1 Mar 2009  #16
there's advisors and people behind the face who make the decisions

Yes. But their job is to advise and decide with respect to their boss’s agenda on a matter. Different agenda, different advice and decisions. And he still gets the final say.

The missile shield was a provocative measure and is really not needed.

I thought you were for the shield, Seanus?
Seanus 15 | 19,706
1 Mar 2009  #17
I didn't say it wasn't a signal, I believe that it is. Provocative in the sense that it was pushed through despite the Russians seeing it as being provocative.
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
1 Mar 2009  #18
Yes. But their job is to advise and decide with respect to their boss’s agenda on a matter. Different agenda, different advice and decisions. And he still gets the final say.

I seriously doubt that, i believe that there's a long running agenda and political continuity and presidents only add or substract in respect to it in a relatively small way.

For example invasion of Iraq was ALL about oil (stealing it in food for oil programmes and so forth) and i doubt that was Bushs idea, more likely that it was more or less subtly suggested to him.

I didn't say it wasn't a signal, I believe that it is. Provocative in the sense that it was pushed through despite the Russians seeing it as being provocative.

Russians use terms like provocation like a serial rapist uses a kidnapped teenager ie whenever they feel like it, ultimately such a middle finger to them is a positive thing for Poland since it furthers us from their zone of influence.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
1 Mar 2009  #19
I was initially for the shield when the discussions got underway. I felt that Europe was waking up to safety concerns after Madrid and other threats from radicals. However, I gradually grew to see through the deceit and political maneuvering. This wasn't really altruistically done in the name of the Polish interest, it was to further America's strategic stronghold in global expansion and also to get an important foothold under, guess what, a pretext.
Grzegorz_ 51 | 6,163
1 Mar 2009  #20
Provocative in the sense that it was pushed through despite the Russians seeing it as being provocative.

lol...
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
1 Mar 2009  #21
This wasn't really altruistically done in the name of the Polish interest

However it was in the Polish interest, despite not being altruist.

was to further America's strategic stronghold in global expansion and also to get an important foothold under, guess what, a pretext.

Sean lets face it, Europe is a bunch of cynical fuckers who would sell Poland out without a second of consideration, they did it twice in 1939 and in Yalta, our politicians have no illusions as to the value of NATO or EU, if USA chooses to invest in Poland in its own interests then lets have them do it, it doesnt matter if Poland gets stronger as part of US plot what matters is that Poland gets stronger.

Those Patriots are completely irrelevant by themselves but i see them as a beginning of pro-polish effort that might do for us what it did for Japan, Germany or Korea and such investment is worth more than a thousand EUs or NATOs.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
1 Mar 2009  #22
It'd've been interesting to see if you'd've still 'LOL'd' if they had actually set the missiles in Kalingrad.

Come on Greg, join in the discussion.

Many Poles were against it, even more Czechs were.
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
1 Mar 2009  #23
It'd've been interesting to see if you'd've still 'LOL'd' if they had actually set the missiles in Kalingrad.

They would not, Russia does not disclose how many operational launchers it has but i'm betting with the state of their nuclear stockpile, not many, also that would aggravate Baltic Republics, Ukraine, even Belarus, those are the countries that would really hate seeing Russia go active, there was a LOT to lose in terms of political capital for Russia there.
Randal 1 | 577
1 Mar 2009  #24
Russians use terms like provocation like a...

Like a Liberal tosses around "racist!" Lol...

However it was in the Polish interest

Indeed it was. Regardless of motives.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
1 Mar 2009  #25
This is Kaczyński-style thinking. Let's have a dig at Russia and open old wounds that have been healing.

Another point, where was Poland's individual initiative in implementing plans for its own security? Do you really need America to be the big brother for you?

I agree, Europeans are lax when it comes to security.
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
1 Mar 2009  #26
This is Kaczyński-style thinking.

No sir, Kaczyński is a moron who would antagonize Russia because he's a little twat ridden with inferiority issues and as a means to appeal to the more simple electorate that swallows anti-german, anti-russian and anti-corruption slogans whereas i ...

Let's have a dig at Russia and open old wounds that have been healing.

... believe that in great diplomacy actions require a valid reason and a purpose, improving relations with Russia above a certain level is not possible without submission, aggravating them seriously takes far more than a defence shield.

The shield showed Russia that we're ready to defy and oppose them, remember that russian goverment operates in a simple weak-strong polarity, submissive nations get used in the worst ways, too bold nations get subdued (Georgia) whereas moderately independent nations have hopes of maintaining relatively normal relations.

The shield is such a path of moderation russian rhetoric notwhistanding.

Another point, where was Poland's individual initiative in implementing plans for its own security? Do you really need America to be the big brother for you?

Not at all but we need to bolster polish position in central Europe by first improving our economical, political and military standing and at a later stage turning towards smaller/weaker nations like Ukraine, Hungary or Romania since Western Europe is in our situation only a paper supporter in times of the true crisis.

So milk the West while we can, get used by US if it wants to use us and then with improved strength turn to the thus far overlooked part of Europe where our true political capital and potential lies.
Randal 1 | 577
1 Mar 2009  #27
I suspect as a result many nations have come to rely on America to provide such things for them that they themselves could do if they wanted to undertake such an initiative. After all, why take on such expense if someone is offering to do it for you?

Often politics are a reflection of common social interaction, just on a grander, international scale.
Here, Russia and Iran are the big drunken bullies, the U.S. the cops and Poland the little guy who needs a hand defending from the louts. When if Little P took some self defense lessons, he wouldn’t need our help so much.

Where was I going with this?? I guess that’s it. Lol…
Seanus 15 | 19,706
1 Mar 2009  #28
I ask again, Sokrates. Where is the perceived threat? Who are you protecting yourselves against with this shield? All I've seen in your last few posts has been talk of Russo-Polish relations.
Sokrates 8 | 3,346
1 Mar 2009  #29
I suspect as a result many nations have come to rely on America to provide such things for them that they themselves could do if they wanted to undertake such an initiative. After all, why take on such expense if someone is offering to do it for you?

No one relies on America however Poland is the only significant supporter next to UK and many nations around us look as to what are we going to do next.

If Europe remains peacefull than Poland will join the big 3 (Germany, France, UK) within the next 20-30 years but US needs that voice much much earlier, no one relies on US its US that will grow to rely on Poland if it hopes to retain its influence in Europe.

Important bit is to understand that if US is going to help out Poland become a fully self supporting strong player thats only because this situation is furthering US goals, so its not exactly a hand out.

Often politics are a reflection of common social interaction, just on a grander, international scale.

Only in the age of kings and great leaders, in times of democracy when its much less personalized its a much more complicated process.

I ask again, Sokrates. Where is the perceived threat? Who are you protecting yourselves against with this shield? All I've seen in your last few posts has been talk of Russo-Polish relations.

Sean at the moment there is no threat however there will be, unless you are willing to bet that Europe is stabilized for good, building our political, military and economical standing in anticipation of the threat is done so much better when its still not there.

Some sort of conflict with Russia is a foregone conclusion, Eastern Europe and Russia have simply to many colliding goals and interests to maintain status quo for much longer, the question is when will the conflict begin, what will be the sides and what form will it take.
Wahldo
1 Mar 2009  #30
the U.S. the cops

Thinking like that is the reason we're broke right now. I don't want to be the cops and I don't want to pay for being the cops.

Here's how it is:

You help Europeans out - They hate you.
You don't help Europeans out -They hate you.

It's cheaper to do nothing.

Home / News / US to deploy Patriot missiles to Poland
Discussion is closed.