The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered [4]  |  Archives [1] 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / News  % width posts: 486

'Fort Trump' Military Base in Poland


jon357 64 | 14,382    
19 Sep 2018  #31
There's ZERO risk of any full scale conflict between Russia and the west.

Only because of the threat that there could be. M.A.D is indeed mad, but has worked so far.

The risk is how far one side are prepared to push things, since a nuclear holocaust is a very big bluff to call.
OP johnny reb 16 | 3,136    
19 Sep 2018  #32
It all has been prophesied and there isn't much we can do about it.
It is only a matter of time.
All at Gods speed.
Fort Trump does have a nice ring to it.
G (undercover)    
19 Sep 2018  #33
The risk is how far one side are prepared to push things, since a nuclear holocaust is a very big bluff to call.

Russians surlly aren't. Any Kremlin guy thinking about it would quickly get "accident".

BTW mods, are you crazy ? My post was 100% on topic. What in your opinion is "kosher" here ? Talking about what Duda was wearing during the meeting ?
jon357 64 | 14,382    
19 Sep 2018  #34
Any Kremlin guy thinking about it would quickly get "accident".

That would depend on whether his name is Vladimir Putin or not. He knows/thinks he knows that he can go quite a long way before any other superpower retaliates.

Last weeks Russia/China wargames (the largest ever) are him flexing his botoxed muscles. Would NATO sacrifice Poland? NO, they can't and wouldn't. Would he push things elsewhere? Undoubtedly.

Does Duda's proposal make much difference? No, only as a show of strength by NATO, a show of loyalty by Poland and of course a potential revenue stream.
Ironside 47 | 9,503    
19 Sep 2018  #35
o look to far away places for salvation, ignoring/fighting the neighbours.

Aren't Poland, Germany and USA in the same alliance? What are you talking about?
G (undercover)    
19 Sep 2018  #36
Would NATO sacrifice Poland?

NATO is totally worthless. Because it's full of parasites. In case of need of rapid deployment the same parasites will be saying "let's be not so provocative, we need more dialog with Russia" and so on basically blocking any decisions.

Vladimir Putin or not. He knows/thinks he knows that he can go quite a long way before any other superpower retaliates.

The thing is that oligarchs and other folks would quickly get him a heart attack if he got crazy enough to provoke any real conflict with the US. A quick local "adventure" with some borderline NATO country is another thing.

That's why, although I'm not a big fan of this move to bring in US forces, I can understand the logic behind it. It's enough to have here 5-6k of US troops. If **** hits the fan, they become immediately involved if the US admin likes it or not. Russians know that hence they won't risk to make a move that could escalate into the nuclear war.
Dirk diggler 9 | 4,091    
19 Sep 2018  #37
And what use is a totally secret nuke anyhow...the total mother of all weapons nobody knows off is no real deterrent either! ;)

Its a wonderful deterrent. Thats why north korea hasnt been invaded by the us and kim jong un is still big man on campus. If ukraine never gave up its nukes im sure russia wouldn't of been so quick to annex it
jon357 64 | 14,382    
19 Sep 2018  #38
NATO is totally worthless.

It's far from worthless. If the home territory of a member state is invaded by a non-member, they have to act.

A quick local "adventure" with some borderline NATO country is another thing.

And the question is, would he be crazy enough to do that. There is always the risk of escalation and he knows that.

That's why, although I'm not a big fan of this move to bring in US force

I'm not a big fan either. Very much a PiS vanity project, though at least the request (and America's response) sends a message. They're more likely to situate a base elsewhere in the world. Nowadays both Russia and America prefer proxy wars outside NATO countries' teritories.
Rich Mazur 5 | 3,014    
20 Sep 2018  #39
It's far from worthless. If the home territory of a member state is invaded by a non-member, they have to act.

Your spelling sucks. It's not "they". It's the USA. The rest of NATO is as worthless as the royal guard with those funny hats. I wonder what's inside.
jon357 64 | 14,382    
20 Sep 2018  #40
It's 'they', meaning NATO member states, some of which have very good armed forces.
OP johnny reb 16 | 3,136    
20 Sep 2018  #41
Poland is willing to invest $2 Billion for Camp Trump.
Beyond just a military base, Poland is including hospitals, schools, and gyms for all military personnel and families.
The White House is seriously considering the offer which is making the Liberals heads explode again.
The eighth and ninth wonders of the world, Camp Trump and the Trump Wall.
Crow 143 | 7,412    
20 Sep 2018  #42
NATO base in Poland could be good thing now when Germany dissolving and all that. Think about it. Plus effects of business in connection with such a large base.
Rich Mazur 5 | 3,014    
20 Sep 2018  #43
It's 'they', meaning NATO member states, some of which have very good armed forces.

Bolivia has very good armed forces. The question is, are those "very good armed forces" good enough without the US?
The answer is no.
Are the US armed forces good enough without the NATO "partners"?

Not only they are good enough, but are better off without the NATO "partners", so that the US does not have to protect their "partners" doing guard duty and can concentrate on the real enemies. Or "consult".

Stupidity of going to Iraq aside, the Brits, the Poles and others were just a decoration so that the US warmongering a-holes in the DC could call it a "coalition". Pure political bullsh**.
jon357 64 | 14,382    
20 Sep 2018  #44
Bolivia has very good armed forces.

Not that good compared to major countries.

Are the US armed forces good enough without the NATO "partners"?

Good enough for what? With support we 'won' in Iraq. Without support they lost in Vietnam.

In Iraq, the Brits, the Poles and others were just a decoration

Don't insult fallen soldiers. Mind you, a few were killed by mistake by poorly-trained Americans...
Rich Mazur 5 | 3,014    
21 Sep 2018  #45
If you already know how poorly trained Americans are, the decoration allies should know that, too. So, they should have stayed home instead of playing American lapdogs. And I don't care how many died. The rule that stupid people get stupid results still holds true. Or, if you prefer, stupid people die first.

What business did the Brits and the Poles have killing Iraqis? Did Iraq threaten Poland?
OP johnny reb 16 | 3,136    
21 Sep 2018  #46
by poorly-trained Americans...

The Americans and Brits train together.
One more reason to create Camp Trump so everyone can train together to avoid such accidents.
Until one has actually served in the military it is easy to be a clueless armchair quarterback.

What business did the Brits and the Poles have killing Iraqis? Did Iraq threaten Poland?

What business did the Americans have killing Iraqis ? Did Iraq threaten America ?
Rich Mazur 5 | 3,014    
21 Sep 2018  #47
None. Hell, no. Our stupidity does not excuse theirs in a me-too role.
TheWizard - | 241    
21 Sep 2018  #48
They are all killed for oil in that part of the world. Thats why all the major powers are there. They want oil. The rest is bs of the most obvious order.
Rich Mazur 5 | 3,014    
21 Sep 2018  #49
They are all killed for oil in that part of the world.

You mean each widow got a tanker full of oil? Just being a wise a**.
Your cynicism aside, if we didn't go there "for oil", would they drink it or try to sell it just as they are doing it right now? The only way that "for oil" argument would have legs is we were actually getting a break on the price for the liberation of Kuwait. But, until Trump, we were too stupid to made any such demands.
OP johnny reb 16 | 3,136    
21 Sep 2018  #50
if we didn't go there "for oil",

Until Trump we weren't getting any hug amounts of oil from shale.
America no longer needs foreign oil as America has more oil then any other country in the world.
Back on topic however.
The military personal from Fort Trump would be spending money at the bars and restaurants, buying cars, clothing for off duty, sight seeing tours, Polish girls. airports and pumping money into the local economy like never before.

They would be flying the wives and girlfriends in to stay at the hotels for congenial visits and taking them shopping and on tours.
Hell in a year or two the Polish merchants might even learn what 'customer service' is to triple their profits.
Rich Mazur 5 | 3,014    
21 Sep 2018  #51
And they may even learn the real English - the one made in the USA.
delphiandomine 85 | 17,658    
21 Sep 2018  #52
Mind you, a few were killed by mistake by poorly-trained Americans...

More than a few. The Americans were widely criticised for their ineptitude, similar to how they managed to bomb the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade despite it being quite obviously not a military target.
OP johnny reb 16 | 3,136    
21 Sep 2018  #53
The Americans were widely criticised

The Americans are use to being criticized.
Have you ever served in the military delph to know how things actually work.
Maybe you should sign up and train at Camp Trump so you can be a real expert on military matters.
Rich Mazur 5 | 3,014    
21 Sep 2018  #54
The Americans were widely criticised for their ineptitude, similar to how they managed to bomb the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade

Bombing the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade despite it being quite obviously not a military target is one thing. Bombing Pearl Harbor was a mistake of biblical proportions. And so was attacking the USSR in 1941.

These three events cannot even be placed together on the same stupid scale. At least our mistakes were mistakes, not the acts bordering on suicidal. Besides, who cares if some foreigners die. I don't.
OP johnny reb 16 | 3,136    
21 Sep 2018  #55
At least our mistakes were mistakes,

Well Rich, first you have to be doing something to make a mistake.
It's the people that never do anything that are the first to criticize the others that do.
My suggestion is for them to volunteer to serve in the military to give back a little bit to their country which affords them and their families their freedoms.

They would make much more money in the military then they do as part time teachers and even learn (the hard way) when to shut their loud mouths.

Cowards (usually ex-pats) that have never served in the military are prime examples.
delphiandomine 85 | 17,658    
21 Sep 2018  #56
Why would anyone sign up to be cannon fodder in the American forces? I mean, dying in some crappy desert just so America can get hold of oil resources?

You'd have to be exceptionally stupid to do such a thing.
OP johnny reb 16 | 3,136    
21 Sep 2018  #57
You'd have to be exceptionally stupid to do such a thing.

Or just a plain COWARD that only takes what others have sacrificed to enjoy for themselves.
Know any COWARD scum like that.
Now, back on topic please.
Dirk diggler 9 | 4,091    
21 Sep 2018  #58
Please everyone knows that European countries participation in NATO missions is just token bullsh1t to show solidarity but their presence makes negligible impact. Theyre only there for their own protection. America is the only one that could actually stand up to russia, china, etc. Without the US, Russia would steam roll all the European countries combined. The us is the only thing stopping them. Oh but lemme guess someone will point out uk and france... big deal india has a bigger and stronger military than both. Saudi arabia, japan s korea have comprabale forces and budgets yet even n korea and iran put them on edge. The new peoples republics in ukraine have more tanks than france and uk alone and theyre not even recognized countries.The US budget for defense is more than the next 10 countries COMBINED. America is 99.9% of NATO.

Maybe you should sign up and train at Camp Trump so you can be a real expert on military matters.

Man most the people here wouldn't pass the physical. Has anyone here ever served in any armed forces?? Im really curious about this.

Atleast w camp trump us will automaticallt be involved should russia attack. History shows that mutual defense treaties mean little to some of our more powerful european 'allies'. Poland should just develop its own nukes and be done with it. No one invades countries with nukes.
delphiandomine 85 | 17,658    
21 Sep 2018  #59
Or just a plain COWARD that only takes what others have sacrificed to enjoy for themselves.

Who cares about dumb jarheads that sacrifice themselves for rich American corporations?
Tacitus 2 | 860    
21 Sep 2018  #60
There is no question that the USA needs its' allies to fight prolonged wars like the ones in Iraq and Afghanistan. Yes, the USA could bear the burden alone if it really wanted to, bit fighting wars like this is more than ressources. Otherwise the USA would not have lost Vietnam. You need to motivate your population, show them that your war is legitimate and that you are not alone in this.

Besides, if we look at the war in Afghanistan, other countries have provided and are still providing significant ressources, both military and financially. (Currently, Allied forces in Afghanistan consists roughly 50% out of Non-Americans).


Home / News / 'Fort Trump' Military Base in Poland
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.