Will Poland's soldiers be used again when U.S. attacks Iran?

Marek11111Threads: 49 Posts: 1,859 Joined: Aug 6, 09 MEMBER ♂	May 4, 10, 23:40 #1
when U.S. attack Iran will Poland send troops to fight? will Israel attack Iran before U.S.

plk123Threads: 30 Posts: 6,410 Joined: Aug 29, 07 ♂	May 5, 10, 02:56 #2
Marek11111: will Israel attack Iran before U.S. most likely

ShawnHThreads: 9 Posts: 3,001 Joined: Jul 2, 09 ♂	May 5, 10, 03:14 #3
plk123: most likely I agree. It isn't looking good, based on media reporting of the situation (if there really even is one???)

FUZZYWICKETSThreads: 12 Posts: 1,821 Joined: Nov 3, 09 ♂	May 5, 10, 06:19 #4
you'll have to ask NATO.

czarThreads: 4 Posts: 233 Joined: Mar 3, 10 ♂	May 5, 10, 06:35 #5
an interview with ahmadinejad i guess he was in NYC last week was interesting, they definitely threaten him and demand Iran to disarm at the same time this is pre-emptive war planning; but he maintains they have no plan if attacked and believe none will. at this point its comical

MEMBER ♂

Edited by: Torq May 5, 10, 09:03 #6

USA have never, EVER helped Poland militarily. Not when we were partitioned in 1795
and dissapeared from the map of Europe as an independent country, not after WW1
when we had to fight the Soviet onslaught in 1920, not in 1939 when we were partitioned
again and not after WW2 when we were invaded and occupied by Soviets, AND they will
not help us in the future. Make no mistake - USA will never go into war with Russia over
Poland.

They disregarded the offset deal connected with the purchase of F16 fighter planes
by Poland and they gave up on missile shield project just to please Russia. How can
anyone see all this and still have any doubts about US attitude towards Poland (full
of scorn, contempt and disrespect).

I won't even mention the visas (which are no longer required in case of Slovakians
or Latvians for example) or the fact that Obama went golfing over dead body of our
late President.

Until USA start treating us like they treat their other allies (I don't even mean Turkey
or Israel but Hungary, Slovenia or Estonia for example) Polish armed forces should refrain
from taking part in any military operations alongside Americans. I'm quite sure that Latvia,
Estonia and Slovakia (as more valued than Poland allies of USA) will be more than happy
to send their armies to assist Americans in Afghanistan after our military withdraws from
there (hopefully immediately) or in Iran.

We have to start respecting ourselves and when Americans openly spit in our faces
we cannot pretend that we don't see it.

JedThreads: - Posts: 235 Joined: Apr 10, 10 ♂	May 5, 10, 09:33 #7
Torq: USA have never, EVER helped Poland militarily. ... We have to start respecting ourselves That's why United Europe is necessary - with more power for a cost of more intergation and centralization. It is not in US lond term interests and Poland rather supported US here. Or do you think the cost for Poland is too high? Do you see any other real alternative?

♂

Edited by: MareGaea May 5, 10, 10:42 #8

Torq:

I won't even mention the visas (which are no longer required in case of Slovakians
or Latvians for example) or the fact that Obama went golfing over dead body of our
late President.

We all know why PL cannot take part in the visa waiver program (yet): they grant this based on the number of visa request from a country over the past decade or so and the number of ppl from that country who have overstayed their visa in the past. You shouldn't be angry at the US for this, but at your fellow countrymen who abused the system before. The US are only following their rules regarding to this. There are other countries as well that don't get a visa waiver program (yet) because of this, not only PL. It has nothing to do with discrimination or racism.

Obama couldn't come because of the volcano. And I guess the alternative route was too dangerous. If I were you, I would be more angry at the European leaders who didn't come. They could've taken the train without much hassle, but didn't. I think that's much more of a neglect than when Obama cancelled his visit.

>^..^<

M-G (tiens)

MEMBER ♂

May 5, 10, 10:48 #9

Jed:

That's why United Europe is necessary - with more power for a cost of more intergation and centralization.

I agree.

Jed:

Do you see any other real alternative?

Realistically, no. In my opinion, Poland should stop looking east and concentrate on filling
the civilizational gap between Poland and Germany and tightening the co-operation with
other EU members.
The regional co-operation between Polish western and German eastern provinces has
to increase for more integration.

Our future lies with Europe and we should reorientate our internal and foreign policy
towards more integration and quit all exotic alliances with exotic countries far away
from Polish borders (Gerogia, USA) from which we can get no real benefits.

♂

Edited by: skysoulmate May 5, 10, 10:59 #10

Marek11111:

when U.S. attack Iran will Poland send troops to fight?
will Israel attack Iran before U.S.

Yes, and it's probably the only thing that can be done. As always the world will condemn the "agression" while most Arab states will give tacit support from the sidelines. Saudi-Arabia routinely shares their intel on Iran with the US with the understanding the info will be forwarded to the "right hands" meaning Israel.

If they attack I'll support them 100% as I'll much rather deal with the wrath of the Muscovites and their allies than with the deranged lunatic in control of a nuclear weapon. There's still chance there'll be a deal but the chances are slim as the Russians support the Iranian ambitions and want a conflict to portray themselves as the only truly pro-Muslim country in the conflict.

Jed:

That's why United Europe is necessary - with more power for a cost of more intergation and centralization. It is not in US lond term interests and Poland rather supported US here.

Like last time you tried to "unite" Europe? ...and time before that?

♂

May 5, 10, 11:06 #11

The US will never send armies of troops to Iran as they did in Afghanistan and Iraq. If and when they do attack it will be by surgical air strikes and without the help of any other allies. They will have the United Nation's approval and possibly some NATO backing for refueling purposes, aircraft spare parts storages and so on. Chill down Torq. As to the shields I too was hopeful that they would go on with it but now realize that there is much about politics we the general populace will never be privilaged to know or understand. Americans may have never directly intervened to help Poland but managed to contain the Russians and Im sure will continue to do so for years to come. This spells Help.

♂

Edited by: Jed May 5, 10, 11:20 #12

skysoulmate:

Like last time you tried to "unite" Europe? ...and time before that?

I never tried myself :)

I believe it is European countries own initiative - to be united. The idea looks attractive from many points.

This idea itself isn't new and before WWI there was an idea of United States of Europe among European socialists - but nationalism and then communism and nazism won and lead to hot and cold wars.

♂

May 5, 10, 11:21 #13

The US will never send armies of troops to Iran as they did in Afghanistan and Iraq. If and when they do attack it will be by surgical air strikes and without the help of any other allies. They will have the United Nation's approval and possibly some NATO backing for refueling purposes, aircraft spare parts storages and so on. Chill down Torq. As to the shields I too was hopeful that they would go on with it but now realize that there is much about politics we the general populace will never be privilaged to know or understand. Americans may have never directly intervened to help Poland but managed to contain the Russians and Im sure will continue to do so for years to come. This spells Help.

♂

Edited by: skysoulmate May 5, 10, 11:29 #14

Jed:

I never tried myself :)

I believe it is European countries own initiative - to be united. The idea looks attractive from many points.

This idea itsef isn't new and before WWI there was an idea of United States of Eorope among European socialists - but nationalism and then communism and nazism won and lead to hot and cold wars.

Jed (by the way, does Jed mean anything in Russian? Just curious)

- the idea is noble but will never fly. At least not with Russia as an integral part of it. 500 years from now there might be some kind of European Union looking like an actual country but Russia still won't be a part of it. You and Velund and some others here might be examples of good Russians interested in peaceful coexistence with others but when it comes to it, historically your country has been controlled by ConstantineK type of nationalistic thuggish bandits, to use a popular Russian ;) who will do whaever takes to take another chunk of Europe. Any weakness in the European unity - and they have in the past and they will in the future use it to their selfish advantage. So yes, the idea is very noble but I predict permanent human settlements on Mars before Russia is part of a European alliance.

♂

May 5, 10, 11:42 #15

skysoulmate:

the idea is noble but will never fly. At least not with Russia as an integral part of it. 500 years from now there might be some kind of European Union looking like an actual country but Russia still won't be a part of it.

I also don't believe in Russia being integral part of it in the nearest few hundred years. Race and nationalistic prejudices will prevent it very effectively. Unfortunately time goes fast and we haven't even spare 100 years.

From the point of economics and demography it would be not a bad idea - just not realistic.

skysoulmate:

by the way, does Jed mean anything in Russian? Just curious

Jed means nothing in Russian - I take it by occasion. JED - JEOL Energy Dispersive (spectrometer I worked with a few years ago). :)

♂

Edited by: Bratwurst Boy May 5, 10, 11:45 #16

Torq:

Hopefully, Poland will get wiser and start look for friends closer to her borders

That makes actually sense as it was done this way between the once arch enemies France and Germany. Close integration led to close cooperation and intermingling of the industry and making it now impossible to go to war with each other, it would mean hurting oneself.

Poland and Germany should go the same way...(but I'm still also naive to think the NATO members will help each other should the need arise).

PS: Poland won't be asked to take part in a pre-emptive attack on Iran (as won't Germany).
It will be most probably an airforce action to destroy the facilities and hence the possibility of Iran to ever produce A-bombs to endanger the West.
There is nothing our countries could bring to the table to help with such an action. (And make no mistake, a functioning nuke in the hands of religious nutters spells doom for all of us)

♂

Edited by: Bratwurst Boy May 5, 10, 11:53 #17

skysoulmate:

Fortunately people like you do not make any decisions when it comes to Poland's participation in NATO which will only get stronger and deeper. I bet you 15-20 years from now there will be more Polish high ranking officers in nato's top command than there are German right now.

I rather would bet on the further development of an european defense force.
The seeds are already sown...
http://www.europeaninstitute.org/EU-Facts/european-defence-timeline.ht ml

There are more and more discrepancies and differences about goals and ways to achieve them between the Atlanticists (US, UK, Poland till now) and the European centrists (German, France and most others).

Either the NATO will adapt (meaning lesser influence of political Washington) or it will split and we will see the rise of an independent EU task force!

♂

May 5, 10, 11:57 #18

Bratwurst Boy:

I rather would bet on the further development of a european defense force.
The seeds are already sown...
There are more and more discrepancies and differences about goals and ways to achieve them between the Atlanticists (US, UK, Poland till now) and the European centrists (German, France and most others).

Either the NATO will adapt (meaning lesser influence of political Washington) or it will split and we will see the rise of an independent EU task force!

Could be, who knows? However, it's going to be a very long process taking generations....

♂

Edited by: Bratwurst Boy May 5, 10, 11:59 #19

skysoulmate:

However, it's going to be a very long process taking generations....

♂

May 5, 10, 12:06 #20

Zbyszko:

The US will never send armies of troops to Iran as they did in Afghanistan and Iraq. If and when they do attack it will be by surgical air strikes and without the help of any other allies. They will have the United Nation's approval and possibly some NATO backing for refueling purposes, aircraft spare parts storages and so on. Chill down Torq. As to the shields I too was hopeful that they would go on with it but now realize that there is much about politics we the general populace will never be privilaged to know or understand. Americans may have never directly intervened to help Poland but managed to contain the Russians and Im sure will continue to do so for years to come. This spells Help.

Very good post.

Bratwurst BoyThreads: 11 Posts: 14,563 Joined: Apr 2, 07 ♂	May 5, 10, 12:09 #21
I actually would prefer a NATO-action with the mandate of the UN. Israel alone would draw alot of criticism again...

♂

Edited by: skysoulmate May 5, 10, 12:11 #22

Bratwurst Boy:

skysoulmate:
However, it's going to be a very long process taking generations....

Why generations?

All the memberstates nourish independent militaries...most of them modern and very expensive.
It needs only the logistic and legal ground work to delegate some troops from either army.

Well, I see your point and yes on paper it all looks feasible. However, Greece's Euro entrance looked feasible on paper too. I'm bringing it up just as an example. I think the European NATO command will have more to say on European member matters in the future (in other words the Central command will stay out) but personally I think NATO is here to stay. It might be reformed and it might be changed and even renamed but I think it's here to stay.

♂

Edited by: Bratwurst Boy May 5, 10, 12:14 #23

skysoulmate:

I think the European NATO command will have more to say on European member matters in the future

That's what I meant with "adapting".
Of course the US always demands from it's european partners to shoulder more of the burden and take greater part in difficult actions but for that it has to give up it's monopol on decision making too.
It will happen regularly that the US and EU differ in the assessment of situations and have different priorities.
We both have to adapt if NATO should work in the future too..

ZbyszkoThreads: 1 Posts: 43 Joined: Mar 18, 10 ♂	May 5, 10, 12:18 #24
By the way Torq; it is because of late prez Reagan Europe is the way it is now. He stood firm and won the "Cold War" by convincing Gorbachev to let go off Solidarity and knock down the Berlin Wall. So on the "Big picture" there is the American help that you don't seem to see... take care.

Bratwurst BoyThreads: 11 Posts: 14,563 Joined: Apr 2, 07 ♂	Edited by: Bratwurst Boy May 5, 10, 12:20 #25
Zbyszko: By the way Torq; it is because of late prez Reagan Europe is the way it is now. He stood firm It takes two to tango...without the already happening inner thawing of Russia he would had been just another western politician talking big! Remember Kennedy? He posed also greatly at the Berlin Wall but nothing happened...Russia was still all ice!

♂ [Suspended]

Edited by: Sokrates May 5, 10, 12:21 #26

Bratwurst Boy:

I actually would prefer a NATO-action with the mandate of the UN. Israel alone would draw alot of criticism again...

Why the feck would we send soldiers to Iran, what did Iran do to us and how does it threaten our business anywhere? For all i care the Jews and Arabs can blow each other to Valhalla, i dont want any Polish or European soldier or Euro spent on that focking hell of a region.

Going to ME is not in Polands good interest or for that matter any european country interest.

Zbyszko:

it is because of late prez Reagan Europe is the way it is now. He stood firm and won the "Cold War"

Dont forget that all of it was done in the interest of USA, America would glass Poland if it viewed such a move as beneficial, dont join enterprises of a country that can turn on you any minute without sentiment or remorse.

Politics is a bytch of a sport but US makes it even more so.

skysoulmateThreads: 41 Posts: 3,039 Joined: Jan 10, 10 ♂	May 5, 10, 12:21 #27
Bratwurst Boy: I actually would prefer a NATO-action with the mandate of the UN. Israel alone would draw alot of criticism again... I do too but it's not going to happen. Had Ahmedinejad threatened the safety of the UK, Germany, or France an action would've been taken a long time ago. ...but he's just talking about Israel, a mini-state everyone loves to hate.

♂

Edited by: Bratwurst Boy May 5, 10, 12:22 #28

Sokrates:

Why the feck would we send soldiers to Iran, what did Iran do to us and how does it threaten our business anywhere?

There won't be any ground troops involved. Only an airforce action makes sense at all....

skysoulmate:

Had Ahmedinejad threatened the safety of the UK, Germany, or France an action would've been taken a long time ago

Well, he doesn't had any nukes...so talking big only it is (till now)...

Religious nutters don't think or act rational. The danger that he uses his nuke once he got it is not to underestimate.
And no, he doesn't hate Israel only....he is of the same spirit as the Taliban or the suicide bombers! Only with a nuke!

♂

Edited by: skysoulmate May 5, 10, 12:32 #29

Jed:

I also don't believe in Russia being integral part of it in the nearest few hundred years. Race and nationalistic prejudices will prevent it very effectively. Unfortunately time goes fast and we haven't even spare 100 years.

Very true.

Jed:

From the point of economics and demography it would be not a bad idea - just not realistic.

I think bringing in Russia would create an endless black hole of expensive EU projects. Lots of rural areas in Russia that'd insist on money from the EU.

Demography? Little of bit and little bit of that is nice. If Brits and the Irish complain about the mass immigration from Poland only imagine if Russia was to join the EU. Within a few months the majority of Londoners would be Russians...

Jed:

Jed means nothing in Russian - I take it by occasion. JED - JEOL Energy Dispersive (spectrometer I worked with a few years ago). :)

I see thanks, so you're a researcher/scientist I take it?

♂

Edited by: Jed May 5, 10, 12:39 #30

skysoulmate:

Within a few months a majority of Londoners would become Russian speakers...

How often you walk in London?

Last January I heard Polish and Russian more then English there :) Poles work and Russians spend their money there...

skysoulmate:

I think bringing in Russia would create an endless black hole of expensive EU projects.

Russia has resources and territory which both necessary for sustainable economics but it hasn't enough people to use it. I choose Europe before China will take it.

skysoulmate:

I see thanks, so you're a researcher/scientist I take it?

In the past, now I'm in business related to science.

POLAND . The Unofficial Guide	Unanswered \| Archives
POLAND . The Unofficial Guide	Republic of Poland Online	Witamy, Guest \| PF Members \| Gold Members

Home \| Unanswered \| Archives \| Random \| Statistics	Time in Poland: 03:46 / Feb 10
About Us \| Contact Us \| Rules, Privacy \| Poland Advertising	© 2005-12 PolishForums.com