Disappointed in Poland

[lupi]

And while so many of yall are here telling the poles how much they should be trusting these fine russian fellows, just don't ask them about katyn.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Duwelon
The liberal left doesn't believe in good or evil.

Anybody that thinks this is about good and evil is extremely ignorant. The Russians aren't being evil, they are being paranoid, and given what happened to them in WWII can you really blame them?

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
If you were Poland and you just watched Russia roll over Georgia wouldn't you want anything and everything you can to defend yourself?

Poland wasn't part of the Soviet Union. I think it is a totally different situation. I don't think Russia would roll tanks into Poland any time soon.

Hungary wasn't "part of the USSR" either, and look what it got them.

Again different era. Thats a time just following WWII where the Soviets were more involved in keeping a buffer zone under their control. Plus, back then tanks could roll into another country and it would be too late to do anything by the time it was realized. Easier to get away with things like that.

 

[Trianon]

Originally posted by: lupi
And while so many of yall are here telling the poles how much they should be trusting these fine russian fellows, just don't ask them about katyn.

So why do Poles love Georgians so much, considering top Soviet leadership at the time of Katyn' was [gasp] Georgian? Shouldn't they be held accountable just like Russians? I guess it's just more convinient at this time to omit that fact.

Wiki

On March 5, 1940, pursuant to a note to Joseph Stalin from Lavrenty Beria, the members of the Soviet Politburo ? Stalin, Vyacheslav Molotov, Lazar Kaganovich, Mikhail Kalinin, Kliment Voroshilov and Anastas Mikoyan; signed an order to execute 25,700 Polish "nationalists and counterrevolutionaries" kept at camps and prisons in occupied western Ukraine and Belarus.[8] The reason for the massacre, according to historian Gerhard Weinberg, is that Stalin wanted to deprive a potential future Polish military of a large portion of its military talent: It has been suggested that the motive for this terrible step [the Katyn massacre] was to reassure the Germans as to the reality of Soviet anti-Polish policy. This explanation is completely unconvincing in view of the care with which the Soviet regime kept the massacre secret from the very German government it was supposed to impress... A more likely explanation is that... [the massacre] should be seen as looking forward to a future in which there might again be a Poland on the Soviet Union's western border. Since he intended to keep the eastern portion of the country in any case, Stalin could be certain that any revived Poland would be unfriendly. Under those circumstances, depriving it of a large proportion of its military and technical elite would make it weaker."[17]

 

[RightIsWrong]

Why are there so many ignorant or intentionally dishonest posters in this thread pointing towards Russia's conflict with Georgia as a reason for this? Russia was not the aggressor in this conflict, the Georgian govt/forces were.

No wonder you are still supporting the war in Iraq. You all probably think that Saddam was the aggressor against the US also.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Why are there so many ignorant or intentionally dishonest posters in this thread pointing towards Russia's conflict with Georgia as a reason for this? Russia was not the aggressor in this conflict, the Georgian govt/forces were.

No wonder you are still supporting the war in Iraq. You all probably think that Saddam was the aggressor against the US also.

Russia was not the aggressor but Georgia did not attack Russia. South Ossetia is considered a part of Georgia...what right does Russia have to invade Georgia?

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Why are there so many ignorant or intentionally dishonest posters in this thread pointing towards Russia's conflict with Georgia as a reason for this? Russia was not the aggressor in this conflict, the Georgian govt/forces were.

No wonder you are still supporting the war in Iraq. You all probably think that Saddam was the aggressor against the US also.

Based on the available evidence I'd say that Russia engineered the conflict. The Georgians unfortunately took the bait which also happened to play into Saakashvili promises to bring those territories back into the fold.

Your last sentence includes several logical fallacies that have nothing to do with this thread.

 

[NaughtyGeek]

Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
wait, so most here disagree with a defense system?

How is Russia at all threatened? Poland and the US are just trying to defend themselves, this is nothing like the Cuban crisis. Cuba had nukes pointed at the US, we are just putting up a defense system.

First strike nuclear capability for the US. Mutually assured destruction is out the window and the balance of power is shifting to the US. The Russians felt "safe" in the fact that any nuclear attack by the US could be countered with a severe counter attack assuring there was nothing to gain from doing so. However, you put the missile shield in place, a first strike by the US can eliminate enough of Russia's nuclear assets to ensure the missile shield can effectively counter Russia's counter attack.

Did I say counter enough?

With US troops massing in countries so close to Russia's border, it's no wonder they may be a little jumpy. Add in our new doctrine of preemptive strikes and the nervous twitch grows. The US is playing very dangerous games in that part of the world and there's a great deal of circumstantial evidence to lead one to believe we may be seeing the beginnings of WWIII.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: BouZouki
Sigh, once again Americans thinking they are the overlookers of the earth.

The USA has no business in Poland, period, we need to keep our noses out of things like this.

The world curses us when we do and they curse us when we don't. They want us to be the world police and they don't want us to be the world police. I don't think it is so much the US that is the problem here. I think the world just needs to make up their damn minds.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: NaughtyGeek

Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
wait, so most here disagree with a defense system?

How is Russia at all threatened? Poland and the US are just trying to defend themselves, this is nothing like the Cuban crisis. Cuba had nukes pointed at the US, we are just putting up a defense system.

First strike nuclear capability for the US. Mutually assured destruction is out the window and the balance of power is shifting to the US. The Russians felt "safe" in the fact that any nuclear attack by the US could be countered with a severe counter attack assuring there was nothing to gain from doing so. However, you put the missile shield in place, a first strike by the US can eliminate enough of Russia's nuclear assets to ensure the missile shield can effectively counter Russia's counter attack.

Did I say counter enough?

With US troops massing in countries so close to Russia's border, it's no wonder they may be a little jumpy. Add in our new doctrine of preemptive strikes and the nervous twitch grows. The US is playing very dangerous games in that part of the world and there's a great deal of circumstantial evidence to lead one to believe we may be seeing the beginnings of WWIII.

The bolded is factually untrue.

The agreement with the Polish government covers 10 interceptors of which I think are questionable at best in their real world effectiveness. This is nowhere near enough to counter the Russian nuclear deterrent which numbers well into the hundreds or thousands depending on how you count. Not to mention the fact that the system is almost totally out of position to engage warheads launched against the continental US from most of Russia.

The US isn't massing troops in eastern Europe. This isn't World War I, II, or III.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: NaughtyGeek

Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
wait, so most here disagree with a defense system?

How is Russia at all threatened? Poland and the US are just trying to defend themselves, this is nothing like the Cuban crisis. Cuba had nukes pointed at the US, we are just putting up a defense system.

First strike nuclear capability for the US. Mutually assured destruction is out the window and the balance of power is shifting to the US. The Russians felt "safe" in the fact that any nuclear attack by the US could be countered with a severe counter attack assuring there was nothing to gain from doing so. However, you put the missile shield in place, a first strike by the US can eliminate enough of Russia's nuclear assets to ensure the missile shield can effectively counter Russia's counter attack.

Did I say counter enough?

With US troops massing in countries so close to Russia's border, it's no wonder they may be a little jumpy. Add in our new doctrine of preemptive strikes and the nervous twitch grows. The US is playing very dangerous games in that part of the world and there's a great deal of circumstantial evidence to lead one to believe we may be seeing the beginnings of WWIII.

Russia knows the missile defense system is ineffective against 1000 nuclear warheads headed towards XYZ. MAD is still in play.

 

[Trianon]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: NaughtyGeek

Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
wait, so most here disagree with a defense system?

How is Russia at all threatened? Poland and the US are just trying to defend themselves, this is nothing like the Cuban crisis. Cuba had nukes pointed at the US, we are just putting up a defense system.

First strike nuclear capability for the US. Mutually assured destruction is out the window and the balance of power is shifting to the US. The Russians felt "safe" in the fact that any nuclear attack by the US could be countered with a severe counter attack assuring there was nothing to gain from doing so. However, you put the missile shield in place, a first strike by the US can eliminate enough of Russia's nuclear assets to ensure the missile shield can effectively counter Russia's counter attack.

Did I say counter enough?

With US troops massing in countries so close to Russia's border, it's no wonder they may be a little jumpy. Add in our new doctrine of preemptive strikes and the nervous twitch grows. The US is playing very dangerous games in that part of the world and there's a great deal of circumstantial evidence to lead one to believe we may be seeing the beginnings of WWIII.

Russia knows the missile defense system is ineffective against 1000 nuclear warheads headed towards XYZ. MAD is still in play.

Not if most of warheads are taken out by first US strike...

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: Trianon

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: NaughtyGeek

Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
wait, so most here disagree with a defense system?

How is Russia at all threatened? Poland and the US are just trying to defend themselves, this is nothing like the Cuban crisis. Cuba had nukes pointed at the US, we are just putting up a defense system.

First strike nuclear capability for the US. Mutually assured destruction is out the window and the balance of power is shifting to the US. The Russians felt "safe" in the fact that any nuclear attack by the US could be countered with a severe counter attack assuring there was nothing to gain from doing so. However, you put the missile shield in place, a first strike by the US can eliminate enough of Russia's nuclear assets to ensure the missile shield can effectively counter Russia's counter attack.

Did I say counter enough?

With US troops massing in countries so close to Russia's border, it's no wonder they may be a little jumpy. Add in our new doctrine of preemptive strikes and the nervous twitch grows. The US is playing very dangerous games in that part of the world and there's a great deal of circumstantial evidence to lead one to believe we may be seeing the beginnings of WWIII.

Russia knows the missile defense system is ineffective against 1000 nuclear warheads headed towards XYZ. MAD is still in play.

Not if most of warheads are taken out by first US strike...

How would the US strike first without a Russian response?

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Duwelon
The liberal left doesn't believe in good or evil.

Anybody that thinks this is about good and evil is extremely ignorant. The Russians aren't being evil, they are being paranoid, and given what happened to them in WWII can you really blame them?

Yes, I suppose I could blame them.

While I wasn't around then I understand that our Army (Patton) wanted to go ahead on into Russia and deal with them, yet was not allowed to.

Had we gone in then, I could see the paranoia. But we didn't, so I don't.

Fern

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: JS80
Russia was not the aggressor but Georgia did not attack Russia.

It killed a dozen Russian troops on the outset.

Russia knows the missile defense system is ineffective against 1000 nuclear warheads headed towards XYZ. MAD is still in play.

And I don't know about you but I wouldn't put trust my life to the US' anti-missile shield. It's about as likely to hit a live, real-use missile as a blind man shooting a grape with a deringer at a thousand yards.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Duwelon
The liberal left doesn't believe in good or evil.

Anybody that thinks this is about good and evil is extremely ignorant. The Russians aren't being evil, they are being paranoid, and given what happened to them in WWII can you really blame them?

Yes, I suppose I could blame them.

While I wasn't around then I understand that our Army (Patton) wanted to go ahead on into Russia and deal with them, yet was not allowed to.

Had we gone in then, I could see the paranoia. But we didn't, so I don't.

Fern

I guess you never studied about the Siege of Leningrad by a foreign army.

Also keep in mind the the US which leads NATO is being ruled by a moron. While Bush looked into Putin's Eyes and saw a friend when Putin looked into Bushes eyes he didn't see much at all.

 

[Trianon]

Originally posted by: JS80
How would the US strike first without a Russian response?

Look up plan Dropshot and the rest of US plans of first strike at the USSR. Due to SU being huge they just couldn't figure out a way to do it so there would not be Soviet counterattack.

 

[mooseracing]

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Hopefully Russia will respond in kind.

The situation in Georgia has already shown they're not afraid of a skirmish to keep their sphere of influence intact.

Obama will solve this problem.

By taking all our guns and melting them into new steel for cars?

 

[NaughtyGeek]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: NaughtyGeek

Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
wait, so most here disagree with a defense system?

How is Russia at all threatened? Poland and the US are just trying to defend themselves, this is nothing like the Cuban crisis. Cuba had nukes pointed at the US, we are just putting up a defense system.

First strike nuclear capability for the US. Mutually assured destruction is out the window and the balance of power is shifting to the US. The Russians felt "safe" in the fact that any nuclear attack by the US could be countered with a severe counter attack assuring there was nothing to gain from doing so. However, you put the missile shield in place, a first strike by the US can eliminate enough of Russia's nuclear assets to ensure the missile shield can effectively counter Russia's counter attack.

Did I say counter enough?

With US troops massing in countries so close to Russia's border, it's no wonder they may be a little jumpy. Add in our new doctrine of preemptive strikes and the nervous twitch grows. The US is playing very dangerous games in that part of the world and there's a great deal of circumstantial evidence to lead one to believe we may be seeing the beginnings of WWIII.

The bolded is factually untrue.

The agreement with the Polish government covers 10 interceptors of which I think are questionable at best in their real world effectiveness. This is nowhere near enough to counter the Russian nuclear deterrent which numbers well into the hundreds or thousands depending on how you count. Not to mention the fact that the system is almost totally out of position to engage warheads launched against the continental US from most of Russia.

The US isn't massing troops in eastern Europe. This isn't World War I, II, or III.

What's the distance from Iraq to Russia? 350, 400 miles? If that's not near the border of Russia, then you're right, my statements were factually incorrect. As to the systems in Poland, they are not the entire missile shield merely a small portion. It's the system as a whole that is a threat to Russia's stability gained through MAD and to deny that is to deny the facts. We've positioned ourselves militarily in a manner which certainly makes Russia uneasy. Toss in our constant rhetoric about Iran and it means nothing more than an even bigger buildup in the region. You say we're nowhere near any type of WW, but tell me what transpires after Russia makes good on threats to attack Poland over the system? What will our response be? This situation is nothing less than a cinder in the tinder box and the slightest breeze could set a blaze out of the control of anyone. Ruskies are notorious for their paranoia but our actions are not doing anything to quell that fear.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Duwelon
The liberal left doesn't believe in good or evil.

Anybody that thinks this is about good and evil is extremely ignorant. The Russians aren't being evil, they are being paranoid, and given what happened to them in WWII can you really blame them?

they're not even being paranoid. they're being russians. they're doing the same thing they've been doing for 400 years. why anyone is shocked about this, i don't know. why anyone would blame the US, when the russians have been doing this since well before the founding of the US as a country, i don't know.

Originally posted by: JS80
Not if most of warheads are taken out by first US strike...

How would the US strike first without a Russian response?[/quote]
if you destroy your enemy's fighting capacity in the first strike they can't strike back. the russians, however, have enough warheads in enough unknown locations that the US couldn't destroy the russians in the first strike.

you don't attack your enemy's cities first in nuclear war.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: SoundTheSurrender
Being Polish myself I'm dissapointed that they agreed to America's request of a missile defense system.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/s...=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Poland is a sovereign country, no?

I don't see why so many here believe such a soveriegn country cannot do as they please to provide for their defensive capabilities.

Is someone here claiming that Poland is a threat to to Russia? They've never invaded Russia AFAIK. Neither has the USA.

This whole "ewe nobody better do anything, even in their own country, to make Russia angry" attitude is very weak. I wonder if this fearful and wimpishly appeasement - type attitude is what can look forward to upon a Dem admin?

Russia has been quite aggressive for some time now - claiming the Arctic for themselves and their own oil/gas exploration, threatening to cut off fuel supplies to neighbors and resumption of bombing runs in violation of others' airspace. IMO, such a policy of appeasement is sure to only motivate them further, not placate them.

Finally, a lot of hypocricy here. I'm too lazy, but I'll bet with a little searching I could find that many here who feel this missle shield is an affront to Russia have also argued elsewhere on this forum how completely useless it is. I.e., Rusia is somehow rightful alarmed at a completely useless missle defense system?

Fern

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: NaughtyGeek

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: NaughtyGeek

Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
wait, so most here disagree with a defense system?

How is Russia at all threatened? Poland and the US are just trying to defend themselves, this is nothing like the Cuban crisis. Cuba had nukes pointed at the US, we are just putting up a defense system.

First strike nuclear capability for the US. Mutually assured destruction is out the window and the balance of power is shifting to the US. The Russians felt "safe" in the fact that any nuclear attack by the US could be countered with a severe counter attack assuring there was nothing to gain from doing so. However, you put the missile shield in place, a first strike by the US can eliminate enough of Russia's nuclear assets to ensure the missile shield can effectively counter Russia's counter attack.

Did I say counter enough?

With US troops massing in countries so close to Russia's border, it's no wonder they may be a little jumpy. Add in our new doctrine of preemptive strikes and the nervous twitch grows. The US is playing very dangerous games in that part of the world and there's a great deal of circumstantial evidence to lead one to believe we may be seeing the beginnings of WWIII.

The bolded is factually untrue.

The agreement with the Polish government covers 10 interceptors of which I think are questionable at best in their real world effectiveness. This is nowhere near enough to counter the Russian nuclear deterrent which numbers well into the hundreds or thousands depending on how you count. Not to mention the fact that the system is almost totally out of position to engage warheads launched against the continental US from most of Russia.

The US isn't massing troops in eastern Europe. This isn't World War I, II, or III.

What's the distance from Iraq to Russia? 350, 400 miles? If that's not near the border of Russia, then you're right, my statements were factually incorrect. As to the systems in Poland, they are not the entire missile shield merely a small portion. It's the system as a whole that is a threat to Russia's stability gained through MAD and to deny that is to deny the facts. We've positioned ourselves militarily in a manner which certainly makes Russia uneasy. Toss in our constant rhetoric about Iran and it means nothing more than an even bigger buildup in the region. You say we're nowhere near any type of WW, but tell me what transpires after Russia makes good on threats to attack Poland over the system? What will our response be? This situation is nothing less than a cinder in the tinder box and the slightest breeze could set a blaze out of the control of anyone. Ruskies are notorious for their paranoia but our actions are not doing anything to quell that fear.

Are you seriously suggesting the US is planning a ground assault into Russia through Turkey/Georgia or perhaps even Iran/Armenia/Azerbaijan with the forces deployed in Iraq?

The entire ABM program consists of 20 missiles with a not so hot track record. There is simply no practical way anyone could consider the Russian nuclear arsenal negated by this.

Russia won't attack Poland, there is far too much risk for a negligible reward.

 

[lupi]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Duwelon
The liberal left doesn't believe in good or evil.

Anybody that thinks this is about good and evil is extremely ignorant. The Russians aren't being evil, they are being paranoid, and given what happened to them in WWII can you really blame them?

you mean the things like invading Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Romania.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Duwelon
The liberal left doesn't believe in good or evil.

Anybody that thinks this is about good and evil is extremely ignorant. The Russians aren't being evil, they are being paranoid, and given what happened to them in WWII can you really blame them?

you mean the things like invading Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Romania.

Exactly,it isnt like the Soviets were angels the 30's. They were clearly on the move as well. Just happens they ran into another ideology even more motivated and conditioned to war than they were.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Duwelon
The liberal left doesn't believe in good or evil.

Anybody that thinks this is about good and evil is extremely ignorant. The Russians aren't being evil, they are being paranoid, and given what happened to them in WWII can you really blame them?

you mean the things like invading Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Romania.

And then having that go bad by Nazi Germany invading them. Keep in mind they were being ruled by a "Georgian" during WWII.

Nobodies saying the Ruskies are Saints ans they sure weren't in WWII but they did suffer as much as anybody else did in that War at the hands of the Nazis.