Prime Minister Donald Tusk makes his first visit to Russia, Friday. Whatever happens when he gets to Moscow, he is going to take some flak at home, and maybe abroad.
Ex-Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski always said that he would go to Moscow after, ‘Putin comes to Warsaw.’
It didn’t happen.
Since the October election, Tusk has been to see Chancellor Merkel, he has been at the Lisbon summit to discuss the EU Constitution (oops, sorry, I meant ‘Reform’) Treaty. In March he is going to see George W. Bush. But a little chat with Putin comes first.
The decision to prioritize warming up the, up until now, Siberian temperatures that characterized the Kaczynski government’s relations with Russia has prompted a snow storm of criticism from the... Kaczynski brothers.
“Sell out!” They shout. President Kaczinski is particularly incensed that Tusk is taking unilateral decisions about foreign policy. “Isn’t the government constitutionally obliged to consult the president?”
“If you appear weak before the bear, then the bear will eat you alive...agggghhhhgurgle...burp,” etc.
What’s worse, Tusk decided to go and see Putin in Moscow before he sees Yushchenko and Tymoshenko in Kiev. “But Ukrainians are our friends..,” the Kaczynskis skweem.
But Tusk has never hid his desire to calm down diplomatic relations between Warsaw and Moscow. The row over the gas pipeline between Russia and western Europe, by-passing Poland; the row over Moscow’s ban on Polish meat imports; the row over the anti-missile shield being placed in Poland; the row over allowing a NATO base in Poland. There have been more rows between Warsaw and Moscow in the last two years than there have been between Tom and Jerry. And some of those rows had the same cartoon quality about them.
Tusk has not helped himself with his desire to want to please everyone, all the time. To say the Polish government has been sending mixed signals of late would be to understate an understatement.
Take NATO: when foreign minister, the Atlanticist Radek Sikorski, was in Washington last week he signaled Poland’s willingness to have a NATO base in Poland. Or did he?
Putin is outraged by this, as the Russian government think that Poland should be sensitive to having too many of the US’s power vehicles parked right outside their front door. Maybe they still see Poland as a ‘buffer’ against the West, just as they used to during Soviet times.
And then PM Tusk goes and confuses matters this week by saying that Poland never had any plans to have the NATO base on its soil, in the first place. Er...? Um...
This followed a December meeting between the Polish government and NATO which indicated that having a radar base in Powidz, western Poland, was very much on the cards. Since then the two sides failed to agree on the sharing of costs – meaning, how much Warsaw will have to cough up.
All very confusing. Tusk is trying to look (at two different directions at once) more independant from both Moscow and Washington than he really is, or ever can be.
And then there is that anti-missile shield unpleasantness. During the election Tusk was keen to show that, like the electorate, he was for getting troops out of Iraq, but against a blank check for the US to place ten interceptor rockets in northern Poland.
In Washington, Radek Sikorski was clear that ‘in principle’ they are for having the missile shield in Poland. On condition. The negotiations will continue to be of a ‘marathon’ length.
But is Tusk tough enough to get enough from Bush in return?
Bush versus Tusk? No contest.
In this context, Donald goes to Moscow to see the Man himself. What can Tusk get from this that will make him look good? It’s a tricky one.
It would be very easy for Putin, playing to his adoring gallery at home, to make Tusk look like the weed he gives the appearance of being. Putin is practiced in looking tough, but also making alternative suggestions, in very reasonable language, of how Russia should be consulted on absolutely everything Poland, and everyone else, does. Always. Tusk says he wants ‘open discussions,’ but how open will he leave himself?
So what can Tusk do? Act tough, and get nowhere – or act weak and look like...well, Donald Tusk?
Thursday, February 07, 2008
From Russia with love?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
44 comments:
Beatroot said: “Take NATO: when foreign minister, the Atlanticist Radek Sikorski, was in Washington last week he signaled Poland’s willingness to have a NATO base in Poland. Or did he?”
I believe he did exactly that and Tusk’s position is not in step with his own foreign minister or the president as Poland presents three variations of foreign policy to the world. Is this a plan to confuse friend and foe alike?
As much as there are political risks with the visit to the Kremlin, there is an upside. Tusk can always claim he had the guts to try and ease tensions, showed up at the door with a few ideas in hand but those Russians were just too unreasonable to deal with. See we Poles are good Europeans but it takes two to tango, don’t blame us.
Life returns to the status quo.
So far, after the morning meeting with the prime minister of Russia that nobody has heard of... it has been so touchy feely....common dialogue blah...a thaw in dialogue blah....
Why should the Polish people want a missile shield for the west with 10 or any interceptors? It just makes Poland a target for Russia and terrorists,that's what most Polish People here believ I have found.
Poland should not be a puppet dancing to the tune of Bush or Putin.Tusk,just be a true man of the people for a change and tell them both to sling their missiles and power Politics somewhere else,but not in/away/towards Poland!
John,Poznan
It isn’t about the missiles!
Let’s review the latest missile lies:
The missiles threaten Russia’s security; nonsense 10 interceptors cannot alter the balance of power, Russia has thousands of nuclear missiles which remain aimed at Nato, the US and China.
The presence of the interceptor will result in Poland being targeted by terrorists; the presence of antimissile systems, which exist in a number of countries, has yet to be the cause of a single terrorist act anywhere on earth.
Cows in Poland will cease to produce milk…………… needs further study.
In fact, the Russian and Polish national interests are contradictory. Poland cannot accept such Russian plans as re-establishing their traditional zone of influence in Eastern Europe. Therefore a western military presence in any form on Polish territory is desirable.
This is all about Russia being seen to have lost it’s influence in the region.
Hmmn, it's a good thing Poland doesn't have any "psychological" issues.
I wonder if Russia put some defensive missiles in Cuba if the US would US this as a pretext to invade Cuba.
schaden freud said... “I wonder if Russia put some defensive missiles in Cuba if the US would US this as a pretext to invade Cuba.”
Firstly your term defensive missile is misleading we are talking about interceptors a form of missile not able to inflict damage on a ground targets.
Under international law there are no prohibitions on such systems as they have no nuclear component and have no offensive capability.
The whole argument here is like a burglar complaining to the homeowner that he just installed a new bugler alarm therefore making robbing the home more difficult.
India may be ready to look into possible US-Indian collaboration on ballistic missile defence, don’t hear the Russians scream at India?
Which side of their mouth are the Russians talking from this week:
The Russian A-135 anti-ballistic missile system is currently operational around Moscow. Only they can have missile defence???
Russian news agencies quoted the deputy foreign minister, Aleksandr Losyukov, as saying that Iran’s test of a rocket this week had raised “suspicions” about its nuclear program. Isn’t this the treat the US is trying to counter?
With respect to Cuba, Americas greatest fear of Cuba is 2 million Cubans suddenly showing up in Florida should a sudden collapse of the system occur. And more importantly cutting the check to clean up Castro’s mess.
jan,
Cows in Poland will cease to produce milk…………… needs further study.
In case of war, such installation will be instantly hit with a megaton-range surface detonation.
This is an example fallout pattern from a 1 Mt groundburst. Superimposing this drawing over the map of Poland is left as an exercise to the reader.
In short, having the installation guarantees that you are hosed even if a limited nuclear exchange occurs. (An unlimited one of course will get you hosed anyway, but it's not the only possible scenario).
Poland cannot accept such Russian plans as re-establishing their traditional zone of influence in Eastern Europe. Therefore a western military presence in any form on Polish territory is desirable.
Poland cannot accept such German plans as re-establishing their traditional zone of influence in Eastern Europe. Therefore a Russian military presence in any form on Polish territory is desirable.
Yup, that makes as much sense.
India may be ready to look into possible US-Indian collaboration on ballistic missile defence, don’t hear the Russians scream at India?
Physics, my friend. A rocket from Russia to the US would fly over a North Pole. You can't shot it down from a base in India... but with Poland, you are in a much better position.
Isn't the purported deployment of the missiles to defend against terrorist attack from middle eastern states?
What about Putin's suggestion to deploy them elsewhere if the Americans stated purpose is sincere?
These launch systems can't use offensive weapons? Seems to me if CIA planes can surreptitiously land in Poland, some offensive weaponry can be brought into or even manufactured on a missile base.
Imagine, Russia has Russian defensive missiles around Moscow! The unmitigated gall of Putin!
But Opamp's argument is more to the point: Yer guaranteed to get hosed immediately in the case of a limited nuclear exchange with Russia.
Also, given all the German products and stores, it seems like the Germans have reestablished their zone of influence and then some in Poland. And they didn't even have to fight another war.
opamp said...” such installation will be instantly hit with a megaton-range surface detonation”
If the Russians ever decided to launch a first strike the presence of the interceptors would be wholly irrelevant to the final outcome, which is ther very point you missed. This system poses no treat to the Russians.
I should remind you that Poland is a front line Nato state, and that of course has some risks. I trust you are not advocating that Poland should leave Nato.
It is also interesting that you suggest the Russians would go for the option of a first strike in response to the existence of a defensive weapons system harmless to their country.
If you feel the Russians are so irrational and unpredictable perhaps you should be lobbing for more weapons expenditures in the Polish budget.
I also see that you equate Germany’s position on Poland with Russia’s as if it were an apple to apples comparison. I find this ill informed and bizarre, how can you equate Germany a democracy firmly anchored in the EU to that of Russia a backward country with no civil society sliding into dictatorship?
Your getting the missiles, live with it!
This system poses no treat to the Russians.
First, this is irrelevant. It's mere existence is enough for it to be put on the target list.
Second, it does not pose a threat at the moment. After several upgrades, who knows? It could suppress Russia's retaliatory capability, paving the way for U.S. launching a first strike. But U.S. is a rational country who doesn't attack... oh, never mind.
Third. Its radar will be able to see Russian airspace, which would be a great strategic advantage. It is akin to a Russian radar in Cuba.
So this system shifts a balance of power.
I should remind you that Poland is a front line Nato state
NATO is not eternal. With gradual strengthening of EU and brain-dead US foreign policy, the natural breakup of NATO is a possible scenario. Consequently, US/Russia conflict with neutral EU becomes a possibility. If that comes to pass, aligning with US is the most stupid thing you can do.
I am inclined to say that in the long term Russia can be indeed more predictable then the U.S. Consider: we are in for a period of wars over shrinking natural resources (in particular oil). Russia is sitting on gas, oil and all of the periodic table. It has a natural client for these resources -- the EU. Provided that Russia can (or already did) evolve a stable form of the government (monarchy would do), we can see a long period of EU-Russia cooperation. Armed conflict between EU and Russia would be the least desirable option. (Instead, we will see Russian undercover attempts to get more influence in the EU).
U.S., on the other hand, is running out of oil and resorting to armed invasions to obtain it. It is becoming less and less predictable.
For Poland, the only viable long-term option is a common EU defense force. And more military spending, because if something happens, all our allies will run away, as always.
schaden freud said... “Isn't the purported deployment of the missiles to defend against terrorist attack from middle eastern states?”
The purported deployment of the missiles is to defend against the launch of a missile from a state such as Iran as an example. As the nuclear gene is out of the bottle any rogue state with a bit technical capability can start a program i.e. an equalizer to American power. The system is meant to be an insurance policy against the crazies getting a nuclear missile. If such a potential escapes you the recent events in Pakistan demonstrate the potential. Thus India’s great interest in such a system.
schaden freud said... “What about Putin's suggestion to deploy them elsewhere if the Americans stated purpose is sincere?”
The Americans looked at this proposal and rejected it; I don’t think they are eager to share the technical lead they enjoy.
schaden freud said... “These launch systems can't use offensive weapons? Seems to me if CIA planes can surreptitiously land in Poland, some offensive weaponry can be brought into or even manufactured on a missile base.”
The CIA planes were perhaps the most poorly kept secret in Poland. Russian intelligence services have Poland (and Nato) well covered just as the KGB did in the days of the cold war i.e. no surprises.
Converting these missiles to offensive Nukes is pointless as Nato already has ground based Nuclear weapons in Europe with the necessary range.
schaden freud said... “Imagine, Russia has Russian defensive missiles around Moscow! The unmitigated gall of Putin!”
So what’s his problem…….missile envy?
schaden freud said... “given all the German products and stores, it seems like the Germans have reestablished their zone of influence”
It’s called free enterprise and are you aware the largest portion of Polish exports are shipped to Germany and you have a choice if the price and quality of the German products aren’t to your liking then buy something else.
It is a telling sign of the times when you hear people complain about all the goods available in Polish stores I bet you don’t remember when we use to make granny wait in line for toilet paper in January as it was only available every six weeks or so. That was in the days of the PRL.
So to get this straight under German influence our shops are filled with every consumer item imaginable but under the Russians we were hard put to find a rotten potato on the store shelve.
Uh, you really don't think it's simply a matter of protection against middle eastern threats. And not even mainly. That's not the game here.
Within range does not equate to equal flight duration. Indeed, there are also American defensive missiles within range located elsewhere.
Free enterprise? Or a form of enterpreneurial colonialization?
We have some nuclear and other toxic waste. If you guys want to really want to help us out, you'd let us dump it in one of your eastern forests. Think of all the protection that will give you against the Russians. We might, maybe that is, even throw a few extra visas your way.
Geez said…” have some nuclear and other toxic waste”
Although a novel idea on defence the Russians already live in a toxic cesspool which is evident in their life expectancy….looks like something from the third world. I dare say they would be a custom to such environmental condition. However shows your thinking out of the box.
Exporting toxic waste could affect the fortunes of organized crime in the US and I understand your economy doesn’t need further economic shocks.
No thank you on the visa’s, the US doesn’t make the top 5 countries on our export destinations. The Polish community in the US has not exactly produce something akin to the Israel lobby but rather slipped into political irrelevance.
However thank you in advance for the new air-defence system.
You're welcome.
And you'll also be reaping all the rewards that American GIs staffing the military bases will bring your way.
. freud said...” That's not the game here”
Once again you are confusing a non-nuclear defensive interceptor (ie does not kill people) with nuclear ballistic missiles. There is no linkage here. If the Russians do not intend to have the option of launching a first strike then they have nothing to be concerned about from such technology. Surely if the Russians were serious they would have offered to dismantle their own anti-missile system which is already operational.
s. freud said.. “Free enterprise? Or a form of enterpreneurial colonialization?”
Nobody is being forced to buy or for that matter sell something to another party against their will. Surely normal economic interaction is not “enterpreneurial colonialization”. Is it just the Germans you have a problem with or the idea of the EU’s free trade concept. Please explain what economic model you feel would be better suited to our needs.
Are you advocating a return to the economic structures of the PRL?
Geez said: “reaping all the rewards that American GIs staffing the military bases will bring your way.”
The limited number GI’s that would be present wouldn’t register in any economic indicators so I wouldn’t think this would be a consideration. Not like in Germany were the large number of personnel does affect the local economy, just listen to the sobbing every time the US talks about closing a base.
A question for you, what is the maximum number of US/Nato personnel Poland can host.
As many as your women can get pregnant by....
opamp said...” Its mere existence is enough for it to be put on the target list.”
As a consequence of Poland’s geographical location you’re already on the target list and have been in one way or another for the last 70 years. Short of moving the country to a place somewhere in the Pacific that isn’t going to change. An idea I would support.
opamp said...” After several upgrades, who knows? It could suppress Russia's retaliatory capability”
When ten non-nuclear interceptor missiles can be upgraded by US technology to nullify the Russia’s missile threat the Russians will have more to worry about than Poland. Your suggestion that the US would launch a first strike against Russia……..to what benefit?
opamp said...” Its radar will be able to see Russian airspace, which would be a great strategic advantage. It is akin to a Russian radar in Cuba.”
Does this mean the armada of spy satellites flying over Russia now are missing something?
opamp said...” So this system shifts a balance of power. “
This system is meant to deal with a relatively low tech ballistic missiles launched in very small number coming from a rogue state. If this system were employed against the Russians more Russian missiles will be lost to malfunction than to anything this system will do and the Russians know this.
geez said...” As many as your women can get pregnant by....”
This is not altogether a bad thing is some rural area genetic diversity is not what it should be; some new genetic material could help. Lets face it American men are not use to real women like our Polish ladies. Most Americans have just been exposed to homegrown stuff usually what passes here for a variation on a bull-dyke lesbian.
Good thing, too, so few American soldiers have STDs.
And please be kind and don't be racist towards the mulatto kids.
opamp said: “NATO is not eternal”
For the foreseeable future Nato is all you have. I agree with that Europe (the EU) should take hold of their own foreign and defence policy however we are no closer to this than we were 25 years ago. I refer to some fine examples such as Bosnia where Europe could not cope with a low level regional conflict in either military or diplomatic terms and in the end needed American help. Having learned nothing they repeated the whole thing again with the first Kosovo crisis. Had not the Americans once again agreed to intervene the Serbian fascist regime encouraged by Russia would have perpetrated another genocide.
Let’s see if Europe can handle the second Kosovo crisis on it own?
De-coupling Europe from the Americans is Russia wet dream and not likely in this century. Unless Russia turned into a liberal democracy forget this notion. At present Russia is at odds with nearly all “European values”.
I will quote a Russian’s assessment of his government:
“an astounding 78 percent of the country's leadership has links to the KGB or FSB, according to estimates by Olga Kryshtanovskaya, a leading sociologist who tracks Kremlin politics and the security services. Twenty-six percent of the officials acknowledge their involvement, while the rest give themselves away "by the holes in their resumes," Kryshtanovskaya said.
In addition to filling government and company posts with intelligence officers, Putin has restored to the FSB much of the power and glory enjoyed by the KGB.”
There is no reason to be concerned with the worst-case scenario a conflict between Russia and the west as there is no benefit to anyone from this nor is there the possibility of an attainable victory by either side.
Opamp said: “For Poland, the only viable long-term option is a common EU defense force. And more military spending, because if something happens, all our allies will run away, as always”
Given your rather pathetic list of allies the Americans are usually the not first to run away, I say there just a bit better than nothing at all when it comes to allies.
geez said…” Good thing, too, so few American soldiers have STDs.
And please be kind and don't be racist towards the mulatto kids”
Yes US army medical services are excellent at keeping the STD situation under control.
As far as the “the mulatto kids” goes, have you ever noticed the naturally dark complexion of many people in the eastern part of Poland.
“racist” – we actually have a Black elected official!
“we shall over come” also resonates in Poland
Really????????????
"a parasitic fringe that makes no contribution to the nation"
"pure bloodline uncontaminated by the foreign pestilence that features so prominently in Polish history"
"we have a win-win situation here a foreign parasite eliminated 12 members of a Polish parasitic group in turn causing his own demise…does it get better?"
"These people take comfort in their idle and irrelevant existence; cutting those lives short will not negatively impact anything. Mol could consider this part of his defence."
"Real vetting involves sturdy lampposts, strong tree limbs and lots of rope."
geez said... "a parasitic fringe that makes no contribution to the nation", "we have a win-win situation here a foreign parasite eliminated 12 members of a Polish parasitic group in turn causing his own demise…does it get better?" and ”These people take comfort in their idle and irrelevant existence; cutting those lives short will not negatively impact anything. Mol could consider this part of his defence."
As a supporter of the Warsaw salon you have yet to demonstrate one contribution this societal fringe has made to the existence of the nation or for that matter the quality of life of the masses.
geez said... “pure bloodline uncontaminated by the foreign pestilence that features so prominently in Polish history"
Any encyclopaedia will suggest to you that Poland has one Europe’s most homogenous populations. And further reading will make it clear to you that it has a long history of being on the receiving end of predatory behaviour on the part of foreigners.
geez said... "Real vetting involves sturdy lampposts, strong tree limbs and lots of rope."
Are you against bringing to justice those that were responsible for the communist tyranny in Poland and accompanying genocide?
One would find your fascist tendencies curious given that you are part of a society that grants it’s people the greatest freedom of expression coupled with the greatest economic liberty. Do you view yourself as a person not fully vested in the American dream and therefore choose to lash out with an ideological position at variance to the main stream?
"And further reading will make it clear to you that it has a long history of being on the receiving end of predatory behaviour on the part of foreigners."
Some lessons are not so easily learned and sometimes even more difficult to apply even when you are being bitten on the nose by foreigners you fawn over.
BTW, if you studied even a smidgeon of American history, you would think twice before you bring up using ropes and tree limbs if your want to impress anybody with your reason.
Here we have the standard Commie obstructionism and abuse of populism
for its own ends. This argument is quite similar to those made by the far left about the Pershing two deployments. Over time we did learn that many of the loudest voices were on Moscow's payroll.
Anti American populism is straight from the classic commie/far left hit list over the last 50 years. Janowak is 100% correct and comedically Geez talks about American history a subject he knows
nothing about.
Nato is a dead end and I would like
to see America disband it. It has served its duty and needs to be retired. The USA should just have a series of agreements with deserving
states. No doubt if Russia reverts to form the Polish people might have to suffer for another 60 years.
Meanwhile Beatroot will just find another salon to sip his Jonestown
amoral kool aide. He might even approve of outside hegemony if the correct code words are said.
How many times have the Polish people been turned into vassals or colonized? It would seem that a military alliance with the USA would serve Poland's interest more than America's.
Now onto the idiocy of visas spoken by the local imbeciles.
Fact Immigration visas limit each countries number to 7% of the total. The country that get screwed
over the most is the Philipinnes, not Poland. India, China and Mexico
also get screwed because of the 7% number.
As stated earlier the countries on the visa waiver program are not determined by political calculations. Those countries are
determined by the rate of people who overstay their visas and do not return home. Nor is this solely a monetary issue as Israel is also not a visa waiver country. No doubt the usual mindless sorts will chalk this up to a cabal. However, the countries on the list are determined by numeric formulas.
Onto Oamp and the war for Oil idiocy. If his mindless version of anti logic is correct our target would be Chavez. The far left is full of this simplistic fare. Paranoid delusions are standard prerequisites for being on the left.
Onto Oamp and the war for Oil idiocy.
So what was the reason for the war?
Maybe we can get back to the point of the post (and avoid all the ropes, trees and other strange fruit).
The 'antimissile system is for rogue states'.
It is true that ten little rockets are not going to be any use against Russian fire power and are indeed not meant for that purpose. But what real purpose are they then? America is keen on the system but would not be threatened by these little rogue states' missiles. There is no evidence that the 'rogue states' - meaning Iran, or the now less fashionable bogeyman, North Korea, have a technology to fire a missile which would zip over Poland on its way to Washington DC. The whole thing is a complete fantasy.
So what are these things for and is it worth all the fuss?
Me, I think not.
A country's national sovereignty is always compromised when it accedes to the placement of foreign military bases on it's soil. Russian, German or American.
The only purpose of the base is to needlessly rattle the Russkies and to allow George Bush and the Poles to feel like they have some balls.
Geez said: “Some lessons are not so easily learned and sometimes even more difficult to apply even when you are being bitten on the nose by foreigners you fawn over.”
We live under no illusions when it comes to the west we remember Yalta, the assassination of General Sikorski and our western European neighbours assuming the role of professional apologists for the Soviet Union. The same people who excuse Russia’s behaviour today……..once a whore always a whore. We have a very limited hope or trust in America but some hope is better then none and at this time there exist nowhere else to turn, believe me it’ll be adios as fast as a viable alternative appears.
Geez said: “BTW, if you studied even a smidgeon of American history, you would think twice before you bring up using ropes and tree limbs if your want to impress anybody with your reason.”
I am aware of the American context but it has no relevance to the Polish situation. The genocide perpetrated on us by our neighbours and the Quisling government imposed on us with western collusion requires justice. Millions of our dead remain unanswered for; such a debt may only be paid for by blood.
Your suggestion that the US would launch a first strike against Russia……..to what benefit?
You have to account some possible scenarios, such as an accidental launch and a madman with a control over the button. The latter seems to be more of concern lately, seeing the sharply declining quality of U.S. leaders over the last two decades.
Not to mention that the installation would be a likely target if some Russian weapons broke loose.
For the foreseeable future Nato is all you have.
This is NOT a NATO installation. This would be an exterritorial U.S. installation, under U.S. command. This is my whole point: this is an unilateral action by the U.S. In fact, this very installation is the best illustration of the fracture in NATO. Its very nature demands one NATO member (Poland) to sacrifice its security for that of another one (U.S.).
This system is meant to deal with a relatively low tech ballistic missiles launched in very small number coming from a rogue state.
Because a rogue country would risk using a quite expensive and unreliable method of delivery in order to subject itself to a massive U.S. retaliation, which would turn it into one big lake. Yeah, right. The leader of this country would not only have to be a madman, but also a complete idiot.
This threat is completely theoretical.
If this system were employed against the Russians more Russian missiles will be lost to malfunction than to anything this system will do and the Russians know this.
We have already determined that it is superfluous against rogue states and useless against Russia.
What is its purpose, then?
beakerkin said... “Nato is a dead end and I would like
to see America disband it.”
Nato has been and continues to be the most successful collective defence agreement ever produced. It’s not perfect. The notion that democratic states form a collective defence alliance remains fundamentally sound.
It sounds like your advocating an almost isolationist policy of America first which really is no longer an option. The entire debate concerning globalization has started taking place after the fact, can any society un-couple it-self without consequence.
Notwithstanding the frustration of trying to a form consensus, withdrawing from a position of world leader to look more inwardly is not a viable solution for the US.
Many think tanks predicted the current situation; during the cold war we had a form of world order based on two super powers and the alignment of the rest in their respective orbit, which created a form of order. Today all bets are off and the variables are countless and unpredictable.
Peter said: “There is no evidence that the 'rogue states' - meaning Iran, or the now less fashionable bogeyman, North Korea,”
The anti-missile system is a prudent and a correct defensive measure.
Iran’s nuclear and rocket technology is just at the point were they could a have nuclear ballistic missile in the next few years. That coupled with their statements that Israel should be destroyed don’t speak well for their future intentions. The Russians have just officially raised concern over Iranian missile technology and its intended purpose. Is Russia’s anti- missile system around Moscow (the only operational system in the world) an irrational act?
North Korea has already demonstrated it has the rocket technology and stated it has nuclear weapons. Leaves little for the imagination. Are the Japanese irrational asking for American help with an anti-missile system?
Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal would fall into the hands of persons unknown if the current government were toppled in the worst-case scenario the fundamentalist. Are the Indians being irrational looking to the US for cooperation in building their own anti-missile system?
This is about defence in a messy and unpredictable world
Nato has been and continues to be the most successful collective defense agreement ever produced. It’s not perfect. The notion that democratic states form a collective defence alliance remains fundamentally sound.
It sounds like your advocating an almost isolationist policy of America first which really is no longer an option…
Firstly, the type of American who thinks like Beakowhako does advocate isolationism. They always do when the US suffers a defeat or has to beat a hasty retreat from somewhere. They always blame those pesky Europeans, particularly of the ‘cheese eating surrender monkey’ variety.
But secondly, the US is getting frustrated with NATO. Many countries simply don’t want to get involved in their wars. This is why the US defense sec (whose name escapes me at the moment, so anonymous has he been since the demise of dear old Rummy) is warning that we must not create a ‘two tier’ NATO. He means US, UK, and kind of Poland, Canada, and then everyone else on the other tier.
In reality, of course, we have a two tier NATO now already.
And that’s because NATO is not being asked to be a DEFENSE organization by the US these days but an attack orientated one. It is US policy that has created the problem in the first place. If they want a one tier NATO then Washington is going to have to go with what the majority in NATO want. And what they want is no more ‘preemptive’ strikes, thank you very much.
opamp said...” an accidental launch and a madman with a control over the button.”
You need to de-couple your dislike of George Bush with the technical aspect of these weapons and their fire control. It’s not the Americans you should worry about but rather the Russians whose lack of technical process could result in catastrophe. In the worst-case situation this non-nuclear missile would be fired into space causing no property damage or loss of life.
opamp said...” This is NOT a NATO installation”
Yes that’s correct but it is an American installation protecting both the US and its Nato partners. Poland security is being enhanced through American military aid my understanding is that Poland has major requirements for the upgrade of it’s defence forces. Poland is free to say NO to this yet all voices of those responsible for the nation security take the view that given some military aid it should go forth.
opamp said...” The leader of this country would not only have to be a madman, but also a complete idiot. “
Just listen to their speeches, some of these third world freaks couldn't get a license for a hand gun based on their mental state let alone giving them control of a nuke.
57: "I am aware of the American context but it has no relevance to the Polish situation."
>>>
Oh, and I thought you were advocating lynching for Mol and "the salon." Looking again, that's what you did advocate (in addition for all the other folks you seem to need to hate). And if an American missile base gives you some kind of hope, I still gotta wonder hope for what?
beatroot said...‘cheese eating surrender monkey’
Question: Why wouldn't the Statue of Liberty work in France?
Answer: Because she has only one arm raised.
Question: How do you confuse a French Soldier?
Answer:Give him a rifle and ask him to shoot it.
Question: What does a French military alliance and a French romance have in common?
Answer: Both are brief, sordid, and completely meaningless.
When defending their continued plunder of Africa you find the French not shy in using their armed forces to help the locals see “reason” in their former colonies.
I agree with you it was a big mistake to involve Nato in the “war on Terror”, firstly it was stretching the intent of the treaty obligation. This has damaged the alliance and the US would have been better off to deal directly with a number of countries willing to participate and hit the rest up for some cash.
Pre-emptive is not a bad thing if you could justify it. But to have invaded Iraq looking for WMD’s and found nothing more than a rusty hand grenade was a political disaster.
Nato’s got some adventures coming up one is a possible new crisis in Kosovo and the other is on a political level concerning expansion i.e. Georgia.
geez said...” I thought you were advocating lynching for Mol”
Under no circumstance as that would imply the potential of a quick death and in this case nature will do just fine…….that is after we hear the judge/judges say guilty as charged.
Secondly did you miss the word “vetting” in the sentence, which has no relevance in contemporary events in Poland around Mole or the salon but rather is widely understood to be a process of identifying those guilty of crimes during the PRL.
Slowly check under your bed, if there’s no bogey man go back to bed otherwise call the nice man in the white jacket to come by with a syringe of happy juice. Repeat after me “everything will be all right”.
Keep trying, 57. Your position on Mol and "the salon" was repeatedly months ago stated clearly enuff and in a wider consistent context. Now you conflate two different quotes to try to confuse matters. C'mon, at least be consistent over time and don't try to sidestep your disdain for black folks and liberals. Nice of you, though, to own up to only wanting to use Americans like Sneakerfreak.
Beaten by the Beaker.
NATO is a waste of time and money. Why should the US tax payer subsidize the defense of Europe?
Who and what are we defending against?
If the Polish people want a bilateral agreement to stave off Russia, so be it. NATO has proven to be quite useless and it has come time to end. Let the EU foot its own bill for defense.
Geez
Why should Beatenrootless care about Poland. His condescending tone towards Poland and his rabid anti American mania are apparent in any basic reading. If Poland gets occupied again he will probably just endorse it so long as the person says a few empty words about social justice like his friend Hugo Chavez.
Now kindly continue to fetch drinks
and play the salon jester. You might even earn minimum wage someday is his majesty Beatroot decides to toss in some chump change.
jan - I don;t think that the Kosovo crisis will get military. The elections in Serbia put a pro-EU president in and he will bend over backwards to please Brussels, which means letting Kosovo become a little more independant (I think they will find some kind of fudge compromise).
The immediate problem for NATO is Afghanistan. The canadians have had enough of getting blwon to bits and they want germany and some of the others to stick their necks out and go where it is dangerous - which is basically in the south of the country.
Poles have been in the south and seem to have had a few bad experiences, but I get the impression that even Warsaw has put bloacks on where it will send its men and what they will do when they get there.
In the worst-case situation this non-nuclear missile would be fired into space causing no property damage or loss of life.
Except a Russian retaliatory strike.
In 1983 nuclear war was closely averted because a Soviet commander violated the procedure when Soviet satellites (incorrectly) detected launches from one of the U.S. missile fields.
In 1995 Russian missile forces
started countdown when their radars picked up a research rocket launched from Norway. Launch was cancelled when it became apparent that the rocket was flying away from Russia.
A million dollar question: what will the Russian commander on duty do when he sees a radar echo of a 'harmless' U.S. missile fired from Poland?
Yes that’s correct but it is an American installation protecting both the US and its Nato partners.
...such as Canada. This system cannot protect European targets. You're at odds with physics again.
Post a Comment