|
|
Post by JustJohn or JJ on Apr 24, 2016 4:53:45 GMT -7
Aggressive Russia, You Say? Poland Set to Double Size of Armed Forces
 The belligerent rhetoric coming out of the Polish defense ministry is reaching new heights, and may soon be backed up by force, with Defense Minister Antoni Macierewicz announcing that the Polish army has plans to more than double in size in the coming years. Speaking to journalists at the opening of a new headquarters for NATO Force Integration Unit (NFIU) in Bydgoszcz, central Poland on Wednesday, Macierewicz said that the army would grow by at least 50%, and would include both new territorial defense forces and operating units, Poland's Rzeczpospolita reported. "The Polish army will be bigger; we envision a substantial increase in the size of the army, by at least 50 percent, in the coming years, including the creation of three brigades for the territorial defense of the country on the eastern flank," the defense minister said. "I do not want it to be understood that the development of the army will be limited to territorial defense. This also applies to operating units," he added. The three new territorial defense brigades will be deployed by the beginning of 2017, Macierewicz clarified. The reason for the massive planned increase, the minister claimed, was the "threat from Russia, and its occupation of parts of Ukraine." Saying that he was grateful to allied and US forces in Poland, and "along the entire eastern flank" of NATO, for the important role they play "in ensuring peace and security," Macierewicz emphasized that nonetheless, "the key to achieving this goal is readiness of the armed forces of Poland and other countries of the eastern region to defend themselves," in coordination with NATO and US troops. The defense minister's announcement follows on statements made earlier to a similar effect. In January, Macierewicz said that Poland's armed forces, which currently number about 95,000 personnel, would grow to 150,000 in the coming years. Moreover, last week, he said that the government has plans to spend nearly $62 billion modernizing its military, a figure close to double the $34 billion the previous government planned to spend through to 2022. Asked to comment on the defense ministry's plans, Tomasz Jankowski, an expert at the European Center for Geopolitical Analysis, told Sputnik Poland that the expansion will come at the expense of Polish taxpayers, who will be forced to give up more of their tax dollars to buy obsolete US weaponry. "Everything will be arranged in such a way that we [Poles] will have to dip into our pockets," Jankowski said. "And that's not the worst thing about it. The worst thing (and what the Law and Justice government seems to want) is that all these purchases and modernization plans are devised for Poland to buy mostly obsolete US weaponry, which the US army no longer needs, and is looking to get rid of." At the same time, the analyst noted, "the defense minister is doubtlessly taking advantage of an atmosphere of constant deception of Polish society, one which suggests that we are threatened with war, presumably against Russia, and that we should supposedly arm ourselves to ensure the country's defense." Commenting on active negotiations between Berlin and Washington on the deployment of US troops to Poland, Jankowski suggested that this was a "key insight" indicating that Germany and the US, rather than Poland, are the ones making the decisions about the deployment of foreign troops in Poland. "This, in turn, means that Poland is under occupation. And because we are under occupation, there is no doubt that the increase in the army's size is not an independent decision, but rather an attempt to cover the spending of billions for American weapons." Finally, the analyst noted, "returning to the term 'eastern flank', we need to ask ourselves the question: Whose eastern flank is it? Poland's or NATO's? They say openly that Polish is only the territory on which the military alliance operates, and Poland has no levers of pressure on it…The term 'flank' indirectly recognizes the fact that Poland is only an object of NATO's gamesmanship, and of the US military industry, which needs a market." Also last Friday, speaking at a security conference in Bratislava, Polish Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski suggested that actually, Russia, and not Daesh, was the real 'existential threat' to Europe. The minister made the comments despite the fact that Daesh has repeatedly attacked European capitals over the last six months, and the fact that Russia has played a key role in rolling back the terrorist group in Syria. For the record, Defense Minister Macierewicz is well-known for his anti-Russian outbursts. Earlier this year, the minister claimed that the 2010 air catastrophe over Smolensk, which resulted in the death of the Polish president and much of his staff, was actually a 'terrorist attack' by the Russian government, equivalent to Hitler's aggression against Germany in 1939. Earlier, before his appointment to the defense ministry by the Law and Justice government last year, Macierewicz was already well-known in Poland for his controversial and sometimes racist statements, suggesting for instance that the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion have some truth' in them, and claiming that Poland and Russia have been in a state of war since the 2010 presidential plane crash. Poland is pushing to receive additional permanent US and NATO bases in the country ahead of the alliance's upcoming summit in Warsaw in July. |
|
|
|
Post by Jaga on Apr 24, 2016 5:57:54 GMT -7
Macierewicz is a conspiracy theory believer. He was the one who started to read a list of many thousands of Polish cooperators with communism... which was made up of everybody whose name was on any secret service list, among them Lech Walesa who was a president in that time.
Macierewicz wants to feel important, like Bush and his people, and he wants to look manly..... starting wars and conflicts feel good to some of these people. Somehow America was unscathed during Obama's administration and he refused to escalate conflicts....
|
|
|
|
Post by kaima on Apr 24, 2016 8:43:05 GMT -7
Aggressive Russia, You Say? Poland Set to Double Size of Armed Forces
The headline writer wants to sensationalize the news of doubling the size of Polish Army. Given the size and power of their next door neighbor it should have the same excitement and provocation as if Canada doubled the size of its armed forces. Well, perhaps the comparison should be the same excitement and provocation as if Mexico doubled the size of its armed forces. Ho - hum!! Kai PS. Just more Polish money down the drain. The USA and Russia can't be beat for feeding that hungry Black Hole (the military) with money! PPS. Imagine President Donald Trump shaking in his boots with Mexico doubling the armed forces!  |
|
|
|
Post by karl on Apr 24, 2016 12:21:29 GMT -7
The situation as seen from the outside is: To make a solution, first must be made the problem. In this case, it is simple logic, Defense Minister Macierewicz is the tail being wagged by PiS. It is a far gone conclusion that Mr. Kaczynski would not oh his life allow weapons even first line equipment, to be purchased from German manufactures. Rather to do this, his allowance would and will be all American even out dated weapons. Due to his {Kaczynski} stubborn nature, he realizes not that time and wear not only erodes the equipment, but becomes dangerious as being defeated in combat by upgraded weapons designed and owned by which ever belligerent state with armed conflict against Poland.
Mr. Kaczynski is playing a dangerious game with his nonsense in confusing stupidity as a virtue.
Karl
|
|
|
|
Post by Jaga on Apr 24, 2016 23:32:34 GMT -7
Macierewicz is a big boy who is a central player in PIS, he is not just a tail in Kaczynski's government. Poland want to feel emperial again!
|
|
|
|
Post by karl on Apr 25, 2016 13:39:11 GMT -7
|
|
|
|
Post by JustJohn or JJ on May 1, 2016 4:49:49 GMT -7
Are Poland’s Elites Itching for War with Russia?
Peter S Rieth April 28, 2016
“The Russian plane should have been fired upon. Not shot down, but fired upon. Too bad the Americans didn’t fire. Secretary Kerry should have announced that next time, the United States will fire on the Russians.” These are the words of Roman Kuźniar, a key foreign policy advisor to the former President of Poland, Bronisław Komorowski. In Poland, Mr. Komorowski was accused of being too soft on Russia. One can only imagine that if firing on the Russian air force in international waters is the view taken by the “doves” in Polish politics, the United States should be alarmed that the present government is even more hardline than the previous.
Yet the United States is on the brink of energizing Polish hardliners by placing at least an armored brigade of American troops on Polish soil. One can only imagine the myriad opportunities this will present to a Polish political class so hell-bent on starting a war against Russia that it actually expresses displeasure when a Russian fly-by over an American naval vessel in the Baltic Sea did not result in escalation and war.
Not even the President of Ukraine, whose government is in open conflict with Russia, is this extreme. For all of the routine accusations that President Poroshenko’s government throws at the Russians, international observers must admit that at least Mr. Poroshenko actually talks to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Russia and Ukraine have, after all, negotiated the Minsk accords which, while not satisfying everyone, are a benchmark upon which further diplomatic progress can be made. The same cannot be said for Poland, whose political class came together above party lines to support the Maidan revolution which ousted Ukraine’s democratically elected President and then actively supported Kiev’s military efforts against Ukrainian citizens in the east who were disenfranchised by the Maidan. The latest close call between Russian and American forces in the Baltic is, for most people, a cause for concern. Secretary Kerry rightly praised the calm professionalism of American naval commanders. Poland’s political class is angry that the United States did not take the opportunity to start the third world war.
One might wonder what compels the broad, bipartisan consensus in Poland as regards Russia? Given that further escalation would at the very least damage economic relations which are already in tatters due to the crisis in Ukraine, why are Poland’s ruling elites playing with fire rather than working hard to reconcile East with West? The answer is largely due to the isolation of the ruling Solidarity elite from the common people. Unlike roughly 38 million Poles who have to work for a living, 4 million of whom have fled West over the past 25 years to escape poverty, the Solidarity elites who were elevated to power in 1989 have almost never had to hold private sector jobs. They have either been in a branch of government or in its orbit for 25 years. This disconnection from reality blinds them to the pressing needs of their people. Many of them also ascribe to dangerous expansionist creeds rooted in Promethism, a political ideology seeking eastward expansion and a settling of historical scores with Moscow. Rather than focus on economic growth for their people and the establishment of good relations with Russia, the Solidarity elite is determined to defeat Russia.
The United States fails to recognize that although it will presumably retain command over any American troops eventually stationed in Poland, it will be helpless in the face of Polish impetuosity. Polish military units might engage Russians on international waters, just as Poland invaded Kiev in 1919 hoping for French and British aid in the endeavor and nearly destroying their young country in the process. The United States has achieved international power and prominence due to a realistic application of military, economic and political power.
The Poles, always looking for a fight with the Russians, will make American prudence in military affairs almost impossible and risk worsening an already tense situation. If the United States is determined to expand American military presence in Poland, the United States must retain full political control over the process so as to preclude the Polish political class from provoking a war with Russia. Everyone recognizes the recent Russian fly-bys in the Baltic for what they were: a demonstration of strength in international waters. The American military reacted with measured professionalism and Secretary Kerry also reacted in proportion to the event, cognizant of the important economic and military cooperation linking Russia, Europe and the United States. The Polish political class, rather than calling for peace, calls for war and bemoans American restraint despite the fact that such restraint will likely save their country from annihilation. The Polish people deserve better, they have a right to live in peace and happiness and do not exist to be cannon fodder for modern “Polish Masters” who ignore their plight and seek not defense against Russia but war with Russia at the cost of their own people.
In the end, as the Baltic sea encounters demonstrate, expanding American military presence in the regions will only raise tension and prompt Russia to flex its own muscles. We have had these debates about deterrence before. Cold War history demonstrates that the expansion of military deterrence brings greater risk because the more weapons we aim at one another the more chance of those weapons being used, even if by accident or on account of one side losing its nerve.
NATO already has sufficient strength to defend its members against aggression, although even a NATO victory will likely mean the destruction of Poland, Russia and the peoples between them. Only authentic and intelligent diplomacy and a renewal of economic and cultural ties can truly solve the problems now afflicting the region. Poland’s political elite lacks imagination, they are unable to fathom that the war they entertain would be the death of their people. The United States must demonstrate a more responsible posture and recognize the current Polish stance for what it is: a death wish combined with an itchy trigger finger. America should not allow those itchy fingers to influence how and when American military might is used.
|
|
|
|
Post by karl on May 1, 2016 7:16:52 GMT -7
"NATO already has sufficient strength to defend its members against aggression, although even a NATO victory will likely mean the destruction of Poland, Russia and the peoples between them. Only authentic and intelligent diplomacy and a renewal of economic and cultural ties can truly solve the problems now afflicting the region. Poland’s political elite lacks imagination, they are unable to fathom that the war they entertain would be the death of their people. The United States must demonstrate a more responsible posture and recognize the current Polish stance for what it is: a death wish combined with an itchy trigger finger. America should not allow those itchy fingers to influence how and when American military might is used".
If the Polish Government inline with the Americans wish to pull the trigger on the Russians, then they will be on their own. What ever the NATO commanders will plan and place what they can at time of initial attact will be with the forces that previously were emplaced, this would be includant of munitions/heavy equipment/manpower and support supplies. For most military commanders know from experience and their lessons learnt in war college, it is most expedient in the first initial stage of war, to strike the enemy with a first heavy devastating shock. This to destroy defensive ability to respond in an effective manner. Then with a close follow up of all arms over take taking control of enemy ground/communiations and all infrastructure. For then occupation to hold ground to commence.
Poland most likely will be destroyed by this first shock use of field grade nuclear weapons. Thusly providing time for our forces to be engaged followed by the French and Brits. It will then be a question of decision of the Americans rather to or not to draw upon their owned nuclear strategic weapons on German soil, to target as subject to this presentation, Russian targeted areas. It takes time for if the respective transporation systems are intakt enough, to assemble and ship to the areas of conflict, armed forces, supplies, armoured equipment, fuel, food, medical units with supplies, and all that will support at least one month of fighting before wearing out. Then if the espective military incursion is still intact, to be resuppled and refitted for continued combat duties. Men/equipment wear out, supplies and ammunition will be used up, all must be replaced in a timely manner as the need progresses.
For most every general will usually fight a new war on the basis of the previous conflict and that is their weakness. The most telling weakness of generals is with out a war, they are a useless drain of resources better used for the purpose of advancing society. War is a hateful event that seems to be like cancer, it eats up and destroys all that has been built for the benefit of people, and leaves behind, death and destruction.
Is this what the Polish people wish for?
Karl
|
|
|
|
Post by Jaga on May 1, 2016 12:35:54 GMT -7
John, Karl, I saw these irresponsible comments of Polish politicians. They want to sound tought, but they are simply stupid. If they are willing to die on war with Russia, let them do it, but do not send there somebody's else child!
|
|
|
|
Post by karl on May 1, 2016 16:16:21 GMT -7
John, Karl, I saw these irresponsible comments of Polish politicians. They want to sound tought, but they are simply stupid. If they are willing to die on war with Russia, let them do it, but do not send there somebody's else child! Jaga Thank you as a parent speak my thoughts exactly. Karl |
|
|
|
Post by JustJohn or JJ on May 13, 2016 12:01:58 GMT -7
Aggressive Russia, You Say? Poland Set to Double Size of Armed Forces
The belligerent rhetoric coming out of the Polish defense ministry is reaching new heights, and may soon be backed up by force, with Defense Minister Antoni Macierewicz announcing that the Polish army has plans to more than double in size in the coming years. Speaking to journalists at the opening of a new headquarters for NATO Force Integration Unit (NFIU) in Bydgoszcz, central Poland on Wednesday, Macierewicz said that the army would grow by at least 50%, and would include both new territorial defense forces and operating units, Poland's Rzeczpospolita reported. "The Polish army will be bigger; we envision a substantial increase in the size of the army, by at least 50 percent, in the coming years, including the creation of three brigades for the territorial defense of the country on the eastern flank," the defense minister said. "I do not want it to be understood that the development of the army will be limited to territorial defense. This also applies to operating units," he added. The three new territorial defense brigades will be deployed by the beginning of 2017, Macierewicz clarified. The reason for the massive planned increase, the minister claimed, was the "threat from Russia, and its occupation of parts of Ukraine." Saying that he was grateful to allied and US forces in Poland, and "along the entire eastern flank" of NATO, for the important role they play "in ensuring peace and security," Macierewicz emphasized that nonetheless, "the key to achieving this goal is readiness of the armed forces of Poland and other countries of the eastern region to defend themselves," in coordination with NATO and US troops. The defense minister's announcement follows on statements made earlier to a similar effect. In January, Macierewicz said that Poland's armed forces, which currently number about 95,000 personnel, would grow to 150,000 in the coming years. Moreover, last week, he said that the government has plans to spend nearly $62 billion modernizing its military, a figure close to double the $34 billion the previous government planned to spend through to 2022. Asked to comment on the defense ministry's plans, Tomasz Jankowski, an expert at the European Center for Geopolitical Analysis, told Sputnik Poland that the expansion will come at the expense of Polish taxpayers, who will be forced to give up more of their tax dollars to buy obsolete US weaponry. "Everything will be arranged in such a way that we [Poles] will have to dip into our pockets," Jankowski said. "And that's not the worst thing about it. The worst thing (and what the Law and Justice government seems to want) is that all these purchases and modernization plans are devised for Poland to buy mostly obsolete US weaponry, which the US army no longer needs, and is looking to get rid of." At the same time, the analyst noted, "the defense minister is doubtlessly taking advantage of an atmosphere of constant deception of Polish society, one which suggests that we are threatened with war, presumably against Russia, and that we should supposedly arm ourselves to ensure the country's defense." Commenting on active negotiations between Berlin and Washington on the deployment of US troops to Poland, Jankowski suggested that this was a "key insight" indicating that Germany and the US, rather than Poland, are the ones making the decisions about the deployment of foreign troops in Poland. "This, in turn, means that Poland is under occupation. And because we are under occupation, there is no doubt that the increase in the army's size is not an independent decision, but rather an attempt to cover the spending of billions for American weapons." Finally, the analyst noted, "returning to the term 'eastern flank', we need to ask ourselves the question: Whose eastern flank is it? Poland's or NATO's? They say openly that Polish is only the territory on which the military alliance operates, and Poland has no levers of pressure on it…The term 'flank' indirectly recognizes the fact that Poland is only an object of NATO's gamesmanship, and of the US military industry, which needs a market." Also last Friday, speaking at a security conference in Bratislava, Polish Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski suggested that actually, Russia, and not Daesh, was the real 'existential threat' to Europe. The minister made the comments despite the fact that Daesh has repeatedly attacked European capitals over the last six months, and the fact that Russia has played a key role in rolling back the terrorist group in Syria. For the record, Defense Minister Macierewicz is well-known for his anti-Russian outbursts. Earlier this year, the minister claimed that the 2010 air catastrophe over Smolensk, which resulted in the death of the Polish president and much of his staff, was actually a 'terrorist attack' by the Russian government, equivalent to Hitler's aggression against Germany in 1939. Earlier, before his appointment to the defense ministry by the Law and Justice government last year, Macierewicz was already well-known in Poland for his controversial and sometimes racist statements, suggesting for instance that the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion have some truth' in them, and claiming that Poland and Russia have been in a state of war since the 2010 presidential plane crash. Poland is pushing to receive additional permanent US and NATO bases in the country ahead of the alliance's upcoming summit in Warsaw in July. |
|
|
|
Post by pieter on May 15, 2016 15:44:41 GMT -7
That Poland Set to Double Size of Armed Forces is not such a crazy idea. I have always believed that the Poles should have the strongest army in Europe. In the same time for Polands business and agricultures sake it should also engage in diplomatic relations with Russia to improve the bilateral Polish-Russian ties, and should be or could be a mediator between Ukraine and Russia. A status quo, a long lasting peace and a safe and secure agreement must be made to ensure staibility, regional cooperation, Ukrainian independence and sovereighnity, and an end to Russian aggression in that region and a respect for human rights and decrease of corruption, nepotism and violation of human rights in Ukraine. Only a strong Poland can get such a position. With a strong and balanced army, with a large land army, Navy, Air Force and excellent special forces. Poland should be able to protect itself. It can not trust on NATO or the EU. If the Russians or other enemies attack they should be able to respond and defend themselves immediately.
|
|
