International News
See other International News Articles
Title: Poland would like a permanent U.S. military base
Source:
HotAir
URL Source: https://hotair.com/archives/2018/05 ... e-permanent-u-s-military-base/
Published: May 28, 2018
Author: Jazz Shaw
Post Date: 2018-05-28 19:02:28 by Tooconservative
Keywords: None
Views: 9176
Comments: 100
The Polish offer reflects a long-standing desire in Warsaw to build closer security relations with the U.S. and put American boots on the ground. The push dates back to Poland’s entry into NATO in 1999, but has taken on added urgency in the wake of Russia’s annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea region four years ago and aggressive posture toward the alliance. Coming just over a month before NATO leaders gather in Brussels for a summit, the Polish initiative is bound to anger Russia, and will be looked at with skepticism by European allies that want to improve relations with Moscow, such as Italy and at times Germany. The first, and strangest thing about this proposal is that it was already sent to Washington, but it came directly from the Polish Defense Ministry. That may not sound all that unusual since their Defense Department would obviously be involved in such planning, but Defense never even told their Foreign Ministry about it, nor did they consult with President Andrzej Duda. Much the same as with the United States government, Duda is Poland’s Commander in Chief. You’d think someone would mention it to him before they committed to spending $2B constructing a foreign military base on their own soil. Duda has had a fairly good relationship with President Trump thus far and, as a NATO ally, has taken a bit more of an adversarial approach toward Russia. But that complicates the picture even further. Poland is justifiably worried about the situation with Putin ever since the hostilities in Ukraine began. Poland shares a border with Ukraine and only has Belarus as a buffer between themselves and the Russian border. But given that things are a bit “tense” between us and the Russians at the moment, it makes entering into such an agreement even more complicated. And, of course, the Russians jumped on the story almost immediately expressing their disapproval. (Reuters) “When we see the gradual expansion of NATO military structures towards our borders…, this of course in no way creates security and stability on the continent,” Dmitry Peskov told reporters on a conference call on Monday. Do we really even need another base over there right now? We’re supposedly focusing on closing and consolidating bases in that region to tighten up the Defense budget. Even with the Poles kicking in a couple of billion, this is still going to cost us some cash and we already have a rotating military presence in their country anyway. We’ve supposedly been on track to close 15 more bases in Europe, including some in Germany, since 2015. Assuming we’re still moving forward with that plan, how do we justify a new base in Poland unless we want to officially ramp up the cold war yet again? We have a solid ally in Poland and cooperation with them probably isn’t a bad idea. But a permanent military base? The benefit to Poland on any number angles is obvious, but I’m not sure what it really does for us. Perhaps we should hold off until Duda has had a chance to make his official position known and set up a call with Trump to discuss this. Poster Comment: The Poles are begging Trump to Make Poland Great Again. I can't recall any of our allies offering to pay billions to build a new base for us to flock to. Maybe the Qataris did for our navy base but I don't recall that they paid either. I think the Poles are hoping to woo us out of Germany where Merkel has gotten more unfriendly and has an embarrassing military. Poland's military is scrappy with good equipment for the most part. Poland would like to be our new military hub in Europe instead of Germany.
Word has leaked out that Poland has delivered a proposal requesting a permanent American military base in their country and they’re willing to put up a couple of billion dollars to help make it happen. What should have been a fairly normal diplomatic request, however, has turned into a complicated mess before it could even be officially announced. Questions were immediately raised as to not only how or if this should happen, but even who came up with the proposal in the first place. (Politico) Poland wants a permanent U.S. military presence — and is willing to pony up as much as $2 billion to get it, according to a defense ministry proposal obtained by Polish news portal Onet. The Kremlin said on Monday that gradual NATO military expansion towards its borders did not improve security or stability in Europe as it commented on media reports Poland is seeking to secure a permanent U.S. military presence on its territory.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Tooconservative, Catholic Girls, Melania, Make Europe Roman Caholic Again (#0)
Neo-Reconquista Catholic Liberation Front Poland is the new Vatican base of operations. The Poles, Donald, and Francis will crush the German heretics and sweep across Europe in a neo-Reconquista prot purge. Then head east and whup those Russian Orthodox's too. Let the Crusades begin!
Then head east and whup those Russian Orthodox's too. Let the Crusades begin! Gracious. Those Poles sound downright dangerous. Stupid old me, I thought they just wanted to give us a nice base. Now I feel gullible at being taken in by these wily Poles.
Poles are not very wily, most of them are romantics at heart, an opposite to their close relatives - Czechs. (I must have some Czech blood in my veins) ;) Do not forget Polish adventures with Napoleon
Who cares? Almost every one I have ever met has been very friendly and has an excellent sense of humor,too. Then again,the ones I have known have all been first or second generation Americans whose ancestors came from Poland back in the 30's and 40's. Those people all had a lot to be happy about.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Poland would be a good place to have a base: it would place US forces well forward and provide assurance that Poland will remain free of anybody's domination. Let's put a base there.
Meanwhile, the Irish Catholics just voted to legalize abortion. Game over. Stick a fork in it.
Like me :)
I'd prefer that to our bad ally, Germany. And it is expensive to have bases there. We're closing a few of them already. We can keep our big German base with the advanced hospital facilities, close the rest, and move into Poland/Hungary/Czechoslovakia. Cheaper to base troops there anyway, especially if the Poles help foot the initial cost (which they'll eventually make back due to our basing of troops and equipment there over, say, a ten year period).
Even better: get out of Europe and cut the size of the US military sufficient to balance the budget.
I'm not sure that even I want to get entirely out of Europe. They may need further American supervision of their petty tribal squabbles. I'm still trying to recall any other country that offered us such a deal to build a base in their country. Poland's offer is the only one I can think of. They're willing to cough up $2B. That ain't chicken feed.
Let's put a base there. Let's NOT put a base there. It is the equivalent of Russia putting a base in Canada. It solves NOTHING and creates a new area to create and escalate tensions. After all,is this still 1914,and we have to have someone load the coal to power the ships to take soldiers to Europe in order to respond to a war? Nothing more than neo-con Empire Building that would accomplish nothing good but defense contracts for the insiders.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
I fully expect to see the violence,kidnappings,and murders to start happening again.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
It's not our role to keep peace in Europe. Honestly, who can really do anything anyway? France has nukes. Britain has nukes. Russia has nukes. Nobody can invade any of the three principal powers. Germany is economically strong and isn't aggressive. Italy is strong economically. The little countries are doing ok. There are some backwaters that always struggled, and still will, but they're not in a position to do anything. The main issue is cratered birth rates and Muslim immigration, and we can't do a thing about any of that other than to pacify the Middle East, which we're doing. It does give us a lot of power to be abroad, but it costs us a lot of money. So it depends on what you value. I'd rather spend that money giving the US a better education and French-style health insurance and pensions and housing security.
Or keep the base there for emergency uses and not move anywhere but back home,leaving only skeleton units to smooth the flow of unit training for any US units that need to train with the Germans. Cheaper to base troops there anyway, especially if the Poles help foot the initial cost (which they'll eventually make back due to our basing of troops and equipment there over, say, a ten year period). . Even cheaper to bring them back home,where they belong. Ok if they decide to base a few liaison troops there to keep things smooth for any SMALL units that might have REASON to interact/train with Polish forces,but we don't need a base for that. The units and individuals I am talking about can be houses on Polish bases. Yes,I do realize the bottom line of an untold number of neo-cons and their paymasters might have to suffer,but who better to suffer than traitors like them?
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Yeah.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
I wouldn't. The Catholics of Ireland took longer, but they've lost their religion like the rest of Europe. It's all secularizing. With Brexit, Ulster is going to get poor unless it breaks free of England and joins Ireland to remain in the EU. Scotland may do the same. The old religious reason that the Irish could not get along is fading, not because the Catholics or Presbyterians won, but because both religions are dying fast in the face of secularism, and without the religious differences, there are no real differences between the Irish, or the Scottish and the the English, etc. Christianity is dying. It has poisoned itself on its own hypocrisy.
And put them on the Mexican border instead of building a big, stupid, expensive white elephant of a wall. Use troops to guard the border - and the air force to fly patrols over it, and the navy to float around offshore to interdict arrivals. Use the military FOR something useful, instead of just having it sit there like a giant beast that is unused. Use it to guard the border and save the money on the wall. Use the savings to balance the budget. With a balanced budget, the debt is eventually paid off.
What are we,their daddies? Let them settle their own shit,and just deal with the survivors if they don't want to listen to verbal reasoning and/or the UN. In some cases,like any case involving Muslims,sell or even give infantry weapons to anyone killing them. Including both sides of any Muslim vs Muslim conflict.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
All of those boat people coming from Africa, and those people coming out of Syria. Put them in camps, train them as a military, fully arm them, and send them back with a supply line to overthrow the oppressive regimes they fled and take over. Then they go home and stay there.
WRONG! If you want to see a Civil War break out in America,just have all the TeeBee networks showing American soldiers,many of whom have Spanish names,gunning down illegal alien men,woman,and children trying to come to America for a better life. This is a problem with controlling our borders,not an actual war against an invading army. Build the wall,and have the border patrol guard it.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Then they go home and stay there. Works for me! I've been saying that for years.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
Poland borders Belarus, not Russia. We have other NATO allies closer to Moscow than Poland is.
This is a problem with controlling our borders,not an actual war against an invading army. Build the wall,and have the border patrol guard it. I'm figuring the Army won't really be SHOOTING anybody, they'll just be THERE, in large numbers, rounding up the folks who cross. And that with all of that focused Air Force surveillance and so many troops in the field, that not all that many will get across.
Then they go home and stay there. I thought we tried that. Didn't they call it the Bay of Pigs? : ) We've tried it elsewhere too, along with setting up our own fake governments-in-exile and all the rest. That is how we got into Iraq to begin with. Maybe this is the kind of thing we should try to avoid. All our meddling in troublespots like the Mideast seem to bring rather bad results. Reagan was smart enough to keep out of it, at least he was after the Beirut airport bombing. If we only make things worse, we should try to minimize or eliminate our presence in these countries. Other than trying to stabilize them against organized bandit/terrorist elements like ISIS, we should play no roles and keep very quiet. I still don't know how we will ever get out of Afghanistan. It's a real problem, our special forces are being exhausted by these unending campaigns. We can't win a final victory over the Pashtun/Taliban unless we kill every last one of them. And they won't ever give up the fight until we leave. Then they subjugate Kabul and the rest of Afghanistan and reimpose full sharia law.
We've tried it elsewhere too, along with setting up our own fake governments-in-exile and all the rest. That is how we got into Iraq to begin with. We didn't follow up the Bay of Pigs with air support and naval gunfire support. Should have. If the government is bad enough that we're willing to arm people and send them in to overthrow it, then we should be using our airpower and logistics power to make sure they win. We did it in Nicaragua, and we won. We did it in Honduras, and we won. We turned Allende's government in Argentina. We stopped the Communists in Greece. Iraq was a mess because we pulled out before we nation-built, but we DID win in the end: Iraq IS a US ally, we have forces there. They're sullen, but we are there, and while they're religiously similar to the Iranians, Iran does not rule Iraq. In the Koreas, it took a long time, but it looks as though we're going to win that one in the end too. From where I sit, the only one we really LOST was Vietnam, and that was by choice.
Break the vials in the rivers. Tell the surrounding nations to be ready to repel the fleeing natives at the borders. Wait three weeks, and just make sure you inoculate the people you send into resettle it. Easy peasy lemon-squeezy.
You only have to kill all the males over age 7.
If your threshold for declaring victory is low enough, I suppose you could say that we won eventually.
Well, it is a direct solution. You must realize there are some squeamish political doves that would throw a fit at the very idea. So not a realistic solution.
We lost Vietnam. We are still in a holding pattern in Korea and Cuba. Eventually we will win both: they will become part of the world system that orbits around us, and the world of countries were freedom, peace and prosperity are possible expands.
So not a realistic solution. Obviously you can't tell anybody you're doing it.
Seems to me that until very recently,Poland was a vassal state of Russia.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
No. The Kennedy's did what all Kennedy's always do,and punked out and denied themthe bombers that were promised to keep the Cuban army from swarming the beach before they could establish a beachhead.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
No,we just gave up. There is a difference.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
I have to wonder if Ireland gave in due to the moral relativism of Pope Frank and his constant stream of non-orthodox statements (which he then retreats from or claims he was misunderstood). When the head of the church constantly acts like he doesn't really believe in the religion, the faithful aren't going to fail to notice. Maybe Ireland didn't want to be more Catholic than the pope.
In Machiavelli there are answers to almost all political questions, (the most of them in his Discourses on Livy): How dangerous it is to trust to the representations of exiles. It seems to me not amiss to speak here of the danger of trusting to the representations of men who have been expelled from their country, this being a matter that all those who govern states have to act upon almost daily; and I touch upon it the more willingly, as Titus Livius gives a most memorable instance of it, though in a measure foreign to the subject he treats upon. When Alexander the Great went with his army into Asia, Alexander of Epirus, his brother-in-law and uncle, came with his army into Italy, having been called there by the banished Lucanians, who had held out the hope to him that by their means he would be able to seize that whole country; and when Alexander, upon their assurances and the hopes held out by them, had come into Italy, they killed him, because they had been promised by the citizens of Lucania permission to return to their homes if they would assassinate Alexander. We see, then, how vain the faith and promises of men are who are exiles from their own country. As to their faith, we have to bear in mind that, whenever they can return to their country by other means than your assistance, they will abandon you and look to the other means, regardless of their promises to you. And as to their vain hopes and promises, such is their extreme desire to return to their homes that they naturally believe many things that are not true, and add many others on purpose; so that, with what they really believe and what they say they believe, they will fill you with hopes to that degree that if you attempt to act upon them you will incur a fruitless expense, or engage in an undertaking that will involve you in ruin. The example of Alexander of Epirus, just cited, will suffice to prove the truth of this; but I will add that of Themistocles the Athenian, who, having been declared a rebel, fled to Darius in Asia, and made such representations and promises to him if he would attack Greece, that Darius allowed himself to be persuaded to undertake it. But when Themistocles found that he could not fulfil those promises, he poisoned himself, either from shame or from the fear of punishment. And if so eminent a man as Themistocles could commit so great an error, we may judge to what extent men of less virtue allow themselves to be misled by their desires and their passions. A prince therefore should be slow in undertaking any enterprise upon the representations of exiles, for he will generally gain nothing by it but shame and serious injury. And as cities are rarely taken by surprise or by means of secret intelligence with those within, it seems to me it will not be out of place if I treat of this in the following chapter, and at the same time give some account of the method practised by the Romans in taking cities. (Discourses, 2nd book, chapter XXXI)
You know, I agree with you on that.
My writings often resemble Machiavelli in their political realism. They are not popular here among the moralists.
Nothing but the Party Line is ever popular with moralists. That way they can avoid having to do all that hard thinking stuff.
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
You're agreeing with Vic who only a few posts back on this thread was suggesting the way to solve the Pashtun problem in Af/Pak is by using bacteriological weapons to poison their water supplies and create a genocide, confining the intended victims within their geographical area until they all die, then resettling the land. If that isn't a Final Solution, I don't know what is. I suppose that makes me a hopeless moralist to some people who have no problem with the idea of America applying Nazi extermination policies to entire populations.
Comments (41 - 100) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: hondo68 (#1)
The Poles, Donald, and Francis will crush the German heretics and sweep across Europe in a neo-Reconquista prot purge.
#3. To: Tooconservative, hondo68, sneakypete, Vicomte13 (#2)
these wily Poles
#4. To: A Pole (#3)
Poles are not very wily,
#5. To: A Pole (#0)
#6. To: hondo68 (#1)
Neo-Reconquista Catholic Liberation Front
#7. To: sneakypete (#4)
I have ever met has been very friendly and has an excellent sense of humor,too
#8. To: Vicomte13 (#5)
Let's put a base there.
#9. To: Tooconservative (#8)
#10. To: Vicomte13 (#9)
(Edited)
Even better: get out of Europe and cut the size of the US military sufficient to balance the budget.
#11. To: Vicomte13 (#5)
Poland would be a good place to have a base: it would place US forces well forward and provide assurance that Poland will remain free of anybody's domination.
#12. To: Vicomte13 (#6)
Meanwhile, the Irish Catholics just voted to legalize abortion.
#13. To: Tooconservative (#10)
#14. To: Tooconservative (#8)
We can keep our big German base with the advanced hospital facilities, close the rest, and move into Poland/Hungary/Czechoslovakia.
#15. To: Vicomte13 (#9)
Even better: get out of Europe and cut the size of the US military sufficient to balance the budget.
#16. To: sneakypete (#12)
I fully expect to see the violence,kidnappings,and murders to start happening again.
#17. To: sneakypete (#14)
Even cheaper to bring them back home,where they belong.
#18. To: Tooconservative (#10)
They may need further American supervision of their petty tribal squabbles.
#19. To: sneakypete (#18)
In some cases,like any case involving Muslims,sell or even give infantry weapons to anyone killing them.
#20. To: Vicomte13 (#17)
(Edited)
And put them on the Mexican border instead of building a big, stupid, expensive white elephant of a wall.
#21. To: Vicomte13 (#19)
All of those boat people coming from Africa, and those people coming out of Syria. Put them in camps, train them as a military, fully arm them, and send them back with a supply line to overthrow the oppressive regimes they fled and take over.
#22. To: sneakypete (#11)
It is the equivalent of Russia putting a base in Canada.
#23. To: sneakypete (#20)
WRONG! If you want to see a Civil War break out in America,just have all the TeeBee networks showing American soldiers,many of whom have Spanish names,gunning down illegal alien men,woman,and children trying to come to America for a better life.
#24. To: Vicomte13, sneakypete (#19)
All of those boat people coming from Africa, and those people coming out of Syria. Put them in camps, train them as a military, fully arm them, and send them back with a supply line to overthrow the oppressive regimes they fled and take over.
#25. To: Tooconservative (#24)
I thought we tried that. Didn't they call it the Bay of Pigs? : )
#26. To: Tooconservative (#24)
I still don't know how we will ever get out of Afghanistan.
#27. To: Tooconservative (#24)
We can't win a final victory over the Pashtun/Taliban unless we kill every last one of them.
#28. To: Vicomte13 (#25)
We did it in Nicaragua, and we won. We did it in Honduras, and we won. We turned Allende's government in Argentina. We stopped the Communists in Greece.
#29. To: Vicomte13 (#26)
Break the vials in the rivers. Tell the surrounding nations to be ready to repel the fleeing natives at the borders.
#30. To: Tooconservative (#28)
If your threshold for declaring victory is low enough, I suppose you could say that we won eventually.
#31. To: Tooconservative (#29)
You must realize there are some squeamish political doves that would throw a fit at the very idea.
#32. To: Tooconservative (#22)
Poland borders Belarus, not Russia.
#33. To: Tooconservative (#24)
I thought we tried that. Didn't they call it the Bay of Pigs? : )
#34. To: Vicomte13 (#30)
We lost Vietnam.
#35. To: Vicomte13 (#16)
Christianity is dying. It has poisoned itself on its own hypocrisy.
#36. To: Tooconservative, Vicomte13, sneakypete (#24)
I thought we tried that. Didn't they call it the Bay of Pigs?
#37. To: sneakypete (#34)
No,we just gave up. There is a difference.
#38. To: A Pole (#36)
#39. To: Vicomte13 (#38)
They are not popular here among the moralists.
#40. To: sneakypete (#39)
They are not popular here among the moralists.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]