Washington talking to Warsaw about possible U.S. missile base in Poland

CNEWS ^ | November 16, 2005 | ROBERT BURNS

[twinself]

WASHINGTON (AP) - U.S. and Polish officials are discussing building a base in Poland from which U.S. interceptors could shoot down long-range missiles as part of a global defence network, a Pentagon official said Wednesday.

It would be the first American strategic missile defence site outside U.S. territory, and would be designed to defend all of Europe against intercontinental-range missiles - primarily those launched from the Middle East.

No decision has been made to proceed with a missile defence base in Poland and alternative sites in Europe are a possibility. But the Pentagon official said Poland appears to be the most likely host country for the kind of American military installation that would have been unthinkable before Poland joined NATO in 1999.

The official discussed the matter only on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly.

The Pentagon has made no public announcement of its discussions with Polish officials, although it has made known its extensive consultations in recent years with NATO allies on the threat posed by ballistic missiles.

On Monday, Poland's new prime minister, Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz, said he was opening a public debate on whether to host a U.S. missile defence base.

He did not specifically say Washington was interested in installing ground-based interceptors of the sort that the Pentagon has recently installed in Alaska.

"This is an important issue for Poland, related to our security and to our co-operation with an important ally," Marcinkiewicz said.

He leads a new conservative government in Warsaw that took office on Oct. 31. The previous government had expressed concern that missile defence co-operation with Washington could harm relations with Russia, which had opposed Poland's decision to become a member of NATO.

The U.S. military has no permanent bases in Poland or other Central and Eastern European countries formerly aligned with the Soviet Union. The U.S. does have bases in former Soviet republics in Central Asia such as Kyrgyzstan.

U.S. officials have been discussing with new NATO members Romania and Bulgaria the possibility of basing some U.S. troops there as part of a repositioning of U.S. forces around the world.

U.S. officials have been considering a number of possibilities for extending the American missile defence network to include Europe, although most of the focus has been on defences against short-range missiles.

Long-range missiles are considered an emerging threat, in the view of Bush administration officials, because of the proliferation of technologies that would allow countries such as Iran and possibly Syria or Libya to build extended-range missiles. The threat is especially worrisome when coupled with nuclear warheads.

The current U.S. defence system against long-range missiles is limited mainly to an installation at Fort Greely, Alaska, where at least six missile interceptors are in underground silos, linked to a command and control system. It is designed mainly to shoot down missiles fired at U.S. territory from North Korea, with future expansion planned.

The Pentagon official who discussed the Polish option said that if a missile defence base were built there, it probably would be the only one needed to defend Europe against long-range missiles, although radars, other sensors and interceptors designed to combat shorter range missiles also would be needed for a complete defence.

The official estimated that a site in Poland would not be ready to begin operating before 2010. He offered no estimate on how much it might cost or when U.S. officials were likely to make a decision to proceed. Also undetermined is whether the site would be controlled jointly by U.S. and Polish forces or possibly with a NATO role.

[jb6]

Combining McCrazy with Cluck is like throwing a powder keg on a raging bonfire.....not a generally good idea, but notice how that's the "dream" team for the GOP that the idiot MSM keeps suggesting. My guess is: 1. either they're totally ignorant of what they're putting togather or 2. this way they can scream: "See the GOP has gone insane and warlike and only voting for us will save your lives and kiddies!".

[jb6]

Actually that's a big difference from Nazi in Germany. Greece was a fascist dictatorship too, so was Albania, Romania, Hungaria, Bulgaria, Spain and Portugal. Even France showed fascist leanings. This didn't mean they were allies with Germany. Those types of dictatorships were very popular in Europe before WW2. Furthermore, Poland WAS a dictatorship before Germany, that's a fact.

[mym]

==This is the way Russian nazis have been explaining aggressions and annihilation of many small nations for a thousand year. Be careful all! Yesterday they murdered the whole Tartar nation==

Lie!
Tartar is the second nationality in Russia after Russians. Tartars live all over Russia, mainly in Tatarstan, Baskortostan, Chelyabinsk region, Orenburg region. My wife is semi-Tartar, semi-Bashkir. The minister of inner affairs of Russia is Tartar. Tartars are good citizens of Russian Federation.

[Freelance Warrior]

I think you're aware of the poor recent state of the Russian military. Since that the US can be tempted with this and attack Russia. Wars are called "peacekeeping operations" nowdays and the liberals will be satisfied with a good pretext.

Since that a good nuclear missile force is absolutely necessary for Russia. At least while we're in crisis.

I'm not trying to villify the US because I consider such policy natural, "welcome to real world" so to speak and the US are not worse (and no better) than the others.

[Freelance Warrior]

How to peacefully resolve own problems to not give a reason anybody to interfere. I don’t say that NATO would attack Russia, it is possible only the minds of some Russians :)

A weak country is a good reason by itself. As long as Russia keeps its nuclear arsenal up-to-date any attack on it is impossible. So I agree with that NATO wouldn't attack and I'm giving you the reason why.

[Freelance Warrior]

What do you mean?

[Freelance Warrior]

The Soviet Union constisted of many nations, including Ukrainians and Belorussians among them. There were some Ukrainian and Belorussian lands occupied by Poland. So, the inclusing of these land into the Soviet Union was justified because of the two reasons you've given for Teszen's case:

(1) A compact territory populated by foreign ethnicity.

(2) The territory was closed to the border with the neighbouring country.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

East European sites provide better defensive coverage than the United Kingdom,

Try the string test for yourself and see whether or not that is a political or technical conclusion.

[RusIvan]

So could you be so kind and provide a single proof of such a conspiracy between Poland and Germany in 1938.==

Ok there wasn't signed pact like in Molotov-Ribbentrop case but was obvious consent between Hilter' Germany and Poland. Or else Hitler wouldn't allow Poland to take this chunk before his nose.

[lizol]

Being a dictatorship is one thing, and being a fascist state is another one. And you're probably fully aware of that.

Poland actually had some authoritarian leaning before WW2, but calling her "Fascist dictatorship" is nothing but anti-Polish propaganda.
Actually Soviets and their "Polish" commie-puppets used to say that. It was the main motive of their propaganda machine aimed against Polish patriots.

[lizol]

This is probably one on your famous "conclusions", I assume?
You're "concluding" again, aren't you?

[lizol]

was obvious consent between Hilter' Germany and Poland. Or else Hitler wouldn't allow Poland to take this chunk before his nose.

I know this discussion is pointless, because it makes no sense to discuss with someone, who doesn't want to know something, as he believes in something opposite.

But I'll try.

Take a look at this map.



As you can see - due to Munich agreement Germans took only Sudetenland, not entire Czechoslovakia. The took the rest in March 1939.
The reason of their claims was that Sudetenland was populated mainly by German people.

At the same time Zaolzie (Cieszyn region) was populated mainly by the Poles (more than 75% of entire population).

So what the hell Germans would need such an area at that time for???

But I know it means nothing to you, as you need some specific presumptions for your "conclusions".

If facts doesn't fit them - the worse it is for those facts.

[GOP_1900AD]

I mean that Russia prefers a country who will not oppose the Kremlin. Witness the example of Finland in the past.

[GOP_1900AD]

Since 1945, the US has only engaged in military opperations against much smaller countries. The way things work in the US government / in the US political system, in order to "sell" a war to a public immersed in liberal, utopian, pacifist propaganda spewed by intellectuals and the Leftist main stream media, the war cannot look like it will be Great War. The war must look like it will be small, short and will not involve more than a few thousand deaths of military personnel. Clearly, with such implied restrictions in place upon freedom of action, unless there is a military coup / martial law or other far fetched scenario, there is essentially no way the US would attack a large nation state. We would not preemptively attack another large nation state because it would mean great war, and great war is not something the majority of US Citizens would support.

[GOP_1900AD]

That piece of land that Poland got is about the size of metropolitan Sacramento.

[Grzegorz 246]

I knew what you were going to "prove" and I understand that Russians use to justify soviet crimes, that's natural anyway. I wrote "usually yes", not in case of one big genocidal perversion, which wants to kill a large part of those "own" people.

[Grzegorz 246]

Gary, may I ask you a question ?
How is this possible that you are blindly pro Russian and on the other hand you import their women for your friends ?

[GarySpFc]

Gary, may I ask you a question ? How is this possible that you are blindly pro Russian and on the other hand you import their women for your friends ?

I could start my response by insulting you in kind, but I will fore go that. I do have a Russian wife, but that is not the major reason for my posts regarding Russia. I fully realize the evil history of the communists, and hate their system, and everything they did. I make no excuse for the communists.

However, the major reason had to do with seeing the baldfaced lies on Free Republic regarding the war in Chechnya. Add to that the blind hatred I see towards Poles towards Russians who are trying to overcome their past. Mind you, I respect and even love many things the Poles do, and in part I could understand it if they would identify it as hatred from communism, but they do not. This hatred is a rotten cancer, which eats away at their souls and blinds them. The country needs to forgive and move on into the future.

[GarySpFc]

Correction, that should read, " Add to that the blind hatred I see Poles have towards Russians who are trying to overcome their past."

[justshutupandtakeit]

That is a more sensible resolution that trying to annex territory of another nation.