Russian General Threatens Poland with Attack over US deal

Jerusalem Post ^ | 15 Aug 2008 | Associated Press

[docbnj]

A top Russian general said Friday that Poland's agreement to accept a US missile defense battery exposes the country to attack, pointing out that Russian military doctrine permits the use of nuclear weapons in such a situation, the Interfax news agency reported. *** Interfax said he added, in clear reference to the agreement, that Russia's military doctrine sanctions the use of nuclear weapons "against the allies of countries having nuclear weapons if they in some way help them." Nogovitsyn said that would include elements of strategic deterrence systems, according to Interfax.

[east1234]

I think the rampant alcoholism plays into the paranoia too.

[east1234]

We’re talking about a former super power with a large nuclear arsenal. We all have “skin in the game” genius, and you do sound like a damn DU’er thowing out challenges like that.

[ItisaReligionofPeace]

And yet, I assume you’re on the side of the FReepers who are advocating war with Russia now? Apparently not everyone is as smart as you or I when it comes to understanding the implications. And, I’m not throwing challenges. I’m simply pointing out that they are internet commandos and that the real ones are very unlikely to be itching for a war with Russia. You’d have to be a complete moron to do so (but apparently they abound!)

[BlackVeil]

You are making a good point. And I have thought for a long while that it is surprising that the Afghanistan show has been allowed to run the way it does. There is all this patience as years pass - waiting for Karzai to extend his rule outside the capital, waiting for the Afghan army to be rebuilt, waiting for the warlords to calm down, waiting for the Taliban to give up. And in the meantime, millions spent every month in Afghanistan.

This is a highly dangerous situation if there is any strategic shift requiring other resources. China, also, has a border with Afghanistan and could easily make trouble there, if it suited them.

[redgolum]

What strategic reason do we have to put missiles in Poland besides angering the Russians? If Iran pops a missile, will we have time to even get authorization for an intercept from the half dozen countries involved?

What purpose will a few Patriot batteries serve? Guys, this isn't a video game, this is for all the marbles. A top Russian general threatened nuclear war if we put missiles in Poland. Do we call his bluff and risk hundred of millions of people?

And just to be clear, if we start a shooting war with Russia, it will end up going nuclear. There is no way they would allow an army inside their borders again. Is Georgia worth that?

Don't pontificate, think. The stakes are to hight to play around with this.

[east1234]

I think my FRiends here are pointing out the fact that Russia is still our enemy, as they have been for decades, and that the sons of bitches need killing. I agree completely. I also think they are full of $h!t, their capabilities are limited, and they rely on their nuclear deterrent. They are bullies, who have a really big gun at home.
That said we cannot, on short notice, project power into Georgia, or Ukraine, or even Poland. We need to immediately develop this ability, but more importantly we need to grow, as a country, the balls to project it. Perhaps more importantly the Europeans need to grow at least a small pair. Russia will not nuke us, or Europe, and of course themselves, if we sometime, in the future, assist our new allies in protecting the integrity of their own countries. Russia set up the eastern block as a ring of buffer countries, post WWII, to prevent a recurrence of the carnage of the Nazi invasion. Who could blame them after some 40 million dead? (not sure on the actual number, but it was far larger than the Russians ever admitted). They are sensitive to losing this buffer and now territory that was their's prior to WWII. They are also power hungry, dictatorial sons-of-bitches who need killing, but I digress. Russia needs to be faced down, but right now the media has so Vietnamized the war on terror that there's little Bush can do openly. I pray we're shipping antitank missiles and the Russian variant of the stinger to our new friends. BETTER DEAD THAN RED!

[justa-hairyape]

My understanding is that the Poland-based missile defense is intended to defend against missiles fired from places like Iran, not Russia.

Not any more. The Russians just threatened that Poland could be attacked by nuclear weapons if Poland continue its plans to construct a missile shield. That now makes the Russians a greater threat then the Iranians.

[east1234]

They aren’t Patriot batteries. These are our ABM’s, like those deployed in Alaska and California.
We won’t require authorization from anyone to shoot down a potential nuclear tipped missile. We’ll just do it.
Assisting allies in pushing back Russian invader does not require invading Russia.
Your hundreds of millions of lives include 140,000,000 Russians, and you can damn well bet they know that.

BETTER DEAD THAN RED!

[HAL9000]

Patriot missiles are part of the deal with Poland, along with the interceptors. Some of the issues concerning the Patriots are who will control them, and how long will they be based in Poland.

[east1234]

interesting.

[HAL9000]

Not any more.

Our official position has not changed. The Polish missile defense system is intended to thwart attacks from Iran and similar countries.

Our deterrent against Russia is still the mutually-assured destruction doctrine.

[justa-hairyape]

The most important question to Poland now is what does Poland view as its biggest threat. Thus, they signed the deal for missile defense. They could develop nukes on their own completely independent of us. Similar to what Iran is doing.

[justa-hairyape]

Concerning the US, our government is too full of Russian sympathizers to actually do what should be done. A suggestion is just that, a suggestion.

[redstateconfidential]

I love the smell of smokin T-72s and Chechens in the morning...smells,..smells like victory!

[epow]

Hey,General Putz,would you like to see what a couple of A-10’s would do to your Russian armor.

I'm not very knowledgeable about modern era military armament, but I understand that the Russkies now have in service a very capable mobile ground to air missile developed specifically to defeat the tank-busting Warthog's electronic defense systems. I also read somewhere recently that the Israelis were surprised by the sophistication of the Russky anti-aircraft equipment supplied by Russia to Hezbollah by way of the duplicitous Syrians during last year's Arab-Israeli embroglio in Lebanon.

In any life or death contest between Russkies equipped with their high tech armament and our guys equipped with US high tech armament, at this stage of the game I would put my entire stack of chips on our own guys' skill with their deadly playtoys. But it's not at all impossible for the newly oil rich Russkies to come up with some very unpleasant surprises for our people if God forbid we ever find ourselves embroiled in a seriously dangerous confrontation with the rich and rejuvenated bear.

[Zero Sum]

In Cuba, the Russians supplied one of their allies with nuclear missiles for attacking America 90 miles from US soil.

In Poland we are supplying our ally with a missile shield to defend themselves from Russian attack.

And Russia is threatening to nuke them for the audacity of wanting to protect themselves from being nuked. Is the Bear banking on Poland still being in a state of Soviet-era battered wife syndrome, or what?

[Nathan _in_Arkansas]

Thank you for remembering it’s guys like me who would fight the Russkies if anything were to come of this. Sure, we would hold the advantage in technology and skill, but it’s something entirely different to lambaste them with taunts that “we’ll kill all of you” when you’re not the ones doing the fighting.

I could be shot down very easily by the Russians, if we were to attack an armored column with our AH-64D Apache “tank busters.” If my country asks me to do this, then so be it. I’ll do it until I’m retired or dead. However, I’m not cannon fodder to be sacrificed by some of those who would throw our military up against a modern enemy without recourse.

Please think about what you’re saying when YOU offer OUR lives in YOUR quest to sound tough on the net.

Again, if my country needs me, then I’m there and doing what needs to be done. But, please be thoughtful of us while you’re making your boasts in these posts. Thank you.

[epow]

What Poland wants is assurance that the U.S. will not cut-and-run and leave them hanging in the future.

If that assurance is what Poland wants she is in for a big disappointment if push ever comes to shove with the Russky bear.

Post WWII US military interventions, IOW wars, in difficult situations and places such as Korea, southeast Asia, and soon to be Iraq if Obama has his way, have ended in cut and run bugouts and betrayals of embattled allies by our leaders that by comparison make Chamberlin's infamous capitulation to Hitler at Munich look like a courageous stand for Czechoslovakia's independence.

Granted, those leaders were frustrated in their efforts by a deplorable lack of determined stick-to-itiveness on the part of a majority of the American people. But it's all the same to the far off people who were left holding the bag when our promises proved to be hollow and our valiant soldiers, Marines, airmen, and sailors were initially held back from waging all out warfare and were later perfunctorily pulled out after suffering many thousands of casualties without being allowed to achieve the victory that had been promised to the war ravished victims of communist aggression.

If I were Poland's Prime Minister I would be busily cultivating a friendly relationship with a more reliable ally than our weak-kneed, wishy-washy, finger-in-the-wind liberal politicians. Perhaps it would be beneficial to Poland to forge an alliance with a more trustworthy national leader such as Zimbabwe's Mugabe or perhaps Libya's Ghadafi who would probably be more prone to honor a commitment than any post-WWII US politician other than GW Bush has proved to be. And if Obama is elected Bush's commitment and the sacrifices of many thousand's of US military men and women will have been in vain because Obama will abandon the Iraqis to their fate just as Nixon abandoned the South Vietnamese to mass slaughter or virtual slavery under communism.

I am not blaming the great majority of Americans for the failures of our leaders to live up to their word regarding foreign wars. The root cause of all instances of deserting our weaker allies after promising our aid has been the radical far left's determination to frustrate every attempt to hold back the spread of communism in the developing nations of the world. My accusations of our leaders is based on their cowardly failure to stand up to the pro-communist thugs who infiltrated our universities and churches with their Marxist ideological garbage and instigated the most flagrant violations of America's traditional respect for law and order since the infamous NYC draft riots of the Civil War era. IMHO there were many instances during that period of unlawful behavior that would have justified giving the radical rioters a "whiff of grape" in the manner practiced by 19th century Parisian militias.

[TNdandelion]

LOL Diplomatate.

[oioiman]

I agree with you, this is complete madness. Georgia attacked and slaughtered peacekeepers and civilians, with the aid of mercs, US miltary advisors, and massive Israeli support to provoke Russia. A huge majority of Geogians are rabidly protesting the move by the tin-pot puppet Mikhail Saakashvili, and now we are further trying to surround and threaten Russia with Poland and the missle shield, plus the Ukraine’s blockade. I hated the Communists, but I also am starting to despise the neo-con scum in our government. They are insanely bent on re-igniting the cold war. I deeply love my country, and know that a nuclear pissing match is the potential ruination of all the world.