France and Germany, Yes/Poland, NO!

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by Annie, Dec 27, 2003.

  1. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    This is very disappointing, we should shaft those that do not help where possible and reward those that do:

    http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=11441

    Shafting the Poles
    By Ralph Peters
    New York Post | December 23, 2003


    The decisive turning point in the West's long struggle against Islamic conquerors came on the afternoon of Sept. 12, 1683, during the last Turkish siege of Vienna. Severely outnumbered Polish hussars - the finest cavalry Europe ever produced - charged into the massed Ottoman ranks with lowered lances and a wild battle cry.
    Led by the valiant King Jan Sobieski, the Poles had marched to save Vienna while other Europeans looked away. The French - surprise! - had cut a deal with the sultan. (To Louis XIV, humbling the rival Habsburgs trumped the fate of Western civilization.)

    The odds were grim. Many of King Jan's nobles feared disaster. But Sobieski risked his kingdom - actually a rough-and-tumble democracy - to save a continent.

    On that fateful afternoon, the Polish cavalry struck the Turkish lines with such force that 2,000 lances shattered. The charge stunned the Ottoman army. A hundred thousand Turks ran for the Danube.

    No army from the Islamic world ever posed such a threat to the West again.

    Poland's thanks for its courage? In the next century, the country was sliced up like a pie by the ungrateful Habsburgs, along with the Romanovs of Russia and the Prussian Hohenzollerns. It was the most cynical action in European history until the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, which divided Poland again in 1939.

    But the Poles never gave up their belief in their country - or in freedom. During our own revolution, our first allies were Polish freedom fighters such as Casimir Pulaski and Tadeusz Kosciusko. (Paris only joined the fight when it looked like we might win. And France intervened to spite Britain, not to help us.)

    Throughout the 19th century, Poles fought for freedom wherever the struggle raged, in Latin America, Greece and Italy, and on the Union side in our Civil War. Although their country had been raped by the great powers of Europe, Poles kept her cause alive.

    Again and again, Poles rose against their occupiers, only to be savagely put down, with their finest young men slaughtered or marched to Siberian prisons. Then, at the end of the Great War, Poland suddenly reappeared on the maps.

    What did the Poles do? They immediately saved Western civilization yet again. In the now-forgotten "Miracle on the Vistula," a patched-together Polish army turned back the Red hordes headed for Berlin. One of history's most brilliant campaigns, it saved defeated Germany from a communist takeover.

    Poland's thanks? The slaughter of World War II. Then the Soviet occupation.

    But the Poles never gave up. Their language, their faith - and their martial traditions - were maintained with rigor and pride. Of all the countries that gained their freedom as the Soviet Union collapsed, none had struggled for liberty as relentlessly as Poland.

    Now the Poles are defending freedom again. In Iraq. While the establishment media agonize over the fickle moods of Paris and Berlin, there's little mention in the press of the superb contribution made by our Polish allies - at great cost to their own country.

    In the words of an American officer who works closely with them, "Poland has taken to the Iraq mission for idealistic and principled purposes: Its leadership and military truly believe that freedom and justice are universal values worth fighting for."

    To how many other nations would those words apply?

    Poland has deployed 2,500 of its best soldiers to Iraq. It sent $64 million worth of its newest equipment - which operations in Iraq will ruin. Warsaw selected its finest officers to command and staff the Multinational Division Center South. A Polish major general commands a total of 12,000 troops from 22 nations with responsibility for a sector previously held by twice as many U.S. Marines. The Polish performance has been flawless.

    Their reward? Surely America must recognize such a great contribution from an economically struggling ally - at a time when Polish troops also support peacekeeping missions in Afghanistan and the Balkans?

    Sorry. Turkey, which stabbed us as deeply in the back as it could on the eve of Operation Iraqi Freedom, will receive a minimum of $2 billion from Washington - and the same elements in the Rumsfeld cabal who failed to plan for the occupation of Iraq hope to increase our aid to Ankara to $5 billion.

    Pakistan, which refuses to press home the fight against al Qaeda, will get billions from Washington. The repressive Egyptian regime will get a few billion, too, as it does every year. Even Yemen will get a welfare check from Uncle Sugar.

    And Poland? Like the Czech Republic, which sent a few medics to the Persian Gulf then withdrew them in panic, Poland will get a standard package of $12 million for NATO-related programs. Other than some logistical support in Iraq, that's it. Strategic peanuts for our most enthusiastic ally on the European continent.

    Poland did have one request - a humble one, in the great scheme of things. Warsaw asked for $47 million to modernize six used, American-built C-130 transport aircraft and to purchase American-built HMMWV all-terrain vehicles so elite Polish units could better integrate operations with American forces. Much of the money would go right back to U.S. factories and workers.

    Our response? We stiffed them.

    For once, the Pentagon and the State Department agree: No can do. Impossible. Our pocket are empty. Got to FedEx every penny to our favorite dictators.

    It's a mistake to over-idealize any nation. But if there's a land of heroes anywhere between the English Channel and the coast of California, it's Poland. Our Polish allies have taken a brave, costly, principled stand for freedom and democracy in Iraq. They desperately want to be seen by Washington as reliable friends in this treacherous world.

    The least we could do is to treat them with respect.
     
  2. nbdysfu
    Offline

    nbdysfu Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    829
    Thanks Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +29
    Poland, UK, Italy and Spain of Europe. Australia and Japan of the Pacific. :clap:
     
  3. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Agreed. We really do have to get over shafting our friends.
     
  4. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    let us not forget South Korea, giver of soldiers.
     
  5. nbdysfu
    Offline

    nbdysfu Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    829
    Thanks Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +29
    Maybe also Canada, South Korea, Thailand, The Phillipines and Taiwan?
     
  6. nbdysfu
    Offline

    nbdysfu Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    829
    Thanks Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +29
    And Puerto Rico!
     
  7. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Best info I could find:

    A list of countries among the willing include, accurate as of March 28, 2003, (1991 participants are in italics): Afghanistan, Albania, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain [1], Bulgaria, Colombia, Costa Rica [2], Denmark, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Georgia, United Kingdom, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait [3], Latvia, Lithuania, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Mongolia, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, Palau [4], the Philippines, Poland, Portugal (but parliament may censure the PM), Qatar [5], Romania [6], Rwanda, Slovakia, South Korea (but Parliament won't vote on whether to send troops), Spain, Republic of China (on Taiwan), Turkey, Uganda, the United States, Uzbekistan. Total: 37 confirmed; 10 not confirmed.

    Nations unwilling include (1991 participants are in italics): Algeria, Angola, Armenia, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belgium, Brazil, Canada (but some Canadian troops on exchange programs are involved)[7], Cape Verde, People's Republic of China, Comoros [8], Croatia (but is providing airspace), Cuba, the Czech Republic (but is supplying anti-chemical specialists), Djibouti [9], Ecuador, Egypt [10], France, Germany (airspace use), Greece (airspace use), Guinea-Bissau, India, Iran, Iraq, Jordan [11], Lebanon [12], Malaysia, Mauritania [13], Morocco [14], Mozambique, Namibia, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, North Korea, Norway (but will provide humanitarian aid), Oman [15], Pakistan, Palestinian Authority [16], Russia, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia [17], Slovenia (providing air space), Solomon Islands [18][19], Somalia [20], Sri Lanka, Sweden (but will provide humanitarian aid), Switzerland, Sudan [21], Syria [22], Tunisia [23], Ukraine (providing anti-chemical weapon troops to Kuwait), United Arab Emirates [24], the Vatican, Venezuela, Yemen [25], Zimbabwe. Total: 57 confirmed.

    Nations declared neutral or with a non-aggressive stance: Ireland (declared neutrality), Singapore (declared itself a member of the 'coalition for the immediate disarmament of Iraq,' not the 'coalition of the willing'), Thailand (declared neutrality) Total: 3 confirmed.

    Nations that have not announced a stance or whose intentions are yet unclear (1991 participants are in italics): Andorra, Argentina, Austria, the Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Bermuda, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia, Botswana, Brunei, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, the Central African Republic, Chad, Chechnya, Chile, Cyprus, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, East Timor, Equatorial Guinea, Fiji, Finland (but see: Anneli Jäätteenmäki), Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, the Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Kenya, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lesotho, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico (flip flopping), Moldova, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Myanmar, Nauru, Nepal, Niger, Niue, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Republic of the Congo, Saint Kitts, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent, Samoa, San Marino, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, South Africa, Suriname, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Vietnam, Western Sahara, Zambia. Total: 93
     
  8. acludem
    Offline

    acludem VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,500
    Thanks Received:
    49
    Trophy Points:
    71
    Location:
    Missouri
    Ratings:
    +69
    Bush's treatment of our allies has been awful. Clearly, unless you kiss Bush's behind, you get no aid. Unless you kowtow to Bush and do whatever he wants, your companies aren't allowed to bid on contracts (even though we in America are for a free-market economy). Coalition of the willing? No, Coalition of those who agree with Bush. The unwilling? No, those who aren't willing to be led around like Bush's puppy dog, and simply had a profound disagreement with him.

    Bush and his handlers have a very bad mentality, either you are with us or against us. There is no in between. I disagree with many of you on this board politically, but I do not then make you out to be my enemy. Reasonable people, reasonable nations, can disagree. According to Bush, the only reasonable position is his. This is dangerous. This is how dictators behave, not leaders of democratic nations.
     
  9. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Treating our allies less well than our enemies is a time honored activity for the US, not just this administration.
     
  10. nbdysfu
    Offline

    nbdysfu Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    829
    Thanks Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +29
    originally posted by acludem
    Bush and his handlers have a very bad mentality, either you are with us or against us. There is no in between. I disagree with many of you on this board politically, but I do not then make you out to be my enemy. Reasonable people, reasonable nations, can disagree. According to Bush, the only reasonable position is his. This is dangerous. This is how dictators behave, not leaders of democratic nations.
    _______________________ _______________________
    contrast

    qoute acludem from a forum two minutes ago:
    ______________________________

    Bush has only met my expecations, which means he's been a complete failure. He and his administration have been nothing short of disastrous for the American people.

    I have yet to decide on a candidate in the Democratic primary, but any of them, short of Al Sharpton, would be a better President than Bush, and between Bush and Sharpton it's a toss-up.
    _____________________________

    :D explain?
     

Share This Page