Zone1 Should Poland be Given Nuclear Weapons?

[Harpy Eagle]

At this time, I trust Eastern European countries much more than Biden's USA

Why would anyone trust the USA no matter who the POTUS is?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Ex-Russian president comments on Polish nuclear request

Dmitry Medvedev has warned that the deployment of US nuclear weapons to Poland could lead to a nuclear war

www.rt.com

Why would Poland want them? Why would America supply them to Poland?
Would it be a wise decision to allow Poland to put some teeth into threatening Russia.

In hopes that this can be discussed rationally without becoming a vengeful pissing match?

I'm posting this in the CDZ because it's a question that needs to be faced before it's too late! IMO.

Moderators: Can we have strict Zone 1 moderating of this topic?

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

So we agree

Why would anyone trust the USA no matter who the POTUS is?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

So we agree

Except you limited it to under Biden, do not

 

[BS Filter]

Every country should be given nukes. As soon as some idiot uses one they should be exterminated.

 

[White 6]

These missiles have a range of over 1,000 kilometres (620 mi) and fly at about 800 kilometres per hour (500 mph).

Tomahawk:

 

[Kruska]

Ex-Russian president comments on Polish nuclear request

Dmitry Medvedev has warned that the deployment of US nuclear weapons to Poland could lead to a nuclear war

www.rt.com

Why would Poland want them? Why would America supply them to Poland?
Would it be a wise decision to allow Poland to put some teeth into threatening Russia.

In hopes that this can be discussed rationally without becoming a vengeful pissing match?

I'm posting this in the CDZ because it's a question that needs to be faced before it's too late! IMO.

Moderators: Can we have strict Zone 1 moderating of this topic?

Off course the Polish - especially the present government want's to have nukes and huge military.

Since the dissolution of the former Polish-Lithuanian Empire (beholding around 80% of today's Belarus and around 50% of today's Ukraine + Kalinngrad) in the 18th century - Polish nationals are having wet dreams about this every night.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Off course the Polish - especially the present government want's to have nukes and huge military.

Since the dissolution of the former Polish-Lithuanian Empire (beholding around 80% of today's Belarus and around 50% of today's Ukraine + Kalinngrad) in the 18th century - Polish nationals are having wet dreams about this every night.

That's not a bad thing. They are better people than we are. Eastern Europe may be the saviors of the white race.

 

[Pellinore]

Here's the problem with saying a blanket 'No': Russia just put nuclear weapons in Belarus.

Putin says Russia put nuclear bombs in Belarus as warning to West

The Russian step is being watched closely by Washington and its allies as well as by China, which has repeatedly cautioned against the use of nuclear weapons in the war in Ukraine.

www.reuters.com

Source: Reuters. Least Biased, Very High factual reporting.

Denying such placement to Poland — who, if you remember, knows first-hand what it feels like to lack the weaponry they need to resist an invasion from Moscow — would be yet one more step of appeasement, allowing Putin and Lukashenko to get away with one more unopposed bite at the cheese.

We also would not be 'giving' Poland nuclear weapons; we would be parking ours there and allowing them a voice in the discussion about them, as we have been doing with many other European countries since 2009.

And another reminder for all readers: 'RT' stands for 'Russia Today.' It is an explicitly pro-Russian-state propaganda source.

RT News (RT.Com) - Bias and Credibility

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no

mediabiasfactcheck.com

 

[White 6]

Here's the problem with saying a blanket 'No': Russia just put nuclear weapons in Belarus.

Putin says Russia put nuclear bombs in Belarus as warning to West

The Russian step is being watched closely by Washington and its allies as well as by China, which has repeatedly cautioned against the use of nuclear weapons in the war in Ukraine.

www.reuters.com

Source: Reuters. Least Biased, Very High factual reporting.

Denying such placement to Poland — who, if you remember, knows first-hand what it feels like to lack the weaponry they need to resist an invasion from Moscow — would be yet one more step of appeasement, allowing Putin and Lukashenko to get away with one more unopposed bite at the cheese.

We also would not be 'giving' Poland nuclear weapons; we would be parking ours there and allowing them a voice in the discussion about them, as we have been doing with many other European countries since 2009.

And another reminder for all readers: 'RT' stands for 'Russia Today.' It is an explicitly pro-Russian-state propaganda source.

RT News (RT.Com) - Bias and Credibility

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no

mediabiasfactcheck.com

What is the strategic advantage of doing so?

 

[Donald H]

Denying such placement to Poland — who, if you remember, knows first-hand what it feels like to lack the weaponry they need to resist an invasion from Moscow — would be yet one more step of appeasement, allowing Putin and Lukashenko to get away with one more unopposed bite at the cheese.

You're missing the point on why it's not a good idea, and will most likely be refused by America.
The reason is already covered with America's objections to Russia's moving nuclear weapons to Belarus.

As to Poland being a deterrent factor against Russia?

There is no deterrent for either side.

 

[Donald H]

What is the strategic advantage of doing so?

Good point White! There is none. Nato's article 5 covers Poland as completely as is necessary.

In a sense, Russia moving nuclear weapons to Belarus is the equivalent of Article 5, in that Russia is setting up the same demands on their allies' security.

We don't want to see Russia sending nuclear weapons to Iran!

And Syria, Iraq, Brazil, and other countries that choose to align with Brics.

Likewise, America's nukes to Canada, Australia, Turkey, Israel, etc.

 

[JohnDB]

If Poland wants Nukes they should make their own

They can....very easily. And in truth they might do just that. The USA really doesn't need to provide them.

 

[Donald H]

They can....very easily. And in truth they might do just that. The USA really doesn't need to provide them.

America has the power to persuade Poland to not pursue nuclear weapons and I think would apply that pressure.

Remember the power America holds over European countries with Nato and it's article 5.

Nuclear weapons in Europe's countries negates the need for Nato! The need for America?

 

[White 6]

Good point White! There is none. Nato's article 5 covers Poland as completely as is necessary.

In a sense, Russia moving nuclear weapons to Belarus is the equivalent of Article 5, in that Russia is setting up the same demands on their allies' security.

We don't want to see Russia sending nuclear weapons to Iran!

And Syria, Iraq, Brazil, and other countries that choose to align with Brics.

Likewise, America's nukes to Canada, Australia, Turkey, Israel, etc.

We can get them anywhere as quickly as needed, as is, from where they are. NATO member Poland can be defended (if necessary) under the umbrella without need to forward locate those strategic munitions there, with less expense and greater security, holding them on hand in already established bases. We don't actually use howitzers as a delivery method, so locating that close to a possible FEBA is totally unnecessary. Nor do we believe an enemy that could come across that border in numbers so overwhelming, as to necessitate tactical nuclear battlefield munitions as a needed defensive battlefield measure, required to defend an overwhelming assault.

 

[Donald H]

We can get them anywhere as quickly as needed, as is, from where they are. NATO member Poland can be defended (if necessary) under the umbrella without need to forward locate those strategic munitions there, with less expense and greater security, holding them on hand in already established bases. We don't actually use howitzers as a delivery method, so locating that close to a possible FEBA is totally unnecessary. Nor do we believe an enemy that could come across that border in numbers so overwhelming, as to necessitate tactical nuclear battlefield munitions as a needed defensive battlefield measure, required to defend an overwhelming assault.

I was pretty sure you would get involved in this discussion!
A few others have made a feeble attempt but I probably stomped out their ignorance too quickly. They need nurturing.

In any case, you're right about Poland not needing nukes.

But I've had the opportunity to introduce a few facts on Russia creating the equivalent of Nato's article 5, with it's delievery of nukes to Belarus.

And I meant it to be unsettling by bringing up the Iran question and the Israel question.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

No. The polish govt can not be trusted to make good decisions. Nr Hungary.

 

[Donald H]

No. The polish govt can not be trusted to make good decisions. Nr Hungary.

Military analysts such as Macgregor and Ritter are suggesting that Nato is finished when the proxy war is finished.
They both completely reject the notion that the Ukraine can win.

And they know that means that America can't win, but don't state it in so many words?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Military analysts such as Macgregor and Ritter are suggesting that Nato is finished when the proxy war is finished.

There will always be alliances because mans nature is inclined to war.

 

[ActionJackson]

Ex-Russian president comments on Polish nuclear request

Dmitry Medvedev has warned that the deployment of US nuclear weapons to Poland could lead to a nuclear war

www.rt.com

Why would Poland want them? Why would America supply them to Poland?
Would it be a wise decision to allow Poland to put some teeth into threatening Russia.

In hopes that this can be discussed rationally without becoming a vengeful pissing match?

I'm posting this in the CDZ because it's a question that needs to be faced before it's too late! IMO.

Moderators: Can we have strict Zone 1 moderating of this topic?

Poland is a sovereign country. They don't need anyone's permission. If America under Biden can have access to nukes then it's a free-for-all. Who the hell is in charge of giving other nations permission?