AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums

Full Version: Beginning of The End?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Is this the beginning of a faster slide downward, in the US's foreign relations, especially with our allies? Listening to your enemies castigate you is one thing. but when your closest friends say terrible things behind one's back, things are in serious jeopardy.

If this is true, things are going to get pretty hairy, pretty fast.

Quote:Polish Foreign Minister: We Gave The US A "Blowjob," Got Nothing

Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski, generally viewed as a leading ally of the United States in Europe, said in a mysteriously-leaked recording Sunday that the alliance between the two countries is “not worth anything.”

“The Polish-American alliance is not worth anything. It’s even damaging, because it creates a false sense of security in Poland,” Sikorski says on an excerpt of a longer conversation set to be published Monday morning in the magazine Wprost, which is reportedly between Sikorski and former finance minister Jacek Rostowski. It’s unclear who recorded the conversation said to be from this spring, and why, though speculation has focused on Russian intelligence, which is believed to have leaked a similarly embarrassing conversation between American officials.

After his interlocutor asks why he’s skeptical of the alliance, Sikorski continues that it is “bullshit.”

“We are gonna conflict with both Russians and Germans, and we’re going to think that everything is great, because we gave the Americans a blowjob. Suckers. Total suckers,” Sikorski says, according to a translation of the account for BuzzFeed.

The recording is one of many made of politicians’ conversations in posh restaurants, and has emerged as a massive problem for the country’s ruling Civic Platform.

Sikorski also employs a racially-charged word in the conversation, describing the mentality of Poles as “Murzyńskość.” An English-language Polish outlet described the phrase as meaning “thinking ‘like a Negro.’”

Sikorski said on Twitter that he hadn’t been to the restaurant in which he was allegedly recorded; Wprost’s editor said the recording had in fact been made in a different location.

This phrase "Like a Negro" is obviously PC for the word most people are afraid to use these days, unless you are driving while Black. Just to think that Sikorski likened his fellow Poles as Washington's 'Nigers' is a major statement, and probably directed at the Zebra in the Wh. S13

Notice that Sikorski did not deny making the statement. All he did was deny the conversation took place at the reported restaurant. Ohhh, My Gosh! S13

But I thought MacDaddy was loved by Everyone. S18
Maybe the British are on to something with their practice of having "votes of confidence." We sure could use that here right now!
Think about this w/o the slur. It isn't important.

Poland has traditionally been since 1945 a state whose people felt a very strong affinity for the USA.

I think it's been maybe 6 or 8 years ago I was reading an article about Poland and they seemed too cocky to me. I recall posting here about it.

I just felt like they were acting too snotty towards Russia because just maybe the US wouldn't be there if they needed us and the Russki were not going anywhere.

This man has learned a lesson. Poland should always conduct themseleves vis a vis Germany and Russia with a strong dose of humility. Back then Russia seemed so weak and Germany was tamed, today Russia is feeling her oats and tomorrow, who knows about Germany? Meantime, the US is going to do what we think is best for us, not Poland or Britain or Burma.
IMO, someone recorded a private conversation where they spoke frankly.
And what they say is true. Countries like Poland can't rely on US troops based in Europe to counter a russian attack. (Why he mentioned Germany is wierd, unless he wanted to expose historical precedent - Slav tend to take past situations for current, of course it isn't).

Not because the US is not a faithful ally but because most of US troops still based in Europe are in Germany, mostly not combat, and in less and less numbers.
If Putin wants to do a blitzkrieg to the west, all he has to do is to roll his tanks through the border fence.
He can go up to Berlin or even Paris before he meets the first serious military opposition. IMO Europe is much easier to invade today for Russia than it was for Germany in 1939.

But Russia won't stay long on the invaded territories. IMO, NATO will react with all its might against Russia if one European country is attacked.

I don't think the US would let down Poland this time as they did in 1945. The Poles ressent that the US didn't push back the Soviet from Poland without thinking that the US didn't have the possibility to do so.
This time (if it happens) will be different because the US would not have to fight back the Russians after having to defeat Germany first.
(06-22-2014, 06:05 PM)Palladin Wrote: [ -> ]Think about this w/o the slur. It isn't important.

Poland has traditionally been since 1945 a state whose people felt a very strong affinity for the USA.

I think it's been maybe 6 or 8 years ago I was reading an article about Poland and they seemed too cocky to me. I recall posting here about it.

I just felt like they were acting too snotty towards Russia because just maybe the US wouldn't be there if they needed us and the Russki were not going anywhere.

This man has learned a lesson. Poland should always conduct themseleves vis a vis Germany and Russia with a strong dose of humility. Back then Russia seemed so weak and Germany was tamed, today Russia is feeling her oats and tomorrow, who knows about Germany? Meantime, the US is going to do what we think is best for us, not Poland or Britain or Burma.

Yes, totally accurate analysis here. But one detail to add: Polish behavior now is identical to their behavior in the 1918-1939 interval, same reliance on an alliance with a far-away country, and same unhappiness that it does not quite deliver what they want. The only difference is the remote white knight used to be France.

And it is possible that WWII would have not happened or started differently if the Poles were less sure about the France rescuing them at the last moment.
You would think Poles would have learned from WWII. I think they are wising up finally.

Honestly, what if the Russki Army invaded west Europe. Not saying it's remotely likely, just for discussion sake. The US is tired of war right now and I don't tihnk we would be able to sustain operations with high casualties.

If we ever went to war in NATO areas, it would be a blowout type and I don't think American young men care to do that right now and not sure if the US pr campaign could ever re=establish a patriotic impulse in them that would make it worth dying over like we could in the 20th century.
In case of such an invasion (highly unlikely), conventional war is unlikely, either the US does nothing or we go into a nuclear exchange.

More interesting would be see the outcome of a limited invasion... what if Russia invades a small NATO member, something like Lithuania. Will the US just bitch or go for a full-scale exchange?

Incidentally, Russian reaction to the leaked conversation was to congratulate the Poles for "rational thinking".
Not sure how important some of these states are to Russia, but, the Baltic states are nearly indefensible for NATO. They could take them w/o that much of a response, IMO.

The rest is defensible if NATO is willing to fight. I question if they are anymore though. I just can't imagine any of us taking a million dead in a year or so. Maybe the Russki would be as reluctant as well.
(06-23-2014, 09:47 PM)Palladin Wrote: [ -> ]Not sure how important some of these states are to Russia, but, the Baltic states are nearly indefensible for NATO. They could take them w/o that much of a response, IMO.

The rest is defensible if NATO is willing to fight. I question if they are anymore though. I just can't imagine any of us taking a million dead in a year or so. Maybe the Russki would be as reluctant as well.

Hey if Obama followed through with putting illegal aliens in the military we could have those millions easy. Suit'em up Ship'em out...
mv Wrote:what if Russia invades a small NATO member, something like Lithuania. Will the US just bitch or go for a full-scale exchange?
Not full exchange but they will react more than today with Ukraine, for sure.
The US can stay idle if a country is taken without opposition from the population, e.g. Crimea.

What will be the US'reaction is not important for Lithuanians, Poles, Latvians etc, what's important is to remind Russia that these nations will not let themselves invaded, occupied and governed by Russians anymore.

Russia can't invade only Lithuania, or only Latvia or only Estonia or only one small country in the east. If they take one, they have to take at least their direct neighbourgs too to protect their flanks and rears.

Russians will face huge resistance and immediate military build-up from neighboring countries unless they invade them too. But this would make it more adventurous because then the whole world will be mobilised against them.

The only country Russia could retake is Estonia. Estonia because it's on the extreme edge of the EU and is very small.
If they invade only Lithuania or only Latvia or only Poland, they will be encircled.
Latvia and Poland will immediately defend Lithuania, and Lithuania and Estonia will immediately defend Latvia.
This is a parameter the Russians will have to care for. And they shouldn't rely on ethnic russians support. It won;t happen.

Palladin Wrote:Not sure how important some of these states are to Russia, but, the Baltic states are nearly indefensible for NATO. They could take them w/o that much of a response, IMO.
I live in Lithuania 50km north of Kalliningrad: I see at least once a week a military convoy heading to the border with Kalliningrad. Usualy it's concripts in tent-covered trucks but last week there was a much more important convoy with different vehicles, some hard to identify.
No tanks but lots of containers, specialized vehicles, semi-armored vehicles etc...
It's always interresting to see all what they have beside tanks and guns.
Some vehicles had Desert camouflage color while all the others are dark green. Maybe some stuffs that was used in Iraq...
Military personel near their trucks were standing on the parking at a private owned truck shipping company. One had a red berret (or was it dark red). I don't know what it meant but it meant something.

Ok, to keep it short, there is an organised defense here. It's not like Europe is totaly helpless without the americans.
I said earlier that it's easier to invade Europe now than in 1939, it's true because we are not living with the fear of being invaded by Russia and there is no planned defense against such invasion. That would be irrational.
But we do have the force to expell an invader in the aftershock and more importantly Europe is much more united than it was against Germany in ww2.

In WW2 Belgium and France had no common plan of defense, to be more exact France had one, Belgium had none. There were no concertation between Belgium and France as how to stop a possible German invasion. That's why Germany could enter into France through Belgium so easily.
Same with Poland. Poland was invaded and nobody moved to help it: Only diplomatic condemnation.
Only the US, together with UK could gather a sufficent force unde a single command and coordination. And a single language too. Because if the french didn't take part in the first wave in Normandy it's because they would be unable to understand, on the radio, what a US officer would say while chewing his cigar.

Today the situation would be completely different. IF one EU nation is attacked (by a non-EU one), I don't think that a single EU will stay out of the fight. The attacker will face a united europe immediately, and this without even talking about NATO.
Generally, Fred is correct, but

Quote:The only country Russia could retake is Estonia. Estonia because it's on the extreme edge of the EU and is very small.
If they invade only Lithuania or only Latvia or only Poland, they will be encircled.

Misses the obvious possibility of Estonia+Latvia.

Palladin Wrote:Not sure how important some of these states are to Russia

Possible positioning of IRBMs or strategic bombers is 90% of their importance. Since one way or another this issue will come up, eventually they will be overrun (well, obviously unless Russia disintegrates). OTOH, all Baltic countries also feature horrible population trends (TFR's are : Estonia: 1.28, Latvia: 1.44 , Lithuania: 1.55) , so they may also get depopulated first.
Compared to the relative population sizes, reality dictates Russia would over run the Baltic states IF it was real important to Russia. I say they are indefensible by NATO simply due to the logistical gap they suffer compared to Poland or Bulgaria does.

They do not enjoy a contiguous friendly country landmass to NATO supplies is all I meant. I didn't mean the locals would not put up the best fight they could, they likely would.

Stratfor wrote an article about this years ago and wondered about the wisdom of NATO accepting that responsibility. My advice is the same for the Baltic states as it was for Poland and would be for Mexico or Guatamala over here or China's neighbors, use some good judgement relating to your large neighbor.
mv Wrote:Misses the obvious possibility of Estonia+Latvia.
Agree.
And they can continue further south starting from that.

But if they don't take Lithuania rapidly and don't neutralise NATO airforces, they will suffer major losses.

Palladin Wrote:They do not enjoy a contiguous friendly country landmass to NATO supplies is all I meant.
If Russia invade one or all Baltic states, their base in Kalliningrad will be destroyed with massive air bombing and then they will lose the province.
Kalliningrad will be first NATO target.
St Petersburg (recalled Stalingrad for the occasion) will be next.

But, yes the goegraphic situation is not ideal. That's why in the last 120 years they had only 30 years of full independance.

What I mean is that the rest of Europe won't sit passively as they would 70 years ago. Even if the US isn't willing to sent troops.
It would be unthinkable to let Russia re-invade parts of eastern europe.
It would be like Mexico re-attacking the USA to claim your southern sates...

mv Wrote:Possible positioning of IRBMs or strategic bombers is 90% of their importance.
When the US bombed Iraq the planes took off from a base in Arizona...
+ It would be crazy to base strategic bombers and missiles so close to Russia. It would very easy for Russians to neutralise bases located in the Baltics.

Actualy their importance is economical: seaports.
(06-24-2014, 04:57 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: [ -> ]
mv Wrote:Misses the obvious possibility of Estonia+Latvia.
Agree.
And they can continue further south starting from that.

Or not. We are talking about a highly unlikely scenario, but keep in mind that the demographic picture in Lithuania is quite different from the other two countries. And interestingly the original Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement assigned Lithuania to Germany.

Quote:Kalliningrad will be first NATO target.
St Petersburg (recalled Stalingrad for the occasion) will be next.

And attacking either would lead to a nuclear exchange. This means two things: the entire Baltic takeover scenario is unlikely at the moment AND that the only scenario that makes sense for Putin is the first strike against Fashington.

Quote:But, yes the goegraphic situation is not ideal. That's why in the last 120 years they had only 30 years of full independance.


More like last 1200 years S6 Great Duchy of Lithuania was not a Lithuanian state, the other two never were really independent (well, Hansean League Towns).
Back to the original topic... I believe this was about the Polish firing squad, the one that arranges itself in a circle?

The thing is that the Polish-US relations are just a small piece of what has been recorded, full tapes are said to be 900 hours of juicy stuff and are being published slowly..... perhaps for more income for the journal that releases them?

Here is a bit on Cameron

Quote:David Cameron's bid to renegotiate Britain's relationship with the EU has been ridiculed by Poland's Foreign Secretary in explosive private recordings leaked to the country's media.

Radek Sikorski, who was in the infamous Bullingdon Club with Boris Johnson at university in Oxford, accused Mr Cameron of 'incompetence' and 'stupidly' pandering to his eurosceptic backbenchers.

He said the Prime Minister had 'f****d up' trying to veto the last European treaty and would fail in his bid to overhaul Britain's relationship with Brussels unless they offer Poland a 'mountain of gold'.

but there is a lot more out there on all kinds of things.

FT overview -- my understanding is that not everything is out yet.
(06-24-2014, 11:22 PM)mv Wrote: [ -> ]Back to the original topic... I believe this was about the Polish firing squad, the one that arranges itself in a circle?

Sort of like how the Brits go bird hunting?
Sounds like the Polish wiki leaks, only more entertaining.

I borrow this thread to post this article on the persecuted Sudanese Christian lady. If she was a Muslim or gay, she'd already be at the US white house with a ceremony.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...untry.html