Poland urges closer U.S. ties after Russia shield comment

reuters.com ^ | Jul 9, 2008 | Patryk Wasilewski

[Tailgunner Joe]

WARSAW (Reuters) - Russia's angry response to U.S. plans to build a missile shield underlines the need for Europe to seek closer security ties with the United States, a top aide to Polish President Lech Kaczynski said on Wednesday.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said in Japan on Wednesday that Moscow was very upset after Washington signed a deal with the Czech Republic on placing a tracking radar on Czech soil as part of the shield project and would consider how to retaliate.

Washington also wants to install 10 interceptor missiles in Poland, but Warsaw has sought in return billions of dollars in U.S. investment to upgrade its air defences. Last week Poland rejected a U.S. offer as insufficient and talks are continuing.

"(Russia's reaction) proves we need to strengthen our alliance with the United States because beyond our eastern border there are politicians who use a language we thought had vanished many years ago, the language of might and imperial ambitions," presidential aide Michal Kaminski said.

"It is absolutely unacceptable for one country to threaten another for acts that are not aggressive in character. The eventual construction of the shield is not directed against Russia," Kaminski told a news conference.

NATO allies Poland and the Czech Republic were once part of the Moscow-led Warsaw Pact and remain distrustful of their former communist-era overlord.

Poland's President Kaczynski, a conservative who has long favoured closer ties with the United States, has been critical of the centre-right government's tough negotiating stance over the missile shield.

The United States says the planned shield is needed to protect its European allies against possible attack by what it calls "rogue states", particularly Iran, or by terrorist groups.

Russia... has threatened to point missiles at the Czech Republic and Poland if the deployment goes ahead.

[Pistolshot]

Ah those Russkies. Paranoid has a new face.

Historically, Poland has always had the big bad bear next door crave her as a possession.

[SJSAMPLE]

Is Russia digging a ditch for the current crop of Polish army officers?

[DoughtyOne]

IMO Russia would do well to keep tight lipped until McCain has destroyed as much of our Nuclear Deterence “as it is safe to” (as if), and he pulls all our tactical battlefield nukes out of Europe.

Then after we have yanked every last one of our troops out of Europe, it will be wide open to Russia’s whims. And then why bluster? Just do what you want while our leaders wee their pants.

[Slapshot68]

Welcome to the new cold war, comrades.

[Radl]

Who would be the most honest official in a soccer game between Germany and Russia? A referee from Poland. He would hate them both.

[dfwgator]

“With the Germans we lose our lives, with the Russians we lose our souls.” -General Anders to General Patton

[lexusppd]

How much of our nuclear deterrence is McCain planning to do away with?

How many times over do we need to destroy the entire planet?

Just on our Ohio class missile subs we have over 5000 warheads on approximately 576 missiles. No one even knows where the damn subs are INCLUDING the Pentagon which only has a rather large geographical area as a guess to where each sub is at any given time. If they can’t be found they can’t be destroyed and they can be anywhere on the planet in about 10 days and have enough firepower each to destroy almost any nation and at the least render them ineffective in as far as waging war.

So how seriously do you think McCain’s proposal will harm out ability to wage a nuclear war?

[DoughtyOne]

McCain’s comments come on top of Bush’s own comments from 2001. Did Bush follow through? You seem to be saying he didn’t.

McCain is very clear about what he plans to do, and it doesn’t sound a bit like peace through strength to me.

It sounds more like peace through high hopes and a lot of blind faith.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0WDQ/is_2001_Nov_19/ai_81011571

[lexusppd]

I don't believe any final agreement was ever made re the reduction of nukes. This was in the article you linked to:

"Bush acknowledged there is disagreement between the two countries over the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and expressed determination to move beyond the ''outdated'' treaty and push the U.S. missile defense program.

Bush said he and Putin agreed to continue talks on the issue as ''partners and friends, not adversaries.''

Putin said at the news conference that Russia's position on the U.S. missile defense program ''remains unchanged,'' but said the two countries will continue talks."

I don't know what if anyhting happened. My only point is that after a certain number of nukes, it becomes overkill.

[DoughtyOne]

I’ve had others express the same view. I don’t think it’s prudent to telegraph to your enemies that you think the world is such a safe place that your are going to disarm.

Whether that is the case or not, it still isn’t a bright thing to do IMO.

We’ve got a dingo in Russia (and frankly I think we’re partly to blame). We have China on the rise. We have the Middle-East easily capable of being a real problem. And we have a one theater capacity to conduct war.

Under these circumstances, you want your enemies to think you have a massive enough arsenal that any though of trying to survive a nuclear war, would be rendered unacceptable.

And yet we continue to spout off in public that we want cuts.

Whether you are right or not, is this Presidential? I sure don’t like it.

[RusIvan]

Who would be the most honest official in a soccer game between Germany and Russia? A referee from Poland. He would hate them both.==

Hate only thing they good for:).

[RusIvan]

We’ve got a dingo in Russia (and frankly I think we’re partly to blame). ==

If you feel your blame then you should do something or you may get Russia completely hostile in few years ahead. Now it is not all lost beleive me but I’m not so sure for future. Without Russia America may live as the fortress but cann’t be solve no problems. You shoulkd strat to hear Russian concern firstly istead of apprising Poland, Gerogia or whoever.f not you blame yourself for loses.

[Radl]

I think God would disagree.

[DoughtyOne]

We’ve got a dingo in Russia, and frankly I think we’re partly to blame.

If you feel your blame then you should do something or you may get Russia completely hostile in few years ahead. Now it is not all lost beleive me but I’m not so sure for future. Without Russia America may live as the fortress but cann’t be solve no problems. You shoulkd strat to hear Russian concern firstly istead of apprising Poland, Gerogia or whoever.f not you blame yourself for loses.

I am going to repeat this to you, because I want to make it clear what I am responding to precisely.  No offense inteded.  If I took your comments wrong, this will allow you to know why I made the commets I did.

If you feel you are partly to blame, then you should take some action so you don't see a completely hostile Russin in a few years.  Russia is not uniformly hostile to the United States now, believe me, but it very well may be in the future.  Without Russia, America may be able to live as a fortress, but it won't be able to solve global problems.  You should listen to Russia's concerns before the concerns of Poland, Georgia or other states.  If not, you should blame yourselves for the loses that follow.

If this is not what you meant, please let me know.

If you feel you are partly to blame, then you should take some action so you don't see a completely hostile Russin in a few years.

I believe we should have had a much better dialogue with Putin over the last eight years.  Some summits would have been advisable.  There have been times when we could have given Putin ways to feel like a well respected global player, instead of our poor cousin.  There have been times when we should have expressed much greater empathy for Russia, as in the instance of the school that was taken over by terrorists.  If I had been president, we would have had a much closer relationship with Russia.  My emphasis would have been to give Putin some status, but more importantly to let the Russian people know that we consider them our friends.  We should have treated that act of terrorism at the school like an attack on U.S. Soil.  We should have had very top level U.S. leaders at the memorial.  I would have gone as President.

That is not to say that Putin hasn't made some mistakes of his own.  His relationship with China is baffling.  China is presently moving large numbers of it's popluace into eastern Russia.  China, while acting the part of Russia friend to get favors, will ultimately turn it wrath on Russia.  Why can't Putin see this?   Putin's intent to supply Iran with nuclear technology that may be used to develop nuclear weapons, is also baffling.  Didn't the act of terrorism at the school or the Moscow movie theater reveal to Putin how dangerous it would be for an extremist Muslim state to obatin the bomb?  Doesn't Putin realize that Iran will provide that technology to terrorists, and Russia may very well be their target at some point?

Russia is not uniformly hostile to the United States now, believe me, but it very well may be in the future.

Well it may turn out to be very hostile, but Russia has as much to lose if this becomes the case, as we do.  And befriending China and Iran is no way to strengthen ties to the U.S.

Without Russia, America may be able to live as a fortress, but it won't be able to solve global problems.

That is evidenced by our problem with Iran.  We are trying to prevent Iran from going Nuclear, and Putin is runing interference for Iran.  We are not trying to stop that four our own safety alone.  Russia will be safer without a terrorist state like Iran getting the bomb.

Prior to North Korea getting the bomb, and our refusal to take reasoned actions with regard to it, I would have stated that at some point we would step in and end Iran's nuclear weapons ambitions.  Today I have no idea what our leadership will do.  It's as baffling to me as it is to you on some matters.

The United States will continue to solve global problems.  It has no choice.  If the world becomes destablized, every nation will become exposed to serious problems.  Russia will be no exception.  If Iran or China act out, Russia is not going to be immune to the problems they create.  We have no designs on Russia, and Russia should know that.

You should listen to Russia's concerns before the concerns of Poland, Georgia or other states.  If not, you should blame yourselves for the losses that follow.

Russia has nobody to blame but itself for selling military equipment to China, and nuclear technology to Iran.  Did it not realize that would make it's neighbors very leary of where it was headed?  If Iran gets the bomb, who is exposed to that bomb?  European nations, Poland, Georgia, Russia, are all targets.  And that's why Poland and Georgia feel the need to have a nuclear deterent on their soil.

What was Puting thinking when he signed on with Iran?  It's a terrorist state.  It cooperates with terrorists.  Can't Putin understand that Russia will have to face nuclear blackmail, if it doesn't start to think about what it is doing?

On the matter of anti-balistic missile sites in Poland, I'm not convinced it's a great idea.  The morons that run our nation are determined to destroy as much of our nuclear arsenal as they can.  And they are making ignorant comments about overkill, to justify it.  What happens to that overkill, if anti-balistic missile programs are introduced by Russia?  And how would we like it if Russia installed those sites in Canada, Mexico, and Cuba?

Both our nations are playing a fools game right now.  I would difuse that as soon as I could.  I would still put anti-balistic missile sites in Europe, but I would try to be a least a little understanding of Russia's view on the topic.  And you will never see the day when I will support cutting our nuclear deterence further than it has already been cut.

We've to North Korea, soon Iran, Russia, China, India, Pakistan, a probably other states that could at some point form aliances that may go against the U.S.  With that being the case, our nuclear arsenal is just fine like it is.

You mention that the U.S. should be careful not to anger Putin.  That's a two way street.  Putin has no reason to think the U.S. intends to attack it.  He has every reason to understand why we are apprehensive about a Putlin-like individual, who could turn Russia back to the lousy globaly player it was for 70 years.  We should both take steps to telegraph that we want a strong U.S. / Russian relationship.  Who do the citizens of Russia feel closer to, China or the U.S.?  I would certainly think it was the U.S., but I have to wonder these days.

I like the Russian people.  I feel a kinship with them.  I would like to see our nations citizens be the friends they should be.  And that comes with good will on both our leadership's part.

[RusIvan]

Thank you for expanded asnwer. And for you corrected my usage. My grammar deteriorated I know. Since I returned home I have no opportunity to speak English. Still I remember some english words but my usage is the problem. So when I write post I simply traslate on English the russian phases word by word. It sounds peculiar american speaker I beleive but understandable.

[RusIvan]

I rered your post and I’m felling that I agree at most. But I’d like to mention 2 cents.

First. We know that Iran didn’t engaged into trrorism to now. They support some antiamerican forces in Lebanon, they hostile to Israel. So Russia now do not really care about Israel and so on. Seems to me it is the case.
Our politians think that if islamists will come to Russia at last turn. Now there is fight between por Israelis and islamists. Russia tries to keep her neutrality.

Second. Seems to me that US get on herself too much of the global problems already. American economy isn’t that strong and may give up if you burden her with the problems which mean nothing to your economy.
Accually Russians very well understand that Amrican struggle benefits Russia. But Russia truly wants to get it for free.

If not Serbia bombing then Russia today was on the side of America. Serbia bombing changed everything. Just illustration. Before bombing the approval rate of USA between Russians was near 70-80% (same as Putin’ rate today!). Now the approval rate of USA is about <10%.
Russians began to think very suspicious of USA intentions. None beleives that USA acts out of good intensions. All think USA just persues her profits but try to fool everyone with peace rethorics. You get the picture?