r/worldnews
•
u/Kaiser_und_allah
•
Mar 20 '23
•
1
Polish Ambassador to France: Poland will be forced to enter war if Ukraine fails to defend itself Russia/Ukraine
https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/03/19/7394148/4.0k
u/Feliz_Desdichado Mar 20 '23
Poland is free to do so indeed, they can come into the war as allies of Ukraine. That does mean however, that they could no longer invoke article 5 since they'd be joining the war separetely.
2.4k
u/Gustomaximus Mar 20 '23
But what if Poland send a 'special military operation' that's totally separate right? /s
844
u/EricForce Mar 20 '23
They could even give some bullshit reasoning like, andI'mpullingthisoutofmyasshere, to denazify Ukraine?
263
u/DeathMetalTransbian Mar 20 '23
The threats of foreign imperialism are encroaching on Poland's borders, after all... They may feel the need to defend themselves, y'know?
→ More replies3
u/Lch207560 Mar 20 '23
Or, now hear me out, the de-nazification of what is left of the red army
→ More replies→ More replies164
u/Caelinus Mar 20 '23
Ironically that would be much less of a bullshit reason.
Russia is the only one acting like a Nazi here.
→ More replies→ More replies205
u/Darth_Memer_1916 Mar 20 '23
Step 1 : Invade Russia
Step 2 : Call it a special military operation and not a war.
Step 3 : Russia actually fights back.
Step 4 : Accuse Russia of carrying out an act of war against you.
Step 5 : P̷͜͠r҈҇͢e̶̕͢s҈̨̛s҉̨͠ t҉̨̛h҉̨͡ȩ̴͡ b̶̨̕ų̴͡t̵͜͡t҈̡̛o̸̡͞n̶̡͞
→ More replies37
→ More replies463
u/Emotional-Main3195 Mar 20 '23
Agreed the only way the U.S. joins is if a nato country is attacked. If Poland chooses to join god speed to them. But the U.S. and NATO should not join.
→ More replies522
u/ScaryShadowx Mar 20 '23
Poland is not going to join without a hell of a lot of backing from the rest of NATO. If the decision was made to go in 'alone', you can be sure they would have had discussions about financial and military support from the rest of NATO.
→ More replies327
u/BackHandLegend Mar 20 '23
Poland is racing to become USA’s most important European partner to date because of the insane progress to its militarization.
Take everything with a grain of salt, but if Poland secured an immense amount of modern military hardware, I could absolutely see them striking Russia in a ripe time of their own accord.
68
u/visope Mar 20 '23
Poland is racing to become USA’s most important European partner to date
There are reasons why Poland so eager to support American invasion of Iraq
→ More replies→ More replies62
u/Dabrush Mar 20 '23
Not sure what you mean by most important partner. Poland always has been trying to be closer to the US than the EU, mostly because they hate Germany and don't like the progressive laws coming out of Western Europe.
But when it comes to trade partners, their economy is just too small and for military partners, it would still take a long time to catch up to Britain.
12
u/AFresh1984 Mar 20 '23 edited Mar 20 '23
Poland and the US' history even goes back to the Revolutionary War.
→ More replies9
u/redbird7311 Mar 20 '23
Poland and the US have had pretty solid relations, even before the US became a superpower.
Poland and the US have always had a bit of a soft spot towards each other, though, the USSR kinda became a speed bump in that deal.
1.1k
u/Kingbrandon Mar 20 '23
lol i bet no one read the article
“Following the ambassador’s remark, Poland’s Embassy in France issued a statement saying that it has been interpreted by some media ‘out of context.’”
479
128
u/StephaneiAarhus Mar 20 '23
This is all prepared.
Ambassador says something a bit too much in order to provoke political reaction (like increasing political support for Ukraine, calling to get troops on the ground in Ukraine, etc), then the ambassade staff themselves publish communique to calm things down.
Meanwhile, the ambassade/or made their job : implying that we need to increase our support and maybe actively join the war with troops in Ukraine.
32
u/Staubsau_Ger Mar 20 '23
It's like kicking the frame of the Overton window and waiting to see what happens instead of actually trying to pick it up and move it.
→ More replies18
u/persianbrothel Mar 20 '23
yep, it also puts the idea out there. it's the same with biden's "gaffs" regarding taiwan.
they know what they're doing. they know full well what they're trying to communicate to the opposition: "this option is on the table, so watch it"
→ More replies→ More replies82
u/evasive_dendrite Mar 20 '23 edited Mar 20 '23
That doesn't really mean anything. The title accurately reflects what he said. Claiming it's "out of context" without further elaboration means nothing.
18
u/normie_sama Mar 20 '23
"I'll bash ye fucken face in, ye prick... whoa, whoa, whoa, settle down lads, that was taken out of context."
→ More replies→ More replies5
23
u/Mr--Weirdo Mar 20 '23
A careful listening to the entire conversation makes it clear that there was no announcement of Poland’s direct involvement in the conflict, only a warning of the consequences that a Ukrainian defeat could have: the possibility of a Russian attack, or the involvement of more Central European countries – the Baltic States and Poland."
Phew
553
u/ramonnl Mar 20 '23
Poland should start a mercenary group like russia got, and then just say that it got nothing to do with them. Let that mercenary group support Ukraine.
→ More replies167
456
Mar 20 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
143
u/Aedeus Mar 20 '23
Which is exactly why they'd choose to enter the war before letting Russia regroup and rearm.
→ More replies16
→ More replies19
u/carpcrucible Mar 20 '23
They clarified their comments. What they meant was that if Ukraine fell, Poland and other eastern european states would be next and they would be forced into a war with Russia.
Exactly. And I wish everyone (i.e. Western europe/US) else took this a bit more fucking seriously. It's inexcusable that it took us a year to just agree to send some old tanks.
→ More replies
18
5.3k
u/FatherWASR Mar 20 '23
Poland knows better than almost any other county how dangerous Russia is. Now is the time to end Putin’s regime.
2.1k
u/twelveparsnips Mar 20 '23 •
Geographically, Poland is the equivalent of "Did you see what she was wearing? She was practically begging for it". It has no natural protection from east, west, or south. Every neighbor it has would benefit strategically by taking over Poland to get better access to resources and trade routes. Every direction has powerful countries next to it; Poland used to stretch all the way through Ukraine and Moscow. so in 1772 they countries did exactly what you'd expect a great power in the 1700s to do when it was next to an indefensible country. European powers shredded Poland up for the next 2 decades. The majority of the time the US has been a country, Poland has not been one.
573
Mar 20 '23
100%. Poland have been a busy thoroughfare for soldiers on horses or in tanks to roll through heading from one empire to another. They don’t want to be that again. That they would get involved in the event of a Russian takeover of Ukraine has always been obvious. It’s an unacceptable outcome for them. Because they know they’d be next.
→ More replies39
u/eric2332 Mar 20 '23
It's the 21st century, Germany is not going to invade Poland any more. Nobody's going to invade from the north (Baltic Sea), and none of the countries to the south are big enough to threaten. The only realistic threat comes from Russia in the east.
271
u/fiskehjelm Mar 20 '23
the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth got screwed because they were attacked by Prussia Austria and Russia at the same time. Poland got screwed because they were attacked by Germany and the USSR at the same time. any country would fall when tackled by multiple great powers at the same time from every direction. Poland still has defensable rivers and mountains, like when the Polish republic was born they defeated the early USSR all on their own when it was a 1v1 in 1920.
→ More replies5
u/Gammelpreiss Mar 20 '23
It got screwed because the Commonwealth's own elite sold it out, mate.
→ More replies86
u/shkarada Mar 20 '23
It is not even about history. https://www.reuters.com/world/russia-unveils-security-guarantees-says-western-response-not-encouraging-2021-12-17/
Putin thinks that Moscow should decide what happens in Poland. We disagree with that. Strongly.
225
u/slopeclimber Mar 20 '23
No natural protection from the south? ok lol only a big mountain range that saw 10x less warfare than east or west frontier
33
u/Captain_Alaska Mar 20 '23
No natural protection from the south? ok lol only a big mountain range that saw 10x less warfare than east or west frontier
The current borders of Poland are not the same borders Poland had in 1772.
13
u/Creshal Mar 20 '23
If you look at a map of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in the 17th century, it originally extended past the Carpathians in the West, and Southeast of the Carpathians it extended far into modern-day Moldova and Ukraine.
So there were plenty of ways to invade around the Carpathians… and after the first partition of Poland, all potentially protective mountain ranges were under Russian/Austrian control and it was all flat country all the way up to Warsaw.
181
u/twelveparsnips Mar 20 '23
Sure, the Carpathian Mountains are there, but it only covers half of it's southern flank.
→ More replies34
→ More replies20
u/demoni_si_visine Mar 20 '23
Try being Romania. Turkic attacks from the east, Austria-Hungary on the other side, throw in some Russians for good measure. It took until 1918 to get to be a fully independent country.
To be honest, we've also been kinda dumb. Didn't take too much to conquer us.
→ More replies20
u/Deadly_Duplicator Mar 20 '23
Regime changing a nuclear power, yea that would NEVER go sideways. Fuck off.
→ More replies786
u/trucknuts_disposal Mar 20 '23
This should have been done over a year ago as soon as it started.
9
→ More replies749
u/SpinozaTheDamned Mar 20 '23
Normally I'd agree, but then there's nukes on the table. This vastly overcomplicates everything, and I can't imagine that every two bit dictator isn't looking at this situation and thinking, oh, if only we had some nukes, that'd be swell.
131
u/WebShaman Mar 20 '23
This is really the crux of the matter - every wanna-be Country with land-grabbing aspirations are watching this situation closely. If having Nukes guarantees safety from reprisal, the World is going to become a very nasty hellhole, fast, as everyone "Nukes up".
Eventually, someone is going to "find out" how the World reacts to Nuking a neighbor.
That's a wildly dangerous path to take, imo.
→ More replies47
→ More replies358
u/tiy24 Mar 20 '23
One of the first thoughts I had after “oh shit this is terrible” when Russia invaded was this basically guarantees a nuclear weapon being used (not just tested) in my lifetime (28). Between the historical examples Libya, North Korea, and now Ukraine have set every strongman and half sane dictator would be mad to not immediately put “acquiring nuclear weapons” at the top of their list of things they have to do to ensure they stay in power. Once that 80 year old tech gets spread around it’s only a matter of time before someone is crazy/desperate enough to use it.
88
u/hesh582 Mar 20 '23 edited Mar 20 '23
The thing is, though, that it's not really about "the tech". Knowing how to make one is not the challenge - as you've said it's 80 year old knowledge and it is not hard to find. The key principles are well understood by scientists in every country, even ones with half sane dictators.
The limiting factor is resources and industrial capacity. Refining uranium is hard and expensive. The machines involved are outrageously expensive and require sophisticated infrastructure to produce. The production and export of these machines is strictly controlled worldwide, and getting them (and keeping them from blowing up, ask Iran) is not easy.
This is not a "in one small secret lab, a tight knit team works in secret on a wonder weapon" thing. Enrichment of uranium at scale is a significant industrial enterprise. It is difficult (verging on impossible) to do secretly, it takes a very long time, and it costs a fortune.
Proliferation is always a concern. But the barriers are greater than people realize. Countries like Iran and North Korea are able to push the envelope for fairly unique reasons. Iran is unusually wealthy and industrialized for an isolated state with overtly hostile relations with most of the developed world. It also is a crucial military power in a very unstable region. North Korea is able to divert an enormous amount of resources to any stupid project because it is one of the most totalitarian states in the history of the planet, with an astonishing lack of consideration for human well being. NK also has far fewer reasons to avoid proliferation because it's so ridiculously isolated from the global system, and NK's drive for total economic independence and self-sufficience has resulted in a unusually comprehensive industrial capacity at the cost of things like "feeding people".
But for most countries it really just functions as a way to waste an enormous amount of money for a bit, while encouraging the developed world to cripple your economy, while also daring the US/Russia/China/Israel/France to conduct a "police action" or something. The incentives just don't line up at all, even if a leader is quite globally unpopular. The fact remains that it is still really quite hard to go from "no nuclear program" to "geopolitical deterrence" - no matter how crazy you are, "crazy/desperate" doesn't make an entire industrial sector appear at scale in your country.
12
u/Chii Mar 20 '23
every strongman and half sane dictator would be mad to not immediately put “acquiring nuclear weapons” at the top of their list
i think they already know this from before the invasion of ukraine.
254
u/ScaryShadowx Mar 20 '23
Nukes are bad, but there is a huge difference between a state being able to deploy a limited size nuke with a fairly limited reach vs being able to launch multiple ICBMs, each carrying up to 10 nuclear warheads, each capable of taking out an entire city.
→ More replies38
18
u/sumthinTerrible Mar 20 '23
Or even say, the house of Saud. I don’t know how much longer they’ll remain an “ally” of the West. Helping them develop nukes could be horrible.
22
u/tiy24 Mar 20 '23
Oh i think it’s too late to stop them because Trump probably gave it to them but yeah saying they aren’t really allies seems like the understatement of the year.
9
u/sumthinTerrible Mar 20 '23
Exactly, that’s why I put in quotations. Lol. And who knows what trump gave them. I was going to mention that, but didn’t want to veer off topic.
→ More replies→ More replies50
u/VegasKL Mar 20 '23
every strongman and half sane dictator would be mad to not immediately put “acquiring nuclear weapons” at the top of their list
You're telling me, I'm not even a strongman or dictator, but I've already begun trying .. figured it'd rally help during any potential divorce negotiations I may find myself in.
Lawyer: "She wants the house ..."
"I will nuke you motherfu..."
22
15
→ More replies9
→ More replies69
u/seclifered Mar 20 '23
You can’t end nuclear regimes with armies. It’s not even about cities getting nuked. Do you honestly think they’ll let a giant army march on and take moscow without nuking it? It’ll take internal revolt so it feels like their own people decided this and there’s no external enemies to attack. What the CIA and other intelligence services do is more important for that goal. But it’ll be hard on a dictatorship
39
15
u/T1res1as Mar 20 '23
Russia is like some old abuser whos victims have grown up and if Russia try their old shit they will all gang up on now weaker Russia and curb stomp them
→ More replies
32
u/Hunterrose242 Mar 20 '23
Many foreign policy experts and NATO directors in this thread. We're very lucky!
12
u/MaimedPhoenix Mar 20 '23
Times like this I'm very grateful many experts in all subjects gathered on Reddit. In fact, I'm more grateful that said experts are men of many talents and are experts in several other fields as well!
God bless Reddit and all its experts.
11
9
u/Celoth Mar 20 '23
The number of Russian talking points being parroted in this thread is too damned high.
9
u/Arkond- Mar 20 '23
’If the day comes that the bloodthirsty megalomaniac becomes our neghbour, we will be forced to defend ourselves.’ The essence of his statement really. Nothing sensational.
359
u/HuskyNotPhatt Mar 20 '23
You can’t end a regime when they have nuclear weapons. Why do you think Iran and North Korea are so hell bent on getting them?
293
u/Crazy_Employ8617 Mar 20 '23
North Korea already has nuclear weapons and has had them for a long time.
→ More replies→ More replies51
u/dawnfire999 Mar 20 '23
You can, but you'll have to facilitate a coup, or an overthrow of the regime's leaders via mass civilian protests. Either way, you'll need the military (or some parts of it) to side with your interests.
→ More replies12
u/GOD_oy Mar 20 '23
doesnt seem very healthy trying to overthrow a dictator that is ready to drop nukes on other people
38
u/WaterIsGolden Mar 20 '23
Poland is NATO and EU. Putin can't just attack Poland, he has to attack all.
26
u/Krydderurten Mar 20 '23
.. Unless Poland strikes first. NATO members are only obligated to enter the war if a member has been attacked unprovoked and they decide to call for help.
→ More replies
838
u/imaxhighsky Mar 20 '23
Right thing to do. No way should wait 10 years for ruzzia to just rearm itself.
37
229
u/galqbar Mar 20 '23
Threatening to destroy the Russian state is just about the only case where Russian doctrine very clearly and explicitly calls for the use of nuclear weapons. Beating them back is all fine and good, but directly acting to overthrow the government is so dangerous it shouldn’t even be bantered around in discussion as an option.
Though I hate them as much as the next person who likes pluralistic democracy, their nuclear deterrent is quite real.
→ More replies→ More replies4
264
u/MagicNumber11 Mar 20 '23
Why would Poland enter the war? If Poland is attacked, NATO would defend it. But if Poland enters a war with Russia, NATO would not automatically be pulled in.
450
u/LegalAction Mar 20 '23
Poland would rather fight in Ukraine than watch its own infrastructure destroyed.
→ More replies198
u/charliespider Mar 20 '23
Yup. Sounds cynical but is logically and strategically the smartest move. Certainly much better than waiting for Russia to invade.
To anyone saying "ya but NATO..." remember that Moscow almost successfully had Trump pull the US out of NATO (they had a sitting US President talking about doing it) so Russia could succeed at getting Polish politicians to do so too after a long concentrated effort (ie: the next decade).
18
u/Krydderurten Mar 20 '23
There is a major difference. Poland won't ever pull out of NATO, no matter how blatantly corrupt their politicians will be in the next decade.
The threat to their existence without NATO is very real and every single pole knows that, which is not really the case with the United States.
4
u/midnightbandit- Mar 20 '23
I think what he means is if Putin gets USA pulled out of NATO, Russia can invade Poland without having to face the strongest military on earth.
→ More replies→ More replies13
u/Deadly_Duplicator Mar 20 '23
No it isn't. You act like it's some certainty that Russia will invade a NATO country, causing WW3 with nukes. That is not likely. Putin strikes me as an asshole, but not stupid. If he wanted to end the world he could have escalated things to that point long ago.
→ More replies39
u/norwal42 Mar 20 '23
Initial thoughts, maybe because a. Then the war remains primarily in Ukraine, not in Poland, b. If there's a shot at victory in Ukraine, a country's worth of buffer land/sovereign nation/intact military defenses/etc are maintained as its neighbor, vs ceding Ukraine.
→ More replies→ More replies26
u/GnatOwl Mar 20 '23
Because another Putin Puppet could easily win the US presidency and then when Poland is attacked, we won't do anything or we might just leave NATO first
652
Mar 20 '23 edited May 08 '23
[deleted]
411
u/Karuna56 Mar 20 '23
Probably Moldavia first, because of Transnistria and the 2000 Russian troops stationed there. An easy win. Absorb Belarus formally. Then, the Baltics. Unless Poland just goes "why wait?".
113
u/Ashen_Brad Mar 20 '23
The Russian troops in moldova are land locked between Ukraine and Moldova. Ukraine is obviously hostile, the moldovan government is uncooperative. Keeps detaining Russian troops without explanation at the airport, holding up/stopping Russian supplies etc. It was also 1700 troops as of July 2022, which isn't enough to roll moldova. Russia would have to link up with them somehow either by taking Ukraine's south West or landing troops from the black Sea in the south. Either way, I don't think it's quite the cakewalk people are imagining. The moldovan government have been doing their best to keep the transnistria based Russian force neutered by the looks of it.
→ More replies23
u/jaggy_bunnet Mar 20 '23
Also the vast majority of the Russian troops in Moldova aren't from Russia, they're locals with Russian citizenship (most folk in Transnistria have 2 or 3 passports). They're also well aware that if they receive an order from Moscow to start any shenanigans, angry Ukrainians will slaughter them with western weapons before they've finished putting their boots on.
Their loyalty to Putin isn't guaranteed.
4
u/righteous_sword Mar 20 '23
They are brainwashed and they idealize Russia. They believe it can't lose. Some of them are worse vatniks than the Russians themselves.
185
u/destuctir Mar 20 '23
I agree nexts steps would be Moldova and then Belarus but russia will never get their hands on Poland or a Baltic state, they are all NATO members and we have to believe that if NATO is challenged they will bring unrelenting fury to the battlefield. NATO have never had to prove their military might, there is far too much to lose if they failed or let a single NATO nation fall to aggressors, every member states alliances would be worthless in an instant, nations outside Europe wouldnt be able to trust America to protect them anymore. Everyone knows this, and any attempt to invade a baltic country would rapidly become total war with the threat of nuclear exchanges.
42
→ More replies14
u/p4di Mar 20 '23
also the baltics would be much easier to grab than Poland as there is the Suwalki Gap. There is a theory that for NATO it is simply impossible/infeasible to defend the Baltics in case Russia closes the gap quickly and cuts the baltics from resupply.
I imagine this situation has drastically changed with Sweden and Finland joining NATO, especially the island of Gotland is a strategic desaster for Russia in the region. Also the Russian army has proven to be much more incompetent than thought before.
Poland on the other hand is just open land that they can't encircle and cut from resupply so it's much harder to advance there for them
→ More replies→ More replies36
u/MitsyEyedMourning Mar 20 '23
US is already soft shoeing around Moldova.
→ More replies24
Mar 20 '23
[deleted]
85
u/MitsyEyedMourning Mar 20 '23
The US is currently working alongside the pro-western government. Soft shoes come before hard boots.
14
u/FeuFighter Mar 20 '23
Oat that what was happening in Ukraine before too
31
u/BackHandLegend Mar 20 '23
The US keeps speaking softly when Ukraine/Taiwan are concerned but has always carried the big stick.
→ More replies36
u/turisto Mar 20 '23
And that is what this is really all about, Putin wants to restore the Soviet Union. After Ukraine, Poland will be next and they know it. Belarus is basically already part of Russia at this point, so Poland will be next.
Poland wasn't part of the Soviet Union, though. Also, they're part of NATO, so Russia would never fuck with them directly.
→ More replies23
u/Krydderurten Mar 20 '23
Soooo many people in this thread doesn't understand that. Russia will never attack Poland unless they want a war with NATO.
It's really stupid to think that Russia has any plans or any capability to attack/invade Poland without the use of nuclear weapons. They don't have the equipment, the men, the capabilities or the money to go to war with NATO.
→ More replies24
u/ProcedureAlcohol Mar 20 '23
Russia dropped their socialist ideals after the fall of the USSR, Putin wants to be emperor of a Russian Empire trough war and and fascism.
57
58
→ More replies41
u/ScaryShadowx Mar 20 '23
An invasion of Poland would mean NATO gets fully involved and no one has any doubt about that. Russia is not going to invade Poland or any of the NATO members, and the invasion of Ukraine was specifically to ensure there is not another NATO country on their border - a country that they could do nothing about if officially under the protection of NATO.
→ More replies
7
u/SvenTropics Mar 20 '23
I've worked with people who immigrated from various ex-communist countries in the soviet block. Most of them were young children or young adults during Russian communist rule (it ended in the early 90s). You've never met more anti-Russian/anti-communist people in your life. One guy talked about flying back just to help fight Russia. It was actually an issue if you had a Russian that wanted to work on a team. They usually weren't nice to him.
49
5
u/Rootkit9208 Mar 20 '23 edited Mar 20 '23
"Oh wait, I've seen this one before!"
"Whataya mean? It's brand new!"
"You kiddin' me? It's a classic!"
5
u/Attack_the_sock Mar 20 '23
…then the winged hussars arrived…charging down the mountainside…spear in hand they turned the tide.
→ More replies
5
53
u/InterestingTheme3750 Mar 20 '23
Would you like to play a game?
→ More replies10
u/booginsmcgooo Mar 20 '23
Your name isn't InterestingTheme3750.....it is Joshua. I'm on to you!
→ More replies8
10
11
u/Qverlord37 Mar 20 '23
when people think of the Russo-Ukraine war, they need to think of 2 things.
1) what if my country is Poland right now.
2) what did Europe do in the first half of WWII.
→ More replies
16
u/autotldr BOT Mar 20 '23
This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)
Poland's Ambassador to France Jan Emeryk Ro?ciszewski said in an interview that a situation could arise in which Poland would have to enter the war.
More details: The embassy stressed that Ambassador Ro?ciszewski made it clear in his interview with LCI that Poland is not currently at war, but is "Doing everything it can to help Ukraine and protect itself" in Russia's war against Ukraine.
"Searching for a sensationalist claim that goes against Poland's consistent efforts over the past year to help Ukraine win in this conflict and so keep it out of Europe and Poland should be seen as a sign of ill will," the embassy said in a statement.
Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Poland#1 Ukraine#2 embassy#3 Ambassador#4 Ro?ciszewski#5
4
3
u/crispy48867 Mar 20 '23
Poland should be giving as much help to Ukraine as possible.
Far better to fight Russia on Ukrainian soil than on Polish soil and that is what they will get if Ukraine loses.
6
u/Maleficent_Trick_502 Mar 20 '23
They are already housing most of ukraine's refugees and usually the first to give tanks, jets and anything else. They dint have the money to compete with the US, but no one is more in Ukraine's corner than Poland.
→ More replies
4
u/flodur1966 Mar 20 '23
It would be preferable if large numbers of western professional soldiers ‘volunteer’ to fight in Ukraine. If every NATO country donates 1 ‘volunteer’ battalion that would be good. Russia needs to be stopped and better in Ukraine then in Rumania.
3
u/Wader_Man Mar 20 '23
Given what we've leaned about Russia's military prowess over the last year I'm pretty sure Poland could overrun the Kremlin by this weekend.
16
15
u/TheMusicMinute Mar 20 '23
I bet if we sent the politicians to the front line of the battle field; we’d have less war.
40
u/SteakHausMann Mar 20 '23
I feel, that 95% of things that the polish government says, is absolute bs.
→ More replies34
u/EvilWhiteKitten Mar 20 '23
And the worst thing is that there are many war enthusiast Redditors that they take them too seriously.
23
u/MyHobbyAndMore2 Mar 20 '23
I skimmed through comments above and I'm like WTF writes these comments?
→ More replies
8
Mar 20 '23
Polish will be at the front line should Ukraine falls into Russia hand... so yeah I can see why.
→ More replies
12.7k
u/Donutkiss Mar 20 '23
This sensational statement was walked back