General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThis is just a heads up. Poland is on alert.
They have concerns over an invasion by Russia.
I will pass on more as I learn more. I have a military source inside Poland.
tridim
(45,358 posts)(Reuters) - Russia announced a ban on most fruit and vegetable imports from Poland on Wednesday and said it could extend it to the entire EU, a move Warsaw called Kremlin retaliation for new Western sanctions over Ukraine imposed on Russia a day earlier.
Moscow, which buys more than 2 billion euros worth of EU fruit and vegetables a year making it by far the biggest export market for the produce, said the ban was for sanitary reasons and denied a link to the sanctions.
Moscow has frequently been accused in the past of using food safety inspections to restrict trade from countries with which it has political disputes. The EU said it was studying the announcement, describing it as a surprise.
"The embargo amounts to political repression in response to the sanctions imposed by the European Union against Russia," Poland's agriculture ministry said in a statement.
-snip-
malaise
(269,024 posts)against EU and US sanctions.
I too would ban all their imports.
I'm trying not to laugh.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)That's probably why Poland wanted to join NATO. The Russians conducted some bloody crackdowns on the Polish people.
Poland saw Russia annex Crimea recently so that's why they're nervous, although I doubt Russia would do anything now that Poland is in NATO.
malaise
(269,024 posts)but we can ask the same question for all dominant global powers.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)And when theose countries had a chance, most of them gave Russia the finger.
It's no surprise the Polish people don't like Russia and it's also no surprise they're nervous when Russia annexed Crimea.
malaise
(269,024 posts)but why would they not expect Russia to ban their goods when they're imposing sanctions on Russia. That's my question.
All dominant powers gobble up countries.
TT_Progress
(67 posts)Doesn't make it right, but it was a result of WW2 and to some extent a reaction to perceived threats and added ideology.
Also, keep in mind that there is an information war going on. Everything that comes out is political and calculated. There may or may not really be a threat and we could be reacting in some paranoia because we no longer have well established Russian culture professionals in places where they can help to understand what events mean.
MattSh
(3,714 posts)big_dog
(4,144 posts)NATOs Europe commander advocates stockpiling a base in Poland with enough weapons, ammunition and other supplies to support a rapid deployment of thousands of troops against Russia, British media reported. The general told a briefing in Naples this week that NATO needed pre-positioned supplies, pre-positioned capabilities and a basing area ready to rapidly accept follow-on forces. Several locations for the future stockpile are planned, with the Multinational Corps Northeast, a base in Szczecin near the Polish-German border being the leading contender.
It would be a 24/7 fully functioning headquarters that forces could quickly fall in on to respond rapidly when needed, the British newspaper cites a source familiar with the expected proposition as saying. Breedlove has been advocating a build-up of NATO assets in Europe, particularly Eastern Europe, in the wake of the Ukrainian crisis in the secession of Ukraines Crimea to Russia. The alliance has already strengthened its presence in the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea and deployed additional military aircraft in Eastern Europe. It said the moves were needed to boost the confidence of eastern NATO members in the alliances ability to protect them from Russian aggression. The stockpiling of supplies is just a step short of a permanent massive deployment of foreign NATO troops in Poland. The alliance says it is needed for a rapid response to a Russian incursion, although Russian generals would probably view this as a possible preparation for a blitzkrieg attack on Russia.
Moscow considers the build-up of NATO troops in Europe as part of a hostile policy aimed at placing the alliances military resources closer to its borders. Russias current military doctrine allows the use of all weapons in its possession, including tactical nuclear weapons, in response to a conventional force attack on Russia. http://rt.com/news/175292-nato-poland-supply-base/
TT_Progress
(67 posts)which means that people who do not understand how these situations escalate are in control.
Russia is not going to invade Poland. But it certainly would be posturing due to the escalation of troops (and possibly ballistic missiles) into Poland.
However, when everyone postures and does not use diplomatic channels well it can easily get out of control.
To add to it, the situation is very different than during the previous cold war. There was a larger buffer around Moscow, and the official policy of both countries was not to be the first to use Nuclear weapons. Now we have stated policies that we can use Nukes offensively.
That shortens the potential "triggers", increases paranoia, etc. Very volatile.
Coventina
(27,121 posts)Please do!!!!!
I wonder what prompted that?
steve2470
(37,457 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)Last edited Sat Aug 30, 2014, 12:42 AM - Edit history (2)
17 wars were fought between Poland (including the PolishLithuanian Commonwealth) and Russia (including the Soviet Union).
When Hitler invaded them from the West, Stalin invaded them from the East. That's the one Americans remember, but the USSR held onto to them a long time after WW2. That's why they're in NATO.
Invasion of Poland
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Poland
Note the Polish casualties in each event. More than we lost in a decade in Vietnam in a smaller country.
But it wasn't the first time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Poland_%28disambiguation%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish%E2%80%93Soviet_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland
At one time, Russia and Poland fought Napoleon's Army and defeated the French Allied Army. A painting of Napoleon's retreat from Moscow which was the beginning of the end for his ambitions:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_invasion_of_Russia
That's a tough neighborhood:
They first among the first of the nations in NATO to call for assistance when Russia reclaimed Crimea, which was involved in another war on Poland:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1589_invasion_of_Poland
One might note the history between the Tatars and the Russians mentioned there. It is the percursor of much of what we've seen since, with biological warfare used by the Mongols, setting off the Black Death in Europe that killed 75% of the total population or 75 million depending on the source. All I know is that it changed things in Europe profoundly.
IMO, Americans are unable to understand these conflicts as they don't know the history. The situation appears bizarre and an aberration to the order established after WW2. The West has tried, for the best of reasons, to avoid another such war:
But it's been a short period of mixed peace in comparison to the history of the region. And I'm betting the people in that region were killing each other long before those wars mentioned in Wikipedia...
Well. going into all of that was fun for me, hope you enjoyed it too.
steve2470
(37,457 posts)I'd expect Russia to invade Ukraine first, IF they were going to invade anyone. Poland would be further down the list.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)It took a while to edit as I was on the phone while I did the edit...
Sorry about that.
steve2470
(37,457 posts)I still think Ukraine and then Belarus (east of Poland) would be higher on the list. I think we'll have to disagree amicably.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)But then, so does Ukraine. In one sense, I don't see Ukraine, Crimea, Belarus, Moldovia, etc. as ever having truly left Russia, no matter how the boundaries were drawn up later.
Americans, the UK, NATO and UN work from a post WW2 framework, but I don't think the Russians do. At one time they may have worked to fit in, but they felt they were robbed by the West when the USSR fell.
Support for Putin's recent actions may be greater than we think and are due to the feeling of loss through the hard years following the collapse of the USSR. People need some kind of 'order' to prosper, safety, security - at least for the majority.
It's the minorities that get the short end of it and the Europeans have a much better grasp of historical alliances at work in the region than we ever will.
TT_Progress
(67 posts)We no longer have many experts on the Russian culture in places that they can help temper strategic decisions.
Folks can argue Putin/Russia's intentions, but regardless of any "plans", there is a very real distrust and defensive concern in Russia (whether it is paranoiac or not does not mean it should not be paid attention to).
If people are not familiar with the "Hatfield/MCCoy" legend , there is a principle in distrust that can drive two parties unnecessarily into conflict when they treat each other without empathy. It becomes a self-caused prophesy. And it seems like we are in that kind of a reactionary relationship (both sides).
In this kind of a situation, increasing tensions can actually have the effect of *causing* aggression that previously would not have happened. It is very dangerous.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)TT_Progress
(67 posts)easily.
Dreamer Tatum
(10,926 posts)REALLY good stuff.
alfredo
(60,074 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)that ships?
eShirl
(18,494 posts)handmade34
(22,756 posts)"Earlier this week, it emerged that the UK is to send a "full battle group" of 1,350 military personnel to take part in Nato manoeuvres in Poland to support allies in eastern Europe"
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-28530283
http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/11379083.UK_should__take_the_lead__on_Russia_at_Nato_summit___report/?ref=var_0
True Blue Door
(2,969 posts)He benefits politically from a state of tension, but he knows damn well that attacking a NATO country would be the end of his games. He's a cowardly gangster like Dick Cheney - he only goes after weak prey that pose no real threat.
alfredo
(60,074 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)Mar 22, 2014
(Reuters) - The U.S. should increase its military presence in Poland and in other NATO members in central and eastern Europe in light of the Ukraine crisis, Polish Defence Minister Tomasz Siemoniak said on Saturday.
Siemoniak said Washington was open towards the idea but detailed talks were yet to begin.
U.S. Vice President Joe Biden visited Poland last Tuesday and confirmed plans to deploy elements of a U.S. missile shield in Poland by 2018 and met with the Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk and President Bronislaw Komorowski.
"The U.S. must increase its presence in (central and eastern) Europe, also in Poland," he said RMF FM radio.
Read more:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/03/22/uk-poland-usa-military-idUKBREA2L0AZ20140322
to DipsyDoodle:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014762179
dembotoz
(16,806 posts)the us has not been invaded since 1812
Poland has tasted being invaded much more recently
always be vigilant
alfredo
(60,074 posts)Jenoch
(7,720 posts)Well, there was a bit of activity in Hawaii in 1941. The Aleutian Islands were invaded by Japanese forces in 1942. Pancho Villa's forces crossed into the U.S. and conducted a raid on the town of Columbus, New Mexico. There were also ships sunk in U.S. waters by German u-boats during WWII.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)alfredo
(60,074 posts)HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)... they've been invaded many times in history, from all directions. Good people, keeping fingers crossed.
alfredo
(60,074 posts)he thought the invasions were a good thing because the Mongols had to fight their way across Russia to get there and fight their way back home.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)Romans, Goths, Rus, Huns, French, Germans, ... damn near every European invader crosses Poland.
alfredo
(60,074 posts)xfundy
(5,105 posts)He damages his own people for political ends. Who learned from who is obvious.
alfredo
(60,074 posts)grasswire
(50,130 posts)There, they are saying "..when the war comes" --- not "if..."