Russia threatens to attack Poland due to the US Poland missile shield deal.

[DAFTEK]

Russia will eat poland alive. And the spetznas are badass. My coaches freind who is ex spetznas got jumped by a group of 6 people and beat them all down=D.

George W. Bush Shock and Awe!

[hypnagogue]

It's not difficult to understand what the Russian Military is saying. If a conflict were to break out, Poland is now a legitimate target. Generals are notoriously poor diplomats.

[JosephTheLibertarian]

If I were Russia I'd just join NATO. Why not?

[sidster]

If I were Russia I'd just join NATO. Why not?

you are a strange one.

[krazy kaju]

Russia will eat poland alive. And the spetznas are badass. My coaches freind who is ex spetznas got jumped by a group of 6 people and beat them all down=D.

Sorry, but GROM is way more badass. They were even used to save trapped Navy Seals operatives during the First Gulf War.

Oh, and I want to see a bunch of 18 year old conscripts leave their homes and actually fight a war against a real enemy willing to fight to the death. Imagine Afghanistan but 100 times worse.

[Hiki]

If I were Russia I'd just join NATO. Why not?

Same here, in fact the Soviet Union wanted to join Nato in the 50's but England and the U.S. denied them access, now imagine what "cold" era could've been avoided if you just let them join Nato

On the issue, I think both the U.S. and Russia are equally stupid. I cant see the point in the whole missile battery and I cant understand what the $#@! is the problem with Russians. It's a defensive system and it just seems to come down to ego.

[sidster]

Sorry, but GROM is way more badass. They were even used to save trapped Navy Seals operatives during the First Gulf War.

Oh, and I want to see a bunch of 18 year old conscripts leave their homes and actually fight a war against a real enemy willing to fight to the death. Imagine Afghanistan but 100 times worse.

So you are saying that if it came to a fight between Russia
and Poland, it would be more than a fair fight as far as Poland
is concerned. Right?

So if it came to that, and say, Poland was smugged off of
the map, no hard feelings. No crying foul. Right?

[sidster]

On the issue, I think both the U.S. and Russia are equally stupid. I cant see the point in the whole missile battery and I cant understand what the $#@! is the problem with Russians. It's a defensive system and it just seems to come down to ego.

Hey, what country do you live in again? Cause I can try to
answer your question if I knew your origin.

[Hiki]

Hey, what country do you live in again? Cause I can try to
answer your question if I knew your origin.

Finland.

[sidster]

Finland.

OK, then. Great country. But I guess I can't use Russia in
my analogy since they are already bordering you.

So you are saying you would have no problem whatsoever
if Iran were to make a deal with Norway and Sweden to
put missile "defense" systems near Finland's border?

What if Russians (civilians) were to make a deal with your
neighborhood and start getting a few tanks and park them
around your street pointing towards your home and calling
those a "defense" system?

Would that not make you nerves one bit?

[Fox McCloud]

not a good situation--if they really do go through with this, I don't know if there's really anything, besides an out and out "Total War" state+WWIII/WWIV scenario (whichever you think it is this time around)...even then, I don't think we can win.

Scary stuff, that's for sure.

[DAFTEK]

My opinion stands!

This is the worse thing Bush did by far, Poland feel for it because this shows how stupid and low influence their puppet government is.

You can't surround RUSSIA in the 21st Century like a dog in the corner, how is this going to help? Would the US accept a defense system in Cuba today? NO....

The US needs Russia more then anyone! To much world power is destructive for the whole world and will bring down the USofA.

United States of America now has more enemies then any other country in the world! WHY? Because "WE ARE FREE AND PROSPEROUS?"

Some here have lost their way and the things that Ron Paul has woken us up to.

Would Ron Paul put a defense shield on Russian borders? NO!

Why not put them on Russian soil heading for Iran if that was the case! Some will say that you cant trust them, well how can you trust them if you alienate them or show them nothing but aggression, lies and hidden agendas and supply weapons in their back yard... History just repeats itself, these monkeys in power don't learn anything from the past...

Georgia for example is a puppet state that was used by Bush to show the world that they are evil and cant be trusted so anything they say in the Iran attack would be void! China is next on the smear campaign. If i was in Iran today i would probably do anything to get out soon....

[ChooseLiberty]

Why are the Russians so worried about this?

The US "missle defense" systems are notoriously over-rated.

Patriot system anyone? Couldn't even stop a Scud.

[sidster]

Why are the Russians so worried about this?

The US "missle defense" systems are notoriously over-rated.

Patriot system anyone? Couldn't even stop a Scud.

I'm a pretty poor shot. Would you feel comfortable if I
was in the same room with you aiming a gun in your general
direction, even if we were on opposite sides of the room?

I'm just saying ...

[pacelli]

Polish officials said they wanted the missile system in Poland for a long time - it isn't a new development. Russia is just using the invasion of Georgia to show that it isn't afraid to flex its hypothetical muscles. Basically, it's a geopolitical power grab.

pacelli, GROM is awesome. two thumbs up.

Yes, I had the honor of meeting 2 of them in their hometown when I was last in Poland. These guys were about as hardcore as I've seen.

[ChooseLiberty]

I'd say it's more like we both had firearms for self defense. Then you decide to cover yourself with tin foil.

These are anti-missile defense systems. They are supposed to shoot Russian missles out of the sky.

Russian missile technology is very advanced at this point. Maybe better than anything NATO has. Check out their new torpedo/missile for example.

I'm a pretty poor shot. Would you feel comfortable if I
was in the same room with you aiming a gun in your general
direction, even if we were on opposite sides of the room?

I'm just saying ...

[Hiki]

OK, then. Great country. But I guess I can't use Russia in
my analogy since they are already bordering you.

So you are saying you would have no problem whatsoever
if Iran were to make a deal with Norway and Sweden to
put missile "defense" systems near Finland's border?

What if Russians (civilians) were to make a deal with your
neighborhood and start getting a few tanks and park them
around your street pointing towards your home and calling
those a "defense" system?

Would that not make you nerves one bit?

No I wouldnt have a problem with Iran placing a defense system into Sweden/Norway, those countries are close to us anyway so we wouldn't have a problem and we would probably be in it.
Well the tank thing is a bit over the edge

[sidster]

I'd say it's more like we both had firearms for self defense. Then you decide to cover yourself with tin foil.

These are anti-missile defense systems. They are supposed to shoot Russian missles out of the sky.

Fair enough. I'll revise my analogy. You are right. We are both
in opposite sides of a room. Each of us have a gun that is loaded.

You are a far better shot and have a much better gun than I do.
Maybe you even have a few more mags than I have.

We've been in this room for many days and there has been no
problems so far. The doors are locked and we can't get out. There
are no windows. Then all of a sudden, one evening, you noticed
that I'm building myself a barricade by stacking chairs and tipping
over the vending machine that is in the room and start taking
cover behind them.


This wouldn't phase you one bit would it? I mean, why should it?
... right?

[ChooseLiberty]

Is it one of those armor plated Coke vending machines? LOL.

OK. I was being a little sarcastic in my first post.

One of the things Russia could be concerned about is even if their tech is currently better, if the US puts a system in Poland the US could possibly eventually upgrade that system to something that could stop 99% of Russian missiles. That would be a big problem.

Fair enough. I'll revise my analogy. You are right. We are both
in opposite sides of a room. Each of us have a gun that is loaded.

You are a far better shot and have a much better gun than I do.
Maybe you even have a few more mags than I have.

We've been in this room for many days and there has been no
problems so far. The doors are locked and we can't get out. There
are no windows. Then all of a sudden, one evening, you noticed
that I'm building myself a barricade by stacking chairs and tipping
over the vending machine that is in the room and start taking
cover behind them.


This wouldn't phase you one bit would it? I mean, why should it?
... right?

[TheEvilDetector]

solution: point missiles at Poland. Russia needs to leearn some better diplomacy tactics.

Pointing missiles at countries as a solution to a problem is the kind of thinking that led to the Cuban Missile crisis (ie. nearly resulted in a nuclear war).

I would have to agree with the second portion of your comments, regarding better diplomacy. Although to keep things in perspective, the same is just as true (if not more) for US and certain other countries.

[TheEvilDetector]

It's not difficult to understand what the Russian Military is saying. If a conflict were to break out, Poland is now a legitimate target. Generals are notoriously poor diplomats.

Are you implying that the russians will do nothing more than keep talking tough if US hypothetically continues to surround them
geographically with US military hardware so long as that's done in a peaceful manner?

Where is the line in the sand? Believe me, there is such a thing.

Maybe Poland is it for Russia.

History tells us that Cuba was it for the US during the Cuban Missile crisis.

If I am right (I hope I am not in the sense that it is less serious), basically we have in some ways a similar situation right now to that of the Cuban Missile Crisis.

The stance which I believe was clearly articulated is essentially that the US/Poland Missile Shield is unacceptable to Russia
and if it is not voluntarily scrapped in the near future, it will be removed by other means by the Russian Federation.

I will leave those other means open to speculation, but I wouldn't rule out bombing or invasion.

[Defining Obscene]

I suppose if Russia propped Canada to strike at the boarder, and wanted to put a missile defense system in Mexico, we would gladly sponsor that.

... People, get your heads out of your rears. We are encroaching on the Russians with puppet governments, the world knows it, and we are trying to cripple their military capabilities. The only bully here is the U.S. and its allies, and its very clear. The U.S. has already shown it is ready to spend countless lives on pointless wars, spend allied nation's lives for its own interest, and it is still beating the drums of war with Iran... I don't know when this country is going to wake up, but I don't expect them to at this point. They can't even process the obvious, even though its muttered in propaganda media. No one is claiming that Russia is a wholesome nation, but this is uncalled for.

I might as well take this opportunity to wish the Polish civilians find a safe haven before we force them into the crosshairs. Don't forget Poland, guys, don't forget Poland...

[Pauls' Revere]

good point about Russia and Iran being allies. Russia is also working with Iran on/for thier nuclear program. Probably selling equipment to Iran. Strategically I see Georgia and the Caucasus region as important militarily as Georgia sits on the land mass which connects Russia to Iran. My guess is that would be an important route for supplies etc for both of them otherwise they have to go around the Eastern side of the Caspian Sea through Azerbajan and Turkenistan I think. Having Georgia as a staunch US ally essentially splits the two apart. Personally this whole thing is BS and our MSM is lacking as usual on the topic.

[hypnagogue]

Are you implying that the russians will do nothing more than keep talking tough if US hypothetically continues to surround them
geographically with US military hardware so long as that's done in a peaceful manner?

Where is the line in the sand? Believe me, there is such a thing.

Maybe Poland is it for Russia.

History tells us that Cuba was it for the US during the Cuban Missile crisis.

If I am right (I hope I am not in the sense that it is less serious), basically we have in some ways a similar situation right now to that of the Cuban Missile Crisis.

The stance which I believe was clearly articulated is essentially that the US/Poland Missile Shield is unacceptable to Russia
and if it is not voluntarily scrapped in the near future, it will be removed by other means by the Russian Federation.

I will leave those other means open to speculation, but I wouldn't rule out bombing or invasion.

To start, the Cuban Missile Crisis involved nuclear weapons pointed at us from 50 miles off our coast. A system to shoot down incoming missiles is different on principle. The only capacity this system denies Russia is the freedom to fire missiles into Europe. The Poles have attested to this fact and Russia has been offered the privilege of running regular inspections of the facilities, so I believe the system truly is defensive.

In this instance, I believe Russia is simply being oversensitive to American activities. Do you think Russia would be protesting so loudly if the Poles built an identical system on their own initiative? I highly doubt it. This is nothing more than lingering cold war bitterness about having the US in their neighborhood.

[TheEvilDetector]

To start, the Cuban Missile Crisis involved nuclear weapons pointed at us from 50 miles off our coast. A system to shoot down incoming missiles is different on principle.

Yes. That is why I used the words 'similar' and 'some ways', rather than identical during my comparisons.

Where do I find such similarities?

a) Military systems sponsored or built by a leading military power in close geographical proximity to the country in question (Russia)
b) Strongly worded warnings and threats about such systems from the country in question.

and there are likely to be other similarities.

The only capacity this system denies Russia is the freedom to fire missiles into Europe.

Your view is too narrow I believe.

This action by US/Poland undermines the global stability achieved through M.A.D (mutually assured destruction).

Think about this. It may sound paradoxical, but this worked for many years, like over half a century.

The Poles have attested to this fact and Russia has been offered the privilege of running regular inspections of the facilities, so I believe the system truly is defensive.

See above.

In this instance, I believe Russia is simply being oversensitive to American activities.

Oversensitive? USA is bombing 2 nations currently (Iraq and Afghanistan, that we know about) as a result of fraudulent justifications for initiation/continuation, actively planning to engage a 3rd (Iran) for similar reasons all the while having helped or currently helping many other nations/organised units commit violence behind the scenes (at least as far as the lack of contemporary US MSM coverage goes).

For the latter you can research CIA backed/assisted revolutions and coups.

Do you think Russia would be protesting so loudly if the Poles built an identical system on their own initiative?

Poles would never do such a thing without backing from a military power such as US. Why not?
Because there is technically no need for it.

Russia can obliterate Poland if it wanted to and it hasn't done anything like that so Poland can rest assured as far as that goes (well they could have, until now).
In addition the boogey-man countries (as designated by US) like Iran would not attack Poland or Europe, for they know they
would overplay their indignation at the US card by doing so and invite total annihilation where even Russia will not be backing them.

I highly doubt it. This is nothing more than lingering cold war bitterness about having the US in their neighborhood.

Yeah, you are right, it is just temporary bitterness.

I think the Russians will snap out of it, as soon as the Americans bring them milk and cookies.

You see, it seems to me that US is spinning out of control due to the lack of meaningful (ie. someone who can actually do something about it)
opposition to its imperial and aggressive foreign policy. That is perhaps until now, although this opposition can have the opposite effect too,
and embolden the US megalomaniacs in charge.

I say that because it is hard to predict how crazy people will react and I believe that the people in charge of US foreign policy are completely psychopathic (eg. Bush/Cheney).

To put so many lives at risk and to have lost huge numbers of others for nothing more than pure profiteering and ego driven power grabs is an act
of a calculating evil psychopath ie. the way most kings and dictators behaved in history.

Let me explain what I mean by psychopath:

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy

"Psychopathy is a psychological construct that describes chronic immoral and antisocial behavior.[1] ... It is estimated that approximately one percent of the general population are psychopaths. They are overrepresented in prison systems, politics, law enforcement agencies, law firms, and in the media.[4][5][6]

The psychopath is defined by a continual seeking of psychological gratification in criminal, sexual, or aggressive impulses and the inability to learn from past mistakes. ... individuals with this disorder gain satisfaction through their antisocial behavior as well as lack a conscience."

If even some of these are true, how could you think otherwise:
Details here: http://chun.afterdowningstreet.org/amomentoftruth.pdf

(Articles of Impeachment against Bush)

"Dennis J. Kucinich of Ohio
In the United States House of Representatives
Monday, June 9th, 2008
A Resolution

Article I
Creating a Secret Propaganda Campaign to Manufacture a False Case for War Against Iraq.

Article II
Falsely, Systematically, and with Criminal Intent Conflating the Attacks of September 11, 2001, With Misrepresentation of Iraq as a Security Threat as Part of Fraudulent Justification for a War of Aggression.

Article III
Misleading the American People and Members of Congress to Believe Iraq Possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction, to Manufacture a False Case for War.

Article IV
Misleading the American People and Members of Congress to Believe Iraq Posed an Imminent Threat to the United States.

Article V
Illegally Misspending Funds to Secretly Begin a War of Aggression.

Article VI
Invading Iraq in Violation of the Requirements of HJRes114.

Article VII
Invading Iraq Absent a Declaration of War.

Article VIII
Invading Iraq, A Sovereign Nation, in Violation of the UN Charter.

Article IX
Failing to Provide Troops With Body Armor and Vehicle Armor

Article X
Falsifying Accounts of US Troop Deaths and Injuries for Political Purposes

Article XI
Establishment of Permanent U.S. Military Bases in Iraq

Article XII
Initiating a War Against Iraq for Control of That Nation's Natural Resources

Article XIIII
Creating a Secret Task Force to Develop Energy and Military Policies With Respect to Iraq and Other
Countries

Article XIV
Misprision of a Felony, Misuse and Exposure of Classified Information And Obstruction of Justice in the Matter of Valerie Plame Wilson, Clandestine Agent of the Central Intelligence Agency

Article XV
Providing Immunity from Prosecution for Criminal Contractors in Iraq

Article XVI
Reckless Misspending and Waste of U.S. Tax Dollars in Connection With Iraq and US Contractors

Article XVII
Illegal Detention: Detaining Indefinitely And Without Charge Persons Both U.S. Citizens and Foreign Captives

Article XVIII
Torture: Secretly Authorizing, and Encouraging the Use of Torture Against Captives in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Other Places, as a Matter of Official Policy

Article XIX
Rendition: Kidnapping People and Taking Them Against Their Will to "Black Sites" Located in Other Nations, Including Nations Known to Practice Torture

Article XX
Imprisoning Children

Article XXI
Misleading Congress and the American People About Threats from Iran, and Supporting Terrorist Organizations Within Iran, With the Goal of Overthrowing the Iranian Government

Article XXII
Creating Secret Laws

Article XXIII
Violation of the Posse Comitatus Act

Article XXIV
Spying on American Citizens, Without a Court-Ordered Warrant, in Violation of the Law and the Fourth Amendment

Article XXV
Directing Telecommunications Companies to Create an Illegal and Unconstitutional Database of the Private Telephone Numbers and Emails of American Citizens

Article XXVI
Announcing the Intent to Violate Laws with Signing Statements

Article XXVII
Failing to Comply with Congressional Subpoenas and Instructing Former Employees Not to Comply

Article XXVIII
Tampering with Free and Fair Elections, Corruption of the Administration of Justice

Article XXIX
Conspiracy to Violate the Voting Rights Act of 1965

Article XXX
Misleading Congress and the American People in an Attempt to Destroy Medicare

Article XXXI
Katrina: Failure to Plan for the Predicted Disaster of Hurricane Katrina, Failure to Respond to a Civil Emergency

Article XXXII
Misleading Congress and the American People, Systematically Undermining Efforts to Address Global Climate Change

Article XXXIII
Repeatedly Ignored and Failed to Respond to High Level Intelligence Warnings of Planned Terrorist Attacks in the US, Prior to 911.

Article XXXIV
Obstruction of the Investigation into the Attacks of September 11, 2001

Article XXXV
Endangering the Health of 911 First Responders "

[hypnagogue]

That was a rather huge post to advance 3 points that I can see: 1) It disturbs the balance of Mutually Assured Destruction, 2) The US beats up on other countries, and 3) Bush is crazy. 2 is irrelevant, since the odds of the US attacking Russia are so near to nil that they're scarcely worth considering. The Cold War is over. 3 is useless, since if he's crazy, he may do anything and there is no proper stance to have against him beside commitment to a mental facility.

1 is addressable. The US and Russia's relationship no longer hinges on the fact that they could both annihilate each other and most of the world along with them. Like I said, the Cold War is over. Would the US threaten military strikes or even care if Canada built a missile defense system which covered North America? I would have to say no. Likewise, Russia shouldn't care either. We are not their enemy any longer. If they choose to do so it is, it is only stung pride which can be to blame.

Further, there is no evidence to suggest that this system does anything to protect America from Russian missiles, which would be the only way that MAD would be disturbed. ICBM's fly through the stratosphere and could be sent over the north pole, or more likely launched from a Russian submarine. It's my understanding of these systems that they're primarily used to down missiles which are going to strike in the vicinity. I do not believe they reach up into the stratosphere and pluck missiles out of the sky.

You also suggested that this system is unnecessary for it's stated purpose, and imply that the real purpose of this system is to defend against Russia. I don't hold to the idea that simply because a particular action is useless, expensive, and provocative that the US government won't do it anyway. I imagine there's a lot of inertia behind this project. Plenty of contractors lined up to produce the hardware and more still to install it. Bureaucrats with plans and contingency plans. The whole works.

I'd like to forego the debate about whether the US should be Europe's keeper, since I doubt we'd find a disagreement, and accept that that is what the US is trying to do. I find it substantially more likely that the US has come up with an expensive and half-witted plan to try to protect Europe from middle-eastern missiles, and that Russia is irate about their old rivals putting up a new military system, which could theoretically diminish their military strength, right in their neck of the woods.

[TheEvilDetector]

Good post, good points, taken under consideration.

Thank you.

I will address some of your points..

That was a rather huge post to advance 3 points that I can see: 1) It disturbs the balance of Mutually Assured Destruction, 2) The US beats up on other countries, and 3) Bush is crazy.

Those things are to a degree interconnected, but yes essentially you are correct.

2 is irrelevant, since the odds of the US attacking Russia are so near to nil that they're scarcely worth considering.

It is not impossible and these are precarious times we live in.

The Cold War is over.

I am not so sure that it is over.

On what basis do you make that judgement?

3 is useless, since if he's crazy, he may do anything and there is no proper stance to have against him beside commitment to a mental facility.

Well, war crimes tribunal would be nice, he may plead not guilty due to insanity I suppose, but I do not know if people will buy that.

When I said crazy, I did not mean someone who is drooling at the mouth and bumping into walls. I meant crazy in the manipulative psychopathic sense.

1 is addressable. The US and Russia's relationship no longer hinges on the fact that they could both annihilate each other and most of the world along with them.

I am not sure you can totally discount the M.A.D doctrine. On what basis do you do this?

Like I said, the Cold War is over.

See above.

Would the US threaten military strikes or even care if Canada built a missile defense system which covered North America?

Maybe. If it was assisted or built by Russians, I think there is a fair chance of US being a little ticked off.

I would have to say no. Likewise, Russia shouldn't care either. We are not their enemy any longer. If they choose to do so it is, it is only stung pride which can be to blame.

It may be pride to the politicians, but it is a lot more than pride as far as the average civilians are concerned.

Millions of lives are at stake.

Further, there is no evidence to suggest that this system does anything to protect America from Russian missiles, which would be the only way that MAD would be disturbed.

M.A.D. may not necessarily refer to total inter-continental destruction in this scenario, it could for example be limited to M.A.D of specific military assets and
personnel on a localised basis eg. Total Destruction of American Units/Bases in all of Europe along with similar destruction of Russian assets in Russian territory lying
in close proximity to Europe. Come to think of it this is where tactical nukes may get a few uses.

To compliment the M.A.D idea I put forth we also have to consider that if (and it's a big if, as one of my earlier posts argued) the European countries decide to 'gang up' on Russia with US in a military confrontation, then Russia would be limited in its ability to retaliate against Europe.

Russians would have to consider all possible uses (from most probable to least probable) for this shield.

ICBM's fly through the stratosphere and could be sent over the north pole, or more likely launched from a Russian submarine. It's my understanding of these systems that they're primarily used to down missiles which are going to strike in the vicinity. I do not believe they reach up into the stratosphere and pluck missiles out of the sky.

Perhaps not, but if Russians let this one slide, then the next may have greater capabilities.

You also suggested that this system is unnecessary for it's stated purpose, and imply that the real purpose of this system is to defend against Russia. I don't hold to the idea that simply because a particular action is useless, expensive, and provocative that the US government won't do it anyway. I imagine there's a lot of inertia behind this project. Plenty of contractors lined up to produce the hardware and more still to install it. Bureaucrats with plans and contingency plans. The whole works.

Well if it's just to fill the pockets of certain agencies without a meaningful military capability then it is an even more of a reckless move.
Why do I say that? Because Poland could face Russian military action as a result of this action and if such activity eventuates a near useless
installation is not worth losing lives over whether Russian, Polish or US.

I think I am being reasonably accurate in saying that US (supposedly an ally of Poland) is putting Poland's security at risk.

I'd like to forego the debate about whether the US should be Europe's keeper, since I doubt we'd find a disagreement, and accept that that is what the US is trying to do. I find it substantially more likely that the US has come up with an expensive and half-witted plan to try to protect Europe from middle-eastern missiles, and that Russia is irate about their old rivals putting up a new military system, which could theoretically diminish their military strength, right in their neck of the woods.

Yes, that may be true but seriousness of the possible consequences remain.

[TheEvilDetector]

If Russia attempts to invade Poland, they'd either have to go via sea or via Belarus. Either way, they'll get the Russian Army will get its ass kicked.

Polish soldier:


Russian soldier:


The Russian Army is nothing more than a bunch of untrained conscripts with a few professionals. Even spetsnaz doesn't hold a candle to grom. Poland also has superior western armor and artillery forces, while Russia is stuck in the Cold War.

POLAND YEAH!

I think both of those men are quite ready to kill, with modern weaponry that is pretty much the main requirement of a soldier.

As far as sweeping generalisations go with respect to training and equipment, it's nice if you can give us some specific data about the respective
military capabilities and assets of both of those countries and incorporate that data somehow into the reasoning behind your stated positions
(I assume that you have used some data to come to your conclusions, hope I am not mistaken, and you simply didn't provide it in the interest of economy).

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...f_armed_forces

Russia has 1,245,000 active and 1,690,000 reserve troops.
Poland has 155,000 active and 260,000 reserve troops.

Russia has 23381 tanks, Poland has 947
Russia has 2118 fighter aircraft, Poland has 102.

The rest of the statistics follow a similar pattern.

[DAFTEK]

That Polish soldier has mostly Russian equipment

[Hiki]

I think both of those men are quite ready to kill, with modern weaponry that is pretty much the main requirement of a soldier.

As far as sweeping generalisations go with respect to training and equipment, it's nice if you can give us some specific data about the respective
military capabilities and assets of both of those countries and incorporate that data somehow into the reasoning behind your stated positions
(I assume that you have used some data to come to your conclusions, hope I am not mistaken, and you simply didn't provide it in the interest of economy).

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...f_armed_forces

Russia has 1,245,000 active and 1,690,000 reserve troops.
Poland has 155,000 active and 260,000 reserve troops.

Russia has 23381 tanks, Poland has 947
Russia has 2118 fighter aircraft, Poland has 102.

The rest of the statistics follow a similar pattern.

Remember remember...