- Joined
- Aug 11, 2010
- defconwarningsystem
- DEFCONWSALERTS
- YOUTUBE
- DefconWarningSystem
-
Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.
Poland asks the United States to deploy nuclear weapons to Poland to deter a potential Russian invasion.
- Thread starter DEFCON Warning System
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2023
- Location
- Georgia, US
Would this make any difference? Since Poland is already in NATO, and Article V would be invoked if Russia did invade, and several NATO members have nuclear weapons that can be launched from platforms outside of Poland, what purpose does Poland making this request serve, perhaps other than appeasing/appealing to domestic/citizen concerns, or Poland communicating to those watching (i.e. Russia) to "not even think about it"?
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2024
It is likely to test America's willingness to defend Europe.
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2010
- defconwarningsystem
- DEFCONWSALERTS
- YOUTUBE
- DefconWarningSystem
Just in case some other NATO countries decide not to risk their own necks for Poland.
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2022
- LOCATION
- Fly over country
It’s symbolic mostly, it’s also part of a ongoing effort by the polish government to see the US move at least some of US forces from Germany to Poland
It’s not a nonsensical strategic adjustment by Poland.
1 they are one of the most dedicated nations in Europe to increase their defenses.
It’s that “Peace through strength” thing.
That and the US’s in process redeployment of nuclear capable intermediate range ballistic missiles to Germany.
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2010
- defconwarningsystem
- DEFCONWSALERTS
- YOUTUBE
- DefconWarningSystem
Totally, but Poland is certainly thinking in terms of needing to defend themselves.
Plus Russia is much less likely to invade with nuclear missiles there. The US would certainly not tolerate Russia advancing on those.
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2024
Really! As far as I know, nuclear-capable intermediate-range ballistic missiles are located in Italy, the Netherlands, and Turkey, and the US is currently redeploying them. Source, please!
Edit : There are some sources that mention Germany and Belgium, but it is not clear, as for a redeployment, nothing specific was found.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 15, 2022
Which is why JD remarked that he'd be "shocked" if Trump agreed to this request. It's just not happening - for a great many reasons, including logistic ones. You can't simply load the warheads on trucks and dump them in a warehouse somewhere. Those things are stored in special climate-controlled facilities with onsite maintenance crews and security befitting an installation of this kind. Ain't no such place in Poland at the moment.
However, a more fundamental problem is that - mentally - the current US administration doesn't really regard Poland as part of their sphere of influence, and has no intention of getting involved if Russia invades. Everyone in Poland (and almost everyone in Europe) is proceeding from this assumption.
- Joined
- May 15, 2022
No, I believe you got your nukes mixed up with your missiles.
The US has about 100 tacnukes stored in five European countries (Italy, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Turkey). Delivery is by aircraft (those things are essentially gravity bombs). No int-range US missiles in Europe right now, although the Biden administration did announce plans to bring them back in response to Russia cheating on their INF obligations with Iskander-K. This has not happened as of yet, and it's doubtful Trump would take this step given his urge to appease Putin at every turn.
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2024
Forget Article 5 for the USA, Putin has a clear path to invade Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.
- Joined
- May 15, 2022
Yeah, but Poland and the Nordic countries will move in to defend, and this thing will go nuclear very quickly. It's possible Russia actually intends to open up with a nuclear attack on Poland and the Nordics.
The US could still prevent a nuclear war, but deterring Russia would require firm commitment to NATO (if you recall, Biden framed it in religious terms - he actually used the words "sacred duty") - and things are just not moving in that direction under Trump. Thus, we're counting down to zero hour.
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2022
- LOCATION
- Fly over country
Army Revives Cold War Nuclear Missile Unit To Deploy New Long-Range Weapons In Europe
56th Artillery Command's return to Germany after 30 years reflects how critical ground-launched missiles would be in any future conflict with Russia.
www.twz.com
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2024
This is not recent, it dates from November 10, 2021. This dates from before the invasion of Ukraine.Army Revives Cold War Nuclear Missile Unit To Deploy New Long-Range Weapons In Europe
56th Artillery Command's return to Germany after 30 years reflects how critical ground-launched missiles would be in any future conflict with Russia.
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2022
- LOCATION
- Fly over country
Yes I realize that, I only posted it to clarify my post regarding it planned deployment to Germany and your question regarding Nuke locations in Europe.
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2022
- LOCATION
- Fly over country
Deploying nukes to Poland now would be highly escalatory right now with Russia.
They have been bitching for years about the Ageis ashore systems in Poland. Though not normally armed with nukes. They could be retrofitted with nukes.
It’s a card that could be played if Russia plays hardball on negotiations or future escalations.
That said just mentioning this sends a message to Russia of possible future escalations. That the US hasn’t said, let’s do it, does not negate its implied threat.
I know there is great concern that Trump is going to abandon Eastern Europe. Or that there is still some rolling steal wall of Russian armor capable of storming thru the Fulda gap.
But the war has shown that Russia is not remotely capable some blitzkrieg attack into Poland Romania Finland or Norway. The Baltic’s in their current defensive status, maybe. And that needs remedied.
Where is the caution and warning to never push a nuclear adversary to the point of desperate measures? Russias redlines have been as imaginary as most western redlines have been as well. But most would agree that the tighter the constraints become. Redlines do become much more real.
Trump is going to do this or that it is said.
It was Trump who first sent javelins and other weapons to Ukraine.
It was Trump who reconstituted the Pershing missile battalion with newer longer range missiles to be deployed to Germany disregarding treaties because Russia was as well with its Islanders.
Trump struck a deal to deescalate things in Syria with the Russians. But when they and the Syrians crawfished on it he pounded them. He’s not afraid of using force directly against them.
Ukraine must have a security guarantee of nato troops. Reasonable expectation given Russias past actions. Also to keep Ukrainian militias in check as well.
Do we really want several US armored cavalry brigades setting on Russias boarder 500 kilometers from Moscow?
It’s now Trump looking at closing the remaining banking transfers for Russian oil. While some European nations are letting sanctions loosen.
Trump isn’t abandoning nato. He’s been very consistent, if you truly want US support then you must do your part.
This is not complicated, I’m sorry it’s inconvenient.
Unless we and nato are prepared to enter the war and help drive Russia back.
This is a stalemated war with Russia being the one to make incremental gains even with mules packing artillery shells around.
Can anyone show that even more weapons flowing to Ukraine will allow them to drive Russia out?
I wanted Ukraine to be able to stand up against Russia and I believe they were right in doing so. But at what cost to them? I simply do not understand the insistence that any negotiations with Russia is a betrayal or capitulation.
One can believe all day long that the US is going to reposition 30000 troops from Germany to Hungary all day long, it’s a sound bite albeit unsupported. Rather than increasing its presence in Romania Poland and other east nato nations.
Make peace, send half the armaments flow to Ukraine into Finland the Baltics Poland and Romania and call it a win.
Establish European and others units in Ukraine as a trip wire to future Russian incursions
Build a sustainable mineral deal with Ukraine rebuild their country make them truly strong and independent.
Russia was not able to reclaim all of a past territory that they wanted. They failed!
Their offensive war making capabilities was shown as a sham and decimated.
Its oil industry has been damaged. And nato’s actual military deployments are stronger and closer to Russia than they have ever been.
It’s a long term strategic win. The Cold War was not won by any single battle or confrontation it was fought over time incrementally across multiple domains.
They have been bitching for years about the Ageis ashore systems in Poland. Though not normally armed with nukes. They could be retrofitted with nukes.
It’s a card that could be played if Russia plays hardball on negotiations or future escalations.
That said just mentioning this sends a message to Russia of possible future escalations. That the US hasn’t said, let’s do it, does not negate its implied threat.
I know there is great concern that Trump is going to abandon Eastern Europe. Or that there is still some rolling steal wall of Russian armor capable of storming thru the Fulda gap.
But the war has shown that Russia is not remotely capable some blitzkrieg attack into Poland Romania Finland or Norway. The Baltic’s in their current defensive status, maybe. And that needs remedied.
Where is the caution and warning to never push a nuclear adversary to the point of desperate measures? Russias redlines have been as imaginary as most western redlines have been as well. But most would agree that the tighter the constraints become. Redlines do become much more real.
Trump is going to do this or that it is said.
It was Trump who first sent javelins and other weapons to Ukraine.
It was Trump who reconstituted the Pershing missile battalion with newer longer range missiles to be deployed to Germany disregarding treaties because Russia was as well with its Islanders.
Trump struck a deal to deescalate things in Syria with the Russians. But when they and the Syrians crawfished on it he pounded them. He’s not afraid of using force directly against them.
Ukraine must have a security guarantee of nato troops. Reasonable expectation given Russias past actions. Also to keep Ukrainian militias in check as well.
Do we really want several US armored cavalry brigades setting on Russias boarder 500 kilometers from Moscow?
It’s now Trump looking at closing the remaining banking transfers for Russian oil. While some European nations are letting sanctions loosen.
Trump isn’t abandoning nato. He’s been very consistent, if you truly want US support then you must do your part.
This is not complicated, I’m sorry it’s inconvenient.
Unless we and nato are prepared to enter the war and help drive Russia back.
This is a stalemated war with Russia being the one to make incremental gains even with mules packing artillery shells around.
Can anyone show that even more weapons flowing to Ukraine will allow them to drive Russia out?
I wanted Ukraine to be able to stand up against Russia and I believe they were right in doing so. But at what cost to them? I simply do not understand the insistence that any negotiations with Russia is a betrayal or capitulation.
One can believe all day long that the US is going to reposition 30000 troops from Germany to Hungary all day long, it’s a sound bite albeit unsupported. Rather than increasing its presence in Romania Poland and other east nato nations.
Make peace, send half the armaments flow to Ukraine into Finland the Baltics Poland and Romania and call it a win.
Establish European and others units in Ukraine as a trip wire to future Russian incursions
Build a sustainable mineral deal with Ukraine rebuild their country make them truly strong and independent.
Russia was not able to reclaim all of a past territory that they wanted. They failed!
Their offensive war making capabilities was shown as a sham and decimated.
Its oil industry has been damaged. And nato’s actual military deployments are stronger and closer to Russia than they have ever been.
It’s a long term strategic win. The Cold War was not won by any single battle or confrontation it was fought over time incrementally across multiple domains.
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2016
- Location
- Indiana, US
Yes. Time to target from Poland gives Russia little to no warning of a first strike. It's why the US pulled their Jupiter missiles out of Turkey in exchange for the USSR pulling the IRBMs out of Cuba. Russia has a valid strategic concern when NATO can deploy a nuclear warhead only a few minutes travel time from Moscow.