Poland considering asking for access to nuclear weapons under Nato program

[AntiGanda]

Deputy defence minister says Poland is discussing whether to join other European countries in hosting nuclear arms to strengthen defences

Poland’s deputy defence minister has said the ministry is considering asking for access to nuclear weapons through a Nato program in which non-nuclear states borrow the arms from the US.

Tomasz Szatkowski said the ministry was discussing whether to ask for access to Nato’s “nuclear sharing” program to strengthen the country’s ability to defend itself.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-access-to-nuclear-weapons-under-nato-program

 

[Space_Chief]

Yeah they only said it was one of the options they could consider but they are not working on it. Poland used to host Soviet nuclear weapons something the Soviets denied at the time but it was discovered later on.

https://translate.google.com/transl...em-do-Nuclear-Sharing.html&edit-text=&act=url

 

[AntiGanda]

Yeah they only said it was one of the options they could consider but they are not working on it.

https://translate.google.com/transl...em-do-Nuclear-Sharing.html&edit-text=&act=url

My posts keep disappearing, so read fast.

Doesn't this violate one of the nuclear treaties?

First pillar: non-proliferation

Five states are recognized by the Non-Proliferation Treaty as nuclear weapon states (NWS): China (signed 1992), France (1992), the Soviet Union (1968; obligations and rights now assumed by the Russian Federation), the United Kingdom (1968), and the United States (1968) (The United States, UK, and the Soviet Union – the World War II's “Big Three” — were the only states openly possessing such weapons among the original ratifiers of the treaty, which entered into force in 1970). These five nations are also the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council.

These five NWS agree not to transfer "nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices" and "not in any way to assist, encourage, or induce" a non-nuclear weapon state (NNWS) to acquire nuclear weapons (Article I).

 

[Space_Chief]

My posts keep disappearing, so read fast.

Doesn't this violate one of the nuclear treaties?

It's a Nuclear Sharing program where the weapons are under US control, so no. I agree it's silly to do it but this is anti-Conservative scaremongering by the a Russia/Lib-tard alliance so the slightest comment gains a lot of moaning in Russia and the Left in the UK/US.

It would be what Russia did in the 1980s in Poland just this time people are being honest about it and there would be fewer weapons.

 

[AntiGanda]

It's a Nuclear Sharing program where the weapons are under US control, so no. I agree it's silly to do it but this is anti-Conservative scaremongering by the a Russia/Lib-tard alliance so the slightest comment gains a lot of moaning in Russia and the Left in the UK/US.

It would be what Russia did in the 1980s in Poland just this time people are being honest about it and there would be fewer weapons.

The very short article states "borrowing" which doesn't mean under US control.

They already get around the treaty by having a US base with nuclear weapons under US control. If this can of worms is opened, what's to stop Russia lending one to Iran?

 

[stricken]

T what's to stop Russia lending one to Iran?

And the whole world has a field meltdown.

 

[Space_Chief]

The very short article states "borrowing" which doesn't mean under US control.

They already get around the treaty by having a US base with nuclear weapons under US control. If this can of worms is opened, what's to stop Russia lending one to Iran?

They remain under US control.

In peace time, the nuclear weapons stored in non-nuclear countries are guarded by U.S. airmen though previously some artillery and missile systems were guarded by US Army soldiers; the Permissive Action Link codes required for arming them remain under American control. In case of war, the weapons are to be mounted on the participating countries' warplanes. The weapons are under custody and control of USAF Munitions Support Squadrons co-located on NATO main operating bases who work together with the host nation forces.[2]

These weapons are also tactical nukes and not strategic nukes.

NATO is currently lending weapons to several countries. As I've told you Russia hosted strategic nukes in Poland in the 70s and 80s and denied they were there. These were also hosted on Russian/Soviet bases.

If Iran wants to host a nuclear base for Russia it may upset a few people, because some say Iran has made threats against Israel but NATO countries have not made threats against other states. I don't see Poland saying they want Russia to be wiped off the map.

Anyhow it's a silly idea. What's needed are US conventional weapons bases in Eastern Europe. Now why don't you complain about Greece having such weapons, why do you worry about Poland so much? Poland has a long history of democracy, second only to the United States, even ahead of France.

 

[AntiGanda]

They remain under US control.



These weapons are also tactical nukes and not strategic nukes.

NATO is currently lending weapons to several countries. As I've told you Russia hosted strategic nukes in Poland in the 70s and 80s and denied they were there. These were also hosted on Russian/Soviet bases.

If Iran wants to host a nuclear base for Russia it may upset a few people, because some say Iran has made threats against Israel but NATO countries have not made threats against other states. I don't see Poland saying they want Russia to be wiped off the map.

Anyhow it's a silly idea. What's needed are US conventional weapons bases in Eastern Europe. Now why don't you complain about Greece having such weapons, why do you worry about Poland so much? Poland has a long history of democracy, second only to the United States, even ahead of France.

The USSR was one political body wrt the treaty.

Poland is very beligerant and I wouldn't want them to have control.

Why would you want US bases in E.Europe? What weapons does Greece have to worry about??

 

[Space_Chief]

The USSR was one political body wrt the treaty.

Well the USSR hosted nukes in places like Poland and lied to the people there and the whole world.

Poland is very beligerant and I wouldn't want them to have control.

Which country has Poland attacked or threatened to attack? It was Russia which attacked Poland. So who is belligerent? Which country wants to host Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad? Come on. Read some history. Russia enslaved Poland since 1792 because of democractic and modern reforms introduced in Poland which threatened the absolute monarchies in Europe and Russia.

Why would you want US bases in E.Europe? What weapons does Greece have to worry about??

Why not? To feel safer? To cement a good relationship with allies? To make money by selling produce to GIs?
Why host them anywhere? Well for one the people there want them there. So why not? Why is Russia in Syria? Because Assad invited them. Why can't Poland invite the US? The Germans don't want so much US influences, well cool, move it east.

These nukes would be under US control regardless and it won't happen. It's saber rattling.

AntiGanda you're a smart guy. I hope you don't believe your own propaganda.

Greece has hosted or is hosting US nukes as part of this program. Does that make you worried? You don't think there was conflict between Turkey and Greece and recently in Cyprus?

 

[AntiGanda]

Well the USSR hosted nukes in places like Poland and lied to the people there and the whole world.



Which country has Poland attacked or threatened to attack? It was Russia which attacked Poland. So who is belligerent? Which country wants to host Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad? Come on. Read some history. Russia enslaved Poland since 1792 because of democractic and modern reforms introduced in Poland which threatened the absolute monarchies in Europe and Russia.



Why not? To feel safer? To cement a good relationship with allies? To make money by selling produce to GIs?
Why host them anywhere? Well for one the people there want them there. So why not? Why is Russia in Syria? Because Assad invited them. Why can't Poland invite the US? The Germans don't want so much US influences, well cool, move it east.

These nukes would be under US control regardless and it won't happen. It's saber rattling.

AntiGanda you're a smart guy. I hope you don't believe your own propaganda.

Greece has hosted or is hosting US nukes as part of this program. Does that make you worried? You don't think there was conflict between Turkey and Greece and recently in Cyprus?

You're going back now in time to a different era to provide an excuse to surround Russia (contrary to promises made btw). May as well go back to the Polish invasion of Russia.

There have been no threats to invade Poland and they are not at war, so no excuse to 'invite' the US onto their land.

By arming the states around Russia, you create a climate of war and Russia then has to arm and put missiles in Kaliningrad. That was a reactory move.

Greece does not host or have nuclear weapons on its territory.

The conflict between Greece and Turkey is worrying, but they just posture. Turkey was the aggressor with their invasion of Cyprus.

 

[Kilgore_Trout_Redux]

... what's to stop Russia lending one to Iran?

Go read up about a little thing called the Cuban Missile Crisis.

 

[AntiGanda]

Go read up about a little thing called the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Yeah and read about the US missiles in Turkey, that were the original provocation and which the US had to withdraw.

 

[ponder]

AntiGanda you're a smart guy. I hope you don't believe your own propaganda.

Omg the tears are running down my face. Dunno whether you were taking the piss or being sincere.

 

[Space_Chief]

You're going back now in time to a different era to provide an excuse to surround Russia (contrary to promises made btw). May as well go back to the Polish invasion of Russia.

Or the Muscovite conquest of surrounding peoples? (Note in contrast that the Polish Lithuanian Commonewealth was a precursor of the European Union in that it was a voluntary union of equals. No conquest ala Prussia and Russia). It is Russia which committed far worse atrocities toward Poland. The current government is a continuation of the pre-Communist govt and believes it exerts influence on surrounding states the way Catherine the Great did and subsequent Russian absolute rulers. The history is relevant. You obviously don't know how Russians and their neighbours think. Maybe educate yourself a little about this.

No AntiGanda. You claimed that Poland is belligerent which is nonsense. Fact is that Russia was behind and it's the world which caught up with the liberties created there.

There have been no threats to invade Poland and they are not at war, so no excuse to 'invite' the US onto their land.

Russia threatened to use Iskander missiles on Poland which is reason enough. Secondly Poland can decide for itself to host US forces as she wishes. She does not answer to anybody as she is sovereign. Both Stalin and Catherine the Great are gone.

By arming the states around Russia, you create a climate of war and Russia then has to arm and put missiles in Kaliningrad. That was a reactory move.

Then so be it. If Russia must target and threaten neighboring countries whose populations it massacred and with the sh-tty legacy of 200 years of Russia Tsarist oppression and then Communist occupation and atrocities then it must be so. However the one acting immaturely here is Russia. Russia wants to force its way on others and disrespects sovereignty of other states. Each state has No 1 priority over its territory to host anybody it wants.

Greece does not host or have nuclear weapons on its territory.

Of the three nuclear powers in NATO (France, the United Kingdom and the United States), only the United States is known to have provided weapons for nuclear sharing. As of November 2009, Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey are still hosting U.S. nuclear weapons as part of NATO's nuclear sharing policy.[3][4] Canada hosted weapons until 1984,[5] and Greece until 2001.[3][6] The United Kingdom also received U.S. tactical nuclear weapons such as nuclear artillery and Lance missiles until 1992, despite the UK being a nuclear weapons state in its own right; these were mainly deployed in Germany.

They did. Fine then Belgium and Turkey.

The conflict between Greece and Turkey is worrying, but they just posture. Turkey was the aggressor with their invasion of Cyprus.

There is no Polish aggression toward Russia of any sort. But who knows what future Tsar Russians may elect and so it's important to host Americans to assure peace, just in case. People don't want war but given Russian imperialism and modern Russian patriotism and historical ethos peace is something one must safeguard. Hosting nuclear weapons is not the answer but hosting conventional bases is good enough.

Hosting nuclear weapons makes one a target for preemtive nuclear strike.