The US is not a very good ally

Discussion in 'US' started by gator, Mar 24, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Our sleazy politicians like Obama are not above any kind of treachery. I am an non Interventionist and believe that Poland should be responsible for their defense. However, they have been a good ally since the end of the Cold War and provided strong troop support in Iraq. We owe them a little more than just throwing them to the Russian wolves.

    Monday, March 23, 2009

    Poland Fears Betrayal

    The U.S. has expressed a willingness to barter away missile defense sites in Poland and the Czech Republic. Now the Polish foreign minister says he hopes his country doesn't regret trusting the United States.

    The Brussels Forum is a privately organized high-level meeting of the most influential North American and European political, corporate and intellectual leaders to address pressing challenges currently facing both sides of the Atlantic.

    One of the pressing issues discussed at this year's conference was whether the U.S. is serious about bartering away plans for missile defense sites in Poland and the Czech Republic in exchange for vague Russian promises of using its influence on Iran regarding its move toward developing nuclear warheads to put on its long-range missiles.

    On Sunday, Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski noted that Poland had taken "something of a political risk" in agreeing to the deployment of 10 ground-based interceptors on its territory. "When we started discussing this with the United States," he said, "the U.S. assured us they would persuade the Russians that it was purely defensive and it would be a noncontroversial decision."

    Now we are wishing the Iranians, whose missiles our ground-based interceptors are designed to intercept, a Happy New Year and suggesting to the Russians that if they can do something about Iran's nuclear and missile programs, we would reconsider our missile defense plans and saw off the limb our Czech and Polish allies have climbed out on.

    Defense Secretary Robert Gates did not ease our allies' fears when he said at a NATO meeting in Krakow, Poland, on Feb. 20, "I told the Russians a year ago that if there were no Iranian missile program, there would be no need for the missile sites."

    This comment came not long after Russian President Dmitry Medvedev threatened to deploy SS-26 Iskander missiles in the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad, situated between our NATO allies Poland and Lithuania, targeting the Polish site.

    The Poles and the Czechs, who have known true freedom for only a short time after enduring both Nazi and Communist oppression, have experienced the consequences of diplomatic betrayal — first at Munich and later at Yalta.

    They sense another betrayal coming in a deal with a belligerent Russian aggressor willing to wage war with the former Soviet state of Georgia, as well as threaten the Ukraine and use the Ukrainian pipeline to starve energy-dependent Europeans of natural gas.

    "We hope we don't regret our trust in the United States," Sikorski said to an audience of senior world politicians and other leaders.

    At the same event, Rep. Ellen Tauscher, who is expected to be named the new U.S. undersecretary for arms control and international security, repeated the administration line that a missile system would not be deployed until it was "proven" to work. It is easier to give away an "unproven" system.
    Missile defense has already proved to be eminently workable and successful. According to the Missile Defense Agency, since 2001 there have been 37 successful hit-to-kill intercepts out of 47 attempts, an astounding 80% success rate. We've even shot a decaying and dangerous spy satellite out of the sky.

    Former Missile Defense Agency Chief Gen. Trey Obering III has said that after dozens of successful missile intercepts, "Our testing has shown not only can we hit a bullet with a bullet, we can hit a spot on a bullet with a bullet."

    Unilaterally scrapping European missile defense could shatter the NATO alliance as we retreat to a Fortress America behind our own ground-based interceptors and Aegis-equipped missile defense destroyers and cruisers.

    The basis of NATO's purpose and existence — collective security — would be shredded as we showed a willingness to sacrifice allies for diplomatic convenience. Either we all hang together or we all hang separately.

    Our Polish and Czech friends have to wonder: Are we the next Georgia? Are we about to trade away the trust of our allies and our collective security for another empty promise of peace in our time?
  2. Biped

    Biped LE Book Reviewer

    Everyone regrets trusting the US. The British have regretted it dozens of times, Eastern Europeans sure as hell regret it repeatedly. British (stupid) banks have regretted ever dealing with US banks, and even Lloyds regrets the day it ever heard of re-insurance too.

    Saddam thought the US was friendly once, and Southern Vietnam thought their security was pretty much guaranteed.

    The Chinese never have and never will trust the US and I think the Russians are wise to the game too.

    Oh, and of course, the Canadians distrust the US the most.

    Grenada didn't think they'd have a problem, but Cuba figured, well, in for a penny, in for a pound :twisted:

    Edited to add: You want to know about the Poles? We promised them freedom, and we gave them 50 years of Soviet occupation. Want to know who served that one up? Well, it wasn't Churchill, becuase he got sidelined by Roosevelt and Stalin. Roosevelt 'allowed' Stalin to have Eastern Europe, despite the protestations of, well, Eastern Europe. Churchill tried to stop it.

    I DO wonder why the Poles don't trust the yanks.
  3. Nobody cares what the British regret. A bunch of bitter old imperialists pining away for their lost empire and now reduced to being crypto-Marxists and blaming the US and the Jews for all of their problems.

    Saddam was a Soviet client, with a little French assistance. The Chinese are autocratic capitalist roaders with a growing Nazi fetish. The Russians are mongoloid Slav barbarians who would rather beat their wives and sell their daughters into white slavery.
  4. Everything you say is true and I agree.

    The Poles have been staunch allies in Afghanistan and Iraq and have willingly shed blood with us. This is a travesty, that now we let them languish when they need us the most.

    The problem with American politicans is that they will always sell their representation to the highest bidders. I suspect in this case the pro Israel lobby came up with more money for the Obama Administration (because Iran is a threat to Israel) than the pro Poland lobby.
  5. USA, we've dropped some bo11ocks over the years but letting them loose with their own country has ,in hindsight, to be a biggie.

    NB. I'm talking about the whole not the individual
  6. Biped

    Biped LE Book Reviewer

    Saddam was a soviet client? Sheeit, and there's me thinking that it was the USA and Germany that provided Saddam with his intelligence and chemical weapons during the Iran/Iraq war. Shows how much I know about history huh?

    Don't knock the Chinese buddy - they own most of the US these days in case you hadn't noticed - who do you think made them so rich? Yep, that's right, they did, taking American money of fat, stupid Americans AND buying US bonds too.

    You're right about the Russians though. :D
  7. US foreign policy post 9/11 has placed them in the position of needing Russian help. The Russians know this, and are fairly open (in diplomatic terms) about what they require - one of those things is to re-establish the Russian sphere of influence in the near abroad. This has been a common theme of Russian foreign policy for as long as Russia has existed, so its hardly news. The Poles know this, they rightly fear that the US will place its own interests ahead of Polands, hence the comments.

    What help ? Well, look at a map of Afghanistan and surrounding countries. To get supplies to our forces you have three choices:

    A. Through Pakistan. A country that our activities in Afghanistan is busy destabilising (not that we're the only cause). One where militants attacking our supply lines is becoming more common. And also a country locked in a stand-off with their larger, also nuclear armed neighbour India. Not a good choice.

    B. Through Russia.

    C. Through the 'stans where Russia holds a veto.

    Forget aerial resupply, you don't have enough airlift.

    And then there's Iran. Want Russia to stop supporting them and push them into playing nice ? There's a price.

    And did I mention that you can't afford to strongarm Russia either ? There's a whole generation of Afghantsi in senior positions salivating at the thought of being allowed to funnel advanced MANPADS, missiles, IEDs and so on the the valiant Mujaheddin, sorry I meant the Taliban.

    Any way you look at it the US has painted itself into a corner and the way out - short of a humilating retreat from Afghanistan - is to accommodate Russia.
  8. Biped

    Biped LE Book Reviewer

    And for the rest of the world to walk away saying "Your bag baby!"
  9. The war was never your fight. You should walk away. I would if I were you. No disrespect for your military intended but I don't think we ever really needed you in the first place.

    You should write Tony Blair a nasty letter for pulling you into a war that really had nothing to do with your own security. I heard his speech to the US Congress in 2004 (I think). He got it all wrong. It was never your fight.

    However, be aware that course of action is a two way street. The next time you get into a war with the Huns or are afraid of the Russians please don't come crying to us and expect us to bail you out. As a non Interventionist I think you need to handle your own conflicts. Good luck with that.
  10. STOP!, Just STOP for gods sake before you step in even deeper shit.

    Your coming across as an amazingly ignorant person and your embarrassing me as an American Veteran. All your doing is guaranteeing 12 pages of now slagging of My Brothers in Arms who still are fighting.

    The British & Canadian, Australian, Dutch, & Polish Forces have more than earned Respect for their actions in this war. Dont fcuk it all to hell with ignorant statements about Huns.
  11. Exactly. As if war between GB and FRG is likely. Or even possible.

    As for standoff and increased tension with the Russian Federation, I'd say that US missile defence in Poland would exacerbate that threat rather than deter or calm it.

    Your comments on Afghan also seem pretty disingenious. Didn't need allies? After installing the AIA the great majority of the US forces up and left to go to Iraq, with only a few remaining to try and hunt down further AQ leaders. Allies were damned important in Afg when you were occupied elsewhere. British forces were also damned important prior to that, when you wanted UKSF and RM to fight in various mountain operations.
  12. It's just his own opinion. What's it got to do with you or me or any other American who posts here?
  13. It's just one little detail: because talk of war between Germany and UK, and
    bear fvck-all relation to reality.
  14. Any chance gator takes a walk in the Everglades and gets eaten by a croc.
  15. Who would you rather have as an ally? Be careful what you wish for and all that...