User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:08:47 PM EDT
[#1]
Six weeks is a long time of the Russians are going all out.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:14:09 PM EDT
[#2]
Does Poland get NATO air support during those six weeks?
ETA: Are we providing them intelligence and maybe launching TLAMs at the invading Bear, or is it really Poland, isolated and alone, against the Russians? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:19:20 PM EDT
[#3]
Six weeks with no assistance? Hell no. There might be some localized hold outs but the Polish military would be demolished.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:20:13 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Does Poland get NATO air support during those six weeks? ETA: Are we providing them intelligence and maybe launching TLAMs at the invading Bear, or is it really Poland, isolated and alone, against the Russians? It is Poland by itself, nobody else, for the first six weeks. No other support except for the lame kind of support we gave our other supposed allies when the Bear decided to make a snack of them (i.e. intel support, "humanitarian" aid, sanctions, etc.). At the end of the six weeks, it is every member of NATO and whatever NATO forces are presently located anywhere in Europe plus two U.S. heavy brigades. Air, Sea, Land, - the whole shebang. Conventional forces only though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:20:23 PM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
OK, can Poland hold out on its own for six weeks vs. the Russians (assume Ukraine is Russia-affiliated for this purpose)? Assuming NATO actually honors Article 5 and does something, can NATO stop the Russians in Poland with the existing NATO forces in Europe and two heavy brigades from the United States added to the mix (arriving at the end of the above six week period)? I kind of wonder if that might cause them to attempt their "nuclear de-escalation" theory. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:21:49 PM EDT
[#6]
Poland has what is probably the most professional, well-funded, and well-trained military in the EU besides the UK today. I would say yes, they would put a serious hurt on Russia. The Polish people and their military remember the Warsaw years and have no intention of going back.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:22:29 PM EDT
[#7]
You could ask Finland - but their memories are fading.
A better country to ask would be Georgia or Ukraine. But consider this: the Polish actually fought well against the Germans in WWII, but, as the world saw: the Wehrmacht out-gunned, out-manned, out-trained, and out-manuevered almost every army on earth. The Polish defeat was inevitable. Today, the Polish army is extremely motivated to fight against another invasion. Would drunken Russian conscripts fight as hard as Poles defending their homeland? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:23:39 PM EDT
[#8]
They might now win but the Poles would give them one hell of a bloodbath before they went down.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:25:41 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It is Poland by itself, nobody else, for the first six weeks. No other support except for the lame kind of support we gave our other supposed allies when the Bear decided to make a snack of them (i.e. intel support, "humanitarian" aid, sanctions, etc.). At the end of the six weeks, it is every member of NATO and whatever NATO forces are presently located anywhere in Europe plus two U.S. heavy brigades. Air, Sea, Land, - the whole shebang. Conventional forces only though. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Does Poland get NATO air support during those six weeks? ETA: Are we providing them intelligence and maybe launching TLAMs at the invading Bear, or is it really Poland, isolated and alone, against the Russians? It is Poland by itself, nobody else, for the first six weeks. No other support except for the lame kind of support we gave our other supposed allies when the Bear decided to make a snack of them (i.e. intel support, "humanitarian" aid, sanctions, etc.). At the end of the six weeks, it is every member of NATO and whatever NATO forces are presently located anywhere in Europe plus two U.S. heavy brigades. Air, Sea, Land, - the whole shebang. Conventional forces only though. Poland probably gets it's ass kicked, but does it really matter if on Week 5 the Russians are sipping lattes (or more likely drinking vodka) in Warsaw if two weeks later they're all dead? Poland would put up a fearsome fight, probably lose, and then the rest of NATO would come in and stomp a new mudhole in Russia, probably to the point that they'd try to nuke us, and we'd nuke them, and they'd nuke us. It'd be a mess if Russia invaded Poland. It'll probably be a mess if Russia tries to invade the Baltic states. Georgia and Ukraine aren't NATO allies. We'd provide much more aid to Poland facing a full-fledged Russian invasion than we ever will with Ukraine fighting "separatists". If Poland gets invaded, I suspect we'd have some B-2's headed that direction within a day or two. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:26:41 PM EDT
[#10]
Obama has Poland's back. Right?
Quoted: OK, can Poland hold out on its own for six weeks vs. the Russians (assume Ukraine is Russia-affiliated for this purpose)? Assuming NATO actually honors Article 5 and does something, can NATO stop the Russians in Poland with the existing NATO forces in Europe and two heavy brigades from the United States added to the mix (arriving at the end of the above six week period)? (Conventional Forces Only) |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:27:30 PM EDT
[#11]
Thread needs NATO to add a poll?
TRG |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:31:43 PM EDT
[#12]
With a quick wiki, only 120k active troops, 80 modern combat aircraft, and no modern attack helos.
Not to mention, the capital is only about 125km from the border. I hope they have a ton of SAMs, MANPADS, and ATGM's. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:34:19 PM EDT
[#13]
NATO is worthless. Just an excuse for member nations to cut their defense programs to pay for socialized shit. If Russia invades, the US will save us. Good luck with that...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:36:18 PM EDT
[#14]
What about civilian support? There are a lot of individuals of Polish descent in the US who could be counted to join volunteer battalions, as well as individuals who would see fighting a Russian incursion into a NATO country (especially if Article V was invoked) as a way of promoting American interests... also a lot of people Hate the Russians and might sign up for that reason.
Another interesting fact, Poland is standing up an arms factory in Texas, and one of the stated reasons is so that they can continue producing armaments if the factories in Poland are overrun. Poland would be in it for the long haul, partisan groups would be extensive (Remember Poland had the 5th highest contribution to the Allied War Effort in WWII despite being occupied for nearly the entire war), if need be heavy forces could regroup in Germany or other NATO countries. There is no way Poland falls under Russian dominion again, Russia does not have enough overmatch to do it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:36:30 PM EDT
[#15]
How well Russia could achieve strategic/tactical surprise would matter a great deal. If Polish armed forces had a little time to mobilize, they'd kill a shitload of Russians, win or lose.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:39:35 PM EDT
[#16]
I don't think NATO will take six weeks to react.
It may take that long to get heavy ground units involved but I think NATO air forces will keep the Russians at bay. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:43:17 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What about civilian support? There are a lot of individuals of Polish descent in the US who could be counted to join volunteer battalions, as well as individuals who would see fighting a Russian incursion into a NATO country (especially if Article V was invoked) as a way of promoting American interests... also a lot of people Hate the Russians and might sign up for that reason. Another interesting fact, Poland is standing up an arms factory in Texas, and one of the stated reasons is so that they can continue producing armaments if the factories in Poland are overrun. Poland would be in it for the long haul, partisan groups would be extensive (Remember Poland had the 5th highest contribution to the Allied War Effort in WWII despite being occupied for nearly the entire war), if need be heavy forces could regroup in Germany or other NATO countries. There is no way Poland falls under Russian dominion again, Russia does not have enough overmatch to do it. I agree - IF the Russian intent was to take & hold Poland. The Poles would not stand for it again. But Poland's problem has always been that someone needs to go THROUGH Poland on the way to fight someplace else. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:43:41 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Poland probably gets it's ass kicked, but does it really matter if on Week 5 the Russians are sipping lattes (or more likely drinking vodka) in Warsaw if two weeks later they're all dead? Poland would put up a fearsome fight, probably lose, and then the rest of NATO would come in and stomp a new mudhole in Russia, probably to the point that they'd try to nuke us, and we'd nuke them, and they'd nuke us. It'd be a mess if Russia invaded Poland. It'll probably be a mess if Russia tries to invade the Baltic states. Georgia and Ukraine aren't NATO allies. We'd provide much more aid to Poland facing a full-fledged Russian invasion than we ever will with Ukraine fighting "separatists". If Poland gets invaded, I suspect we'd have some B-2's headed that direction within a day or two. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Does Poland get NATO air support during those six weeks? ETA: Are we providing them intelligence and maybe launching TLAMs at the invading Bear, or is it really Poland, isolated and alone, against the Russians? It is Poland by itself, nobody else, for the first six weeks. No other support except for the lame kind of support we gave our other supposed allies when the Bear decided to make a snack of them (i.e. intel support, "humanitarian" aid, sanctions, etc.). At the end of the six weeks, it is every member of NATO and whatever NATO forces are presently located anywhere in Europe plus two U.S. heavy brigades. Air, Sea, Land, - the whole shebang. Conventional forces only though. Poland probably gets it's ass kicked, but does it really matter if on Week 5 the Russians are sipping lattes (or more likely drinking vodka) in Warsaw if two weeks later they're all dead? Poland would put up a fearsome fight, probably lose, and then the rest of NATO would come in and stomp a new mudhole in Russia, probably to the point that they'd try to nuke us, and we'd nuke them, and they'd nuke us. It'd be a mess if Russia invaded Poland. It'll probably be a mess if Russia tries to invade the Baltic states. Georgia and Ukraine aren't NATO allies. We'd provide much more aid to Poland facing a full-fledged Russian invasion than we ever will with Ukraine fighting "separatists". If Poland gets invaded, I suspect we'd have some B-2's headed that direction within a day or two. Nukes will not get slung for a non existential (to the US and Russia) conflict. If Russia tries to make a play to expand their borders the strategic calculus is different then an all out soviet rush to the Atlantic. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:45:17 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
With a quick wiki, only 120k active troops, 80 modern combat aircraft, and no modern attack helos. Not to mention, the capital is only about 125km from the border. I hope they have a ton of SAMs, MANPADS, and ATGM's. Poland has 32 operational Mi-24. While that's not a huge amount, and they're only "modernized," the Mi-24 is still a huge threat to Russian tank forces. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:47:49 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Georgia and Ukraine aren't NATO allies. We'd provide much more aid to Poland facing a full-fledged Russian invasion than we ever will with Ukraine fighting "separatists". If Poland gets invaded, I suspect we'd have some B-2's headed that direction within a day or two. Historically, Poland has been hung out to dry by its other European allies - what twice? three times in the 20th century? And Obama in the White House? I know which way I'd be betting if I were Poland. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:49:44 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Obama has Poland's back. Right? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Obama has Poland's back. Right? Quoted:
OK, can Poland hold out on its own for six weeks vs. the Russians (assume Ukraine is Russia-affiliated for this purpose)? Assuming NATO actually honors Article 5 and does something, can NATO stop the Russians in Poland with the existing NATO forces in Europe and two heavy brigades from the United States added to the mix (arriving at the end of the above six week period)? (Conventional Forces Only) Just because Obama announced he was cancelling the missile deal with Poland on the 70th anniversiary of Stalin's invasion of Poland doesn't mean anything. I'm sure he will continue his Administration's policies in support of our allies. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:49:45 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Poland has what is probably the most professional, well-funded, and well-trained military in the EU besides the UK today. I would say yes, they would put a serious hurt on Russia. The Polish people and their military remember the Warsaw years and have no intention of going back. I agree with you observation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:49:47 PM EDT
[#23]
How long did Finland hold out? Germans gave them some arms, that's it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:50:30 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thread needs NATO to add a poll? TRG Six weeks. Besides, I'm more interested in the reading the reasoning than the general opinion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:54:55 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Poland has 32 operational Mi-24. While that's not a huge amount, and they're only "modernized," the Mi-24 is still a huge threat to Russian tank forces. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
With a quick wiki, only 120k active troops, 80 modern combat aircraft, and no modern attack helos. Not to mention, the capital is only about 125km from the border. I hope they have a ton of SAMs, MANPADS, and ATGM's. Poland has 32 operational Mi-24. While that's not a huge amount, and they're only "modernized," the Mi-24 is still a huge threat to Russian tank forces. Poland's Maverick and JSOW-armed F16s are an even bigger threat to them.... if JSOW works half as good as advertised it could seriously fuck up a mass armored thrust. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 2:55:45 PM EDT
[#26]
Has anyone here fought along side any Polish units over the last 12 years? Just curious what your impression was in terms of their TTPs and gear.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 3:00:43 PM EDT
[#27]
6 weeks makes no sense.
Either Article 5 is invoked and it's on,or NATO falls apart immediately. There is no other way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 3:20:03 PM EDT
[#28]
According to Wikipedia (take it with a grain of salt) Russia has approx. ten times the "active military" soldiers as Poland, with a LOT more reserves than Poland has. That said, I have to wonder what percentage of its military Russia can effectively outfit and send into combat outside its own borders? Even if it's only half, it certainly looks difficult for Poland.
I've heard that Poland has a comparatively professional armed forces and respectably equipped. This would suggest that Russian troops would face better trained and better equipped resistance than they faced in Georgia or Ukraine. Someone more familiar with Poland's armed forces could speak to that and correct me if necessary. Poland would be fighting to protect their homes, parents, siblings, spouses, and children. That's a lot more motivating than the Russian soldiers' motivation of loot and women to rape. Now factor in the current economic situation in Russia. Projecting war beyond its own borders would be expensive, and Russia isn't currently rolling in the money. So the only advantage I'm seeing for the Russians is numbers. In every other way Poland would be a match for Russia and possibly even superior in some regards. Still, the disparity in numbers would be nothing to sniff at. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 3:21:10 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nukes will not get slung for a non existential (to the US and Russia) conflict. If Russia tries to make a play to expand their borders the strategic calculus is different then an all out soviet rush to the Atlantic. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nukes will not get slung for a non existential (to the US and Russia) conflict. If Russia tries to make a play to expand their borders the strategic calculus is different then an all out soviet rush to the Atlantic. We'd never think of going nuclear over something like Poland, but Russia doesn't share our views. Russia (and France) have crazy-low thresholds for unleashing nuclear weapons. http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2015/02/25/russia_cant_beat_nato--but_putin_may_try.html This is especially dangerous because Putin does not seem to grasp that NATO’s members, once invaded, will fight according to their training and their experience, and not by a snap poll of people in New York or Nebraska. They will fight with very real and very modern Western weapons, rather than with hashtags and selfies from chipper spokespeople back at the State Department. And in the end, if Putin orders his forces West, the Russians will lose, and lose badly.
At that point, Putin will only have two options: he can sue for peace (something he seems constitutionally incapable of doing) or he can resort to nuclear weapons. Russian military planning already includes a bizarre concept called “nuclear de-escalation,” in which the use of tactical nuclear arms shocks the enemy – meaning NATO – into letting Russia off the hook for whatever mad scheme got them into a jam in the first place. The idea that nuclear arms “de-escalate” anything makes no sense unless except to those molded by Soviet indoctrination: if you believe the West is inherently weak and decadent, then you believe the use of even one nuclear bomb will bring NATO to its knees and expose the U.S. and its allies as cowards. The reality, of course, is that nuclear use will almost certainly escalate, and no matter how it ends, Putin, his regime, and Russia as he knows it today will all be gone. http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2015/02/27/natos_nuclear_nightmare_over_ukraine_107670.html While it’s true the Russians haven’t employed nuclear weapons, they are already on the table as a means of coercion. As Dr. Matthew Kroenig of Georgetown University argued in a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing recently, “The ongoing conflict in Ukraine is very much a nuclear crisis.” While the U.S. has made great pains to marginalize nuclear weapons in its strategy, over the past two decades Russia has moved nuclear weapons front and center to its national strategy. Not only do Russia’s national leaders, including Putin himself, imply or sometimes explicitly threaten to employ nuclear weapons, the military conducts exercises showing just how it would do it. Russian foreign minister Lavrov, even stated that Russia had the “right” to deploy nuclear weapons in Crimea.
The Russians hold to a theory that by employing “tactical nuclear weapons” that is, ones that will incur limited damage, as opposed to total destruction, the enemy (i.e. NATO), would immediately sue for peace, deeming any further conventional fight not with the cost. Ambassador Robert Joseph explained at a recent conference that, “Russia’s doctrine assumes an asymmetry of interests and a lack of willingness on the part of the enemy to risk nuclear war.” Moscow may calculate that it wants to put an end to NATO more than the alliance, including the U.S., wants to engage in a retaliatory strike. The Russians are surely wrong about this, and that means a quickly escalating catastrophic war. And to be sure, Russia has a great number more of these lower yield battlefield nuclear weapons than what the U.S. has—some estimate as many as ten times as many. This is why the number and type of nuclear weapons the U.S possess matters and matters greatly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 3:22:41 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
6 weeks makes no sense. Either Article 5 is invoked and it's on,or NATO falls apart immediately. There is no other way. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Polish_military_alliance. The Poles held out about 5 weeks. The English didn't arrive in time, to say the least. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 3:30:06 PM EDT
[#31]
Any guesses how many troops Russia could mobilize and commit to an invasion of Poland?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 3:33:38 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Any guesses how many troops Russia could mobilize and commit to an invasion of Poland? <a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dc/Russia_Army_New.png" target="_blank">http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dc/Russia_Army_New.png</a> Nowhere near that many. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 3:33:43 PM EDT
[#33]
Poland would severely hurt Russia's military. This isn't the old Soviet Union, and Poland is very much protected and armed by the West.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 3:34:42 PM EDT
[#34]
Won't do any good when the Obama administration denies their export licenses.
Quote HistoryQuoted: Another interesting fact, Poland is standing up an arms factory in Texas, and one of the stated reasons is so that they can continue producing armaments if the factories in Poland are overrun. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 3:40:44 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Won't do any good when the Obama administration denies their export licenses. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Won't do any good when the Obama administration denies their export licenses. Quoted:
Another interesting fact, Poland is standing up an arms factory in Texas, and one of the stated reasons is so that they can continue producing armaments if the factories in Poland are overrun. No M855 for us, no toys for Poland either. FBHO is like the Grinch who stole Christmas. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 3:47:08 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Poland has what is probably the most professional, well-funded, and well-trained military in the EU besides the UK today. I would say yes, they would put a serious hurt on Russia. The Polish people and their military remember the Warsaw years and have no intention of going back. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 4:01:01 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Polish_military_alliance. The Poles held out about 5 weeks. The English didn't arrive in time, to say the least. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
6 weeks makes no sense. Either Article 5 is invoked and it's on,or NATO falls apart immediately. There is no other way. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Polish_military_alliance. The Poles held out about 5 weeks. The English didn't arrive in time, to say the least. The english gave China millions , they gave poland a small pitance of what they promised (poland asked 60 million, england promised 9 million, delivered 10,000). The english and french turned their backs on Poland to not anger Russia. Poland could have defeated Nazi Germany , Poland could have beaten Russia, would have obliterated Slovakia out of existence With the full aid that they asked they may have been able to beat back all odds long enough for actual assistance from their supposed allies. What have we done to Poland since Obama the Tyrant? Removed most defensive measures, left Poland in the cold. We are acting like England and France did in WW2. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 4:03:55 PM EDT
[#38]
Russia has not a bottle of vodka's chance in Moscow of taking Poland.
The purported quality of Polish armed forces aside, and even if Belarus played along, Russian logistics aren't up to keeping a large fighting force in action 800 miles from the Motherland. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 4:14:55 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Poland has 32 operational Mi-24. While that's not a huge amount, and they're only "modernized," the Mi-24 is still a huge threat to Russian tank forces. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
With a quick wiki, only 120k active troops, 80 modern combat aircraft, and no modern attack helos. Not to mention, the capital is only about 125km from the border. I hope they have a ton of SAMs, MANPADS, and ATGM's. Poland has 32 operational Mi-24. While that's not a huge amount, and they're only "modernized," the Mi-24 is still a huge threat to Russian tank forces. APC's, mostly. Hind was never an anti-tank helo; it's a troop transport with offensive capabilities. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 4:17:13 PM EDT
[#40]
Not without assistance from the rest of Europe. Steamroller rolls on.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 4:21:29 PM EDT
[#41]
U.S. have put in plans for rapid deployment and we're very good at mobilizing our forces quickly. Provided US political leadership didn't drag its feet and made a quick decision I think we could prevent Russia from conquering all of Poland. However, political reality is at this point that the decision would not be made to respond until the mission became liberating Poland rather than defending it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 4:24:55 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
U.S. have put in plans for rapid deployment and we're very good at mobilizing our forces quickly. Provided US political leadership didn't drag its feet and made a quick decision I think we could prevent Russia from conquering all of Poland. However, political reality is at this point that the decision would not be made to respond until the mission became liberating Poland rather than defending it. Think of all the awesome YouTube videos we'd get out of it though 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 4:28:28 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The english gave China millions , they gave poland a small pitance of what they promised (poland asked 60 million, england promised 9 million, delivered 10,000). The english and french turned their backs on Poland to not anger Russia. Poland could have defeated Nazi Germany , Poland could have beaten Russia, would have obliterated Slovakia out of existence With the full aid that they asked they may have been able to beat back all odds long enough for actual assistance from their supposed allies. What have we done to Poland since Obama the Tyrant? Removed most defensive measures, left Poland in the cold. We are acting like England and France did in WW2. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
6 weeks makes no sense. Either Article 5 is invoked and it's on,or NATO falls apart immediately. There is no other way. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Polish_military_alliance. The Poles held out about 5 weeks. The English didn't arrive in time, to say the least. The english gave China millions , they gave poland a small pitance of what they promised (poland asked 60 million, england promised 9 million, delivered 10,000). The english and french turned their backs on Poland to not anger Russia. Poland could have defeated Nazi Germany , Poland could have beaten Russia, would have obliterated Slovakia out of existence With the full aid that they asked they may have been able to beat back all odds long enough for actual assistance from their supposed allies. What have we done to Poland since Obama the Tyrant? Removed most defensive measures, left Poland in the cold. We are acting like England and France did in WW2. I thought the German Army decimated the Polish Army in days? Didn't Poland still have horse Calvary. edit: wrong operation, not Barberossa |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 4:31:29 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I thought the German Army decimated the Polish Army in days? Didn't Poland still have horse Calvary. edit: wrong operation, not Barberossa Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
6 weeks makes no sense. Either Article 5 is invoked and it's on,or NATO falls apart immediately. There is no other way. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Polish_military_alliance. The Poles held out about 5 weeks. The English didn't arrive in time, to say the least. The english gave China millions , they gave poland a small pitance of what they promised (poland asked 60 million, england promised 9 million, delivered 10,000). The english and french turned their backs on Poland to not anger Russia. Poland could have defeated Nazi Germany , Poland could have beaten Russia, would have obliterated Slovakia out of existence With the full aid that they asked they may have been able to beat back all odds long enough for actual assistance from their supposed allies. What have we done to Poland since Obama the Tyrant? Removed most defensive measures, left Poland in the cold. We are acting like England and France did in WW2. I thought the German Army decimated the Polish Army in days? Didn't Poland still have horse Calvary. edit: wrong operation, not Barberossa So did the Germans. Many countries still had it. My understanding is that Polish horse units actually did pretty well for themselves, in some cases routing German units. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 4:38:55 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So did the Germans. Many countries still had it. My understanding is that Polish horse units actually did pretty well for themselves, in some cases routing German units. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
6 weeks makes no sense. Either Article 5 is invoked and it's on,or NATO falls apart immediately. There is no other way. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Polish_military_alliance. The Poles held out about 5 weeks. The English didn't arrive in time, to say the least. The english gave China millions , they gave poland a small pitance of what they promised (poland asked 60 million, england promised 9 million, delivered 10,000). The english and french turned their backs on Poland to not anger Russia. Poland could have defeated Nazi Germany , Poland could have beaten Russia, would have obliterated Slovakia out of existence With the full aid that they asked they may have been able to beat back all odds long enough for actual assistance from their supposed allies. What have we done to Poland since Obama the Tyrant? Removed most defensive measures, left Poland in the cold. We are acting like England and France did in WW2. I thought the German Army decimated the Polish Army in days? Didn't Poland still have horse Calvary. edit: wrong operation, not Barberossa So did the Germans. Many countries still had it. My understanding is that Polish horse units actually did pretty well for themselves, in some cases routing German units. Poland had horse units, but they were rapid reaction horse borne Cav. Doctrinally they were supposed to move on horseback and dismount to engage in heavy fighting. They could fight on horseback (and did) against light forces such as infantry. Interestingly, Polish Cavalry units had a horse transportable 37mm Anti-tank guns. More info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charge_at_Krojanty |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 4:43:29 PM EDT
[#46]
The Poles are well trained, reasonably well equipped, and are extremely well motivated. The Russians would see combat on a scale and pace they hadn't since the '40s if they tried to invade Poland. There are more Russians than Poles, but the Russians have shit logistics, so it would become a race to see if NATO could resupply the Poles before they got overwhelmed (to give time to actually reinforce them) or how many casualties Putin is willing to suck up before he either declares victory and leaves or starts dropping nukes.
Apart from the intensity of the theoretical combat, this isn't WWII, the Russia is not the USSR and they can't afford to trade too many lives for victories they way they could in '44-45. A war of attrition won't work for them unless they're either very short or very geographically constrained wars. Today Russia has a smaller population than the US currently does, they're not going to get by fighting for years fighting a war of attrition; while Putin and the high command may have no qualms about doing that, they simply don't have enough people to absorb losing too many men over too long a period of time unlike in WWII. All of that is pretty much moot though, if Russia can be engaged in offensive ground operations in a NATO country for 6 weeks without NATO doing anything besides moral support, then there is no NATO. It's either all in, or all out right from the get go. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 4:43:45 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So did the Germans. Many countries still had it. My understanding is that Polish horse units actually did pretty well for themselves, in some cases routing German units. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I thought the German Army decimated the Polish Army in days? Didn't Poland still have horse Calvary. edit: wrong operation, not Barberossa So did the Germans. Many countries still had it. My understanding is that Polish horse units actually did pretty well for themselves, in some cases routing German units. The Poles used horses for moving their mounted infantry across various terrain in a fairly rapid manner. Once reaching their destination, they usually dismounted for actual combat. On one or two occasions the German armored units caught the mounted cavalry exposed in the open and cut them down with tank cannon and machine gun fire before the Poles could dismount and prepare themselves. Nazi German propaganda used these rare occurrences to portray the Poles as stupid. Interestingly enough, Polish jokes today are a carry over from the Nazi propaganda of WWII. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 4:46:24 PM EDT
[#48]
Poland would be no pushover. They have some good equipment and are in the process of acquiring even more of it. I don't think the Russians have the manpower or logistics to put as many troops into Poland that it would take to get the job done. Historically, the attacking force needs a 3-1 advantage in numbers. Can Russia send 300,000+ troops into Poland while simultaneously protecting and keeping open its line of logistics? That might be problematic, being as it would pretty much require the entire Russian Army to participate. This isn't the 1980s when the Soviets could put 2 or 3 million troops on the field of battle. Today they have a smaller and much less capable army than we do. Russia isn't ten feet tall and bulletproof like so many like to make them out to be. The only thing they possess that you really have to respect is their nuclear capability. That is why we should be working overtime to develop a robust system capable of rendering their nuclear arsenal useless against us, rather than taking the minimalist approach we're using now when it comes to missile defense.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 4:52:19 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Think of all the awesome YouTube videos we'd get out of it though Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
U.S. have put in plans for rapid deployment and we're very good at mobilizing our forces quickly. Provided US political leadership didn't drag its feet and made a quick decision I think we could prevent Russia from conquering all of Poland. However, political reality is at this point that the decision would not be made to respond until the mission became liberating Poland rather than defending it. Think of all the awesome YouTube videos we'd get out of it though If it were not for all the death it might be nice to have a proper war with uniformed bad guys in an area of the world with attractive women without serious religious restraints. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2015 4:53:05 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Poles used horses for moving their mounted infantry across various terrain in a fairly rapid manner. Once reaching their destination, they usually dismounted for actual combat. On one or two occasions the German armored units caught the mounted cavalry exposed in the open and cut them down with tank cannon and machine gun fire before the Poles could dismount and prepare themselves. Nazi German propaganda used these rare occurrences to portray the Poles as stupid. Interestingly enough, Polish jokes today are a carry over from the Nazi propaganda of WWII. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I thought the German Army decimated the Polish Army in days? Didn't Poland still have horse Calvary. edit: wrong operation, not Barberossa So did the Germans. Many countries still had it. My understanding is that Polish horse units actually did pretty well for themselves, in some cases routing German units. The Poles used horses for moving their mounted infantry across various terrain in a fairly rapid manner. Once reaching their destination, they usually dismounted for actual combat. On one or two occasions the German armored units caught the mounted cavalry exposed in the open and cut them down with tank cannon and machine gun fire before the Poles could dismount and prepare themselves. Nazi German propaganda used these rare occurrences to portray the Poles as stupid. Interestingly enough, Polish jokes today are a carry over from the Nazi propaganda of WWII. Yep they trained them to act as mounted infantry more than traditional cavalry. And ironically enough, once the war reached a fever pitch the Germans not only employed far more cavalry than the Poles ever did, but used horses for supply and transport on a massive scale. They didn't use cavalry on the Western Front but my great-uncles knew the Germans were in a world of trouble when they saw how many horses they were using in Normandy while their units were completely motorized. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
