This author thinks American troops in more than token numbers should not be deployed in Poland.
There is a long portion about European NATO states largely failing to meet the defense spending pledge, which has admittedly been a longstanding failure. One, Germany is definitely a shameful example of failing to make progress toward the goal. Two, Britain surely has made an odd decision to cripple the rest of their military to build two sizable aircraft carriers. Three, the NATO pledge is to be met by 2024, so there is time for states that aren't Germany to meet the pledge. And four, saying Poland currently "barely" meets the pledge is an odd way of dismissing the fact that Poland has met the pledge early.
But what are the author's actual reasons hidden among that distracting filler and other non-arguments simply designed to anger readers and appeal to their biases?
If we want a tripwire, a hundred bored infantrymen will do: adding a thousand troops would make little difference in a fight against the full weight of the Russian armed forces. A serious U.S. troop buildup in Poland, of multiple brigades, would risk a classic security dilemma, with Russia reinforcing its units on Poland's border in the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad in response.
This is, to use a technical argument, "stupid."
The author says that Russia could smash Poland with a thousand American troops there; and on the other hand, if America dares to help Poland defend itself with more American troops, Russia can at will match American efforts.
But if about 15,000 American troops would require Russia to add forces, that sounds like a significant American addition to Poland's defense. Which helps deter Russia from striking Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania by establishing the core of a counter-attack force.
And honestly, if Russia reinforces their Kaliningrad exclave, let them! The Russian troops would start a war cut off, and if NATO does it right those forces would be destroyed, neutralized, or captured. There is a reason that NATO didn't jam more troops into West Berlin during the Cold War.
Also keep in mind that America's small presence in Poland is designed to eventually absorb a U. S. Army corps if sent there, which will be a solid formation around which other NATO forces can rally.
And even if NATO Europe doesn't do as much as we want to defend Europe, don't forget that Europe is an objective in addition to being a source of allies as long as America has a strong position in NATO. America has an interest in dominating Europe in order to deny any enemy control of that concentration of economic, demographic, and scientific power that has great military potential.
This article was simply the dumbest thing I've read recently. Did the author think nobody would notice the nonsense filler that conceals the paucity of actual arguments--that are stupid?
