Why Are We In Vietnam?
by H. Grodsk
While the barman was ejecting some difficult guests last night someone switched channels on the TV above the bar to a news show. The sound was on. They were talking about Afghanistan. It seems that Barack Obama gave prime minister Donald a bell and Don immediately agreed to send another hundred thousand or half a million Polish soldiers out east. The burning question was: was Donald’s haste in agreeing to send in more men hasty enough to be deemed “unseemly”? The more fundamental question of whether Poland should be fighting in Afghanistan was raised, it’s true, but the answers revolved – quite openly, none of your false Western hypocrisy here – around: what’s in it for Poland? Apparently, Warsaw is less likely to be bombed by terrorists if Polish soldiers are being bombed in Afghanistan. That seems pretty much to be the answer to the all important question of what’s in it for Poland.
Tags: Afghanistan, Barack Obama, Donald Tusk, war
December 9th, 2009 at 7:01 am
Ah, this is only part of this story. On 21 October Joe Bidden visited Poland, following President Obama’s (what was considered) an ill-timed (17 September) announcement that there would be no defence shield. Then as a GW reader you may have read on 23 October that Poland would send the 600 additional soldiers to Afghanistan. After that, it was the new American ambassador to Poland who thanked the Polish government on 24 October for the commitment to ‘enhance its presence’ in Afghanistan. Later, on 27 October, the Defence Minister Klich was all over the news, firmly denying that there had been either any agreements, or even plans between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The Ministry of Defence and the Prime Minister Tusk’s office in regard to increasing the Polish contingent in Afghanistan. In fact, Minister Klich called the Ambassador’s 24 October’s announcement ‘a blunder,’ although he did add that Mr Feinstein could be forgiven, as those were his first days at the post. Faced with such reaction both by Mr Klich and the Polish media, the American embassy promptly blamed everything on the Polish translator, but soon enough it turned out that more troops would indeed be sent. Go figure that.
December 10th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Well yes, but I was in the bar at the time. Some of the details escaped me. That’s interesting that they tried the old blame the translator number.
December 14th, 2009 at 6:07 pm
Well, if you can’t blame the translator, there’s always the ever so ambiguous meaning of the word ‘is’.