· 136 comments · Save ·
Questions & Help Mar 17, 2026 at 4:17 PM

Donald Tusk: Poland Will Not Send Troops to Iran

Posted by Auspectress

https://tvn24.pl/polska/tusk-polska-nie-wysle-wojsk-do-iranu-st8952051
🚩 Report this post

136 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
Subject-Addendum-199 Mar 17, 2026 +1093
The only Donald T I trust
1093
qdp Mar 17, 2026 +304
And the only Mr. -usk too. 
304
StatisticallySoap Mar 17, 2026 +37
If Trump and Musk has a baby. I guess two wrongs can make a right
37
SelectionSenior229 Mar 18, 2026 +11
Overflow error
11
muegle Mar 17, 2026 +36
Donald Tusk is such a flashbang of an article title name these days
36
sluncer Mar 17, 2026 +8
Donald Tr?u(mp|sk)
8
--zaxell-- Mar 19, 2026 +1
There's a Donald Trusk out there. We need to find him to right the world's wrongs.
1
[deleted] Mar 17, 2026 -1
[deleted]
-1
AlbatrossNew3633 Mar 17, 2026 +4
This seems consistent in every country, no matter what the world thinks of their leader, the compatriots' hating faction will always be louder. Sanchez, Trudeau and Macron seem giants on the world stage but people in their respective countries can't stand them if you go by the online sentiment
4
Xsiah Mar 17, 2026 +2
I mean Trudeau won federal elections 3 times (that's 10 years), so the people also were fine with him (especially given the alternative) but the shine wore off gradually and he became pretty ineffective as a PM. He was good at the progressive feel-good stuff (which conservatives obviously always hated) but he was bad at the hard stuff, like addressing the cost of living and housing issues which obviously became a lot more important to Canadians than whether or not he had a gender-balanced cabinet. He also came off as a bit of a d*** in parliament, and his family has money which was a bad look when he's going on family vacations to visit his wealthy friends on the taxpayer dime, and the people at home can't afford groceries. So I wouldn't agree that Canadians hated him, but we got tired of him not being able to improve things while he looked as smug as when he was first elected. But mad respect to him for recognizing that he needed to step down and doing it without a fuss.
2
TheRealDynamitri Mar 17, 2026
According to TV Republika, maybe
0
Wingedball Mar 17, 2026 -17
Trust and Tusk don’t go together
-17
_KodeX Mar 17, 2026 +20
When comparing to diaper pedo president, Tusk is saintly
20
peterausdemarsch Mar 18, 2026 +8
That's a very very low bar though...
8
KMS_HYDRA Mar 18, 2026 +1
Not our problem that the US decided to send the bar to the earths core. (Ok, kinda is a problem, but I hope you get what I ment)
1
vasta2 Mar 17, 2026 +471
So glad this isn’t going anywhere near as well as it was “planned” by the dumbfucks in Washington
471
kurttheflirt Mar 17, 2026 +267
I 100% believe that they believed it would be a Venezuela situation. They thought it would be 1 week of hitting them and done. They ignored and fired all people saying otherwise because they quite literally think they are geniuses and don't need a real intelligence apparatus. The same thing happens with strong men governments all the time. Only the people saying yes and sucking up to you get to keep their jobs and get promoted, and you just end up with incompetence.
267
Impressive-Potato Mar 17, 2026 +35
They hit them with the B2 bombers in the summer. Said it destroyed their nuclear program. So was that all bs? Is the B2 not as effective as they claimed?
35
juanmlm Mar 18, 2026 +20
It’s not the B2. That’s just a delivery vehicle. What has always mattered is what it drops, and that it can drop it where others couldn't. They attacked some facilities and killed some people. That was never going to do anything, but what it 100% did was convince Iran NOT to trust the US ever again. We had a deal with Iran from 2015 that was actually effective, so Trump shat on it because it was from the Obama years, and that's what he does, so Iran was like “okay the deal’s off, so let’s start our nuclear program again”. Then Trump and Natanyahu said “no we’ll bomb you”, which they did, but not nearly enough, so all they accomplished was to enrage the Iranians.  Everyone worth listening has been fired or kept away, so all they have now surrounding the decision makers is yes men or ignorant hawks like Lindsey Graham. Now this second campaign has killed so many people the most extreme hardliners are going to take power, and given how trump broke the deal and then started bombing them, they will 100% get nuclear weapons at any cost as a national priority, because apparently deals with the US are now worth nothing and nuclear weapons are all that matters. The other alternative is boots on the ground, but that will become like Afghanistan, but much, much worse. Iran is much larger with more people, very mountainous, and where the Taliban were a ragtag militia, the Iranians had an actual army to begin with. Worse: there might have been a small window of opportunity in early January when the protests had a lot of momentum, but some of the US forces that would have been necessary to assist the protesters topple the regime were in the Caribbean to capture Maduro. By the time they sent the Ford back, the protesters had all been massacred.
20
MechMan799 Mar 18, 2026 +5
Example numero uno....Donny's pen pal bro luver, Kim Jong Un. Kim has nukes, Kim is a dictator, Kim gets Donny's love.
5
Druggedhippo Mar 18, 2026 +1
> they will 100% get nuclear weapons at any cost as a national priority, because apparently deals with the US are now worth nothing and nuclear weapons are all that matters. This was on the board when Russia invaded Ukraine. Russia would never had dared if Ukraine had kept their nuclear weapons, or if the Budapest memorandum had teeth. And this Iranian conflict is just another push. All small nations will now push for nuclear weapons to protect themselves from the US.
1
juanmlm Mar 18, 2026 +3
Not just from the US: from anyone stronger who’s ever threatened them: Japan from China, South Korea from North Korea, all of Russia’s neighbours from Russia, etc.
3
AccomplishedBrain309 Mar 18, 2026 +3
Inteligence says iran had 4500 missiles. Well hidden in secure bunkers . They have used 1300 and are most likley building up production. Israel spent 2 years to level Gaza which was a village compared to Iran. So indefinite end to war. I suggest Netanyaho start a nuclear weapons ban and peace agreement immediately. Trump should stick to cheating at golf which pisses off the least amount of countries.
3
TurkeyBLTSandwich Mar 17, 2026 +44
What's wild is even with Iran planning for "decades" for a significant prolonged bombing campaign, Israeli lead bombings have decapitated Iranian leadership. As dark as it sounds, it seems like Iran is sort of playing things out as intended? Ground units are still operating as necessary and striking ships in the Strait of Hormuz and pressuring the entire global oil markets. So it's "impressive" Israel and America were able to knock out all of the publicly known leadership of Iran and also impressive Iran is able to continue operations without major directives from top leadership. I know Iran did plan on contingency plans if centralized leadership had fallen and they had to act as independent cells. But I guess the question is how long can they sustain operations without logistics refueling, refitting, and other external controls? Sure Iran no longer has an Airforce or Navy, but their ground force is still a significant threat along with their rocket artillery and drones.
44
WhenTheLightHits30 Mar 17, 2026 +21
For anyone harping on Iran’s navy being wiped out, I just point to Ukraine. That country lost its navy almost day one of their war and has managed to gain what amounts to strategic control of their regions on the Black Sea. The lack of planning demonstrated by the US makes me anxious for the possibility of naval losses on the part of the US. There seems to me plenty to be lost when the Iranian mission is simply to hit anything they don’t like with drones/missiles.
21
GenericRedditor0405 Mar 18, 2026 +11
The Ukrainians lost their entire navy *before* they sank the largest Russian ship in the region. The danger of the Trump administration’s casual recklessness can’t be understated.
11
actuallyapossom Mar 17, 2026 +18
Iran delegates military authority down the CoC and has succession ladders in place for exactly this reason. It's like regional semi-autonomous forces which have pre-approved options to take without a need for direct communication. It was a revolutionary government when it started, so they were immediately motivated to diversify, expand and invest in security. The last 20 years have given them relevant conflicts to learn from, and they have acted to prepare for asymmetric war. Our military is focused on eliminating threats and defending territory/assets, it's not built for conquest. I think that idea is many layers too deep for Trump or Hegseth, and I worry about how bad potential escalation could be.
18
ERedfieldh Mar 17, 2026 +10
I just wonder how many times Trump has asked why we can't just glass them and how many people have had to explain to him very slowly why that is an incredibly bad idea. Eventually he'll come across someone who says "sure, let's do it".....
10
theblackthorne Mar 18, 2026 +3
God that's just unlocked a new fear. Trump gets so frustrated he decides to nuke an Iranian city or two to get a surrender. Sounds insane but that man is deranged.
3
kurttheflirt Mar 17, 2026 +23
I think it really depends if China decides to support Iran. Russia cannot as they were already shown to not be able to prop up the Assad Regime showing their waning influence on the region. I really doubt China cares too much for Iran, they will use them when convenient but that's about it. Maybe they come in after it's over and try and give them some friendly "loans" to rebuild and up their influence, but I don't see them doing anything while Iran has no central leadership.
23
thisvideoiswrong Mar 18, 2026 +2
On the other hand, China is the one country that's really benefiting from this. They've been investing hard in preparing to take on the US military over Taiwan, and a big part of that has been with their advanced ballistic missiles. Now the US is rapidly burning through our supply of ballistic missile interceptors fighting Iran, to the point that we're pulling them out of active units in South Korea. And these things are extremely advanced, and thus expensive and slow to build, which means this hole in our stockpiles won't be filled easily. So we'd now be significantly weaker in a conflict against China, and we'll keep getting weaker as long as this war continues. If China sees an opportunity to exacerbate those losses at minimal risk they'd probably be wise to take it. And we'd be wise to pay a great deal to get out of this without further damage.
2
toad__warrior Mar 17, 2026 +5
[Here](https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2026/3/17/why-the-iranian-regime-did-not-collapse-after-khameneis-assassination) is an interesting article on why decapitating Iranian leadership is ineffective.
5
PugilisticCat Mar 18, 2026 +3
Look into the mosaic defense. Iran knew about the plan to decapitate leadership for a while and had a plan in place and distributed to appropriate commanders. They knew they would be able to lock down Hormuz + assault Israel and the Gulf with drone technology indefinitely since none of these resources have to be centralized like typical air forces do. More importantly, US intelligence knew this was their plan.
3
lethargy86 Mar 18, 2026 +4
Right, it's like 10+ different military units with separate chains of command now Even if Washington wanted to negotiate their way out of this one now, I'm not sure they could, especially since no one is really sure that the new Supreme Leader is functional. And even if he were, no chance in hell they are going to negotiate with countries that bombed them during prior negotiations. Twice. The only way this ends is the US and Israel just walk away, leave the region. Well, Israel for one can't, and the US will not give up their bases. So short of total invasion and takeover, hostilities will essentially never cease, so the region will always be under threat, even after withdrawal the carrier groups, expeditionary units, etc. Since that withdrawal isn't going to happen any sooner than Half-Life 3 comes out, we are already officially in quagmire territory. Congratulations, GOP, you've done it again.
4
toastythewiser Mar 17, 2026 +1
[ Removed by Reddit ]
1
Mighty__Monarch Mar 17, 2026 +8
Trump thought so. Many of their advisors including top generals such as Caine did not, and knew it would spell the end of American global hegemony if it continues, thats why they leaked information to the press in the weeks up to the attack. Bibi and Israel money had Trump's ear. Talked a big game, Venezuela 2.0, ending an American conflict of over 40 years within a week, one big strike and theyll concede. Not impossible that Epstein tapes gathered by Israel also play a role, carrot and stick.
8
metalflygon08 Mar 17, 2026 +8
> I 100% believe that they believed it would be a Venezuela situation. I'm torn between this, or as a way to break up NATO, or at the very least pull the US out while making the people in the US believe its because nobody else is honoring the NATO alliances (because nobody remembers the USA is the only country in NATO to call Article 5).
8
kurttheflirt Mar 17, 2026 +6
I just don't think they can plan that far ahead. I really think its more sheer incompetence than anything. And then they use their f*** ups to do more harm like this anti-natio talk
6
Yuukiko_ Mar 17, 2026 +7
this isnt even an article 5 or NATO issue, Iran didnt attack the US, it was the other way around
7
padizzledonk Mar 18, 2026 +3
>I 100% believe that they believed it would be a Venezuela situation. They thought it would be 1 week of hitting them and done. They ignored and fired all people saying otherwise because they quite literally think they are geniuses and don't need a real intelligence apparatus. They also expected Iran to just roll over again Theyre morons and forgot that the enemy also has a vote And they f****** openly warned that they were gping to do this if theyre attacked again, over and over aggain and they just ignored them
3
dearth_karmic Mar 17, 2026 +6
Your use of the word "they" is incorrect. There is no "they." This was Trump. If he wanted to invade Canada with boots on the ground, "they" would have gone along with it. It's all him. FIFY >I 100% believe that he believed it would be a Venezuela situation. He thought it would be 1 week of hitting them and done. He ignored and fired all people saying otherwise because he quite literally thinks he's a genius and doesn't need a real intelligence apparatus.
6
hiddencamela Mar 18, 2026 +1
They got too used to the ego part of climbing the ladder, and didn't realize that competence coupled with reliability was an actual requirement for these jobs. Not simply just \*showing\* they could be confident.
1
m__s Mar 18, 2026 +1
I’m not sure if they actually believed that, but I’m 100% sure he did. He got a quick reality check. I have to say, the way Iran is fighting back is impressive. I would never have expected them to attack oil refineries and basically disrupt most air travel to Asia. A blockade of the Strait of Hormuz was obvious, we all expected that, but this? As bad as it sounds, I just hope they get Netanyahu. It would be one monster less...
1
8ackwoods Mar 17, 2026 +43
It was hardly a plan anyways
43
Palsable_Celery Mar 17, 2026 +28
Dare I say there was only ever concepts of a plan?
28
Nervous_Ad_6998 Mar 17, 2026 +5
The most beautiful plan, no one‘s ever seen such a beautiful concept of a plan, people are saying.
5
akhimovy Mar 18, 2026 +2
Just three days of the special military operation and then everyone can celebrate!
2
Osiris32 Mar 17, 2026 +8
My main fear is that this will cause the mentally deficient red bellied lemur in charge to double down and start putting troops into Iran. And then the bodies will start stacking, and that won't be good for anyone.
8
dearth_karmic Mar 17, 2026 +3
> and that won't be good for anyone. It will be good for most of this country as he will be destroyed in the midterms and kicked out of office. And we won't do this again for a while.
3
Impressive-Potato Mar 17, 2026 +9
They might nuke Iran.
9
Osiris32 Mar 17, 2026 +11
I'm not a giant fan of human sacrifice for political outcomes.
11
ERedfieldh Mar 17, 2026 +3
Most aren't, but let's not kid ourselves and pretend that hasn't been how politics have worked for millennia.
3
dearth_karmic Mar 18, 2026 +1
Those political outcomes do have human sacrifices. 168 Iranian school girls are dead. Next will be Cuba and maybe Greenland and Canada.
1
AnonymousInMI Mar 17, 2026 +3
How long will that last? People already forgot about Iraq & Afghanistan or else the GOP would hold zero power. You’d think people would start realizing it’s Republicans throwing us in these pointless wars yet they continue voting for them.
3
longpenisofthelaw Mar 17, 2026 +17
This might be the only war in American history that its constituents mostly hopes it loses and quickly
17
Epaminodas_ Mar 17, 2026 +8
A loss is bad for Trump, and anything bad for Trump is good. Because of this war and previous strikes, Iran now has every incentive to develop nuclear weapons. If the regime remains intact they will try. Saudi Arabia will follow. Turkey, Japan, and several others may follow as well. Nuclear proliferation is coming regardless of the war in Iran. The outcome of this war may expand and accelerate the process.
8
Cynical_Classicist Mar 17, 2026 +7
Well... we're not talking about the paedo files.
7
Guy_GuyGuy Mar 17, 2026 +16
People don't want to hear this but this war has worse optics than the pedo files ever did. Conservatives 100% memory-holed and fell in line over the pedo files. They were ready to do that after the first few days of the strikes on Iran too, but after the high of killing Khamenei wore off and the reality that Trump and his administration had *absolutely no plan for this* started to set in, far more cracks are starting to show in MAGA than I've ever seen before.
16
AnonymousInMI Mar 17, 2026 +2
Well yeah because now they can’t afford to fill up their gas guzzling pickup trucks. These people only care about themselves & only defect when the consequences of Orange Nero affects them.
2
CRtwenty Mar 17, 2026 +3
They know their constituents can't imagine away high gas prices
3
Guy_GuyGuy Mar 17, 2026 +8
High gas prices. High everything prices soon to follow after already being high to begin with. Another forever war in the middle-east. Not a single country agreeing to help us.
8
akhimovy Mar 18, 2026 +1
A beautiful case of FAFO, I would say.
1
MadDaddyDrivesaUFO Mar 18, 2026 +1
The last time something like this happened the US economy was still great. 2008 hadn't happened yet. This time that's not the case. Their constituents are noticing.
1
ERedfieldh Mar 17, 2026 +2
yes people still are. the news ain't reporting it, doesn't matter. People still bring it up constantly.
2
TheRadBaron Mar 18, 2026 +1
Americans have had audio tape of Trump bragging about being a serial rapist was since 2016. It's not a big deal to voters, and it's not something that especially needs to be distracted from. Painting every disastrous misstep of the Trump administration as deliberate 5D chess only makes him look better, and it's dishonest to boot. All evidence suggest that the Trump admin thought this would go differently.
1
dearth_karmic Mar 17, 2026 +2
As someone who lived thru the 70's, I can't believe my country is at war with Iran and I'm on Iran's side. SMH
2
atlasraven Mar 17, 2026 +1
It feels like a repeat of 2003 iraq with even less oversight
1
_flustershy Mar 17, 2026 +511
I thought this was joke on Trump name until I glanced at the picture. lol
511
PluginAlong Mar 17, 2026 +72
So did I, it thought it was a joke on Trump/Musk. This poor guy picked a bad time to be PM.
72
polmix23 Mar 17, 2026 +67
He's been PM before Trump or Musk even dreamed of being where they are
67
theunquenchedservant Mar 18, 2026 +11
There were a few times when Musk was active in the White House that I saw headlines with Donald Tusk and thought that was the best nickname the news outlet could come up with for those two.
11
Korchagin Mar 18, 2026 +4
? I'm sure Tusk is one of the top 10 European politicians - former President of the European Council and now PM of Poland again.
4
ikeusa Mar 18, 2026 +1
Donald John Tusk
1
Johannes_P Mar 17, 2026 +33
They sent troops in IRaq back in 2003 and got burned by the US during the Ukraine War, so...
33
gizamo Mar 18, 2026 +4
Poland should be sending troops to help Ukraine. They know Russia is coming for them after they're done in Ukraine anyway. May as well try to team up to prevent Russia from winning anything sooner than later.
4
MadDaddyDrivesaUFO Mar 18, 2026 +1
I'm pretty sure Poland would love to serve Moscow their just desserts. Poland could annihilate Russia. But they can't do that by getting involved with an American quagmire. The impression I've gotten is that the rest of Europe doesn't want to unleash Poland due to the potential of a nuclear issue. I think if Russia's nuclear capabilities as much as everyone says, they'd have nuked Ukraine already. But I can't fault EU for not wanting to take the chance.
1
gizamo Mar 18, 2026 +1
> But they can't do that by getting involved with an American quagmire. Read it again, mate.
1
Four_beastlings Mar 18, 2026 +1
It's not the EU. NATO members are barred by NATO from joining the war in Ukraine, as Russia could use it as an excuse and allege that NATO attacked them. My husband was mil at the start of the war and we had to carefully check all the materials we sent as aid to make sure nothing could be identifiable as belonging to a NATO member. Also, although many members of the Polish armed forces would gladly go help their Ukrainian brothers, Polish people in general have no desire to attack anyone. War isn't a video game and we love our husbands and sons.
1
gizamo Mar 18, 2026 +1
That is not true. NATO is a **defense** alliance. Any NATO country could send troops to fight against Russia in Ukraine without invoking Article 5. NATO countries would only be obligated to help if Russia directly attacked the NATO country itself. They should be helping Ukraine. Instead, they are using Ukrainian husbands and sons *and* grandpas, grandmas, mothers, and daughters as a shield—just like the rest of Europe has. It's shameful. Russia should have never gained an inch, including in Crimea. They did only because Europe failed Ukraine. Vastly more people died because Europe couldn't stick together.
1
Four_beastlings Mar 18, 2026 +1
I know what NATO is, but since when does Russia care about the truth? Anyway I'm just letting you know what the members of European (and US) militaries were told regarding intervention in Ukraine, from the point of view of a household with a member directly involved in the aid efforts aka literally doing everything they were allowed to do.
1
gizamo Mar 18, 2026 +1
Many people from European militaries were allowed to go volunteer to fight in Ukraine, and many did just that. The only reason the full military of any EU country hasn't gone into Ukraine to help defend it is due to the leadership of the country not wanting to engage Russia. It has nothing to do with NATO restrictions. Good on you for your aid efforts. Much of that also saves lives.
1
Johannes_P Mar 18, 2026
> They know Russia is coming for them after they're done in Ukraine anyway. May as well try to team up to prevent Russia from winning anything sooner than later. And even if Ukraine falls, Poland would get seasoned troops.
0
Straight-Chip-5945 Mar 18, 2026
Lol, it's clear you have no idea what you're talking about.
0
gizamo Mar 19, 2026 +1
Utter nonsense. Nothing I said was incorrect, which is why you didn't actually address any actual points.
1
pixeltackle Mar 17, 2026 +27
Insane that this is even being asked, given the multi-year war at Poland's doorstep.
27
oiseaua20 Mar 17, 2026 +51
I’m sure Trump is already drafting a Truth Social post about how Poland is “low energy” for refusing to pay their fair share of the sequel to a war he claimed he already ended 😂
51
Auspectress Mar 17, 2026 +52
Poland will not send its troops to Iran, Prime Minister Donald Tusk announced before Tuesday’s cabinet meeting. He added that Poland has other tasks within NATO, and that our allies understand this position. "This conflict does not directly affect our security," the head of government stated, adding that the decision not to send troops to Iran applies to "our land, air, and naval forces," which, as he noted, are "still under construction." "What we have at our disposal regarding the sea must serve the security of the Baltic, and our allies—including the Americans—understand this very well," he added, noting that "there is no reason for concern." # Tusk on SAFE: There Will Be No Problems The Prime Minister also addressed the implementation of the EU's SAFE armament loan program. Last week, President Karol Nawrocki announced that he would veto the bill regarding this mechanism. In response, the government adopted a resolution to implement the "Armed Poland" (*Polska Zbrojna*) program instead. "There will be no problems regarding our partners. Everyone understands what happened in Poland. The 'Armed Poland' program will be implemented, and these loans will flow to Poland," the head of government said. He also thanked Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defense Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz for his "work toward a swift resolution" of what he called an "unnecessary crisis caused by the position of the President and the opposition." # Trump’s Appeal Regarding the Strait of Hormuz Since February 28, the USA and Israel have been bombing Iran, which has responded by attacking Israel and Persian Gulf states, striking both American bases located there and civilian targets. Iran has also blocked the Strait of Hormuz—a key route for the oil trade—leading to a sharp increase in crude oil prices on global markets. U.S. President Donald Trump has called for other nations to join the operation aimed at reopening the Strait of Hormuz. He also threatened consequences for NATO.
52
FloridaGatorMan Mar 17, 2026 +55
>U.S. President Donald Trump has called for other nations to join the operation aimed at reopening the Strait of Hormuz. He also threatened consequences for NATO. He's just the cartoon version of an arrogant moron. He breaks everything in the China shop and then threatens people if they don't clean it up for him. My favorite was when he said ships should just be brave and just go through the strait. "I think the problems I directly caused should just resolve themselves."
55
H0vis Mar 17, 2026 +18
What consequences can he threaten that he hasn't already tried? He's threatened war with Denmark. He's attempting to annex parts of Canada. He's been in a constant trade war with Europe. He's accused NATO allies of cowardice in Afghanistan and he's stabbed Ukraine in the back. All this why he's supposedly on our side. We just need to stop picking up the phone to America until he's gone one way or the other.
18
_fenwoods Mar 17, 2026 +16
When the US can’t get the UK and Poland on board, we are really, truly alone.
16
schacks Mar 17, 2026 +13
Nobody should send any troops, weapons, munitions or equipment to help the US with the war it started.
13
huntsab2090 Mar 17, 2026 +33
I really wish one eu leader would just laugh and say “of course we arent sending our troops to die to protect a frigging paedophile. Why is this even a question. “
33
tooshpright Mar 17, 2026 +29
Tempting, but the EU still has some concept of diplomacy.
29
Gekokapowco Mar 17, 2026 +9
this soft decorum is one of the things that allows fascism to take root and grow do not disapprove of these belligerent assholes, reject them outright. Disapproving silence is compliance, and they will never play on your terms.
9
vagabond139 Mar 18, 2026 +4
Yeah this is exactly what led us to the point where we are at now. Everyone just threw their hands up in the air and took no real action and they just kept inching farther and farther right with every single inch that given to them. Fascism must be stomped out on site or else it will fester. The paradox of tolerance is real. Call the shit out every single time. Do not give it a single f****** inch of breathing room.
4
RainyDayColor Mar 17, 2026 +4
Thank goodness. The West's crazy glue these days.
4
IvanStarokapustin Mar 17, 2026 +52
No reason for anyone else to expose their soldiers. This will be the US folly.
52
TylerHyena Mar 18, 2026 +1
Yep, and sadly just on us but all I picture now is the Tangerine Tyrant to keep doubling down and swearing that everything is going well.
1
oblivion476 Mar 17, 2026 +18
Good. The rest of the world shouldn't be dragged into this US war. Let the pedophile-supporters sort this themselves.
18
flower4000 Mar 17, 2026 +9
Send troops to America before trump does something truly unrepairable. The government isn’t stopping him, the people aren’t stopping him, he needs to be stopped.
9
DCB2323 Mar 17, 2026 +15
Iranians provided refuge and hospitality to Polish refugees during WWII. It's something many Poles have never forgotten...not saying this has anything to do with today's events but it's an interesting historic note and a good reminder that the way a country is portrayed in certain media and government circles does not always align woth realities experienced by other people.
15
SliceIka Mar 18, 2026 +1
That’s before the islamic regime took over Iran,
1
koziello Mar 18, 2026 +2
They also take active care of Polish catholic cementaries in Iran, which there are quite a few. There is kind of link of sympathy and understanding thanks to described hospitality of Iranian forefathers in WW2. Also, Polish army in exile stationed briefly in Iran and while there it was helping the local population with logistics and construction leaving another trace of sympathy that, I heard, still is remembered fondly by common Iranians. Sort of "these exotic, foreign guys helped our grandparents" feel good stories that people pass to their offspring.
2
odriweber Mar 17, 2026 +6
Solid move, keeps things from escalating further.
6
odriweber Mar 17, 2026 +6
Solid move staying out of that mess
6
Narradisall Mar 17, 2026 +6
I mean with their border to the east I’d want to keep troops on hand as well.
6
Really_Obscure Mar 18, 2026 +5
NATO is a defensive pact, not an offensive one.
5
Difficult_Dog9572 Mar 17, 2026 +14
I'm not too deep into Politics so upon first reading the headline I got excited thinking there was a new derogatory nickname for Trump.
14
West-Recipe-9300 Mar 17, 2026 +3
Operation Epstein Fury
3
Professional-Bird180 Mar 18, 2026 +3
Why doesn’t he ask the board of peace to sent ships to the hormuz?
3
Cynical_Classicist Mar 17, 2026 +6
A Donald T. to root for!
6
KingoftheMongoose Mar 17, 2026 +7
I had to reread that headline twice to catch on. Is the leader of Poland truly a walrus named Donald Tusk?
7
sasnulla Mar 18, 2026 +2
Solid move avoiding another endless quagmire
2
nsoni8882 Mar 18, 2026 +2
Here we go.... Next tweet coming about decimating Poland now in 3...2.... THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION IN THIS MATTER
2
broke_boi1 Mar 18, 2026 +2
I also won’t be sending troops to Iran, if anyone was wondering
2
procheeseburger Mar 18, 2026 +2
I absolutely love that all of these countries are standing up to Trump and also they are stepping up in Ukraine. I just pray that the next president can fix all the damage he has created.
2
ph33randloathing Mar 17, 2026 +4
Donald Tusk? The simulation is just recycling names now, isn't it? Who's the richest guy in Poland? Elon Mump?
4
Paladar2 Mar 17, 2026 +3
It’s also funny because Rick and Morty already had Elon Tusk
3
Sea_Quiet_9612 Mar 17, 2026 +2
Ouchh ...Comment il se fait prendre pour la salope qu'il est le Trump , avec toute son équipe de merde ,ils ont perdu toute Crédibilité partout , qu'il aille sucer son pote Netaniahou ce caffard inutile
2
Muritavo Mar 17, 2026 +1
Did someone send until now?
1
noriseaweed Mar 17, 2026 +1
I thought it was having a stroke when I read that dear god
1
PipelineBertaCoin69 Mar 18, 2026 +1
This name always catches me off guard lol
1
TodayEasy949 Mar 18, 2026 +1
Who is this Donald duck?
1
Substantial_Policy60 Mar 18, 2026 +1
I just picture Elon Tusk from Rick and Morty which *is* a bit better lol
1
Novemberai Mar 18, 2026 +1
They don't need to when their nuclear research center is being cyberattacked
1
themadbee Mar 18, 2026 +1
Donald Tusk= The Good Donald
1
Marhyc Mar 18, 2026 +1
That was the prime minister. The president on the other hand will probably b**** and cry about how much he'd love to send troops there to please his orange skinned overlord.
1
Inner_University_848 Mar 19, 2026 +1
Donald Tusk… I thought for a moment I had woken up in a nightmare world where some hybrid mutant of Donald Trump and Elon Musk was ruling the planet … I guess it’s kind of not too far off anyway
1
Glittering_Cow9208 Mar 17, 2026
This may be Asinine but Why’s his name so English?
0
TheOwnerOfMakiPlush Mar 17, 2026 +7
Some surnames in poland might sound like words in another languages while in reality they mean nothing. I mean every word has a meaning, but you get what i mean
7
square3481 Mar 17, 2026 +3
I believe his family had German origins, and were from Gdansk/Danzig, which was German before WWII.
3
Arumhal Mar 17, 2026 +13
He has some German ancestry on his mother's side, but Tusk is Kashubian. Kashubians are Slavs. >Gdansk/Danzig, which was German before WWII. It was a lot of things before WWII, but it was not part of Germany in 1939.
13
_fenwoods Mar 17, 2026 +6
It was Polish for 800 years before it was Prussian/German.
6
Tight_Balance_599 Mar 17, 2026
This name is like a copyright play from The Simpsons or Family Guy or something. Everytime I hear it feels like a fictional character that has Donald and Musk in it...
0
Stewie01 Mar 17, 2026 -6
Trump: America will not have troops in Poland.
-6
wgszpieg Mar 18, 2026 +4
By all means, no troops, and no influence.
4
← Back to Board