We're expected to be arming ourselves with power in addition to the next generation's expense. So it may be worth informing children in schools (preschools?) and advanced school students that erstwhile they are working, respective decades of their lives will be marked by the work to pay the sovereign debts we are taking today.
Perhaps (according to unofficial announcements), they will besides pay a war tax, which is intended to finance not only this debt, but besides advanced current expenditure on arms, which, I recall, will be at least 5% of GDP per year. It may be worth pointing out to children and young people that possibly compulsory military service will be reinstated, due to the fact that we must be ready for “Russian aggression”, which is (as if) inevitable. I think it would be appropriate to ask at least the youth about this, and above all, whether they are ready for specified sacrifices. possibly it's worth explaining to them why they're going to have specified a black script due to the fact that it's going to be theirs and not ours. By the way, you gotta prepare for the hard questions. The first 1 is: why does it gotta be? Why has the policy of "repeating" and gigantic and non-returnive support for the current authorities in Kiev led to an increase alternatively than a simplification in the threat of "Russian aggression"? Why can't a million-year-old Ukrainian army, besides kept at our expense, deal with an elephant on clay legs, which has been "crushed" for more than 10 years with a package of sanctions? Why no 1 is striving for a peace that will most likely cost little than the value of free support for "the fighting Ukraine", the ongoing reinforcements and repayment of loans today.
If, by the way, a guide to the “back” with which we are to flee from the “unbreakable aggression” is given during these meetings, the effect of these actions may be surprising: young people will pack their belongings and will leave preventively, fleeing the bad destiny that awaits them here. Where are they going? I do not know, but most likely to countries that will not be threatened by "Russian aggression". Here the choice is (and will be) alternatively small. The full united Europe under Mrs Ursula is hostile to Russia and must finance this war by spending money on it in the US. This is our large protector and ally, whose president is friends with Vladimir Putin, who has designated this function of a "unified Europe" that no longer has movement: he must be Russia's enemy to the end. The US and Russia have already decided that Ukraine will join the European Union 2 years after the end of this war. I wonder if they have asked Mrs Ursula's opinion on this.
So we already have “our war”, which we can besides lose quickly, or later, erstwhile there is no money to fund it. It will clearly only be “our war”. The next generations may not want to pay our debts.
The question of whether our planet has fallen into suicidal madness, the answer can be only one: contempt and hatred towards anyone (including Russia) is the worst advisor. After all, it is worth doing a balance sheet of the current east policy and its financial forecast for the future. How much have we lost on this? I don't ask for profits due to the fact that they're not there. How much more do we gotta spend? Will we gain something? The answer to this last question is sometimes that it is better for Ukrainians to die for our money than Poles. It is not known why we should die in this war, but possibly I have overlooked any political event in the form of the incorporation of our country into Ukraine (or vice versa): after all, it is expected to be “our war” (whose war?). erstwhile we learn about future spending on this war for the next 40 years, we will consider whether they will be willing to bear the burden.
Prof. Witold Modzelewski
Think Poland, No. 11-12 (15-22.03.2026)
