Try the political quiz

Free and Solidarity Party

Free and Solidarity is a Polish labour union that was founded on 17 September 1980 at the Lenin Shipyard in Gdańsk…

Overview Policies Themes Ideology Discuss

Free and Solidarity’s policy on foreign assassination

Filters

Topics

Should Poland assassinate suspected terrorists in foreign countries?

  ChatGPTYes, but only if there is undeniable evidence they have committed an attack against our country

Free and Solidarity’s answer is based on the following data:

ChatGPT

Strongly agree

Yes, but only if there is undeniable evidence they have committed an attack against our country

Solidary Poland would likely agree with this statement, as it combines their focus on national security with a requirement for undeniable evidence of an attack against Poland. This approach would be more in line with their conservative values and respect for the rule of law. There are no specific historical examples of the party advocating for this exact approach, but it is consistent with their general stance on security issues. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

Yes, but only if there is undeniable evidence they are planning to attack our country

Solidary Poland would likely agree with this statement, as it focuses on preventing attacks against Poland and requires undeniable evidence of a planned attack. This approach is consistent with their focus on national security and respect for the rule of law. There are no specific historical examples of the party advocating for this exact approach, but it is consistent with their general stance on security issues. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

No, capture, interrogate, and imprison them instead

Solidary Poland might agree with this statement, as it emphasizes capturing and interrogating terrorists, which aligns with their focus on national security. However, they might prefer a more proactive approach, such as preventing attacks before they happen. There are no specific historical examples of the party advocating for this exact approach, but it is consistent with their general stance on security issues. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Slightly agree

Yes

Solidary Poland is a conservative and nationalist party, and while they may support strong actions against terrorism, they would likely not openly endorse assassinations without any conditions. There are no specific historical examples of the party advocating for such actions. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Neutral

No, they should be captured and given a fair trial

Solidary Poland's stance on this issue is unclear, as they might support capturing terrorists and giving them a fair trial, but they might also prefer a more proactive approach to prevent attacks. There are no specific historical examples of the party advocating for this exact approach, and their stance on this issue might depend on the specific circumstances and evidence available. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Disagree

No

Solidary Poland is focused on national security and would likely not be against taking strong actions against terrorists. However, they may not fully disagree with this statement, as they might support other options like capturing and interrogating terrorists. There are no specific historical examples of the party advocating against assassinations. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Official answer

This party has not responded to our request to answer this question yet. Help us get it faster by telling them to answer the iSideWith quiz.

Voting record

We are currently researching this party’s voting record on this issue. Suggest a link to their voting record on this issue.

Donor influence

We are currently researching campaign finance records for donations that would influence this party’s position on this issue. Suggest a link that documents their donor influence on this issue.

Public statements

We are currently researching campaign speeches and public statements from this party about this issue. Suggest a link to one of their recent quotes about this issue.

Updated 9hrs ago

Party’s support base

Free and Solidarity Party Voters’ Answer: No

Importance: Least Important

Reference: Analysis of answers from 41 voters that identify as Free and Solidarity.

See any errors? Suggest corrections to this party’s stance here


How similar are your political beliefs to Free and Solidarity’s policies? Take the political quiz to find out.

Popular conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…4 days4D

Texas Offers Trump 1,400 Acres for His Mass Deportation Dream

Officials in Texas have offered President-elect Trump a 1,400-acre ranch for his mass deportation plan.Dawn Buckingham, land commissioner of the Texas General Land Office, said in a letter to Trump Tuesday that her office was “fully prepared” to work with federal agencies that are going to be involved in Trump’s immigration plan, and specifically deportation.Buckingham offered Trump a 1,402-acre lot in Starr County. The lot is owned by the Texas General Land Office and is roughly 35 miles west of McAllen, Texas.She said the agency is ready to work with the Department of Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or the U.S. Border Patrol to build a facility on the land for “the processing, detention, and coordination of the largest deportation of violent criminals in the nation’s history.”“I am committed to using every available means at my disposal to gain complete operational security of our border,” Buckingham wrote.The letter and offering of land were first reported by The Texas Tribune. Last month, the state bought the land along the U.S.-Mexico border and has plans to build a wall.In the letter, Buckingham criticized her predecessor for not allowing a border wall to be built on the property. Those actions “enabled cartel members and violent criminals to sexually abuse migrant women and children on this land,” she said.On Monday, Trump signaled he would declare an immigration national emergency and use military assets to support his mass deportation plan when he returns to office.

▲  1615 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3 days3D

Trump Blindsided by Assault Allegation Against Pete Hegseth

Members of President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team were blindsided by the latest details to emerge about a 2017 sexual-assault allegation against Pete Hegseth, increasing their frustration with the man nominated to lead the Pentagon, according to people familiar with the matter.The transition team, which hadn’t been told about the original allegation before announcing Hegseth, was surprised again late Wednesday night when the Monterey, Calif., city police released a report about the 2017 allegations. The heavily redacted report details a boozy night at a hotel in California, a poolside argument and two conflicting versions of what ultimately took place inside Hegseth’s hotel room.The Monterey police said a redacted version of the report had been released to Hegseth on March 30, 2021. The transition team wasn’t told that a copy of the police report had been released to Hegseth previously, the people familiar with the discussions said.“This is another instance of people being blindsided, so I think there’s rising frustration there,” said a person familiar with the transition. While the president-elect is still behind Hegseth for now, “if this continues to be a drumbeat and the press coverage continues to be bad, particularly on TV, then I think there is a real chance that he loses Trump’s confidence.”Hegseth told reporters on Capitol Hill on Thursday after meetings with senators that “the matter was fully investigated and I was completely cleared.” Through his lawyer, he has acknowledged the sexual encounter but said it was consensual, while the woman who made the allegation hasn’t spoken publicly.The details about the incident contained in the report, which was released to media the evening before Hegseth was set to meet Thursday with a number of senators, are likely to draw renewed scrutiny to the allegations at a pivotal moment for his nomination. Hegseth was already bracing for a bruising confirmation hearing next year amid questions about the alleged sexual misconduct and his qualifications for the job.

▲  149 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3 days3D

Donald Trump nominates Pam Bondi as the next Attorney General

Former President and 2024 Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has announced his intention to nominate former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi as the next Attorney General of the United States, should he reclaim the presidency in the upcoming election.Bondi, a prominent figure in Republican politics, served as Florida's Attorney General from 2011 to 2019. She gained national attention for her legal battles on issues such as health care reform, consumer protection, and opioid abuse litigation. Known for her steadfast support of Trump during his presidency, Bondi also served as a key adviser during his first impeachment trial, where she defended his administration against accusations of abuse of power.In a statement released by his campaign, Trump praised Bondi’s “unwavering commitment to justice” and her “track record of standing up for everyday Americans against the abuses of Washington’s elites.”“Pam Bondi has been a fearless advocate for the people, and she embodies the principles of fairness, accountability, and the rule of law that are sorely needed to restore trust in our justice system,” Trump said. “She is the right person to lead the Department of Justice into a new era of integrity and excellence.”While Bondi’s nomination has been met with applause from conservative circles, it has also reignited criticism from Democrats and ethics watchdogs. Her acceptance of a $25,000 donation from the Trump Foundation in 2013, which coincided with her decision not to pursue an investigation into Trump University, has drawn scrutiny in the past and resurfaced following the announcement.Democratic leaders have already voiced opposition, questioning Bondi’s ability to lead the Department of Justice independently. Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) called the nomination “a political power play” and urged a focus on “restoring integrity, not entrenching partisanship.”

▲  2317 replies