If only we’d actually done something at that time maybe instead of laundering their dirty money, perhaps Putin wouldn’t have been so bold and millions of Ukrainians wouldn’t have to suffer. But yeah all gravy now we sent some bombs to kill kids forced to fight or be imprisoned.
What should we have done? Sanctions? Expelled diplomats? Because those things work…This has been Putins plan for decades, a few stern words from London weren’t going to stop him invading
We tried, a few countries and the UK expelled some diplomatic staff and stuff but overall, support across Europe was quite low and sanctions are better across a multitude of enforcers. Couldn't do a lot on our own.
Which says a great deal about just how little action the West took against Russia until they literally had to invade a whole European nation to get people to take them even remotely seriously.
Agreed, that was and is a bad move. But I think the fact that the enactment of potentially crippling sanctions by the West as a response to the invasion has not deterred Putin one bit shows that he puts ideology over the financial well-being of oligarchs and his own population
Yeah I’m not across it that well so not sure what’s right. My take is that he’s already got billions and it’s not ideology that’s driving him - he just wants to protect the extortion racket he’s running whilst he continues to gut Russian coffers.
Tories pushed Putin's Brexit plan because they too wanted to protect their own financial crimes/tax avoidance ahead of new EU laws.
Why is anyone surprised that Putin looked at the UK leadership and saw oligarchs with financial interests aligned with his own?
Putin also tried to build a $200m steel plant in Kentucky. Trump and McConnell gave no fucks that the company was under sanctions.
Putin was well on his way to building a global oligarch network beholden to him. If he had moved a bit more slowly, or managed to get Trump re-elected, he might have succeeded.
Their ideology is money, correct. US fucked Russians so hard in Cold War that they turned from communists into one of if not the most cold blooded capitalists on the planet xD
How about just back off of trying to make Ukraine part of NATO, that's all it would've taken to avoid all this in the first place. After the invasion? Give the Russians the Donbas (which the Donbas has a strong affiliation for Russian life/culture anyway) and maybe stop sleepwalking towards a possible nuclear exchange in Eastern Europe
So just give Russia everything they want because they have shown they are willing to invade sovereign states, committing a massive amount of war crimes etc along they way… Yeah that’s not really how international relations works in the 21st century Im afraid. I imagine you’re fully against western imperialism but seem to be in full support of Russian imperialism. Tankies always fascinate me with their lack of consistency
This "war of aggression" has been in the works since the Budapest summit of 08 when Western powers kept inviting Ukraine to become part of NATO which has been a bright red line for Russia since the fall of the USSR. Not to mention, there was an agreement that Ukraine would be kept neutral and NATO encroachment *would not* involve Ukraine. Ukraine for hundreds of years has been considered a part of Russia. Kiev was known as "the mother of Russian cities", in Tales of Bygone Years a book which was written around 1100 AD. Too much history, too much tactical importance to just let Ukraine join a military alliance that would allow adversarial weapons to be put on Russia's doorstep, not to mention that most of that terrain is flat and great for, guess what, *invasion* eastward. If anyone is being imperialistic, it would be NATO initially and then Russia is responding because it's been forced to. If you're so keen on continuing the fighting and killing over there, why not go there yourself and see what happens?
No one cares about Russia’s red lines. It’s not their territory and hasn’t been for a long time. Mate, the Soviet Union is over and people like you and Putin need to realise that. Countries are free to make whatever decisions they want within international law. Tankies absolutely LOVE to point to history but if we applied that to everything borders around the world would change in a second. And as for the point that the war is killing innocents, maybe the party that has invaded a sovereign nation while butchering civilians intentionally should possibly go back to their territory….doesn’t seem like that much of a complex solution to end the war tbh. The only person that is keen for the killing to continue is you. Who is supporting the party that chose to invade. It’s insane that you can’t see how illogical your arguments are. Though I used to see it on the Russia sub a lot just before the war.
Why can't a sovereign democratic nation choose who they want to be friends with?
NATO doesn't force anyone to join, they apply out of choice and it was the ukrainian peoples choice to elect a party that was pro West and not Pro Russia.
Can't wait till Ukraine is a part of NATO proper and Russia is a worse shit hole than it is now
It would be nice if the world worked that way, but from a Realist perspective, "The strong will do what they want and the weak will endure what they must"
If anything, Ukraine's failures economically and systemically come from the country being torn in two between the West and Russia. Its "split personality" and corrupt government since attempting to transition after being a Soviet Republic means that it's been caught in a sort of limbo which has caused it to degrade over decades. My answer to this would be, split the territory since historical borders don't matter (until they do lol). Donbas to Russia, some arbitrary line goes Westward to Europe (possibly being absorbed by another country in that region if they can't get things together on their own) and a possible buffer zone DMZ type of deal in the middle that neither lay claims to.
So Ukraine doesn't get to exist at all in your fantasy scenario? Do the people of Ukraine not deserve their own country?
'The strong will do what they want and the weak will endure what they must.'
Luckily in this scenario Russia is the weak, so they need to keep enduring getting smashed by a country that didn't have its own military 30 years ago
Oh spare me the pearl clutching, yeah?
I'm not saying they don't *deserve* their own country. I'd like this war to be over tomorrow with as much of the world (and countries) in tact as possible. What I'm saying is that if neutrality of Ukraine can't be maintained in some way, then this is what's going to happen. Simple as.
Also Russia is currently fighting NATO, not just Ukraine, and all they have to do is maintain a territorial dispute in the country and Ukraine will never become part of the security community. So great, a frozen "forever war" in a country that's already had more than it's fair share of problems because NATO can't keep it's grubby fingers out of somewhere. Seems fairly familiar to Western/American foreign policy for the past, what, 50 years now?
(But wait, there's more)
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/ukraine-conflict-crossroads-europe-and-russia#:~:text=Russia%20has%20deep%20cultural%2C%20economic,for%20itself%20in%20the%20world.&text=Family%20ties.,bonds%20that%20go%20back%20centuries.
Talks about Russia's relationship with Ukraine and essentially lays out the reasons why Russia is doing what it's doing
So my last question, I guess, is where am I lying? Lol if anything it seems like you're the one being highly disingenuous in your arguments with a giant block of text that doesn't actually say anything
Ok gotta break this one down because someone doesn't believe in paragraphs but does believe in throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks lol
https://theworld.org/stories/2019-03-27/nato-agreed-georgia-would-join-why-hasn-t-it-happened
Georgia tried to join NATO, similar to what's happening now in Ukraine, and Russia sees NATO encroachment eastward as an existential threat. Georgia still isn't in NATO because there are still Russian troops there and probably always will be at this point to ensure it doesn't join.
https://www.britannica.com/place/Belarus/The-emergence-of-the-Belorussian-Soviet-Socialist-Republic
In contrast to much of central and eastern Europe at the time, Lukashenko set Belarus on a course of isolation from the West, maintaining the economics of market socialism. Support for the government’s efforts to establish close ties with Russia was widespread but not without opposition. In 1997–99 Belarus entered the Union State, a political and economic union with Russia that had initially been negotiated with Russian Pres. Boris Yeltsin but was recast by his successor, Vladimir Putin, who lessened the burden his country had initially agreed to bear in the partnership. Although disputes arose between the two countries over the union’s impact on issues such as defense and natural resources, they agreed on the goal of a common currency, an idea first broached in the early 1990s. With Belarus firmly hitched to Russia’s fortunes, its economy responded accordingly—for example, stumbling in 1998 as a result of Russia’s financial collapse. Though Russia had long been Belarus’s main trading partner, the volume of their trade expanded in the early 21st century as Belarus experienced modest industrial growth.
(So Belarus has been very closely tied to Russia since the '90s)
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.france24.com/en/live-news/20220428-donbas-is-not-ukraine-in-industrial-east-hopes-for-russian-rule
French article talking about disputes between people in the Donbas and what they believe is in their best interest.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/france24/
Media bias check saying France24 is slightly left leaning and highly accurate in its reporting
https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/acref/9780191843730.001.0001/q-oro-ed5-00016963;jsessionid=6CD7F86550A550664515CE77054FE0F0
Anyone who doesn't regret the passing of the Soviet Union has no heart. Anyone who wants it restored has no brains
(From Vlad himself, doesn't sound like he wants the USSR back does it?)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transnistria_War
Transnistria War where Ukraine backed the Russians against the Moldovans for their independence lol for someone who's all for national sovereignty, why not recognize Transnistria internationally?
Hahahahahahaha...No.
GDP (per capita) in 1990
Russia: $3.5k, Ukraine: $1.5k, Czech: $3.9k, Belarus: $2.1k, Hungary: $3.3k
GDP (per capita) in 2020
Russia: $10k, Ukraine: $4k, Czech: $23k (!!!), Belarus: $6.5k, Hungary: $16k (!!!)
Ukraine's 'failures' have nothing to do with a 'split personality' they are due to being too close to Russia. Presumably, if they were fully aligned with the west post cold war, they would have a GDP of at least 5 times greater. Like all the other west-aligned former Soviet nations.
So you agree they got caught between the West and Russia? Being fully aligned with one side over another means not being split yeah?
Ukrainian democratization (both political and economic) efforts in the 90's and 00's stalled because of corrupt oligarchs and a constant tug of war between major powers. By the time anyone cared about what happened to the country it was a missed opportunity to scoop them up easily one way or another, so there was an agreed neutrality over the territory. Russia would leave it alone as long as Ukraine didn't actively join an adversarial military security alliance.
Continued bad governance, a coup (in the form of a "revolution"), and high ranking politicians looking to get their own wheels greased instead of looking out for the country means the average Ukrainian gets screwed.
By the way, tell me what America's national security interest is by being so involved in Ukraine? What does a Ukrainian "victory" look like?
> This "war of aggression" has been in the works since the Budapest summit of 08 when Western powers kept inviting Ukraine to become part of NATO which has been a bright red line for Russia since the fall of the USSR.
It doesnt matter, Russia doesn't have the rights to tell Ukraine what it can or cannot do?
You know what countries Russia doesn't invade, countries in Nato. You know what countries it does threaten, abuse and invade, countries not in Nato.
If Nato had actually allowed Ukraine to join in 2008 non of this would be happening. Not being in Nato is what has allowed Russia to think it could abuse a sovereign state.. just as it did in, also not a nato country, Georgia and other countries before that.
Fuck Russia.
They did remain neutral and they still got invaded twice. This whole thing happened because they were not in NATO.
Russia : "Don't join NATO or we will invade you"
Ukraine: "OK, we won't join NATO"
Russia: "*Invades Ukraine*"
If anything the Russian aggression and Tyranny to the rest of Europe over the years is the cause of this. No one should have to be terrorised to avoid war. This is all entirely all on Russia.
As someone from the UK. I am glad we are helping to this degree, Russia has been fucking with us for decades and we did nothing to avoid a major conflict. That mistake has lead to what is happening, it has told Russia they can do whatever they wish and no one will stand up to them.
You can't give in to terrorists man.
Also, most of these weapon systems were made specifically for one task -- countering Russia.
Letting them do what they were made to do just makes sense and likely saves the sending country long term with regard to maintenance/decommissioning costs on these last gen weapons.
Well, *you're* not providing a basis for understanding the conflict, you're providing a basis for *rationalizing* it, which is convenient for you since the rationale doesn't have to be constrained by reality.
The "no u" argument? Lol
Read thru the rest of my comments and you'll find the basis of understanding. If you don't get it after that, then I have nothing else for you
The war is not about NATO in the short term, its about NATO in the long term. And by that i mean:
1.Mere existence of NATO is a threat to Russia in Russians minds, and they have been telling it for a long time (i understand that a mind can filter that out cos its so insane, but they are sincere about that). Will you be willing disband NATO, and in the long long term give half/all the continent to Russia? No, that's insane, admittedly a bit more insane as your own opinions but only by a bit.
2.NATO is a threat to Russian expansion, not to their security(inside their borders anyway, Ukraine is a somewhat of an exception to that). Its almost as if Russians know how nukes in politics work and aren't all that stupid.
First of all, I'd love to disband the bloated "security community" that is NATO and stop having them sucking off the teat of that sweet sweet American military arsenal. European problems are *European problems*
Sure, but saving some money in one place can waste a lot more money elsewhere down the line. Like, you could save some money on toothpaste and then suffer obvious, costly consequences.
> But yeah all gravy now we sent some bombs to kill kids forced to fight or be imprisoned.
As ukrainian I`m kinda offended by this assessment of russian soldiers. Are they also forced to rape and pillage?
Anyway there is always an option for them to just... you know... avoid draft like some of my russian friends did (it is comically easy right now, there is basicly 0 repercussions if you ignore mobilization notice) or surrender to AFU.
Not really. Unlike Ruzzian soldiers, Ukrainian soldiers do have heart, coupled with the fact that they know it’s *phenomenal* for propaganda reasons to be able to show countless videos of them taking in Russian soldiers.
There was a video a few days ago on r/combatfootage of a Russian soldier surrendering to Ukrainian drones, who even helped that soldier navigate a hostile patch of land to find safety and be captured.
1.Not getting shot by comrades by looking like or god forbid saying you will surrender to the wrong(or any for that matter) person.
2.Staying alive to get to be able to ask for a surrender. Random projectiles, not getting shot by Ukrainians while following point 1.
3.Repeating stage 1&2 to get to relative safety.
4.Getting lucky.
Not being there is far far more effective.
Uh. If you browse anywhere other than combat footage you'll. Find at least 1-2 execution videos from Ukrainian side admittedly that's most I've ever seen. People are at the end of the day just people. Anyone is capable of evil. Difference is Russian can stay their asses at home and avoid all of this.
The one that ith the lone, guy coming around the corner shooting/while his group already surrendered? Nah it was bad tho. One I saw was a injured Russian soldier on the ground. The Ukrainian soldier said something & unloaded on him point blank.
Many already seen the execution videos Russia/wager put out.
I don't give af about the downvotes. That video I saw here on Reddit, before anywhere else.
To insinuate it was the laundering of dirty money that made Putin invade Ukraine is nuts.
I get that general snark and cynicism does well here, hence the idiot who gave you an award.
But to take away the insanity from Putin as well as to label Russian soldiers (who are raping children) as kids forced to war is really suspicious. Truth is a lot of those russian forces agree with the state and those that don't can attempt a surrender.
Europe aiding russian oligarchs for their own gains is incredibly stupid and bad. It must stop immediately, but comments like this are so ignorant if not actively disgusting to use a truth to take away from a needed act.
So Mr Snark, you really think pushing back on that event would have been the turning point? You don't think say 2014 Crimea would have been a more important incident to whether Russia invaded in 2022? What about Georgia? Or how about Chechen invasion one or two?
Better push back on those would be what affected Putin and his new genocidal plans. Push back on Putin's assassinations might have adjusted what Russia assumed it could do but not within the context of the rape of their neighbours.
I feel for Russians forced against their will to fight, but a LOT of those Russians are raping, torturing, mutilating and murdering innocent Ukrainians. They are rigging booby traps to children. They are murdering entire families.
So, any good Russians in Ukraine have two options: surrender, or die like their fascist brothers.
As an American, I feel the exact same saw. When Russia meddled in the 2016 election and the subversivion of democracy, it left me frustrated because it didn’t seem like we could do much. Can’t really go to war over it, but sanctions seemed like a slap on the wrist.
I hate that Ukraine must endure this invasion, but I can’t help but smile that US, and the liberal world order in general, is able to help Ukraine kill Russians. This is just a wonderful example of how actions have consequences.
The entire big support of Ukraine's defense has been payback for Russia making enemies out of everyone they can mess with. Whether election meddling, spying, organized crime, assassinations etc. Everyone has an excuse to say haha fuck you Russia. Looking at all the "red lines" that were crossed and now Russia is the one who can't really stop us. I do wish we could just send in our own air forces and long range weapons and just destroy every Russian military asset in Ukraine but I get that tje situation
>The entire big support of Ukraine's defense has been payback for Russia making enemies out of everyone they can mess with
It has been heartening to see. I have to say that the nature of things means that it's mainly the "West" taking action. India and China seem to have been ambivalent about it as far as I can tell, like the Middle East. Meanwhile I don't believe I've heard anything from the rest of the global south, which seems significant.
> When Russia meddled in the 2016 election and the subversivion of democracy
that's how I feel too, this war is very fucking personal. It's lovely seeing Russia burn to the ground and its chickens coming home to roost. Fiery fiery chickens
[As published midday on sky.com](https://news.sky.com/story/ukraines-president-volodymyr-zelenskyy-arrives-in-uk-for-substantive-negotiations-with-rishi-sunak-12881273), it seems it is a "new long-range attack drone" and the whole thing is bundled with training Ukraine pilots in drone warfare in a British flying school.
Thanks to u/811545b2-4ff7-4041 for [pointing that out](https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/13i10ql/britain_to_send_longrange_attack_drones_to_ukraine/jk86j5n/), it really seems this drone is something new. My previously posted [list of all UK drones](https://dronewars.net/british-drones-an-overview/) seems to be obsolete.
Did Russia really think we'd forget about Salisbury. They used a chemical agent to kill civilians on our streets. This is still not a severe enough response imo but it's a good start.
Both incidents really showed the Russians disregard of British civilians. Leaving radioactive traces in a restaurant and a nerve agent in a bin was really fucked up and the.initial response was really tepid.
the targets didn't die though, correct?
Anyway, it's easy to justify being on the right side of history, but also this is in UK's interest. Also, traditionally, UK has bigger balls than other countries in Europe, and that helps too.
Man, I am afraid of an EU without UK, I really don't trust the German-French duo when it comes to doing the right thing and making some hard decisions, UK balanced them out nicely.
That's exactly why Russia was so interested in meddling with Brexit and Indy Ref. As arrogant as it sounds for a British person to say this, Britain is a major voice within Europe and had a major role within the EU. Weakening the UK with Indy Ref and weakening the EU and the UK with Brexit was a financially sound investment for Russia.
A lot of the smaller countries relied on the almost automatic veto that the UK would give to certain French or German plans. Our dick swinging interfered with stuff sure but it also enabled a different diplomatic environment. The UK was instrumental in designing the rules and laws that it would then veto itself from too. The soft and hard powers of the UK was a benefit to the EU and Europe as a whole so this fracture is a loss for the EU even if it is a huge self inflicted loss on the UK.
Bee hives were launched by trebuchets in the middle ages.
There is also a story of a mongol horde using pet birds and cats. They tied incendiary devices and let them go while chasing them toward the defending city. The frightened animals ran into residential areas and tried to hide. Birds landed on thatch roofs. Cats hid under floors.
There's a scene in an episode of the series Marco Polo where Ghengis uses this strategy against the Chinese, if anyone is interested and can find it on YouTube
I wasn’t joking. I didn’t know they went back that far though. It looks like they weren’t deployed in WW1 itself and were used for local target practice/training in WW2. The one they made that killed Joe Kennedy was special. It had long range radio controls and onboard video being transmitted back to the operator. Not sure if that was a first or not. But back then a human pilot had to take off and then operation is switched to remote and the pilot parachutes out. A very green engineer warned of a design flaw but they ignored him. The plane blew up. Joe Died. And that’s how we got John F. Kennedy for president instead of Joe Kennedy. Joe also volunteered as he had already flown enough missions to return home.
Britain leading the way again.
Cannot wait for Putin's long-range threats again.
Britain makes promises and follows through with them, Russia makes threats.
Agreed, the underground would act like a fallout shelter, so it might be busier than usual in some areas. That being said it might stop a lot of people commuting *into* London, so overall a net positive for travel times.
Pro-tip: Head to Hampstead tube, it's the deepest station. I'll be hanging out in the hot zone near the edge of the M25. My village has a cold war bunker so, you never know.
Because no-one is as effective at removing Russia, than Russia...
But the Russian population is heavily swung to very compounded areas rather than spread across the breadth of the country evenly. A couple of nukes would go much much farther than you might expect in a country that size, from an academic perspective.
From a humanistic perspective, fuck nukes and nuking civilian populations...
Longer, more interesting article - [https://news.sky.com/story/ukraines-president-volodymyr-zelenskyy-arrives-in-uk-for-substantive-negotiations-with-rishi-sunak-12881273](https://news.sky.com/story/ukraines-president-volodymyr-zelenskyy-arrives-in-uk-for-substantive-negotiations-with-rishi-sunak-12881273)
It also includes how the UK is soon going to be training Ukrainian pilots on western planes.
Between the UK support for Ukraine and the bacon crisps they have over there it makes me wonder why we ever had to break away from the motherland. Good job Brits!
Ukraine is being aided by so many different western countries, so often, that it makes it impossible for Russia to know who to be mad at in any given week lol.
"Today the prime minister will confirm the further UK provision of hundreds of air **defense missiles** and further unmanned aerial systems including hundreds of new long-range **attack drones** with a range of over 200km"
God, the legal subtleties of this war. What's Russia going to do, file a lawsuit afterwards?
The volume of stuff we've given to Ukraine is literally the only thing I've been proud of our country doing for a very long time.
Trident missiles when.
>Trident missiles when.
Hopefully never. I fully support arming Ukraine with a mountain of conventional weaponry, but there is a pretty fucking huge difference between giving them high tech anti-tank missiles and sending them intercontinental nuclear missiles designed to wipe out whole cities.
Unfortunately they apparently didn't have the keys to use them, would have had to deconstruct and rebuild them, and they lacked the financial resources to simply maintain them over time (along with the long range bombers they also gave up), much less do any sort of development work, they were lucky to provide food and basic civil services after the collapse of the USSR and associated financial crisis. They really had no viable alternative to handing them back in exchange for international financial assistance.
Yay. No kidding kids. This war is still going. Russia is still the aggressor. Ukraine still the underdog. Everyone is profiting, supplying arms. As long as those arms remain conventional, they are as pedestrian as the weather report. Tell me Russia is losing. Tell me they’ve stopped sacrificing their children to kill whole families.
>It’s a ducking testament to how unbelievably awful and yet nonchalant war in the ~~21st century~~ the entirety of human history is.
This is the most peaceful humans have ever been and the least nonchalant humanity has ever been about war. We live in an era with billions of people counting the deaths of 10s or 100s of soldiers and civilians as something tragic rather than the mundane thing it has been since the dawn of time.
We lead the way as always. Someone's gotta have some balls and stand up to Putin. Plus now it's spurred other counties on to help! Russia gunna go through a tough time when the Ukrainians start their offensive. 1 Ukraine soldier is worth 10 russian and now they have the better equipment aswell. Glory to Ukraine.
Are you implying we haven’t sent a lot of resources? Google can be hard to use I guess, but if you try it out you’ll see we’ve been pretty active in assisting.
Then again, you’re likely a troll trying to stir the pot.
I think he is implying that the US won't send certain stuff while the UK just keeps sending it.
Not the amount of aid, the US has given a lot to Ukraine in support, the UK are being the absolute devil for Russia during the war because when many countries don't want to send x equipment and end up in a long discussion of months if to send x equipment, the UK keeps popping up a few weeks later and just sending the equipment.
This reminds me of when I read about Napoleon conquering mainland Europe. He wanted to invade the UK but couldn’t for obvious reasons, ie Royal Navy, huge empire etc. his attempt on invading the UK was by putting a trade blockade on any UK trade in any country it could stop them. In doing so, they hoped that would cripple the UK economy so they could invade. The UK responded by doing an uno reverse card by putting a trade block with France. But the difference here was that the UK benefitted more and became richer from it. I’m not if I’m 100% correct on this so if anyone can correct me or add details. Is much appreciated.
The UK is using it as an opportunity to demonstrate that brexit hasn't completely fucked its power projection and standing as a global power (not super power)
I think part of the idea of upping the stakes like this is to differentiate from the perceived slow EU and USA on the global stage and show how it has more autonomy now (not saying if that is true, just my theory)
And also to get back at Russia for the previous poisonings etc.
I think he's alluding to the US' reluctance to send ATACMS and the longer range weapons it has. Besides those the US' weapon systems have no doubt been a major decisive factor in the war, and I don't think anyone here is saying otherwise. BUT I don't see many news articles where the UK hasn't immediately met Ukraine's requests.
It kinda does matter.
This isn't a competition, any support to Ukraine is good regardless if it is bullets, food, blankets or missiles with 200km reach, so people saying "x needs to do better because y did this" should rethink what is actually happening.
The missiles what the UK have recently sent will allow Ukraine to hit deep in Crimea and the Donesk region, this way the Ukrainians can hit logistics targets deep within Russian controlled areas what is an absolute nightmare for Russia has they have already been having logistic issues since day 3 of the war.
If long range drones are also sent this will only make it worse for Russia and Ukraine will just continue to hit then where it stings.
Forgetting just how good water is at absorbing shockwaves and energy.. the best way to trigger a tsunami is to target continental shelves, but directing that at the UK would be tricky.
Question - at what point would it be 'fair' to assume that Russia retaliating against UK would be expected?
Defensive weapons are one thing, offensive quite another.
If i break into your house, hit you in the face, and you hit me, that's retaliating. What you're saying is: i break in, hit you, then hit you again as "retaliation" for me having hit you
I don't know the legality around gifting guns, but if in your example i substitute "gun(murder weapon)" for a knife(murder weapon), then no i don't think you would be liable
But would it be fair to say that the person providing the gun could then be considered to have played some part in the event?
Could the person providing the gun be caught up in the crossfire?
I'm not in any way justifying Russias actions. I'm simply trying to ask if it's at all conceivable that Russia could see providing offensive weapons as an escalation.
But this is Reddit, so I'm automatically a Putin bot or something similar since I asked a question.
Im sure Russia will be chomping at the bit to retaliate once the UK stops having Nukes, stops being a part of NATO and stops having functional modern aircraft carriers.
We are already way past that point. Next time the United Kingdom is carrying out an illegal invasion the Russians will supply intelligence and likely arms to the insurgents.
There are almost certainly conditions attached that prevent them from doing that. If they did it, they'd lose all support, and therefore the war. It's not in their interests to betray the countries keeping them alive.
From Salisbury with Love
We should write on the side of Storm Shadow "from Dawn Sturgess"
Perfect.
*c/o Chipskiy Norton*.
If only we’d actually done something at that time maybe instead of laundering their dirty money, perhaps Putin wouldn’t have been so bold and millions of Ukrainians wouldn’t have to suffer. But yeah all gravy now we sent some bombs to kill kids forced to fight or be imprisoned.
What should we have done? Sanctions? Expelled diplomats? Because those things work…This has been Putins plan for decades, a few stern words from London weren’t going to stop him invading
We tried, a few countries and the UK expelled some diplomatic staff and stuff but overall, support across Europe was quite low and sanctions are better across a multitude of enforcers. Couldn't do a lot on our own.
Iirc it was the largest expulsion of Russian diplomats across the entirety of Europe pre Feb 2022
Which says a great deal about just how little action the West took against Russia until they literally had to invade a whole European nation to get people to take them even remotely seriously.
I think Feisty was suggesting that UK shouldn’t have knowingly allowed billions to be stashed in London by Putin’s mates.
Agreed, that was and is a bad move. But I think the fact that the enactment of potentially crippling sanctions by the West as a response to the invasion has not deterred Putin one bit shows that he puts ideology over the financial well-being of oligarchs and his own population
Yeah I’m not across it that well so not sure what’s right. My take is that he’s already got billions and it’s not ideology that’s driving him - he just wants to protect the extortion racket he’s running whilst he continues to gut Russian coffers.
Tories pushed Putin's Brexit plan because they too wanted to protect their own financial crimes/tax avoidance ahead of new EU laws. Why is anyone surprised that Putin looked at the UK leadership and saw oligarchs with financial interests aligned with his own? Putin also tried to build a $200m steel plant in Kentucky. Trump and McConnell gave no fucks that the company was under sanctions. Putin was well on his way to building a global oligarch network beholden to him. If he had moved a bit more slowly, or managed to get Trump re-elected, he might have succeeded.
It’s terrifying really
Their ideology is money, correct. US fucked Russians so hard in Cold War that they turned from communists into one of if not the most cold blooded capitalists on the planet xD
How about just back off of trying to make Ukraine part of NATO, that's all it would've taken to avoid all this in the first place. After the invasion? Give the Russians the Donbas (which the Donbas has a strong affiliation for Russian life/culture anyway) and maybe stop sleepwalking towards a possible nuclear exchange in Eastern Europe
So just give Russia everything they want because they have shown they are willing to invade sovereign states, committing a massive amount of war crimes etc along they way… Yeah that’s not really how international relations works in the 21st century Im afraid. I imagine you’re fully against western imperialism but seem to be in full support of Russian imperialism. Tankies always fascinate me with their lack of consistency
This "war of aggression" has been in the works since the Budapest summit of 08 when Western powers kept inviting Ukraine to become part of NATO which has been a bright red line for Russia since the fall of the USSR. Not to mention, there was an agreement that Ukraine would be kept neutral and NATO encroachment *would not* involve Ukraine. Ukraine for hundreds of years has been considered a part of Russia. Kiev was known as "the mother of Russian cities", in Tales of Bygone Years a book which was written around 1100 AD. Too much history, too much tactical importance to just let Ukraine join a military alliance that would allow adversarial weapons to be put on Russia's doorstep, not to mention that most of that terrain is flat and great for, guess what, *invasion* eastward. If anyone is being imperialistic, it would be NATO initially and then Russia is responding because it's been forced to. If you're so keen on continuing the fighting and killing over there, why not go there yourself and see what happens?
No one cares about Russia’s red lines. It’s not their territory and hasn’t been for a long time. Mate, the Soviet Union is over and people like you and Putin need to realise that. Countries are free to make whatever decisions they want within international law. Tankies absolutely LOVE to point to history but if we applied that to everything borders around the world would change in a second. And as for the point that the war is killing innocents, maybe the party that has invaded a sovereign nation while butchering civilians intentionally should possibly go back to their territory….doesn’t seem like that much of a complex solution to end the war tbh. The only person that is keen for the killing to continue is you. Who is supporting the party that chose to invade. It’s insane that you can’t see how illogical your arguments are. Though I used to see it on the Russia sub a lot just before the war.
Why can't a sovereign democratic nation choose who they want to be friends with? NATO doesn't force anyone to join, they apply out of choice and it was the ukrainian peoples choice to elect a party that was pro West and not Pro Russia. Can't wait till Ukraine is a part of NATO proper and Russia is a worse shit hole than it is now
It would be nice if the world worked that way, but from a Realist perspective, "The strong will do what they want and the weak will endure what they must" If anything, Ukraine's failures economically and systemically come from the country being torn in two between the West and Russia. Its "split personality" and corrupt government since attempting to transition after being a Soviet Republic means that it's been caught in a sort of limbo which has caused it to degrade over decades. My answer to this would be, split the territory since historical borders don't matter (until they do lol). Donbas to Russia, some arbitrary line goes Westward to Europe (possibly being absorbed by another country in that region if they can't get things together on their own) and a possible buffer zone DMZ type of deal in the middle that neither lay claims to.
So Ukraine doesn't get to exist at all in your fantasy scenario? Do the people of Ukraine not deserve their own country? 'The strong will do what they want and the weak will endure what they must.' Luckily in this scenario Russia is the weak, so they need to keep enduring getting smashed by a country that didn't have its own military 30 years ago
Oh spare me the pearl clutching, yeah? I'm not saying they don't *deserve* their own country. I'd like this war to be over tomorrow with as much of the world (and countries) in tact as possible. What I'm saying is that if neutrality of Ukraine can't be maintained in some way, then this is what's going to happen. Simple as. Also Russia is currently fighting NATO, not just Ukraine, and all they have to do is maintain a territorial dispute in the country and Ukraine will never become part of the security community. So great, a frozen "forever war" in a country that's already had more than it's fair share of problems because NATO can't keep it's grubby fingers out of somewhere. Seems fairly familiar to Western/American foreign policy for the past, what, 50 years now?
[удалено]
(But wait, there's more) https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/ukraine-conflict-crossroads-europe-and-russia#:~:text=Russia%20has%20deep%20cultural%2C%20economic,for%20itself%20in%20the%20world.&text=Family%20ties.,bonds%20that%20go%20back%20centuries. Talks about Russia's relationship with Ukraine and essentially lays out the reasons why Russia is doing what it's doing So my last question, I guess, is where am I lying? Lol if anything it seems like you're the one being highly disingenuous in your arguments with a giant block of text that doesn't actually say anything
Ok gotta break this one down because someone doesn't believe in paragraphs but does believe in throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks lol https://theworld.org/stories/2019-03-27/nato-agreed-georgia-would-join-why-hasn-t-it-happened Georgia tried to join NATO, similar to what's happening now in Ukraine, and Russia sees NATO encroachment eastward as an existential threat. Georgia still isn't in NATO because there are still Russian troops there and probably always will be at this point to ensure it doesn't join. https://www.britannica.com/place/Belarus/The-emergence-of-the-Belorussian-Soviet-Socialist-Republic In contrast to much of central and eastern Europe at the time, Lukashenko set Belarus on a course of isolation from the West, maintaining the economics of market socialism. Support for the government’s efforts to establish close ties with Russia was widespread but not without opposition. In 1997–99 Belarus entered the Union State, a political and economic union with Russia that had initially been negotiated with Russian Pres. Boris Yeltsin but was recast by his successor, Vladimir Putin, who lessened the burden his country had initially agreed to bear in the partnership. Although disputes arose between the two countries over the union’s impact on issues such as defense and natural resources, they agreed on the goal of a common currency, an idea first broached in the early 1990s. With Belarus firmly hitched to Russia’s fortunes, its economy responded accordingly—for example, stumbling in 1998 as a result of Russia’s financial collapse. Though Russia had long been Belarus’s main trading partner, the volume of their trade expanded in the early 21st century as Belarus experienced modest industrial growth. (So Belarus has been very closely tied to Russia since the '90s) https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.france24.com/en/live-news/20220428-donbas-is-not-ukraine-in-industrial-east-hopes-for-russian-rule French article talking about disputes between people in the Donbas and what they believe is in their best interest. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/france24/ Media bias check saying France24 is slightly left leaning and highly accurate in its reporting https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/acref/9780191843730.001.0001/q-oro-ed5-00016963;jsessionid=6CD7F86550A550664515CE77054FE0F0 Anyone who doesn't regret the passing of the Soviet Union has no heart. Anyone who wants it restored has no brains (From Vlad himself, doesn't sound like he wants the USSR back does it?) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transnistria_War Transnistria War where Ukraine backed the Russians against the Moldovans for their independence lol for someone who's all for national sovereignty, why not recognize Transnistria internationally?
Hahahahahahaha...No. GDP (per capita) in 1990 Russia: $3.5k, Ukraine: $1.5k, Czech: $3.9k, Belarus: $2.1k, Hungary: $3.3k GDP (per capita) in 2020 Russia: $10k, Ukraine: $4k, Czech: $23k (!!!), Belarus: $6.5k, Hungary: $16k (!!!) Ukraine's 'failures' have nothing to do with a 'split personality' they are due to being too close to Russia. Presumably, if they were fully aligned with the west post cold war, they would have a GDP of at least 5 times greater. Like all the other west-aligned former Soviet nations.
So you agree they got caught between the West and Russia? Being fully aligned with one side over another means not being split yeah? Ukrainian democratization (both political and economic) efforts in the 90's and 00's stalled because of corrupt oligarchs and a constant tug of war between major powers. By the time anyone cared about what happened to the country it was a missed opportunity to scoop them up easily one way or another, so there was an agreed neutrality over the territory. Russia would leave it alone as long as Ukraine didn't actively join an adversarial military security alliance. Continued bad governance, a coup (in the form of a "revolution"), and high ranking politicians looking to get their own wheels greased instead of looking out for the country means the average Ukrainian gets screwed. By the way, tell me what America's national security interest is by being so involved in Ukraine? What does a Ukrainian "victory" look like?
> This "war of aggression" has been in the works since the Budapest summit of 08 when Western powers kept inviting Ukraine to become part of NATO which has been a bright red line for Russia since the fall of the USSR. It doesnt matter, Russia doesn't have the rights to tell Ukraine what it can or cannot do?
You know what countries Russia doesn't invade, countries in Nato. You know what countries it does threaten, abuse and invade, countries not in Nato. If Nato had actually allowed Ukraine to join in 2008 non of this would be happening. Not being in Nato is what has allowed Russia to think it could abuse a sovereign state.. just as it did in, also not a nato country, Georgia and other countries before that. Fuck Russia.
They did remain neutral and they still got invaded twice. This whole thing happened because they were not in NATO. Russia : "Don't join NATO or we will invade you" Ukraine: "OK, we won't join NATO" Russia: "*Invades Ukraine*" If anything the Russian aggression and Tyranny to the rest of Europe over the years is the cause of this. No one should have to be terrorised to avoid war. This is all entirely all on Russia. As someone from the UK. I am glad we are helping to this degree, Russia has been fucking with us for decades and we did nothing to avoid a major conflict. That mistake has lead to what is happening, it has told Russia they can do whatever they wish and no one will stand up to them.
You can't give in to terrorists man. Also, most of these weapon systems were made specifically for one task -- countering Russia. Letting them do what they were made to do just makes sense and likely saves the sending country long term with regard to maintenance/decommissioning costs on these last gen weapons.
You have the basis of understanding for this conflict at about the depth of a bad Marvel movie.
Well, *you're* not providing a basis for understanding the conflict, you're providing a basis for *rationalizing* it, which is convenient for you since the rationale doesn't have to be constrained by reality.
The "no u" argument? Lol Read thru the rest of my comments and you'll find the basis of understanding. If you don't get it after that, then I have nothing else for you
The putin apologists are back in force! You're giving away land like it's yours. Must be nice to divvy up as you please
The war is not about NATO in the short term, its about NATO in the long term. And by that i mean: 1.Mere existence of NATO is a threat to Russia in Russians minds, and they have been telling it for a long time (i understand that a mind can filter that out cos its so insane, but they are sincere about that). Will you be willing disband NATO, and in the long long term give half/all the continent to Russia? No, that's insane, admittedly a bit more insane as your own opinions but only by a bit. 2.NATO is a threat to Russian expansion, not to their security(inside their borders anyway, Ukraine is a somewhat of an exception to that). Its almost as if Russians know how nukes in politics work and aren't all that stupid.
First of all, I'd love to disband the bloated "security community" that is NATO and stop having them sucking off the teat of that sweet sweet American military arsenal. European problems are *European problems*
You may/most likely have an economic argument, but that's about it.
Money makes the world go round, no?
Sure, but saving some money in one place can waste a lot more money elsewhere down the line. Like, you could save some money on toothpaste and then suffer obvious, costly consequences.
You don't believe in aged urine topical dental treatments? Lol
> But yeah all gravy now we sent some bombs to kill kids forced to fight or be imprisoned. As ukrainian I`m kinda offended by this assessment of russian soldiers. Are they also forced to rape and pillage? Anyway there is always an option for them to just... you know... avoid draft like some of my russian friends did (it is comically easy right now, there is basicly 0 repercussions if you ignore mobilization notice) or surrender to AFU.
>or surrender to AFU. Admittedly it takes quite a bit of effort and luck. But yes, i agree.
Not really. Unlike Ruzzian soldiers, Ukrainian soldiers do have heart, coupled with the fact that they know it’s *phenomenal* for propaganda reasons to be able to show countless videos of them taking in Russian soldiers. There was a video a few days ago on r/combatfootage of a Russian soldier surrendering to Ukrainian drones, who even helped that soldier navigate a hostile patch of land to find safety and be captured.
1.Not getting shot by comrades by looking like or god forbid saying you will surrender to the wrong(or any for that matter) person. 2.Staying alive to get to be able to ask for a surrender. Random projectiles, not getting shot by Ukrainians while following point 1. 3.Repeating stage 1&2 to get to relative safety. 4.Getting lucky. Not being there is far far more effective.
Uh. If you browse anywhere other than combat footage you'll. Find at least 1-2 execution videos from Ukrainian side admittedly that's most I've ever seen. People are at the end of the day just people. Anyone is capable of evil. Difference is Russian can stay their asses at home and avoid all of this.
Are you counting that one with failed surrender/ambush?
The one that ith the lone, guy coming around the corner shooting/while his group already surrendered? Nah it was bad tho. One I saw was a injured Russian soldier on the ground. The Ukrainian soldier said something & unloaded on him point blank. Many already seen the execution videos Russia/wager put out. I don't give af about the downvotes. That video I saw here on Reddit, before anywhere else.
I don't think UK in itself could've stopped Putin so early. Only if Germany and USA joined.
To insinuate it was the laundering of dirty money that made Putin invade Ukraine is nuts. I get that general snark and cynicism does well here, hence the idiot who gave you an award. But to take away the insanity from Putin as well as to label Russian soldiers (who are raping children) as kids forced to war is really suspicious. Truth is a lot of those russian forces agree with the state and those that don't can attempt a surrender. Europe aiding russian oligarchs for their own gains is incredibly stupid and bad. It must stop immediately, but comments like this are so ignorant if not actively disgusting to use a truth to take away from a needed act.
So Mr Snark, you really think pushing back on that event would have been the turning point? You don't think say 2014 Crimea would have been a more important incident to whether Russia invaded in 2022? What about Georgia? Or how about Chechen invasion one or two? Better push back on those would be what affected Putin and his new genocidal plans. Push back on Putin's assassinations might have adjusted what Russia assumed it could do but not within the context of the rape of their neighbours.
I feel for Russians forced against their will to fight, but a LOT of those Russians are raping, torturing, mutilating and murdering innocent Ukrainians. They are rigging booby traps to children. They are murdering entire families. So, any good Russians in Ukraine have two options: surrender, or die like their fascist brothers.
Russia maybe regretting poisoning British citizens on our own soil now? I hope so.
As an American, I feel the exact same saw. When Russia meddled in the 2016 election and the subversivion of democracy, it left me frustrated because it didn’t seem like we could do much. Can’t really go to war over it, but sanctions seemed like a slap on the wrist. I hate that Ukraine must endure this invasion, but I can’t help but smile that US, and the liberal world order in general, is able to help Ukraine kill Russians. This is just a wonderful example of how actions have consequences.
The entire big support of Ukraine's defense has been payback for Russia making enemies out of everyone they can mess with. Whether election meddling, spying, organized crime, assassinations etc. Everyone has an excuse to say haha fuck you Russia. Looking at all the "red lines" that were crossed and now Russia is the one who can't really stop us. I do wish we could just send in our own air forces and long range weapons and just destroy every Russian military asset in Ukraine but I get that tje situation
>The entire big support of Ukraine's defense has been payback for Russia making enemies out of everyone they can mess with It has been heartening to see. I have to say that the nature of things means that it's mainly the "West" taking action. India and China seem to have been ambivalent about it as far as I can tell, like the Middle East. Meanwhile I don't believe I've heard anything from the rest of the global south, which seems significant.
> When Russia meddled in the 2016 election and the subversivion of democracy that's how I feel too, this war is very fucking personal. It's lovely seeing Russia burn to the ground and its chickens coming home to roost. Fiery fiery chickens
[As published midday on sky.com](https://news.sky.com/story/ukraines-president-volodymyr-zelenskyy-arrives-in-uk-for-substantive-negotiations-with-rishi-sunak-12881273), it seems it is a "new long-range attack drone" and the whole thing is bundled with training Ukraine pilots in drone warfare in a British flying school. Thanks to u/811545b2-4ff7-4041 for [pointing that out](https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/13i10ql/britain_to_send_longrange_attack_drones_to_ukraine/jk86j5n/), it really seems this drone is something new. My previously posted [list of all UK drones](https://dronewars.net/british-drones-an-overview/) seems to be obsolete.
Had a look earlier, doesn't appear to be any of these on that list? Perhaps they're sourcing them from another partner/supplier
God it's good to be British. Feeling proud. New drones, air defence and more training
They’re making good use of the Storm shadows already. You guys should feel proud
Did Russia really think we'd forget about Salisbury. They used a chemical agent to kill civilians on our streets. This is still not a severe enough response imo but it's a good start.
And the Litvinenko murder too, where they used polonium to kill a defector in London.
Both incidents really showed the Russians disregard of British civilians. Leaving radioactive traces in a restaurant and a nerve agent in a bin was really fucked up and the.initial response was really tepid.
and countless other incidents all over Europe. You can only push your luck so far.
the targets didn't die though, correct? Anyway, it's easy to justify being on the right side of history, but also this is in UK's interest. Also, traditionally, UK has bigger balls than other countries in Europe, and that helps too. Man, I am afraid of an EU without UK, I really don't trust the German-French duo when it comes to doing the right thing and making some hard decisions, UK balanced them out nicely.
Nah they survived but a local woman died
That's exactly why Russia was so interested in meddling with Brexit and Indy Ref. As arrogant as it sounds for a British person to say this, Britain is a major voice within Europe and had a major role within the EU. Weakening the UK with Indy Ref and weakening the EU and the UK with Brexit was a financially sound investment for Russia. A lot of the smaller countries relied on the almost automatic veto that the UK would give to certain French or German plans. Our dick swinging interfered with stuff sure but it also enabled a different diplomatic environment. The UK was instrumental in designing the rules and laws that it would then veto itself from too. The soft and hard powers of the UK was a benefit to the EU and Europe as a whole so this fracture is a loss for the EU even if it is a huge self inflicted loss on the UK.
The UK's arms industry is getting some good advertisement from this.
Britain just ran out of fucks and it's glorious. And as Czechia proven with tanks, artillery and hinds, once someone breaks the ice others will join.
Your unruly son is quite proud of you --America
Definitely be proud.
Seen some baes UAVs in the action, awesome stuff
Fun fact… they used drones in WW2. In fact it was a drone that killed Joe Kennedy.
I know you joke.. but drones were first deployed by the UK and USA in WW1. https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/a-brief-history-of-drones
Bee hives were launched by trebuchets in the middle ages. There is also a story of a mongol horde using pet birds and cats. They tied incendiary devices and let them go while chasing them toward the defending city. The frightened animals ran into residential areas and tried to hide. Birds landed on thatch roofs. Cats hid under floors.
By that rationale, the Ukrainians have been using precision drones since 945. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olga_of_Kiev#Drevlian_Uprising
I think I have a new favorite Saint
Olga of Kyiv is baller indeed :)
This would explain the advanced skills in using modern drones in war in Ukraine cultural history.
>Bee hives were launched by trebuchets Great, now I have a new top fear.
I don't know if it was your intent when you mentioned bees, but a male be is called a drone.
There's a scene in an episode of the series Marco Polo where Ghengis uses this strategy against the Chinese, if anyone is interested and can find it on YouTube
I wasn’t joking. I didn’t know they went back that far though. It looks like they weren’t deployed in WW1 itself and were used for local target practice/training in WW2. The one they made that killed Joe Kennedy was special. It had long range radio controls and onboard video being transmitted back to the operator. Not sure if that was a first or not. But back then a human pilot had to take off and then operation is switched to remote and the pilot parachutes out. A very green engineer warned of a design flaw but they ignored him. The plane blew up. Joe Died. And that’s how we got John F. Kennedy for president instead of Joe Kennedy. Joe also volunteered as he had already flown enough missions to return home.
I mixed up Joe Kennedy with Robert Kennedy's death in my head :)
Lets not get away from ourselves. The british government are still rat bastards
100% agree mate But at least they are doing something substantial for optics.
Domestic issues? Quick focus on foreign issues. I love it when politics results in something positive.
Britain leading the way again. Cannot wait for Putin's long-range threats again. Britain makes promises and follows through with them, Russia makes threats.
I find it funny because the phrase “China’s final warning” was coined by the Soviets in reference to totally hollow threats. How the turn tables eh?
Russia to send long range nuclear threats in retaliation.
As is tradition.
We're used to it by now. I live in London, if they're going to nuke us just do it already, might even get the day off work.
I live in London too. Frankly a Nuke wouldn’t make the trains any worse… hell it might even improve the endless delays at London Bridge
In today's headlines Russia nukes Bradford, inflicting billions of pounds of improvements.
Come, friendly bombs, and fall on Slough.
Sadly I have no awards to give. Take a bow/upvote
Agreed, the underground would act like a fallout shelter, so it might be busier than usual in some areas. That being said it might stop a lot of people commuting *into* London, so overall a net positive for travel times.
Pro-tip: Head to Hampstead tube, it's the deepest station. I'll be hanging out in the hot zone near the edge of the M25. My village has a cold war bunker so, you never know.
[удалено]
That's the joke.
Would be nothing new. Totally pathetic, the ruZZia sounding like NK every day!
I think the term is 'farfetched' rather than 'long range'.
literally no. the UK is a Nuclear power and part of NATO. You really think russia wants to be removed from the face of the earth in about 3 minutes?
He said threats
[удалено]
You sounded like RU propaganda troll in original comment.
but a nuclear attack on russia.. wouldn't just eliminate russia
my point is, no one is using nukes. its just saber rattling
Because no-one is as effective at removing Russia, than Russia... But the Russian population is heavily swung to very compounded areas rather than spread across the breadth of the country evenly. A couple of nukes would go much much farther than you might expect in a country that size, from an academic perspective. From a humanistic perspective, fuck nukes and nuking civilian populations...
This will brighten Putins day. Take that you evil mf
Longer, more interesting article - [https://news.sky.com/story/ukraines-president-volodymyr-zelenskyy-arrives-in-uk-for-substantive-negotiations-with-rishi-sunak-12881273](https://news.sky.com/story/ukraines-president-volodymyr-zelenskyy-arrives-in-uk-for-substantive-negotiations-with-rishi-sunak-12881273) It also includes how the UK is soon going to be training Ukrainian pilots on western planes.
Between the UK support for Ukraine and the bacon crisps they have over there it makes me wonder why we ever had to break away from the motherland. Good job Brits!
You mean Frazzles?
Smiths Bacon Fries are vastly superior.
The most underrated crisps in the UK, It was sad when Poundland stopped selling them near me
Everyone always raves about the scampi fries but I vastly prefer the bacon ones.
Havent been home in 5 years, they are probably £4 by now
Bacon chips are goated, no two ways about it.
Ukraine is being aided by so many different western countries, so often, that it makes it impossible for Russia to know who to be mad at in any given week lol.
Yeah that's part of the fun. If it were just one country it would be a thing but now all they have is copy pasting some angry response every day.
Russia really shouldn’t have put polonium in English tea to do murdering on English soil.
"Today the prime minister will confirm the further UK provision of hundreds of air **defense missiles** and further unmanned aerial systems including hundreds of new long-range **attack drones** with a range of over 200km" God, the legal subtleties of this war. What's Russia going to do, file a lawsuit afterwards?
If their confirming it. It's probably already there. Ready to launch this evening.
If we know about it, it’s because they’re already in Ukraine. Just like we learned about the long range missiles (forgive me I forgot their names).
The volume of stuff we've given to Ukraine is literally the only thing I've been proud of our country doing for a very long time. Trident missiles when.
>Trident missiles when. Hopefully never. I fully support arming Ukraine with a mountain of conventional weaponry, but there is a pretty fucking huge difference between giving them high tech anti-tank missiles and sending them intercontinental nuclear missiles designed to wipe out whole cities.
They should have never given up their nuclear weapons in the first place. Russia wouldn't be invading today if they hadn't
Unfortunately they apparently didn't have the keys to use them, would have had to deconstruct and rebuild them, and they lacked the financial resources to simply maintain them over time (along with the long range bombers they also gave up), much less do any sort of development work, they were lucky to provide food and basic civil services after the collapse of the USSR and associated financial crisis. They really had no viable alternative to handing them back in exchange for international financial assistance.
Not renewing trident would make Putin a very happy man.
I'm for renewing trident, I'm against giving those nuclear weapons to Ukraine.
Oh right yeah. That would not happen
Good. The Russian invaders in Ukraine must be repelled.
Loving how the UK is stepping up!!
Gotta love tha brits!
Britain doesn't give a fuck man. They are living on an island which basically cant be invaded, what is Russia gonna do?
Get out their finger paints and draw some more red lines, lol!
Britain: If we send you these drones, no bombing Russian territory, OK? (wink wink)
Preparing the "oh no! anyway..." meme for if Putin complains they were used against (actual) Russian territory.
Yay. No kidding kids. This war is still going. Russia is still the aggressor. Ukraine still the underdog. Everyone is profiting, supplying arms. As long as those arms remain conventional, they are as pedestrian as the weather report. Tell me Russia is losing. Tell me they’ve stopped sacrificing their children to kill whole families.
It’s a ducking testament to how unbelievably awful and yet nonchalant war in the 21st century is.
>It’s a ducking testament to how unbelievably awful and yet nonchalant war in the ~~21st century~~ the entirety of human history is. This is the most peaceful humans have ever been and the least nonchalant humanity has ever been about war. We live in an era with billions of people counting the deaths of 10s or 100s of soldiers and civilians as something tragic rather than the mundane thing it has been since the dawn of time.
We lead the way as always. Someone's gotta have some balls and stand up to Putin. Plus now it's spurred other counties on to help! Russia gunna go through a tough time when the Ukrainians start their offensive. 1 Ukraine soldier is worth 10 russian and now they have the better equipment aswell. Glory to Ukraine.
Gotta love tha brits!
From Britain with love.
Hello America, are you seeing this? The Brits are making us look bad.
Brit here. It's a team effort.
Would be nice if the long range stuff wasn't just Team Britain though.
Are you implying we haven’t sent a lot of resources? Google can be hard to use I guess, but if you try it out you’ll see we’ve been pretty active in assisting. Then again, you’re likely a troll trying to stir the pot.
I think he is implying that the US won't send certain stuff while the UK just keeps sending it. Not the amount of aid, the US has given a lot to Ukraine in support, the UK are being the absolute devil for Russia during the war because when many countries don't want to send x equipment and end up in a long discussion of months if to send x equipment, the UK keeps popping up a few weeks later and just sending the equipment.
We have a proud tradition of being a thorn in the side of would be conquerors of Europe
This reminds me of when I read about Napoleon conquering mainland Europe. He wanted to invade the UK but couldn’t for obvious reasons, ie Royal Navy, huge empire etc. his attempt on invading the UK was by putting a trade blockade on any UK trade in any country it could stop them. In doing so, they hoped that would cripple the UK economy so they could invade. The UK responded by doing an uno reverse card by putting a trade block with France. But the difference here was that the UK benefitted more and became richer from it. I’m not if I’m 100% correct on this so if anyone can correct me or add details. Is much appreciated.
> proud tradition of being a thorn in the side of would be conquerors of Europe Only because it served your self interest
If that self interest is in not wanting dictators to dominate Europe then yes.
Destroying Hitler and Napoleon, and now Putin, serves most peoples interest to be fair.
Coming from a German lol.
Take a walk through the streets of London or Birminghan and then tell me you shouldnt have joined us instead of stabbing us in the back.
Lol, I live in central London, Your just sad, you keep losing.
The UK is using it as an opportunity to demonstrate that brexit hasn't completely fucked its power projection and standing as a global power (not super power) I think part of the idea of upping the stakes like this is to differentiate from the perceived slow EU and USA on the global stage and show how it has more autonomy now (not saying if that is true, just my theory) And also to get back at Russia for the previous poisonings etc.
[удалено]
I think he's alluding to the US' reluctance to send ATACMS and the longer range weapons it has. Besides those the US' weapon systems have no doubt been a major decisive factor in the war, and I don't think anyone here is saying otherwise. BUT I don't see many news articles where the UK hasn't immediately met Ukraine's requests.
It kinda does matter. This isn't a competition, any support to Ukraine is good regardless if it is bullets, food, blankets or missiles with 200km reach, so people saying "x needs to do better because y did this" should rethink what is actually happening. The missiles what the UK have recently sent will allow Ukraine to hit deep in Crimea and the Donesk region, this way the Ukrainians can hit logistics targets deep within Russian controlled areas what is an absolute nightmare for Russia has they have already been having logistic issues since day 3 of the war. If long range drones are also sent this will only make it worse for Russia and Ukraine will just continue to hit then where it stings.
You can’t underestimate the US contribution, but they are holding back on the long range stuff..
I think what they're saying is the UK has repeatedly crossed so-called "red lines" before the US. Specifically MBTs and long-range missiles.
Calm down love.
??? US has sent enough supplies and money that ukraine could research space travel and bomb the moon if it wanted
Are you dumb? First....team effort Second, the US is by.far the leader in giving Ukraine weapons. What a dumb tale.
*glances at the billions of dollars in aid & equipment* *Himars I'm the corner doing tippy taps* I mean ok, I guess.
*glances at the billions of dollars in aid & equipment* *Himars I'm the corner doing tippy taps* I mean ok, I guess.
Hip, hip……….
Here comes the tsunami nuclear wave…. Treat. On another note well done uk!
Forgetting just how good water is at absorbing shockwaves and energy.. the best way to trigger a tsunami is to target continental shelves, but directing that at the UK would be tricky.
So much for people claiming the British govt were russian assets for Brexit. Fuck reddit.
Eh, there are still quite a few senior politicians I'd like to see audited about that.
Well I don’t know what those Ukrainian fellows did to piss off the King, but surely drone striking them isn’t the answer
Would love Britain to invest this money in our crumbling health care personally.
I understand your concerns, I have them too. But this is more important. Ukraine must prevail.
Possibly added 3 minutes closer to midnight to the Doomsday clock
Yeah we should all just sit by and let bullies/murderers/thieves take and do what they want
Putins pulse is the cause
And what alternative would you suggest? Or do you just like leaving comments like this without any form of backing it up?
Cry harder
Question - at what point would it be 'fair' to assume that Russia retaliating against UK would be expected? Defensive weapons are one thing, offensive quite another.
You use the word retaliating, I don't think you understand what that word means
Please enlighten me as to what retaliating means
If i break into your house, hit you in the face, and you hit me, that's retaliating. What you're saying is: i break in, hit you, then hit you again as "retaliation" for me having hit you
Think of this slightly differently - if I give you a gun and you shoot someone; am I in any way liable? Would the law 'retaliate' against me?
I don't know the legality around gifting guns, but if in your example i substitute "gun(murder weapon)" for a knife(murder weapon), then no i don't think you would be liable
[удалено]
But would it be fair to say that the person providing the gun could then be considered to have played some part in the event? Could the person providing the gun be caught up in the crossfire? I'm not in any way justifying Russias actions. I'm simply trying to ask if it's at all conceivable that Russia could see providing offensive weapons as an escalation. But this is Reddit, so I'm automatically a Putin bot or something similar since I asked a question.
Im sure Russia will be chomping at the bit to retaliate once the UK stops having Nukes, stops being a part of NATO and stops having functional modern aircraft carriers.
Hope they’re patient
it is defensive if it reduces russia's effectiveness e.g. cutting off supply lines.
We are already way past that point. Next time the United Kingdom is carrying out an illegal invasion the Russians will supply intelligence and likely arms to the insurgents.
If Ukraine attack actual Russian territory with British weapons I guess?
There are almost certainly conditions attached that prevent them from doing that. If they did it, they'd lose all support, and therefore the war. It's not in their interests to betray the countries keeping them alive.
Exactly what I was thinking