Active discussions

Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Politics
Original poster

Ukraine

29 replies

dubsie · 05/05/2023 09:10

I was reading today that Bill Clinton knew it was only a matter of time before Putin invaded the Ukraine. He knew this in 2011.

If this was the case why did this government welcome such high volumes of Russian investment into the Uk. It's left us extremely vulnerable to corruption and weaker to the effects of the current sanctions.

The last Labour government sanctioned Putin heavily after the assassination of two Russian businessesmen but this bunch appeared to welcome the regimes cronies with open arms.

There is now a war on our doorstep thousands of civilians have died. The current stance is to keep pumping weapons into the Ukraine until Russia falls....but what then. If Russia falls one possible outcome is an even more unstable situation.

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
L1ttledrummergirl · 25/05/2023 19:21

dubsie · 13/05/2023 08:22

I don't support giving any weapons to the Ukraine. What we should have done is given the Ukraine the choice of western troops on the ground before Russia invaded. Basically defended them.

With large numbers of western boots on the ground Russia would not have invaded and 300,000 lives would have been saved.

That's where I stand....a show of force to prevent war.

Ukraine have been defending their territory with old weaponry, and have successfully prevented Russia from taking the capital, keeping the war in a small part of the country.
Supporting them is the one thing this government is doing right.

KnittedCardi · 15/05/2023 14:25

dubsie · 13/05/2023 08:22

I don't support giving any weapons to the Ukraine. What we should have done is given the Ukraine the choice of western troops on the ground before Russia invaded. Basically defended them.

With large numbers of western boots on the ground Russia would not have invaded and 300,000 lives would have been saved.

That's where I stand....a show of force to prevent war.

I don't really know where to start with this..... if we had put troops on the ground in Ukraine, that would have been Western aggression. Europe would have been at war, and thence Nato.

Surplus2requirements · 15/05/2023 13:25

Yellowdays · 15/05/2023 10:34

We are the second largest donor to Ukraine in the world, after the US. And by a long shot, given ours to date is £7.16bn and the third, Germany, is £3.86bn.

It is not acceptable, whilst the cost of living is going up quite so much and the NHS is on its knees. And we are poorer as a result of the (at least) £40 billion Liz Truss fiasco.

On top of which, we know from past behaviour that it will be quoted back at us as an excuse to raise prices and keep salaries low for years to come.

Inflation and strain on our economy will only get worse if the invasion of Ukraine turns into a protracted stalemate, even if we weren't supplying weapons and loans.

The war is a major reason for inflation and a swift and decisive conclusion would be the best for both our economy and the worlds.

For both physical and financial security in Europe for the long term we need not only for Russia not to win but to lose in Ukraine.

If they gain anything from their invasion there will remain the incentive to do it again and elsewhere.Ideally they will be in a worse position than before Putin ordered tanks to roll over the border.

Yellowdays · 15/05/2023 10:34

We are the second largest donor to Ukraine in the world, after the US. And by a long shot, given ours to date is £7.16bn and the third, Germany, is £3.86bn.

It is not acceptable, whilst the cost of living is going up quite so much and the NHS is on its knees. And we are poorer as a result of the (at least) £40 billion Liz Truss fiasco.

On top of which, we know from past behaviour that it will be quoted back at us as an excuse to raise prices and keep salaries low for years to come.

Greenshake · 13/05/2023 11:30

It’s not ‘The Ukraine’, that’s the Russian styling.

Original poster
dubsie · 13/05/2023 08:22

I don't support giving any weapons to the Ukraine. What we should have done is given the Ukraine the choice of western troops on the ground before Russia invaded. Basically defended them.

With large numbers of western boots on the ground Russia would not have invaded and 300,000 lives would have been saved.

That's where I stand....a show of force to prevent war.

OP posts:
Greenshake · 12/05/2023 23:44

I couldn’t agree more.

Surplus2requirements · 12/05/2023 23:20

Escalation? There is only one country that is trying to erase a national identity.

De-escalation is simple, withdraw Russian troops back behind Russian borders

Greenshake · 12/05/2023 20:54

All this talk of escalation……fact is, if Putin wants to escalate things, he will. What we do or don’t supply in terms of weapons will have little to do with it.

Surplus2requirements · 12/05/2023 19:21

dubsie · 12/05/2023 18:45

I don't support any escalation of this conflict, long range missiles will escalate this.

People forget about India, China, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, South America.....how the world views our actions is very important. I'm not saying we should shy away from making decisions that might not please everyone but imagine if China, India and South Africa decide to start supplying arms.

Does that mean you support giving Ukraine just enough to maintain the stalemate in which thousands are dying rather than giving Ukraine the tools to expel the invaders back to their own borders?

Original poster
dubsie · 12/05/2023 18:45

I don't support any escalation of this conflict, long range missiles will escalate this.

People forget about India, China, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, South America.....how the world views our actions is very important. I'm not saying we should shy away from making decisions that might not please everyone but imagine if China, India and South Africa decide to start supplying arms.

OP posts:
TooBigForMyBoots · 12/05/2023 12:43

The Americans have delivered 30 odd tanks at £10million each this week. With more to come in autumn.

Who is talking you that we are contributing more financially than other countries? Because they're telling you lies @Yellowdays. Is it Farage the Putin Puppet?

KonTikki · 12/05/2023 08:13

No one wants Russia to implode. Just to go back to their own borders.
Appeasement rarely works.
Better to stand up for what you believe in, and contribute to restoring the status quo.

Yellowdays · 12/05/2023 07:58

(Which will cost more than those provided by others).

Yellowdays · 12/05/2023 07:57

We are certainly providing more powerful weapons, according to yestodays press.

TooBigForMyBoots · 12/05/2023 00:10

@dubsie, what do you mean if Russia implodes?

Greenshake · 11/05/2023 23:20

Nobody is asking you to repeat your objection.

TooBigForMyBoots · 11/05/2023 23:17

The money we're spending on the long(ish) range missiles for Ukraine comes from the Defence budget and goes into the UK's profitable and successful arms industry, providing jobs and taxes and probably a whack of cash for someone close to the Tory party.

It isn't charity and it wouldn't be spent on the poor in this country.

Yellowdays · 11/05/2023 23:03

I wouldn't have spent it on the coronation either. I can't be more clear what my objection is. Repeating it won't make it clearer.

KnittedCardi · 11/05/2023 22:39

The UK isn't a small country, nor an insignificant one. We are the fifth largest economy, the second largest contributor to NATO. Depending on how you cut it, we are top 5 for military spend top, 10 for military power. We have military resources, and we have rightly decided to support a European neighbour in defending their country.

Greenshake · 11/05/2023 22:01

This delivery of weapons isn’t entirely selfless you know. There will be big investment opportunities in Ukraine when this is all over, and we are making sure that we are going to be one of the first in line. That aside, given the money that has just been blown on the Coronation, I have no issue with this sort of spend whatsoever. I was just reading that a lot of these missiles were basically sat there gathering dust so we should be using them for their intended purpose - and this is definitely it.

TooBigForMyBoots · 11/05/2023 21:50

@Yellowdays, different countries are providing various arms and assistance. We are not providing some help,not the most. What, specifically, is your problem with the UK involvement?

Is it just cost?

Yellowdays · 11/05/2023 21:44

We are a very tiny country, with the worst deficit in Europe. We are making the poorest pay more every month. Kids are going without food. Yes we can send a big pile of weapons at £2m each.

Also I'm concerned we are taking steps which nobody else is willing to take. We are paying £2m per missile. Also , what is the reason US and others won't go this far? Which they won't. Will there be consequences? Will we pay them?

Obviously, you don't know the answers to these questions, any more than I do.

I don't like it, and for a number of reasons.

That doesn't mean that I support Russia. I just don't think we are in a position to actually lead the fight back (after Ukrainian, obviously). We just aren't that big, any more, even though there is a section of the population which hasn't noticed.

Surplus2requirements · 11/05/2023 21:22

Ukraine winning isn't about Russia falling.

It's about Russian military going back to Russia

Greenshake · 11/05/2023 20:58

Why are you unhappy about it? It’s the right thing to do.