AIBU to not want to go to war

[TemporaryPosition]

It's expensive and it hurts and it helps nothing, it just puts innocent sons, brothers, fathers, uncles and friends through the meat grinder. The only people who benefit are those who make a fortune from selling weapons and are granted contracts for reconstruction.

Haven't we learnt anything? What happened to "never again".

AIBU to really really really not want to be involved in any war?

FFS, use the quote function. You keep copying and pasting other people's posts in without acknowledgement and without doing any formatting to make it clear or even stating that that's what you're doing, and then add a sentence of your own, so the whole thing is just confusing. It's not as if it's difficult to quote properly.

Yes, I must admit I thought it was a mistake and a fundamental misunderstanding of his US counterparts for Zelensky to use appeals to pathos and emphasise Ukraine’s suffering.

It was clear that this is of no interest to them – they do not care about the welfare of other nations. I don’t believe they care about US citizens either, however this is obviously their ticket to power on home soil.

I sympathise with the position he was put in (they were clearly goading him and want to justify withdrawal of support for Europe and Ukraine), however I also think it is a shame he rose to the bait somewhat. Very difficult though, as they were both openly disrespecting him, so not to challenge them would have left him looking humiliated also.

Are you serious 😂

Talk about false equivalency and collapsing any distinctions between the two.

They are entirety, profoundly different prospects.

I thought things fell apart when Zelensky pointed out that there had been repeated previous attempts at diplomacy, but that Putin had demonstrated that he couldn't be trusted. Faced with the truth, Vance and Trump just started shouting at Zelensky.

I think Zelensky’s approach was entirely too earnest.

That’s not to blame him – what he was faced with was a bizarre and hostile situation. I appreciate too that he is also fighting an active war against an aggressor so it’s not a fererro rocher at the ambassador’s party kind of sphere he’s operating in.

Agree 100% The only winners are the arms industries. I am surprised by the all the people here seem to be so very keen to support Ukraine.

Ukraine was the number 1 country in the whole world for corruption, Zelensky is a puppet put there by previous American administration, see Victoria Newland conversation.

UK is in no position to go to war with Russia. Even though I agree they should retreat from Ukraine, I don't see how we can win a war with Russia.

Who here wants their sons and daughters on the front line?

I lived through the Cold War. Perhaps that makes a difference to how I feel on this issue. The people who think the most important thing is to keep themselves and their loved ones alive at any cost - alive and thriving, or alive and just existing? It took centuries to get to the position most of Europe is in now, with various freedoms and rights enforced in law - freedom of speech, freedom of thought and religious belief, all adults entiled to vote in elections, employment protections, universal health and welfare entitlements, free education for everyone, consumer protections, health and safety laws, etc etc. No system is perfect and there are lots of things that could be improved in the UK. However, in theory anyway, we are all equal before the law and that is absolutely not the case in Putin's Russia (nor China, nor many other states around the world, whether they masquerade as democracies or not). I would fight to protect our way of life and I would hope that most of my fellow citizens would too. The sort of life the Putins and Trumps of this world would impose on the rest of us would not be worth living.

I agree, and I feel worried for the world right now.

I think there is a lot of naïveté (on MN today anyway – from anonymous posters posting from who knows where) about what life under a power like China or Russia might look like.

Ignorance is bliss as they say.

Pretty sure even with corruption it was better to live in Ukraine than Putin’s Russia. That’s what we are talking about here. Ukrainians and then who else? Living in Putin’s Russia. And support doesn’t mean conscripted British troops. Don’t be daft. If Putin expands his borders it might though.

If Ukraine was ever the number one country in the world for corruption, Putin has certainly knocked them off that spot, and Trump is really hoping to catch up.

@Parker231 Zelenskyy has been clear on needing the US to continue but on what others can contribute without US this covers Europe

It asks can we do it without them

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czjeejw9z4zo.amp

Scots died at Culloden. And the subsequent Highland Clearances permanently influenced Scotland's demographics and prosperity. I'd argue the sky did come down for Scotland as it had been... That's the issue with what you call 'hostile mergers'.

The list of female leaders historically and in living memory who chose war as a way to protect their nations' interests does not skew with your opinion.

TemporaryPosition · Today 09:42

Leafy74 · Today 08:19
Equality.
**
Perhaps then war would be a good idea to put this decadent nonsense to bed

WTF does that mean? You believe equality is decadent?

Nothing to do with us?

Much like WWII wasn't

Really?

Nobody wants to go to war, and modern armed forces are highly professional so they wouldn't be conscripting anyone unless it was seriously dire (aka what is happening in Ukraine) in which case I think your attitude will change. Yabu to mention only male relatives, todays armed forces are equal opportunity opportunities organisations, my dd is one of them and yes she will deploy not only alongside men but in charge of them

An inhumane thing to say, I know, but I think it’s a justified hope. That Putin and Trump won’t be around for much longer and that the voters in the US (where Trump’s popularity rating has fallen since he moved into The Whitehouse) and the subjugated people of Russia will choose a different path, having observed how very quickly the world can descend into chaos with “strong men” in positions of power.

Putin shouldn't have invaded them then

Quite. It’s easy for the victors and those unaffected to say everything was fine. Less so for those taken over. See also Wales, where the animosity still runs quite deep going back to Edward I and beyond.

How have you managed to.convince yourself that appeasing a man like Putin means that the UK will not be within his remit of aggression eventually?
Pushing their way to the back of the line of a crocodile's intent, does not mean that the crocodile has lost interest in eating the creature that it has frightened into temporarily avoiding it.

Putin has showm himself to be in need of the " go for the leader and his/her crowd will scatter" treatment as the other options are not working on him.
His leadership has not been of any revolutionary note in Russia and his need to go out in a blaze of land acquisition glory is the axis his ego spins on.

He is Trump without being a gift to comedy.
And like Hitler, Putin goes to murderous lengths to quell dissent and obstacles, imagined or real in Russia or Russian abroad.

It's a Hitleresque type of sane madman that is being dealt with here and not a. Stalinesque non paranoid, but extremely brutal type.
And yes, a Stalin type would be better to deal with, being a "does what it says on the tin" type, even if what is inside the tin aint to one's fancy.
But that super paranoid, unstable in one's identity, insecure in one's masculinity type?
Yes, Putin needs to be put under manners before it's too late.

@cardibach

And support doesn’t mean conscripted British troops. Don’t be daft

I'm not daft, this is way the wind is blowing.

They have already brought up the possibility of conscription.

Here is one link from many if you google "conscripted British troops"

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/uk-army-conscription-update-as-ex-nato-chief-demands-return-of-national-service/ar-AA1zvOlM

What do you mean if?

www.theguardian.com/news/2015/feb/04/welcome-to-the-most-corrupt-nation-in-europe-ukraine

Why should Zelenskyy back down? Russia invaded and stole their land!

Some bully at school decides that your child isn't allowed to play in one area of the playground. What are you going to do? Get the teachers to sort it out, or tell your child "yes, let them have the playground. You go somewhere else!" Ummmmmm

Now Trump is wading in saying with some protection racket for Putin saying that Zelenskyy not only needs to lose part of his country, but also the oil, gas and rare minerals that Ukraine sits on.

And we're supposed to stand back and let them rape the fucking country?!

No it isn’t.
That’s a retired officer sounding off. It’s not policy or anything like it - though Sunak did moot it once.
If Russia get beyond Ukraine and attack NATO countries it’s an outside possibility - but the forces are much more professional and technical than they used to be. An ignorant conscript wouldn’t be much help.
Though if Russia is at the gate…

@cardibach It's not if Russia attacks, it's if the UK push back.

I'm not saying it's right btw, but I cannot see how we could possibly win a war with Russia, other than Nuclear and that would be the mutual assured destruction that nobody wants to happen.