To agree with increasing tax and more benefit cuts to pay for defence

[Viviennemary]

I was surprised to hear that Labour is to spend more on defence. We really do need to with the threats from Russia and run down of weapon stocks because they have been given to Ukraine. All of Europe needs to wake up. But I think they realise this.

Err Budapest Memorandum perhaps?!

No IMO they were previously more favourable to Ukraine, for example there was 'reality on the ground' Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson or Zaporozhye.
But I have not read them thouroughly.

I don't know what point you are trying to make though? Several years and thousands and thousands of deaths and injuries later, plus global economic shocks they are back at the table (sort of), I am glad for that but it seems so futile to go through all that and be in the same place or worse off, is that your point?

I accept that but my original post was just to point out that we have been involved in worsening and prolonging the Ukraine war

You have lost me, please point me to the clause which requires us in the event of a conflict to egg Ukraine on?

@tamadeit was more a question, I missed those negotiations but have read the most recent ones. And wondered if they were similar.

I agree with @Noodlewaveon hyping of threat by Labour for political capital and to potentially pitch roll tax rises due to poor policy.

Do your own research, but try having a more open mind.

are you Russian? because what you're saying is exactly Russian propaganda line.

I went back to the document which you referred me to, as I thought it is basically the UK, RF and USA promising not to attack or threaten Ukraine economically or militarily when they give up their nuclear weapons. Obviously Russia has broken their promise but as far as I can see it is irrelevant to my opinion that we (UK, collective West) have stirred our share of shit in the conflict

Nope I am as English as if I had been born within earshot of Bow bells.

But I live in a Brics+ country so I may be exposed to different/more viewpoints

Russia has been held back because the US has provided billions in military aid, intel and comms.

Had they not done this, its likely they would have a lot more of the country, plus been able to deploy their air force, which so far, they've not been able too.

We cannot rely of the US anymore & i suspect that the 3% aim will quickly become 5% plus.

You can agree all you like with the appeasers, bit like Badenoch in that regard.... but the reality is that almost every Govt in Western Europe is planning on increasing defence spend.
NATO is planning on a 5% of GDP target, which some already meet.

Pity Hunt didn't use the 11bn he cut from NI to boost defence spend when he had the chance.

If we want decent Education, Health etc than taxes will have to increase, just as they were higher in the Cold War across Europe.

You may be able to fly back to Australia but most of can not if Russia decides to take more of the old USSR, destroy under sea infrastructure, mess with Elections etc.

You likely have Badenoch in your mind more than others going by your posts.

Things are going well apparently according to you and Labour. Pay from that.

As for the personal stuff at the end try not to, it’s a bit odd.

Spot on. Five percent it is. The US is packing up from Europe, imo

The US has announced that some troops in Europe will be deployed elsewhere later this year. Currently, we have 80,000 active-duty military personnel in Europe, which is more soldiers than the British Army has worldwide. The plan is to withdraw up to 10,000, so a 12% reduction.

Much of the value of the US's participation in NATO comes from intelligence sharing and the provision of an overall command structure. Neither of those contributions requires a lot of boots on the ground in Europe.

What's with the personal stuff?

Who exactly is Badenoch appeasing? Have you swallowed the 'same column as Russia Iran and China' bullshit that Starmer keeps spewing?

Hunt hasn't been Chancellor for almost a year. If you don't like something, perhaps blame the current Chancellor for not reversing it.

Starmer won't even commit properly to 3%, he just wants to improve his polling. The only time he saw an improvement in polling was when he was banging on about boots on the ground.

Well I hope you don’t regard my post as critical of the US. But basically I assume that the US would rather deploy its resources elsewhere and so cuts on boots will continue.

As for Five Eyes and contributions I assume without a lot of proactive work on behalf of the UK that cooperation both on boots and spooks will decline.

The UK is not yet on its own, but it is unhappily dependent on the US being friendly and upholding its international commitments which look flakier than any time in my memory. There’s worse than Trump over there.

Putting money into defence also should help the economy as they are skilled jobs and lots of apprenticeships which trickle down in the future. Innovations in the defence industry then help wider society too.

Perhaps I’m bias as have direct links to it. Any young people considering what to do at university, mechanical or electrical engineering are very good options!

I didn't take it as critical, I just wanted to add some context, i.e. that there would still be a very substantial US military presence in Europe after those troops were redeployed.

Five Eyes has been incredibly valuable to everyone involved. Some American contributions to intel sharing would be hard to replace if they were withdrawn, but I don't think it's likely that will happen. I agree that excessive dependence on the US was never good for anyone.

Trump keeps going on about Canada’s contribution to defence but the only country we’re facing any danger from is the US whilst Trump is in WH.

What personal stuff? fairly obvious, if war broke out in Europe, many of those that could would leave the continent...

Russia is praising Badenoch's stance... and the pp doesn't want to spend any more on defence and neither do you, fortunately Lab and Europe wont listen to this level of disarmament.

According to you both, its all Starmer/Lab scaremongering....& a ruse to raise taxes.... perhaps they should take note of Mark Rutte?

Or is he on Side Starmer too....

Build a wall.

Cheaper and easier to just get rid of Trump. Hasn’t been any issue before he became President. We use to cross the border regularly for lunch or shopping. Not any more.

Yes let's kill our own before Russia gets a chance!

How are you employed with such senseless reasoning skills

You’re summarising incorrectly. I said no to more tax rises.

As for what personal stuff, check your post.

Where did I say I didn't want to spend more on defence? That's a huge reach and totally untrue. Its also untrue that Badenoch is a kremlin puppet, but I think you already know that. Starmer knows it too.

As for defence, I'll believe it when I see it, they have not committed to even 3%. It's an ambition. So far, its smoke and mirrors to grab headlines. No funding commitments, no timeline.

Mark Rutte needs to look in his own back yard where they spend even less than we do. He wants to include things like new roads and railway lines as defence spending to make it more palatable to get to 5%. I wonder what else they'll come up with to pretend they're spending on our armed forces. Govs are usually quite inventive with what they categorise as 'defence' spending.
Do you class a new tram line in greater manchester as 'defence'? I know I don't.
As I said I'll believe it when I see it.

Well he's been voted in so hard luck. But it's not for that long. At least he's a bit more interesting than dull as ditchwater Keir.