Zelensky visiting ❤

[MsAmerica]

Zelenskyy visits Britain as Prime Minister Andy Burnham signals more support for Kyiv
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/zelenskyy-visits-britain-as-prime-minister-andy-burnham-signals-more-support-for-kyiv

Zelensky visit sends clear message of support for Ukraine, Burnham says
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy8me5vyjg2o

Zelenskyy to visit Britain Monday as Burnham announces Stone Cloak technology transfer to Ukraine – media
en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/1188296.html

@MsAmerica ,

‘Everyone should have an open chequebook. The U.K. should remember back to an unchecked Hitler.’

Why?

At the beginning of WW2, the UK could make a reasonable claim to being a world power. Now….give me a break!

Sure, we should maybe take a minor supporting role (I believe our special forces are still world class, and maybe our submarines), but let more powerful and closer countries lead, both in terms of money and rhetoric.

And, if we REALLY do decide that Ukraine is the thin end of the wedge, we need to commit a minimum of 7% of our GDP to defence, and start by buying a significant amount of patriot batteries (and similar).

And yet, strangely, we can’t even get to 4%. And a lot of the pledges are either in the future or renaming existing budgets to make us look better. It’s embarrassing.

Our support for Ukraine is purely photo ops for our PMs, putting us in danger, and accruing Ukraine minimal (at best) advantage. It is like our ‘leadership’ in net zero. No one cares except for our enemies and competitors.

What do you want to see happen, @Newbutoldfather ? I agree more needs to be spent on defence, but as far as "putting us in danger" goes, it would be far, far worse if Putin ever has the upper hand in Ukraine. I don't think he does at the moment and it needs to be prevented.

@Uricon2

I think I made it fairly clear what I expected to be done. Either take a sensible back seat role in supporting the EU (rejoining would really help here) in aiding Ukraine.

Less of the performative stuff and actually do something useful given our size and relevance.

And, in case you are any doubt what would happen if anyone fired a ballistic missile at the UK:

‘The UK does not own or operate any MIM-104 Patriot missile systems or equivalent dedicated long-range anti-ballistic missile ground batteries. For land-based air defense, the British Army relies on Sky Sabre (using CAMM missiles), which is a short-to-medium range system limited to a ~25 km range and unable to intercept ballistic missiles. 1, 2, 3, 4]
Land-Based Air Defense (Short/Medium Range)

• Sky Sabre Systems: The UK fields approximately 7 to 9 mobile Sky Sabre systems (operated by the 16 Regiment Royal Artillery), though several are routinely deployed overseas, leaving domestic homeland protection very limited against major multi-missile salvos. 1, 2]
• Capability: Designed to target fighter jets, helicopters, drones, and smart bombs, but explicitly lacks the high-to-medium altitude capability (HiMAD) required for ballistic or hypersonic missile defense. 1, 2]‘’

OK. I think even Putin firing an intercontinental ballistic missile at the UK is a bit alarmist. He bit off far more than he could chew in Ukraine, much to his surprise I imagine and he isn't doing terribly well at all. He didn't expect drones attacking Russia and the loss of combatants will start to affect even the ever Spartan Russians, eventually. I feel the support from other NATO countries is important, however it is expressed (let's forget Trump)

We've been thought irrelevant at many points in our history @Newbutoldfather and it hasn't often worked out terribly well for the enemy. We are far from a First World power now and have to live with that, but we're not finished.

But yes, we need more defence spending, definitely.

Yep. More money will be thrown about.

I do think it is funny how many believe Putin is a realistic threat to the UK.

He is, but only because we make it so!

He harks back to get ‘glory days’ of the Soviet Union. He probably wants some of its d zone of influence back. But, realistically, that may include the Baltic nations and Ukraine. He has no interest (or capability) of rolling his tanks across Poland and Germany.

Putin is a cruel despot, but he is right about the West humiliating Russia in the 90s when they wanted to join NATO and then rolling NATO right up to Russia’s border having promised not to.

Sure, there is a case for helping places like Ukraine and the Baltic nations resist him, but let’s make it honestly and not as some ludicrous Hitler analogy.

Sorry, but I consider Zelensky a hero, no matter what. I don't care if he isn't perfect. I don't care if he's made some bad decisions. I don't care if he stashed some money away. He's been astonishing.

I agree 100%.
He is literally a light in a dark world right now.

Yes I agree.

We are not going to be told exactly what military help we are giving. I have noticed that when one of our PMs visits an army training, a navy ship, etc., there are Ukrainians there training alongside. Hopefully, we are also learning a lot from them - thinking especially of the drone warfare.

Putin has been directly interfering in the political situation in Ukraine throughout the 2000s. He could not accept that, after the Soviet era, the rest of the world did not see them as so special. In other words, he has always sought to make Russia great again. When he is thwarted he just digs in. How to make him pull out without losing face, that's always been the problem?

Me too. The geopolitical world needs more Zelenskyys.

Honestly, I’m a little sick of my money being spent overseas. Can’t we at least stop the illegal immigrants and deport criminals first before we fund overseas wars?

If you can get the Russian threat to wait until then, absolutely. Until you've made those arrangements, no, our security requires that we arm Ukraine now. If you don't like that, take it up with Putin.

Russia is not a threat to NATO countries. Russia would be annihilated and Putin deposed the second an invasion starts in the Baltics. Ukraine needs to stand and defend itself by their own means already.

@LondonPapa ,

‘Russia is not a threat to NATO countries. Russia would be annihilated and Putin deposed the second an invasion starts in the Baltics. Ukraine needs to stand and defend itself by their own means already’

I don’t think Russia is a threat to any Western NATO country, but it may be to countries from the old USSR who are now in NATO.

A typical scenario to challenge NATO might be to invade a small part of Estonia which Russia would claim they had territorial rights over.

That would pose a huge dilemma to NATO, especially the U.S. I believe Trump has already questioned whether going to war with Russia over the Baltic states made sense.

Where I agree is that Putin has no expansionist ambitions beyond the old USSR. He grew up in the era of the Cold War and resents what he sees as western and NATO expansion. He is actually terrified of fighting any modern army.

Russia attacks the UK regularly. The idea that land invasions are the only possible threat is woefully naive. They use alternative methods to try and get at the West precisely because they so obviously couldn't succeed in conventional military warfare.

But if they'd been able to do what they wanted to in Ukraine, rather than being expensively bogged down for several years, they'd then be able to pursue further territorial ambitions. And we know they have them in the Baltics.

Tbis is why it's so important that the UK helped in Ukraine and continues to do so until Russia are beaten. It's for our benefit. Russia hates us, attacks us and it serves our interests for them to fail at their expansionist attempts.