Where will all the fighters come from then? This is just a transfer of wealth to arms manufacturers, or perhaps a way to keeping Ukrainian people in debt after the war.
Unless you want to start ww3 by sending nato troops.
https://www.economist.com/europe/2025/02/26/ukraine-is-scrambling-to-find-fresh-fighters
In that case we would have to arrest every single person who ever met with the IDF - another terrorist organisation
Endless war, fuck the poor
Russian bribes, Israeli bribes, saudi bribes, private healthcare bribes
Which MPs dont take bribes ? I know one but he was deemed unelectable by the commentari
Labour continue to show that they are no different from the Tories.
How many of their major decisions have been different from Tory policy making?
But thank god they were so electable!
Also worth remembering that Lenin wanted Russia to lose ww1 (ie lose to a literal dictator) - having a critical stance against the military activities of your own government is not sucking up to a dictator which your own capitalist government has decided to make an enemy
Dude if you want to be a socialist you cant be pro nato as well. Nato’s entire raison d’être is to protect capitalism.
I would give up my lunch money if it meant not getting into a brawl.
If the mafia shakes you down every week, you dont snitch to the cops, because the cops can only make more violence. Its the same principle here. You won’t get out of this situation with more war.
War is shit for people who live through it. Nato is only good for making war. Only de-escalation can stop war.
Well why don’t you fucking volunteer to go Ukraine then if its so important.
I’ll tend your wounds when you’re home sweetie
I’d rather be nuked than join the military
The Uk is between a rock and hard place geopolitically. It seems that joining the eu is political suicide but aligning economically with the Usa means selling off the nhs.
I guess the best we can hope for is going our own way and hoping for some economic miracle . Maybe we’ll discover some more north sea oil…
Im not sure what you’re referring to but i do know that USA has been interfering in the Ukraine which Russia considers its backyard. Imagine if Russia started arming and funding militias in alaska or mexico? (I know you’re probably going to bring up Russian bots but that isnt the same, and the USA does that kind of shit all the time).
Would we have had a couple hundred thousand dead if we hadn’t armed Ukrainian military? No the war would have ended if Russia just took the corridor it seems to want. If Russia had taken the whole country there would have been many resistance fighters but nowhere near the scale we’ve seen.
In any case , while we’ve been talking the russian minister at the talks with trump has said they wont accept peacekeeping forces anyway. So this is all futile speculation. There won’t be peacekeeping forces unless you want to prolong the war.
The USA invaded iraq - they didn’t have any intention of making it sovereign territory. That’s not enough evidence of intent.
Yes i also did gcse history and learnt about Chamberlain
Perhaps we could avoid war instead by making Russia a geopolitical ally rather than continually making them an enemy? Its not like we have any trouble making strategic alliances with other disreputable states.
No this chat by starmer is sabre rattling stupidity , what i dont fully understand is why they do it. The USA will be taking all the spoils from this war.
Any evidence for this?
Right i see why you think that, its a very seductive argument. We are in the right, we protect the weak, therefore what could possibly be bad about our presence?
However, thats not how real politics works. Russia will undoubtedly see this as a threat and it will escalate the war further. It doesn’t matter if they are correct to view us as such, but they will.
Unless Russia agrees to some unilateral peacekeeping arrangements as part of a peace deal, which seems unlikely, then why should we poke the beast?
There is also the fact that peacekeeping is not our forte, remember iraq, Afghanistan? Do you really think that pro-russian militias won’t retaliate? It doesn’t matter that we are in the right, our presence will not lead to peace.
I think Einstein said you can’t simultaneously prevent and prepare for war. Its time to choose which you want.
Regarding your Palestine comment, its just a completely different situation. Im not sure its comparable. Peacekeeping forces might be part of a settlement reached by hamas and Israel but it would have to be acceptable to both parties otherwise it leads to more violence.
Well yes you’ve discovered the problem of means testing any benefit. Its much better in general just to give everyone the option instead of farting about with the admin of deciding who is eligible.
So in order to get peace you want to escalate the war?
There is no sense in this argument. When has increasing the presence of troops ever led to fruitful peace talks?
From their perspective it just looks like we’re about to invade Russia for a regime change
“The additional appointments were delivered in part by extra evening and weekend working, the government said.”
This is very sensible and sustainable. Although i recognise that it’s not possible to train more staff in time to get through the backlog , there’s no indication that enough staff will be trained or maintained (many trusts have hiring freezes, no decent pay rises).
This target has been met sure but where is the plan to stop it happening again?
I mean what is the difference between terrorists and freedom fighters in your opinion? Its not a term serious academics of politics tend to use.