Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Fri Feb 14, 2025 10:39 am
Some are on Truth, others on X. Hard to keep the overall message on point.
Page 177 of 186
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Fri Feb 14, 2025 11:07 am
See my pithy one liner above, it's just reactive to what they previously say.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Fri Feb 14, 2025 11:29 am
Timothy Snyder is always worth reading, especially on the subject of Ukraine and Russia. Quite long but very informative comment here.
https://snyder.substack.com/p/appeaseme ... dium=email
Spoiler
Show
Appeasement at Munich
World Wars, Past and Possible
Timothy Snyder
Feb 14, 2025
As American and Russian negotiators converge today in Munich for a major security conference, carrying in their briefcases various plans about Ukraine without Ukraine, the temptation is to recall another meeting in that city. Appeasement of the aggressor seems to be the plan now, as it was with Germany in 1938.
But the resemblances between that moment and this go deeper, and it worth pausing to consider them. The symmetry between Germany-Czechoslovakia in 1938 and Russia-Ukraine in 2022 is uncanny, and pausing for a moment on the resemblances might help us to take a broader view of today. We are prisoners, now more than ever, of the rumors and disinformation and emotions of the moment. History can give us at least a calmer perspective. And so consider:
Hitler denied the legitimacy of the Czechoslovak state. As German chancellor, he systematically denied that it had a right to exist. Although its leaders were democratically elected, he claimed that they had no right to rule. Because its people spoke various languages, he claimed that there was no such thing as a body of Czechoslovak citizens. Hitler argued that Czechoslovakia itself was artificial, the result of a historical turning point that never should have happened, the settlement after the First World War. He claimed that the existence of national minority gave him the right to intervene in Czechoslovak politics. In May 1938, he ordered his army to make preparations for a quick strike on Czechoslovakia. He also activiated his agents inside the country. On September 12th Hitler gave a rousing speech to Germans about the entirely fictional extermination of the German minority in Czechoslovakia. We know what comes next: Britain and France, together with Germany and Italy, decided in Munich on September 30th that Czechoslovakia should cede crucial border territories to Germany. These were the most defensible parts of the country. Czechoslovakia’s leaders, although they were not consulted, chose to accept the partition of their country.
To see where we are now, it might help, though, to imagine how things might have gone differently. And so, a counterfactual paragraph, in italics:
Czechoslovak’s leaders chose to resist. Though President Benes was generally expected to flee to a foreign capital and form a government in exile, he remained in Prague. His position was stronger than it might have seemed. Although it was a new state and little known to the European powers, Czechoslovakia was a successful democracy and an industrial power. It had the best arms industry in Europe, and a series of fortifications improved the natural defense provided by the mountain range on its border with Germany. Although in the capitals of Europe, the wise heads expected the Germans to reach Prague in three days, in fact the Wehrmacht stuttered in the mountains. The Sudeten War was underway. European public opinion turned against the aggressors. Germany was forced to bring troops from other sectors, and then to mobilize more soldiers. In the midst of a war with an unsure outcome, this was unpopular. Seeing the success of the Czechoslovak resistance, the British and the French began to provide aid, financial and then military. The Americans helped the British to help the Czechoslovaks. France reoccupied the territories that it had allowed Germany to take a few years earlier. A year into what was called the Sudetenland War, Hitler decided that he needed a quick victory to secure his domestic position and intimidate the European powers. Under the cover of another mobilization, he ordered an invasion of Poland’s Baltic territories. But he was unable to keep the operation a secret. Germans began to protest. The Poles had time to move troops from their eastern border. Hitler had to call off the operation. Meanwhile, the Czechoslovaks exploited the chaos to launch a series of paratroop drops behind German lines. Germans took to the streets to demand peace. The Sudeten War was over.
To be sure, we cannot say in detail what might have been. Had Czechoslovakia resisted, however, we can be reasonably confident that there would have been no Second World War, at least not of the sort that Europe experienced beginning in September 1939.
A war against Czechoslovakia in 1938 really would have been hard going for the Germans. Hitler was not bluffing, but his army was not ready. The partition of Czechoslovakia without a fight made matters much easier for him. When Germany invaded Poland in September 1939, it used intact Czechoslovakia tanks and other Czechoslovak arms. He also controlled Czechoslovak economic and human resources. Had Czechoslovakia resisted, that would not have been the case. Even assuming that Czechoslovakia were eventually defeated by Germany, there is no way Germany would have been able to move so quickly against Poland. Also: when Germany invaded Poland in September 1939, it depended on its alliance with the Soviet Union, sealed that August in agreements remembered as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Had Czechoslovakia resisted, the much harder for the Soviets to have chosen that most active form of appeasement of the Nazis. It is not clear that Germany would have dared to invade Poland at all without Soviet support.
So it does seem reasonable to presume, at a minimum, that Germany would have been, at the very least, slowed down, and denied the prestige and self-confidence that came from the succeeding lightening victories over Poland in 1939 and then France in 1940. Czechoslovak resistance would have made appeasement of Hitler, until then the major drift of European policy, all but impossible.
Now let us consider some of the deeper resemblances between 1938 and 2022. The coincidence of two meetings at Munich is part of two longer stories, eerily similar.
Putin denied the legitimacy of the Ukrainian state. Although its leaders were democratically elected, he claimed that they had no right to rule. Because its people spoke various languages, he claimed that there was no such thing as a body of Ukrainian citizens. Hitler argued that Ukraine itself was artificial, the result of a historical turning point that never should have happened, the collapse of the Soviet Union. He claimed that the existence of national minority gave him the right to intervene in Ukraine politics. At some point in 2021, he ordered his army to make preparations for a quick strike on Ukraine. He also activated his agents inside the country. In a series of speeches that December, Putin provided pretexts for a coming invasion of Ukraine.
Here the timeline turns in a different way. Something happened in early 2022 that few people beyond Ukraine expected to happen.
Ukraine’s leaders chose to resist. Though President Zelens’kyi was generally expected to flee to a foreign capital and form a government in exile, he remained in Kyiv. His position was stronger than it might have seemed. Although it was a new state and little known to the European powers, Ukraine was a democracy and an industrial power. It had one of the best arms industries in Europe, and its commanders had a plan to allow Russian forces to penetrate and then to surround and destroy them. Although the wise heads in Moscow and Washington expected the Russians to reach Kyiv in three days, in fact the Russians were defeated at Kharkiv and Kyiv, although they made meaningful gains in the southeast. By the end of 2022 Ukraine had taken back about half the territories Russia took in the first weeks of the war. European public opinion turned against the aggressors. Appeasement of Russia became difficult. Russia was forced to bring troops from other sectors, and then to seek help from China, Iran, and North Korea.
No italics this time: that is how it happened. And these events give us a sense of what we have to lose.
Three years in, the outcome of the war remains uncertain. What is certain is that no wider war began. Ukraine has destroyed much of the Russian armed forces, and drawn Russian troops away from NATO borders. With some help from allies, it is, in effect, fulfilling the entire NATO mission with its own armed forces, and without NATO membership. Indirectly but meaningfully, Ukraine contributed to the fall of Assad in Syria, by drawing away the Russian air forces and other forces.
Ukraine also, by resisting, has made less likely other wars of aggression. Although this went largely unnoticed, the Ukrainians also held back nuclear proliferation. Russia used nuclear bluffs throughout the war. By ignoring them and resisting a conventional invasion with conventional power, Ukraine communicated to the world that nuclear weapons were not necessary to resist a nuclear power. That, like so much else, depended upon Ukraine’s continuing ability to fight.
Although one can never be sure exactly where a counter-factual example leads, the events in Czechoslovakia in 1938 help to clarify the stakes of the war in Ukraine. In the first case, a timeline led to a world war, because unnecessary concessions to Hitler created opportunities he would not otherwise have had. The Czechoslovaks, of course, were not chiefly to blame. Had Britain and France not joined Italy and Germany in the Munich agreement, it would have been far easier for Czechoslovakia to resist. In my view, Czechoslovakia still might have done so, and in so doing would have prevented a world war. But it is important to see that the great powers also bear responsibility.
Had Czechoslovakia acted to prevent a world war, it is very unlikely that anyone’s imagination would have reached that far. It is very unlikely that anyone would have thanked to Czechoslovaks for preventing what did not happen. History would have recorded instead a Sudeten War, or a Central European War, or something along those lines. This is worth bearing in mind. We do not appreciate what the Ukrainians have prevented. We lack the imagination, or perhaps the generosity, that is needed to see our own interests.
A mile marker in southern Ukraine. TS, 2/2025
No one in the heights of Musk-Trump, I would suppose, gives a thought to what would have happened had Ukraine not resisted, or what will happen if American policy makes that resistance impossible. For whatever reason, most of the high officials in the Trump administration have taken something that resembles Russia’s view of the war. But Russia can only win if it is appeased, which is to say helped. Three years in, Americans seem to be rushing to Munich appease the aggressor. (Except for Secretary of State Marco Rubio, whose plane, it is reported, had a mechanical problem.)
One way to consider the current state of events is this: the Ukrainians have kept us in a kind of suspended 1938, a 1938 that has lasted three years. The year 1938 was far from ideal, but it was much better than 1939, and world war. By resisting, essentially on their own, the Ukrainians have created a timeline that would not otherwise have existed. The rest of us, although we live in that timeline, have done little to deserve it.
Whatever the Trump administration’s other motives in appeasing Russia, that lack of appreciation is among them. Trump himself, his vice-president, the man who holds power (Musk), and their milieux in general all tend to treat Ukraine as a kind of irritant, as a problem rather than as a solution. They are very far away from understanding that Ukraine has held off chaos and war well beyond its borders. Or, perhaps, in some cases, they blame Ukraine for that very achievement, because what they want is war and chaos.
However that may be, Trump’s policy, at least in the last few days, has been a race to appeasement. He has tried to make it normal to speak to Putin. His administration has publicly said what Ukraine has to do. And, again, whatever the motives, the operative logic is one of appeasement: granting land to the aggressor, reducing the sovereignty of the country attacked.
History can help us to remember certain patterns of causality. It can also, perhaps more importantly, remind us that many things are possible, including things that, for better or worse, did not actually happen. Upon the decisions of a few people at a critical time can hang the passage of one chain of events to another.
Any irony will be lost on American and Russian negotiators at Munich. Russian diplomats have been trained to believe that 1938 was directed against the Soviet Union, and thus that they were the true victims — which is pretty much the Putinist interpretation of history in general. The people who instructed the American team is unlikely to know what happened in Munich in September 1938, sad to say.
But one does not need irony, or even history, to see the essentially logical problem of appeasing Putin now.
Russia is the aggressor. Russia says openly that its war aims extend far beyond what it has achieved now. Russia has an interest in a pause in the war because it is doing poorly and because its leaders believe, reasonably, that a ceasefire will end US support of Ukraine, distract the Europeans, and make it harder for Ukraine to mobilize its population and resources a second time for a later Russian strike. Russia also naturally has an interest in American leaders putatively granting it Ukrainian territory, including territory which it does not even occupy. This sets a precedent that international law does not matter and/or that Ukraine is not a legitimate state protected by such law.
Appeasing Russia, if it leads to Russian victory now or later, could very well create the conditions for a world war. A Russia that destroys Ukraine, in effect with American assistance, would be a very different country. Ukrainian resources, like Czechoslovakia resources in 1938, would make of the aggressor a much stronger power. This is an uncomfortable point, but one that must be considered. Ukraine has the best army in Europe, and the most battle-hardened one. It is the only country in the West to have fought a major war in this decade. It is innovating faster than others can copy. All of this, and the agriculture, and the minerals, and the ports, can be lost to Russia. And then, after a time of course, Europe faces a far more powerful country, one made for war, one whose leaders believe that war works.
A Russian victory, especially one enabled by American diplomacy, opens the world not just to further Russian aggression in Europe, but to wars of aggression everywhere. It also almost certainly means nuclear proliferation, since future aggressors and those who fear them will both learn the lesson that nuclear weapons are necessary.
The Russo-Ukrainian War is horrible, and should be brought to an end. But appeasement is an apparent shortcut that leads to longer and bloodier conflict. It would not be that difficult, at least in normal conditions, to apply American power to end Russia’s war in Ukraine. The logic is simple: make things harder for Russia, and make things easier for Ukraine.
At the moment, American policy is the opposite.
Musk-Trump is making it harder for the Ukrainians to keep us in our extended 1938. Of course, that does not mean that American policy will be consistent, let alone succeed. The war cannot actually be halted without Ukrainian and indeed European participation. The desire for a quick resolution is more likely than not to lead to unexpected consequences, for which the Americans will likely lack the patience.The desire for a quick deal leads to a haste that overlooks important aspects of the problem.
Given the general level of distress across the federal government, it is hard to imagine that the Americans are very well prepared for these meetings — although the Russians will be. The Americans cannot get official planes off the ground. Lower-ranking officials are right now trying to qualify the more radically appeasing concessions that Trump and his secretaries of defense and state have made in public. The American vice-president was going to meet with the Ukrainian president at Munich. But then again now perhaps he is not. There is a distressing “who knows” quality to all of this.
But however things turn out, the first American move under Musk-Trump has been to endorse appeasement. Knowingly or not, and I do not presume to say which, that choice pushes us one step towards 1939.
11:35am Munich time, 14 February 2025
World Wars, Past and Possible
Timothy Snyder
Feb 14, 2025
As American and Russian negotiators converge today in Munich for a major security conference, carrying in their briefcases various plans about Ukraine without Ukraine, the temptation is to recall another meeting in that city. Appeasement of the aggressor seems to be the plan now, as it was with Germany in 1938.
But the resemblances between that moment and this go deeper, and it worth pausing to consider them. The symmetry between Germany-Czechoslovakia in 1938 and Russia-Ukraine in 2022 is uncanny, and pausing for a moment on the resemblances might help us to take a broader view of today. We are prisoners, now more than ever, of the rumors and disinformation and emotions of the moment. History can give us at least a calmer perspective. And so consider:
Hitler denied the legitimacy of the Czechoslovak state. As German chancellor, he systematically denied that it had a right to exist. Although its leaders were democratically elected, he claimed that they had no right to rule. Because its people spoke various languages, he claimed that there was no such thing as a body of Czechoslovak citizens. Hitler argued that Czechoslovakia itself was artificial, the result of a historical turning point that never should have happened, the settlement after the First World War. He claimed that the existence of national minority gave him the right to intervene in Czechoslovak politics. In May 1938, he ordered his army to make preparations for a quick strike on Czechoslovakia. He also activiated his agents inside the country. On September 12th Hitler gave a rousing speech to Germans about the entirely fictional extermination of the German minority in Czechoslovakia. We know what comes next: Britain and France, together with Germany and Italy, decided in Munich on September 30th that Czechoslovakia should cede crucial border territories to Germany. These were the most defensible parts of the country. Czechoslovakia’s leaders, although they were not consulted, chose to accept the partition of their country.
To see where we are now, it might help, though, to imagine how things might have gone differently. And so, a counterfactual paragraph, in italics:
Czechoslovak’s leaders chose to resist. Though President Benes was generally expected to flee to a foreign capital and form a government in exile, he remained in Prague. His position was stronger than it might have seemed. Although it was a new state and little known to the European powers, Czechoslovakia was a successful democracy and an industrial power. It had the best arms industry in Europe, and a series of fortifications improved the natural defense provided by the mountain range on its border with Germany. Although in the capitals of Europe, the wise heads expected the Germans to reach Prague in three days, in fact the Wehrmacht stuttered in the mountains. The Sudeten War was underway. European public opinion turned against the aggressors. Germany was forced to bring troops from other sectors, and then to mobilize more soldiers. In the midst of a war with an unsure outcome, this was unpopular. Seeing the success of the Czechoslovak resistance, the British and the French began to provide aid, financial and then military. The Americans helped the British to help the Czechoslovaks. France reoccupied the territories that it had allowed Germany to take a few years earlier. A year into what was called the Sudetenland War, Hitler decided that he needed a quick victory to secure his domestic position and intimidate the European powers. Under the cover of another mobilization, he ordered an invasion of Poland’s Baltic territories. But he was unable to keep the operation a secret. Germans began to protest. The Poles had time to move troops from their eastern border. Hitler had to call off the operation. Meanwhile, the Czechoslovaks exploited the chaos to launch a series of paratroop drops behind German lines. Germans took to the streets to demand peace. The Sudeten War was over.
To be sure, we cannot say in detail what might have been. Had Czechoslovakia resisted, however, we can be reasonably confident that there would have been no Second World War, at least not of the sort that Europe experienced beginning in September 1939.
A war against Czechoslovakia in 1938 really would have been hard going for the Germans. Hitler was not bluffing, but his army was not ready. The partition of Czechoslovakia without a fight made matters much easier for him. When Germany invaded Poland in September 1939, it used intact Czechoslovakia tanks and other Czechoslovak arms. He also controlled Czechoslovak economic and human resources. Had Czechoslovakia resisted, that would not have been the case. Even assuming that Czechoslovakia were eventually defeated by Germany, there is no way Germany would have been able to move so quickly against Poland. Also: when Germany invaded Poland in September 1939, it depended on its alliance with the Soviet Union, sealed that August in agreements remembered as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Had Czechoslovakia resisted, the much harder for the Soviets to have chosen that most active form of appeasement of the Nazis. It is not clear that Germany would have dared to invade Poland at all without Soviet support.
So it does seem reasonable to presume, at a minimum, that Germany would have been, at the very least, slowed down, and denied the prestige and self-confidence that came from the succeeding lightening victories over Poland in 1939 and then France in 1940. Czechoslovak resistance would have made appeasement of Hitler, until then the major drift of European policy, all but impossible.
Now let us consider some of the deeper resemblances between 1938 and 2022. The coincidence of two meetings at Munich is part of two longer stories, eerily similar.
Putin denied the legitimacy of the Ukrainian state. Although its leaders were democratically elected, he claimed that they had no right to rule. Because its people spoke various languages, he claimed that there was no such thing as a body of Ukrainian citizens. Hitler argued that Ukraine itself was artificial, the result of a historical turning point that never should have happened, the collapse of the Soviet Union. He claimed that the existence of national minority gave him the right to intervene in Ukraine politics. At some point in 2021, he ordered his army to make preparations for a quick strike on Ukraine. He also activated his agents inside the country. In a series of speeches that December, Putin provided pretexts for a coming invasion of Ukraine.
Here the timeline turns in a different way. Something happened in early 2022 that few people beyond Ukraine expected to happen.
Ukraine’s leaders chose to resist. Though President Zelens’kyi was generally expected to flee to a foreign capital and form a government in exile, he remained in Kyiv. His position was stronger than it might have seemed. Although it was a new state and little known to the European powers, Ukraine was a democracy and an industrial power. It had one of the best arms industries in Europe, and its commanders had a plan to allow Russian forces to penetrate and then to surround and destroy them. Although the wise heads in Moscow and Washington expected the Russians to reach Kyiv in three days, in fact the Russians were defeated at Kharkiv and Kyiv, although they made meaningful gains in the southeast. By the end of 2022 Ukraine had taken back about half the territories Russia took in the first weeks of the war. European public opinion turned against the aggressors. Appeasement of Russia became difficult. Russia was forced to bring troops from other sectors, and then to seek help from China, Iran, and North Korea.
No italics this time: that is how it happened. And these events give us a sense of what we have to lose.
Three years in, the outcome of the war remains uncertain. What is certain is that no wider war began. Ukraine has destroyed much of the Russian armed forces, and drawn Russian troops away from NATO borders. With some help from allies, it is, in effect, fulfilling the entire NATO mission with its own armed forces, and without NATO membership. Indirectly but meaningfully, Ukraine contributed to the fall of Assad in Syria, by drawing away the Russian air forces and other forces.
Ukraine also, by resisting, has made less likely other wars of aggression. Although this went largely unnoticed, the Ukrainians also held back nuclear proliferation. Russia used nuclear bluffs throughout the war. By ignoring them and resisting a conventional invasion with conventional power, Ukraine communicated to the world that nuclear weapons were not necessary to resist a nuclear power. That, like so much else, depended upon Ukraine’s continuing ability to fight.
Although one can never be sure exactly where a counter-factual example leads, the events in Czechoslovakia in 1938 help to clarify the stakes of the war in Ukraine. In the first case, a timeline led to a world war, because unnecessary concessions to Hitler created opportunities he would not otherwise have had. The Czechoslovaks, of course, were not chiefly to blame. Had Britain and France not joined Italy and Germany in the Munich agreement, it would have been far easier for Czechoslovakia to resist. In my view, Czechoslovakia still might have done so, and in so doing would have prevented a world war. But it is important to see that the great powers also bear responsibility.
Had Czechoslovakia acted to prevent a world war, it is very unlikely that anyone’s imagination would have reached that far. It is very unlikely that anyone would have thanked to Czechoslovaks for preventing what did not happen. History would have recorded instead a Sudeten War, or a Central European War, or something along those lines. This is worth bearing in mind. We do not appreciate what the Ukrainians have prevented. We lack the imagination, or perhaps the generosity, that is needed to see our own interests.
A mile marker in southern Ukraine. TS, 2/2025
No one in the heights of Musk-Trump, I would suppose, gives a thought to what would have happened had Ukraine not resisted, or what will happen if American policy makes that resistance impossible. For whatever reason, most of the high officials in the Trump administration have taken something that resembles Russia’s view of the war. But Russia can only win if it is appeased, which is to say helped. Three years in, Americans seem to be rushing to Munich appease the aggressor. (Except for Secretary of State Marco Rubio, whose plane, it is reported, had a mechanical problem.)
One way to consider the current state of events is this: the Ukrainians have kept us in a kind of suspended 1938, a 1938 that has lasted three years. The year 1938 was far from ideal, but it was much better than 1939, and world war. By resisting, essentially on their own, the Ukrainians have created a timeline that would not otherwise have existed. The rest of us, although we live in that timeline, have done little to deserve it.
Whatever the Trump administration’s other motives in appeasing Russia, that lack of appreciation is among them. Trump himself, his vice-president, the man who holds power (Musk), and their milieux in general all tend to treat Ukraine as a kind of irritant, as a problem rather than as a solution. They are very far away from understanding that Ukraine has held off chaos and war well beyond its borders. Or, perhaps, in some cases, they blame Ukraine for that very achievement, because what they want is war and chaos.
However that may be, Trump’s policy, at least in the last few days, has been a race to appeasement. He has tried to make it normal to speak to Putin. His administration has publicly said what Ukraine has to do. And, again, whatever the motives, the operative logic is one of appeasement: granting land to the aggressor, reducing the sovereignty of the country attacked.
History can help us to remember certain patterns of causality. It can also, perhaps more importantly, remind us that many things are possible, including things that, for better or worse, did not actually happen. Upon the decisions of a few people at a critical time can hang the passage of one chain of events to another.
Any irony will be lost on American and Russian negotiators at Munich. Russian diplomats have been trained to believe that 1938 was directed against the Soviet Union, and thus that they were the true victims — which is pretty much the Putinist interpretation of history in general. The people who instructed the American team is unlikely to know what happened in Munich in September 1938, sad to say.
But one does not need irony, or even history, to see the essentially logical problem of appeasing Putin now.
Russia is the aggressor. Russia says openly that its war aims extend far beyond what it has achieved now. Russia has an interest in a pause in the war because it is doing poorly and because its leaders believe, reasonably, that a ceasefire will end US support of Ukraine, distract the Europeans, and make it harder for Ukraine to mobilize its population and resources a second time for a later Russian strike. Russia also naturally has an interest in American leaders putatively granting it Ukrainian territory, including territory which it does not even occupy. This sets a precedent that international law does not matter and/or that Ukraine is not a legitimate state protected by such law.
Appeasing Russia, if it leads to Russian victory now or later, could very well create the conditions for a world war. A Russia that destroys Ukraine, in effect with American assistance, would be a very different country. Ukrainian resources, like Czechoslovakia resources in 1938, would make of the aggressor a much stronger power. This is an uncomfortable point, but one that must be considered. Ukraine has the best army in Europe, and the most battle-hardened one. It is the only country in the West to have fought a major war in this decade. It is innovating faster than others can copy. All of this, and the agriculture, and the minerals, and the ports, can be lost to Russia. And then, after a time of course, Europe faces a far more powerful country, one made for war, one whose leaders believe that war works.
A Russian victory, especially one enabled by American diplomacy, opens the world not just to further Russian aggression in Europe, but to wars of aggression everywhere. It also almost certainly means nuclear proliferation, since future aggressors and those who fear them will both learn the lesson that nuclear weapons are necessary.
The Russo-Ukrainian War is horrible, and should be brought to an end. But appeasement is an apparent shortcut that leads to longer and bloodier conflict. It would not be that difficult, at least in normal conditions, to apply American power to end Russia’s war in Ukraine. The logic is simple: make things harder for Russia, and make things easier for Ukraine.
At the moment, American policy is the opposite.
Musk-Trump is making it harder for the Ukrainians to keep us in our extended 1938. Of course, that does not mean that American policy will be consistent, let alone succeed. The war cannot actually be halted without Ukrainian and indeed European participation. The desire for a quick resolution is more likely than not to lead to unexpected consequences, for which the Americans will likely lack the patience.The desire for a quick deal leads to a haste that overlooks important aspects of the problem.
Given the general level of distress across the federal government, it is hard to imagine that the Americans are very well prepared for these meetings — although the Russians will be. The Americans cannot get official planes off the ground. Lower-ranking officials are right now trying to qualify the more radically appeasing concessions that Trump and his secretaries of defense and state have made in public. The American vice-president was going to meet with the Ukrainian president at Munich. But then again now perhaps he is not. There is a distressing “who knows” quality to all of this.
But however things turn out, the first American move under Musk-Trump has been to endorse appeasement. Knowingly or not, and I do not presume to say which, that choice pushes us one step towards 1939.
11:35am Munich time, 14 February 2025
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Fri Feb 14, 2025 12:41 pm
Well if the US isn't going to help...
Ukraine proposed to the EU to jointly extract minerals. Shmyhal highlighted that Ukraine holds 22 out of 30 minerals critical to the EU, ranks first in Europe for uranium reserves, and possesses the largest lithium and titanium reserves. Ukraine can also export uranium to meet the EU's demand.
https://politico.eu/article/ukraine-vol ... ithout-us/
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Fri Feb 14, 2025 7:35 pm
Bloody Russians have attacked the melted reactor at Chernobyl.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/world-news/3605 ... tive-shell
https://www.stuff.co.nz/world-news/3605 ... tive-shell
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Fri Feb 14, 2025 8:26 pm
Hopefully Trump settles this war.
Ukraine should have complied with the Minsk agreements. Now it's too late. They have lost their country. It will be divided up between Russia and BlackRock etc The lucky will become part of Russia. The rest will be owned by Western corporations
The MIC puppets will continue to paint Russia as the bad guy. The next Hitler etc etc. Before giving up and moving to Iran. And China. But big bad Russia will be keep for another day. They need fictional enemies to keep the huge money flowing.
The war has resulted in extreme harm not just to Ukraine. God only knows how many have been killed. Others have wisely fled. The rest have seen their country destroyed. And elections cancelled by leaders who will eventually take the huge money made from this war and move elsewhere before it's too late.
But it's also harmed the EU countries. Like Germany that needs cheap Russian gas. Russia is fine and will come out of this war much stronger and united. The West not so much. Esp the EU.
Ukraine should have complied with the Minsk agreements. Now it's too late. They have lost their country. It will be divided up between Russia and BlackRock etc The lucky will become part of Russia. The rest will be owned by Western corporations
The MIC puppets will continue to paint Russia as the bad guy. The next Hitler etc etc. Before giving up and moving to Iran. And China. But big bad Russia will be keep for another day. They need fictional enemies to keep the huge money flowing.
The war has resulted in extreme harm not just to Ukraine. God only knows how many have been killed. Others have wisely fled. The rest have seen their country destroyed. And elections cancelled by leaders who will eventually take the huge money made from this war and move elsewhere before it's too late.
But it's also harmed the EU countries. Like Germany that needs cheap Russian gas. Russia is fine and will come out of this war much stronger and united. The West not so much. Esp the EU.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Fri Feb 14, 2025 8:44 pm
ahhhh...
ok. New log in, same small town support for a tyrant. We've seen you around here before, right.
ok. New log in, same small town support for a tyrant. We've seen you around here before, right.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 8:12 am
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 8:12 am
Fuck off DAC.Firewater wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 8:26 pm Hopefully Trump settles this war.
Ukraine should have complied with the Minsk agreements. Now it's too late. They have lost their country. It will be divided up between Russia and BlackRock etc The lucky will become part of Russia. The rest will be owned by Western corporations
The MIC puppets will continue to paint Russia as the bad guy. The next Hitler etc etc. Before giving up and moving to Iran. And China. But big bad Russia will be keep for another day. They need fictional enemies to keep the huge money flowing.
The war has resulted in extreme harm not just to Ukraine. God only knows how many have been killed. Others have wisely fled. The rest have seen their country destroyed. And elections cancelled by leaders who will eventually take the huge money made from this war and move elsewhere before it's too late.
But it's also harmed the EU countries. Like Germany that needs cheap Russian gas. Russia is fine and will come out of this war much stronger and united. The West not so much. Esp the EU.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 8:29 am
The quick answer is no.
There was a big flurry of activity when they got in doing executive orders but they will run out of steam and that's when the vacuousness of this administration will be fully apparent.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 9:33 am
Easiest block decision ever.Guy Smiley wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 8:44 pm ahhhh...
ok. New log in, same small town support for a tyrant. We've seen you around here before, right.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 9:52 am
Not to mention that the chaos from the sackings and court orders is going to paralyse the US government by the Summer.Uncle fester wrote: ↑Sat Feb 15, 2025 8:29 amThe quick answer is no.
There was a big flurry of activity when they got in doing executive orders but they will run out of steam and that's when the vacuousness of this administration will be fully apparent.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 10:06 am
As one comment says "Jesus Christ it gets worse."
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/nation ... rcna192325
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/nation ... rcna192325
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 11:16 am
Kind of hoped your time out would have given you time to reflect on your decent into extremism and conspiracy. But no, here we are againFirewater wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 8:26 pm Hopefully Trump settles this war.
Ukraine should have complied with the Minsk agreements. Now it's too late. They have lost their country. It will be divided up between Russia and BlackRock etc The lucky will become part of Russia. The rest will be owned by Western corporations
The MIC puppets will continue to paint Russia as the bad guy. The next Hitler etc etc. Before giving up and moving to Iran. And China. But big bad Russia will be keep for another day. They need fictional enemies to keep the huge money flowing.
The war has resulted in extreme harm not just to Ukraine. God only knows how many have been killed. Others have wisely fled. The rest have seen their country destroyed. And elections cancelled by leaders who will eventually take the huge money made from this war and move elsewhere before it's too late.
But it's also harmed the EU countries. Like Germany that needs cheap Russian gas. Russia is fine and will come out of this war much stronger and united. The West not so much. Esp the EU.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 12:58 pm
Can we please not quote the fruitcakes. Means we can still see their drivel despite blocking them...
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 1:45 pm
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 3:02 pm
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 3:40 pm
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/ ... ce=twitterPutin’s Ukraine
The End of War and the Price of Russian Occupation
Nataliya Gumenyuk. March/April 2025 Published on February 12, 2025
From afar, the situation Ukraine faces after three years of full-scale war with Russia seems clear. Over the past 12 months, Moscow has intensified its assault on civilian populations, sending drones, missiles, and bombs in almost daily attacks on cities across the country. Infrastructure and power stations have been relentlessly targeted. Millions of people have been displaced, and millions more who fled the country after 2022 have been unable to return. Even as Ukraine has struggled to hold the frontlines, its soldiers continue to be injured and killed.
Given these mounting costs, and that Ukraine has, against all odds, managed to defend 80 percent of its territory, one might expect its citizens to support any effort to end the war. That would be sensible in the eyes of many Western analysts. Just as Russia seems unlikely to make major new advances, it will also be very difficult for Ukrainian forces, contending with an enemy that is prepared to burn through huge quantities of ammunition and manpower, to recapture all the territory now controlled by Russia. In this view, securing a cease-fire and bringing relief to the bulk of the country should be a top priority.
Yet that is not how Ukrainians see it. With U.S. President Donald Trump’s vow to quickly end the war—and even before that, the threat from the United States and its allies that they might reduce military aid in the future—Ukraine’s government and population have had to take seriously the discussion of a cease-fire. But such a scenario diverges sharply from the victory plan that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky outlined in the fall of 2024. And many Ukrainians themselves are deeply skeptical of a settlement, saying that no deal is better than a bad deal. Indeed, in Western eyes, Kyiv’s determination to keep fighting—sometimes in grueling months-long battles to defend ruined towns and villages—may seem irrational.
In part, Ukrainians’ continued support for the war can be explained by the country’s resilience. Despite intense pressure on civilian areas, Ukraine has managed to preserve and even rebuild a degree of normalcy in everyday life. Following the economic shock of the initial invasion, Western budgetary support, which now makes up 20 percent of Ukraine’s GDP, has allowed the economy to grow by an average of 4.4 percent over the past two years; there has been real household income growth, and inflation remains fairly low. Since the middle of 2023, when Ukrainian drones had effectively neutralized Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, maritime routes have been open again, with Ukrainian exports up by 15 percent over the past year. And according to the government in Kyiv, some 40 percent of the weapons Ukraine is using on the frontlines are now produced domestically, compared with hardly any in 2022. None of these changes take away from the extraordinary hardships of war, but they have helped give Ukrainian society a kind of adaptability and endurance that may not be fully visible to outsiders.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 4:05 pm
I've only just joined. Hoping it was different to the lunacy on PR. Where posters can't tolerate a different viewpoint and think for themselves. Sadly it seems many / most here are no different to PR posters. I will restrict my posting to rugby now as the other topics are such very low quality anyway. It's just repeating the childish nonsense and lies from the mainstream media.Slick wrote: ↑Sat Feb 15, 2025 11:16 amKind of hoped your time out would have given you time to reflect on your decent into extremism and conspiracy. But no, here we are againFirewater wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 8:26 pm Hopefully Trump settles this war.
Ukraine should have complied with the Minsk agreements. Now it's too late. They have lost their country. It will be divided up between Russia and BlackRock etc The lucky will become part of Russia. The rest will be owned by Western corporations
The MIC puppets will continue to paint Russia as the bad guy. The next Hitler etc etc. Before giving up and moving to Iran. And China. But big bad Russia will be keep for another day. They need fictional enemies to keep the huge money flowing.
The war has resulted in extreme harm not just to Ukraine. God only knows how many have been killed. Others have wisely fled. The rest have seen their country destroyed. And elections cancelled by leaders who will eventually take the huge money made from this war and move elsewhere before it's too late.
But it's also harmed the EU countries. Like Germany that needs cheap Russian gas. Russia is fine and will come out of this war much stronger and united. The West not so much. Esp the EU.
Many have seen the light. Others fear it and prefer to continue living in a fantasy world. Fair enough I guess
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 4:12 pm
You go for it, Champ
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 4:39 pm
Go fuck yourself with a broken bottle, DAC. Then crawl back under whatever rock you were hiding under. Pond scum.Firewater wrote: ↑Sat Feb 15, 2025 4:05 pmI've only just joined. Hoping it was different to the lunacy on PR. Where posters can't tolerate a different viewpoint and think for themselves. Sadly it seems many / most here are no different to PR posters. I will restrict my posting to rugby now as the other topics are such very low quality anyway. It's just repeating the childish nonsense and lies from the mainstream media.Slick wrote: ↑Sat Feb 15, 2025 11:16 amKind of hoped your time out would have given you time to reflect on your decent into extremism and conspiracy. But no, here we are againFirewater wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 8:26 pm Hopefully Trump settles this war.
Ukraine should have complied with the Minsk agreements. Now it's too late. They have lost their country. It will be divided up between Russia and BlackRock etc The lucky will become part of Russia. The rest will be owned by Western corporations
The MIC puppets will continue to paint Russia as the bad guy. The next Hitler etc etc. Before giving up and moving to Iran. And China. But big bad Russia will be keep for another day. They need fictional enemies to keep the huge money flowing.
The war has resulted in extreme harm not just to Ukraine. God only knows how many have been killed. Others have wisely fled. The rest have seen their country destroyed. And elections cancelled by leaders who will eventually take the huge money made from this war and move elsewhere before it's too late.
But it's also harmed the EU countries. Like Germany that needs cheap Russian gas. Russia is fine and will come out of this war much stronger and united. The West not so much. Esp the EU.
Many have seen the light. Others fear it and prefer to continue living in a fantasy world. Fair enough I guess
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 6:17 pm
As penance, go watch the last ten Wales games.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 7:41 pm
Ha! I was sure he was that other humourless bigot convoluted, especially after his first few posts were a feeble effort at establishing a "Kiwi rugby interest" cover... which didn't last long. Then it was straight back into his dumbarse maga condescending-to-the-sheeple schtick. Sad.Hellraiser wrote: ↑Sat Feb 15, 2025 4:39 pmGo fuck yourself with a broken bottle, DAC. Then crawl back under whatever rock you were hiding under. Pond scum.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2025 11:27 pm
I could have posted this on a number of threads, but this is probably the most relevant, because this is the one where the decisions of fuckwits is going to cost the lives of teenagers.
40 fucking Admirals earning >£100k when the entire service only has 25 actual warships
This has been a dumpster fire that was decades in the making, & the decision to prioritize two unsustainable carriers (& we can't even discuss the, you know, planes), over having a properly constructed fleet is all down to this 40x cunts; not the Politicians !!!!
How there ever loving fuck did the Royal Navy sink this low ?
40 fucking Admirals earning >£100k when the entire service only has 25 actual warships
This has been a dumpster fire that was decades in the making, & the decision to prioritize two unsustainable carriers (& we can't even discuss the, you know, planes), over having a properly constructed fleet is all down to this 40x cunts; not the Politicians !!!!
How there ever loving fuck did the Royal Navy sink this low ?
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sun Feb 16, 2025 1:34 am
Ooof... nope, there are some lines that shouldn't be crossed. A plea for mercy. Feeling quite queasy at the mere thought.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sun Feb 16, 2025 8:03 am
DId not want to work with the French ?fishfoodie wrote: ↑Sat Feb 15, 2025 11:27 pm I could have posted this on a number of threads, but this is probably the most relevant, because this is the one where the decisions of fuckwits is going to cost the lives of teenagers.
40 fucking Admirals earning >£100k when the entire service only has 25 actual warships
This has been a dumpster fire that was decades in the making, & the decision to prioritize two unsustainable carriers (& we can't even discuss the, you know, planes), over having a properly constructed fleet is all down to this 40x cunts; not the Politicians !!!!
How there ever loving fuck did the Royal Navy sink this low ?
(and actively torpedoed the Australian navy in passing).
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sun Feb 16, 2025 9:32 am
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sun Feb 16, 2025 1:17 pm
Firewater wrote: ↑Sat Feb 15, 2025 4:05 pmI've only just joined. Hoping it was different to the lunacy on PR. Where posters can't tolerate a different viewpoint and think for themselves. Sadly it seems many / most here are no different to PR posters. I will restrict my posting to rugby now as the other topics are such very low quality anyway. It's just repeating the childish nonsense and lies from the mainstream media.Slick wrote: ↑Sat Feb 15, 2025 11:16 amKind of hoped your time out would have given you time to reflect on your decent into extremism and conspiracy. But no, here we are againFirewater wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 8:26 pm Hopefully Trump settles this war.
Ukraine should have complied with the Minsk agreements. Now it's too late. They have lost their country. It will be divided up between Russia and BlackRock etc The lucky will become part of Russia. The rest will be owned by Western corporations
The MIC puppets will continue to paint Russia as the bad guy. The next Hitler etc etc. Before giving up and moving to Iran. And China. But big bad Russia will be keep for another day. They need fictional enemies to keep the huge money flowing.
The war has resulted in extreme harm not just to Ukraine. God only knows how many have been killed. Others have wisely fled. The rest have seen their country destroyed. And elections cancelled by leaders who will eventually take the huge money made from this war and move elsewhere before it's too late.
But it's also harmed the EU countries. Like Germany that needs cheap Russian gas. Russia is fine and will come out of this war much stronger and united. The West not so much. Esp the EU.
Many have seen the light. Others fear it and prefer to continue living in a fantasy world. Fair enough I guess
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Sun Feb 16, 2025 11:45 pm
How about this as an idea.
Zelensky wants a European army, but lets face it; that will take time & organization & will take someone putting a gun against the head of cunts like Orban & making certain realities very, very clear to him.
Let's just keep it simple, & repeat what worked in WW II
The EU launches a "Freedom & Security Bond", that the EU backs to deliver ~5-6% yield, & the proceeds are to (i) Fund the creation /expansion of manufacturing facilities for existing weapons & systems in the EU, (ii) to fund expansion of the armed forces of EU members, & finally (iii) to develop new weapons system e.g. newer & more SSBNs, & next gen fighters etc.
There's a lot of money wasting away in savings accounts, & the EU* has a lot of people who would be happy to make more than the minimum from their savings, & anything that can guarantee this will be attractive !
The EU doesn't really need to create new weapons to help Ukraine defeat Russia; they just need volume, & the ability to incrementally deliver improvements.
If the EU wants to bring the US back into NATO, then what it needs more than anything is to put itself into the position where the likes of India or Taiwan will go to the EU first if it wants to secure reliable access to the latest generation of weapons !!!
The screaming from the US Military Industrial complex will do the rest if the GOP want to survive.
* and I include the UK in this, because this is an area of common interest.
Zelensky wants a European army, but lets face it; that will take time & organization & will take someone putting a gun against the head of cunts like Orban & making certain realities very, very clear to him.
Let's just keep it simple, & repeat what worked in WW II
The EU launches a "Freedom & Security Bond", that the EU backs to deliver ~5-6% yield, & the proceeds are to (i) Fund the creation /expansion of manufacturing facilities for existing weapons & systems in the EU, (ii) to fund expansion of the armed forces of EU members, & finally (iii) to develop new weapons system e.g. newer & more SSBNs, & next gen fighters etc.
There's a lot of money wasting away in savings accounts, & the EU* has a lot of people who would be happy to make more than the minimum from their savings, & anything that can guarantee this will be attractive !
The EU doesn't really need to create new weapons to help Ukraine defeat Russia; they just need volume, & the ability to incrementally deliver improvements.
If the EU wants to bring the US back into NATO, then what it needs more than anything is to put itself into the position where the likes of India or Taiwan will go to the EU first if it wants to secure reliable access to the latest generation of weapons !!!
The screaming from the US Military Industrial complex will do the rest if the GOP want to survive.
* and I include the UK in this, because this is an area of common interest.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2025 12:11 am
The worlds a pretty sad place really when you stop and think we still need all these weapons.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2025 1:14 pm
Well so Russia wouldn't want Ukraine to improve and modernise its defensive capabilities, wonder why that could be?
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2025 1:16 pm
Then why include the US who are also arming Ukraine?tabascoboy wrote: ↑Mon Feb 17, 2025 1:14 pm Well so Russia wouldn't want Ukraine to improve and modernise its defensive capabilities, wonder why that could be?
They're not even trying any more.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2025 3:28 pm
Perun's latest on Russian casualty numbers has a bunch of interesting points but unfortunately he doesn't go too much into conclusions for the future bar the enormous problems Russia will have attempting to rebuild their army.
One item I'd not realised is the scale of the losses of the forced conscripts from Donetsk and Luhansk. It is nothing less than horrific and a clear strategy of effective depopulation removing anybody who may have issues with Russian occupation. People need to have a very real long hard think about what giving Russia its existing occupied borders actually means.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja6-espHVSE
One item I'd not realised is the scale of the losses of the forced conscripts from Donetsk and Luhansk. It is nothing less than horrific and a clear strategy of effective depopulation removing anybody who may have issues with Russian occupation. People need to have a very real long hard think about what giving Russia its existing occupied borders actually means.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja6-espHVSE
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2025 3:46 pm
Trump elected 2016, Ukraine proper invaded 2022, and yet of the large European countries only Poland has made any effort to develop a viable military to deal with this threat. The British Army would leave empty seats inside Twickenham, the French think they might have a single division ready to go by 2027, the Germans are nothing short of a joke. Spain’s spending is pitiful. We’ve had over 8 years warning of this, 3 to get really serious and we’re no better (worse?) prepared than we were.
Make Vance making a speech the baddie all we want but our inability to influence events is due to our own inaction, arrogance and complacency. We’ve walked Ukraine up a hill and left them to die on it. Shameful stuff
Make Vance making a speech the baddie all we want but our inability to influence events is due to our own inaction, arrogance and complacency. We’ve walked Ukraine up a hill and left them to die on it. Shameful stuff
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2025 3:56 pm
Can't see how this would work, Russia would always claim they're acting in self defence against "provocation". Just seems another indicator that the US is completely disunited on how to deal with negotiations and are completely naive about how the Russian leadership operates
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2025 4:27 pm
Or else it would be an unknown, unregulated, guerrilla force, lets call it 'Son of Wagner' for example, but definitely not a Russian force that responds to the 'provocations'!tabascoboy wrote: ↑Mon Feb 17, 2025 3:56 pm Can't see how this would work, Russia would always claim they're acting in self defence against "provocation". Just seems another indicator that the US is completely disunited on how to deal with negotiations and are completely naive about how the Russian leadership operates
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2025 4:38 pm
Our defence spending hasn't really recovered from the Cameron/Osborne austerity programme when if fell by over 20% in real terms in 8 years or so. There were marginal real term increases in successive years but 2023/24 the year after Russia invaded Ukraine it was cut again.Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Mon Feb 17, 2025 3:46 pm Trump elected 2016, Ukraine proper invaded 2022, and yet of the large European countries only Poland has made any effort to develop a viable military to deal with this threat. The British Army would leave empty seats inside Twickenham, the French think they might have a single division ready to go by 2027, the Germans are nothing short of a joke. Spain’s spending is pitiful. We’ve had over 8 years warning of this, 3 to get really serious and we’re no better (worse?) prepared than we were.
Make Vance making a speech the baddie all we want but our inability to influence events is due to our own inaction, arrogance and complacency. We’ve walked Ukraine up a hill and left them to die on it. Shameful stuff
Can't see the massive increase that Trump expects happening any time soon. Good luck to Starmer trying to square that circle.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2025 4:43 pm
It’s been an enormous downward spiral regardless of party in charge throughout my lifetime. Look at the force we sent to the Gulf War and compare it to anything we could do now! Embarrassing stuff and we still strut around like we could send a thousand bomber raid over MoscowSaintK wrote: ↑Mon Feb 17, 2025 4:38 pmOur defence spending hasn't really recovered from the Cameron/Osborne austerity programme when if fell by over 20% in real terms in 8 years or so. There were marginal real term increases in successive years but 2023/24 the year after Russia invaded Ukraine it was cut again.Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Mon Feb 17, 2025 3:46 pm Trump elected 2016, Ukraine proper invaded 2022, and yet of the large European countries only Poland has made any effort to develop a viable military to deal with this threat. The British Army would leave empty seats inside Twickenham, the French think they might have a single division ready to go by 2027, the Germans are nothing short of a joke. Spain’s spending is pitiful. We’ve had over 8 years warning of this, 3 to get really serious and we’re no better (worse?) prepared than we were.
Make Vance making a speech the baddie all we want but our inability to influence events is due to our own inaction, arrogance and complacency. We’ve walked Ukraine up a hill and left them to die on it. Shameful stuff
Can't see the massive increase that Trump expects happening any time soon. Good luck to Starmer trying to square that circle.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2025 5:02 pm
Purely at the sharp end, they've been actively trying to increase the number of warm bodies in the armed forces for years, and defence spending has increased year-on-year since 2015, so it's not entirely like they've been sat on their hands doing nothing.
This recruitment is outsourced to Capita and they're well below targets - last I heard recruitment rates had dropped from about 95% to less than 70%.
To give Capita some benefit of doubt, despite them not doing an amazing job (taking ages to do basic background and medical checks, for example) It's not all on them - the overall benefits for soldiers could do with looking at, and aspects such as decent, clean housing for soldiers' families has been sadly lacking for a fair few years. You're asking young lads and lasses to make notable commitments and accept significant life change - and no little risk, if and when shooting starts - for relatively poor recompense.
These issues are across the board - one of the factors influencing the fleet composition of the navy is the staffing levels they can support.
I also think the situation in Ukraine has deteriorated further and more rapidly than expected, in terms of Russian belligerence and Trump's Manchurian act. Not sure how useful our beautiful new aircraft carriers will be in a potential land war in Eastern Europe. Arguably we could do with a functioning ajax, AS90 replacement and Challenger 3 fleet PDQ.
This recruitment is outsourced to Capita and they're well below targets - last I heard recruitment rates had dropped from about 95% to less than 70%.
To give Capita some benefit of doubt, despite them not doing an amazing job (taking ages to do basic background and medical checks, for example) It's not all on them - the overall benefits for soldiers could do with looking at, and aspects such as decent, clean housing for soldiers' families has been sadly lacking for a fair few years. You're asking young lads and lasses to make notable commitments and accept significant life change - and no little risk, if and when shooting starts - for relatively poor recompense.
These issues are across the board - one of the factors influencing the fleet composition of the navy is the staffing levels they can support.
I also think the situation in Ukraine has deteriorated further and more rapidly than expected, in terms of Russian belligerence and Trump's Manchurian act. Not sure how useful our beautiful new aircraft carriers will be in a potential land war in Eastern Europe. Arguably we could do with a functioning ajax, AS90 replacement and Challenger 3 fleet PDQ.
Re: What's going on in Ukraine?
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2025 5:26 pm
Beautiful new aircraft carriers without any suitable planesinactionman wrote: ↑Mon Feb 17, 2025 5:02 pm Purely at the sharp end, they've been actively trying to increase the number of warm bodies in the armed forces for years, and defence spending has increased year-on-year since 2015, so it's not entirely like they've been sat on their hands doing nothing.
This recruitment is outsourced to Capita and they're well below targets - last I heard recruitment rates had dropped from about 95% to less than 70%.
To give Capita some benefit of doubt, despite them not doing an amazing job (taking ages to do basic background and medical checks, for example) It's not all on them - the overall benefits for soldiers could do with looking at, and aspects such as decent, clean housing for soldiers' families has been sadly lacking for a fair few years. You're asking young lads and lasses to make notable commitments and accept significant life change - and no little risk, if and when shooting starts - for relatively poor recompense.
These issues are across the board - one of the factors influencing the fleet composition of the navy is the staffing levels they can support.
I also think the situation in Ukraine has deteriorated further and more rapidly than expected, in terms of Russian belligerence and Trump's Manchurian act. Not sure how useful our beautiful new aircraft carriers will be in a potential land war in Eastern Europe. Arguably we could do with a functioning ajax, AS90 replacement and Challenger 3 fleet PDQ.
Ajax replacements 5 years behind schedule and umpteen £billion over budget
Challenger 3 tank upgrade that makes the crew sick and suffer from tinnitus when driven at speed
We arre so fucking useless at procurement!!!!