Posted on 06/03/2025 5:28:56 PM PDT by ransomnote
ransomnote: At the link, there's a chart showing the proxy war in the Ukraine.
Sir Keir Starmer’s flagship plan to transform the armed forces has been undermined in less than 24 hours after Nato demanded the Government spend 3.5 per cent of GDP on defence.
On Monday, the Prime Minister unveiled his long-awaited Strategic Defence Review (SDR), setting out the future of the British forces and how they would adapt to future battlefields, with a focus on AI, drones and cyber technology, while remaining a “Nato first” military.
However, Sir Keir declined to commit to a firm timeline on when he would hit a stated ambition of spending 3 per cent of GDP on defence.
Just hours later, Nato sources briefed that the UK would be required to spend a higher sum of 3.5 per cent of GDP instead.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
Globalists and their minions are certainly doubling down everywhere.
There would be no war of any kind if Russia would just go home. Those who are making this a proxy war are those who erroneously think that a Russian victory would somehow advance the cause of freedom in the west. They are letting their distain for their domestic political opponents color their views about Ukraine.
Okay my note at the top got truncated when I copied it. The chart at the link shows funding for the proxy war by nation (includes non NATO members).
In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Nato demand for 3.5pc defence spending blows hole in Starmer’s review, Petrosius wrote: There would be no war of any kind if Russia would just go home. Those who are making this a proxy war are those who erroneously think that a Russian victory would somehow advance the cause of freedom in the west. They are letting their distain for their domestic political opponents color their views about Ukraine.
False. NATO/CIA created this war. The timeline starts even before they overthrew the Ukraine in 2014. You keep posting as if the proxy war started in 2022 with Russia. It started long before then with NATO/CIA.
Seriously. All ages accepted.
See: Victoria Nuland (Obama)
Incorrect. This war started in 2014 when Putin induced Yanukovych to betray the Ukrainian people by reneging on the EU economic agreement and seeking to tie Ukraine to Russia via the Eurasian Economic Union. This, not the CIA, is what set off the protests that lead to Yanukovych fleeing to Russia. And this is the little inconvenient fact that Russian apologists always gloss over.
LIMITED TIME OFFER
1 year for $29
”
NOT happening…..
Trump says the State Department helped overthrow the Ukraine in 2014. I believe Trump, not you.
” Those who are making this a proxy war “
You lie. Who bragged about weakening Russia? Lindsay Graham and the other warmongers. Let’s not forget Biden talking about regime change. Who did he think was going to do that? Yep, our proxy, the Ukraine. So Mr. Uke Nationalist, you’re trying to spread more propaganda here.
Trump is not our Dear Leader with whom we must always agree. He has made some ill-informed statements about Ukraine. But even if it were true, it has been made moot by the two subsequent elections. What may or may not have happened in 2014 is no justification for Russia's invasion eight years later. The truth is that Putin is upset that his own interference in Ukrainian with Yanukovych was thwarted. It is the hight of hypocrisy for Putin to complain about Yanukovych's removal when one of his stated war aims is to replace the elected Ukrainian government with a pro-Russian one acceptable to Moscow.
And how does a Russian victory in Ukraine, one which would subjugate a whole nation, advance the cause of freedom in the west?
| In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Nato demand for 3.5pc defence spending blows hole in Starmer’s review, Petrosius wrote: |
Trump says the State Department helped overthrow the Ukraine in 2014. I believe Trump, not you. |
And how was that supposed to happen? All you are offering is paranoid speculation.
He watched while they built an army and dug fortifications for 8 years for the purpose of starting a war and driving him from office.
Did you miss the part where Russia invaded and occupied that land. Ukraine was not intending to attack Russia; only to recover its own land and protect itself from Russian attacks. There were no NATO troops in Ukraine to back them up. Do you really think that Ukraine would have been able to attack Russia on its own?
They wanted to make a long bloody war so that Russian citizens would tire of it and remove him. That's why Zelensky keeps the war going long after he could conceivably continue to staff his war (he's out of men and ammunition).
If that were true then the Russians should be able to just march to Kyiv unopposed. Russian apologists have been predicting a Ukrainian collapse for over three years. It has yet to happen. Zelensky is continuing to fight because the Russians are continuing to attack. Is that really that hard to understand?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.