Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 02/22/2026 9:04:14 AM PST by MinorityRepublican
The UK’s defence secretary, John Healey, has written in the Sunday Telegraph saying he wants to deploy British troops to Ukraine as it would signal an end to Russia’s war, days before the fourth anniversary of the full-scale invasion. Here is an extract from what he wrote
There is no heavier burden on any defence secretary or any government than committing our armed forces on operations.
I want to be the defence secretary who deploys British troops to Ukraine – because this will mean that this war is finally over.
It will mean we have negotiated peace in Ukraine. And a secure Europe needs a strong, sovereign Ukraine.
(Excerpt) Read more at theguardian.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
No only do you rob UK citizens of their safety, their freedom of speech, their economic security, their religious freedom now you want to send them to be slaughtered to prolong the Neocon con job.
Boris Johnson speaking along the same lines.
Side note to the British commander: Remember that the Charge of the Light Brigade against Russian troops in 1854 didn’t go so well. So you probably don’t want to try that again.
Spades identifying as missiles.
Just send plenty of body bags.
The EU wants this war to continue indefinitely for reasons known best to them.
I am far more concerned with Ukraine and it's foreign backers trying to provoke a renewal of the conflict to draw in the US than I am about Russia wanting to go back into a war with Ukraine
I disagree, and believe they desperately want an end to the bloodshed. As does Ukraine.
Right. Noone read the article. Just posted what they usually, with zero thought
“...as it would signal an end to Russia’s war...”
No it wouldn’t. It would just increase the loss in the Ukraine and other properties along with destroy the safety of the UK with attacks happening there when they turn on Russia.
And you can observe the changes in the way Russia handles it’s foreign business causing problems in many countries.
wy69
De-Fence?
or Defense?
Are we talking about immigration here, maybe building a wall or a tall fence structure? Or is this national security? Misspellings can be confusing.
Read the article. Quote in part:
"There is no heavier burden on any defence secretary or any government than committing our armed forces on operations.So, 1) he hasn't "committed: troops, 2) talks about "committing" when "this war is finally over," after and not before "we have negotiated peace.""I want to be the defence secretary who deploys British troops to Ukraine – because this will mean [ future tense ] that this war is finally over.
"It will mean [ future tense } we have negotiated peace in Ukraine. And a secure Europe needs a strong, sovereign Ukraine."
So, like most political speech on so many sides, he promises "jam tomorrow." But when tomorrow comes, it is "today," so the promise remains for "tomorrow." Ref: Lewis Carroll.
When the article comes from the Guardian, the headline probably says it all. Anything past the headline is the whole cloth of fabrication. Adding Brit troops to the Ukrain mess is probably going to get someone nuked.
The UK would appear to not intend strong support for Ukraine.
If they did, this troop deployment would not depend on a peace agreement. If they did they would deploy right now.
They would get many or most of their troops killed, but so what? Isn’t that sort of sacrifice support?
We are told this and that, about democracy, human rights and sovereignty.
But ALL wars have an economic / power basis and the Brits have a long history in that area with few folks in the US in particular realizing this.
I am truly starting to believe in the wisdom of Washington’s farewell address.
As we meddle in euro affairs, we risk getting sucked into their bloody wars.
They are big kids (economy bigger than ours, EU vs. US, more populous).
They need to handle their issues and we should focus on ours.
From the same country that appeased Hitler and got it shoved up their arse, only for this country to have to save their sorry arse once again.
I'm sure Putin is laughing his arse off over John Healey's comments, just like Hitler laughed his arse off after Chamberlain signed the Munich Agreement in 1938.
“I want to be the defence secretary who deploys British troops to Ukraine – because this will mean that this war is finally over.”
From the same country that appeased Hitler and got it shoved up their arse, only for this country to have to save their sorry arse once again.
Ironically Ukraine originally welcomed the Nazis as liberators.
> As we meddle in euro affairs, we risk getting sucked into their bloody wars. <
I was going to say we had to intervene in Europe in WW2 to stop Nazi Germany.
But wait. Had we not intervened in WW1, the Kaiser’s government might have survived. Then there would have been no Nazi Germany.
Britain and Germany should have been allies in 1871. Britain has The Empire, Germany has Europe, screw the French.
Would have saved the world from a lot of grief.
You could argue that was the long range intention of Prince Albert.
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.