UK Politics

3097 readers

139 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

tom

GreatAlbatross

flamingos

UK expected to give Ukraine Storm Shadow missiles to strike inside Russia (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 2 days ago by Emperor to c/uk_politics

31 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Britain is expected to supply Storm Shadow missiles for use by Ukraine on targets inside Russia, now that the US president, Joe Biden, has agreed to do the same for the similar American long-range Atacms weapon.

Keir Starmer, the prime minister, said at the G20 summit that the UK recognised it needed to “double down” on its support for Ukraine, while diplomatic sources briefed they expected other European countries to follow the US lead.

...

Russia, however, accused the west of escalation and said that Biden risked adding “fuel to the fire” in Ukraine, and while Donald Trump remained silent on the issue, his son Don Jr accused the military industrial complex of wanting to get “world war three going”.

Storm Shadow missiles have a range of about 250km (155 miles), similar to the US Atacms, and have in the past been given to Kyiv by the UK and France to strike targets inside Ukraine’s internationally recognised borders.

But the US retained an effective veto on their use because it supplies a guidance system and repeated lobbying by the UK had failed to shift the US position, which has only begun to soften after the election victory of Donald Trump earlier this month.

...

Ukraine had also become increasingly exasperated with Britain on the issue of long-range missiles, complaining earlier this month that not only had there been no progress on their use inside Russia but that the UK had stopped supplying them at all.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] MarxMadness@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 day ago

They want a demilitarized, denazified zone encompassing their most vulnerable border, a totally reasonable desire for any state, especially one facing down the lying, bloodthirsty savages of NATO.

And this was promised to Russia upon the breakup of thr Soviet Union -- Ukraine's constitution calls it something like a "permanently neutral state."

Then, after 20 years of NATO pushing east (and destroying countries like Yugoslavia and Libya), the U.S. backs a color revolution in Ukraine in 2014. Next you start hearing talks of Ukraine joining NATO and Russian speakers in Eastern Ukraine start getting attacked. Then Ukraine breaks the Minsk agreements (those same ones Angela Merkel admitted were a stall tactic to arm Ukraine for this very war).

You can disagree over whether this approaching hostility is justification for an invasion (the U.S. certainly would think so; it invaded Cuba over far less), but there's really no argument that evil Putler just woke up one day and decided to do a land grab for reasons.