• SpaceBar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Perhaps if the UK conservatives didn’t mess up their country so badly with Brexit and privatization, they wouldn’t be so concerned about paying for another country to stop Russia’s imperial expansion.

    • freehugs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I feel like people are starting to lose track of the big picture as the war becomes more and more normalized. I imagine the same goes for Ukraine seemingly taking the allies’ support more “for granted” than in the beginning of the war. Obviously, Ukrainians are fighting this war in the interest of the entire western community, so to ask them to be more grateful for western support just seems petty imo.

      • Caradoc879@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        This is literally a NATO proxy-war with Russia. If we don’t want to send actual troops, we better be giving them all the equipment they ask for. Blank check.

        • freehugs@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Is it really a proxy war if NATO is reacting to Russian agression, though? Maybe I misunderstand the meaning of the term, but I don’t see much evidence that NATO was rooting for this conflict to escalate the way it did.

          • norske@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Trying to make sure I understood the root of your question here.

            Is it that the war in Ukraine can’t be a proxy war because NATO isn’t rooting for it?

            • freehugs@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              In my understanding, calling the Ukraine war a NATO proxy war suggests that NATO is seen as an agressor/enabler in this conflict, effectively exploiting Ukraine to further NATO’s agenda. I’m not sure if that’s what the other commenter was implying (cause if so I would disagree with them), but that’s why I’m asking :)

              • Deuces@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I just looked up the definition and you’re absolutely right. I’m not the OP but I would have used it the same way. I always thought a proxy war was any war between two great powers where at least one didn’t get involved, I never realized it required an absent power to be the aggressor.

  • BlendedRacer@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    They (UK) are also not meeting their obligations under the Budapest 1994 agreement. In that US and UK (and ironically Ruzzia) agreed to have “boots on the ground” to defend Ukraine!

  • Ignacio@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    “We’re not Amazon”, said the country that during the Second World War was begging for help to United States so they could stop Hitler.

    Stop acting like the spoiled child of Europe and start helping a country that is fighting for its existence.

    • blackn1ght@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Start helping? I dunno what to tell you if you think the UK hasn’t done anything to help Ukraine.

    • Richie030@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Read the article, he was not referencing the UK, he was advising them how to get more backing from western countries.