Is Liz Truss intending to take the UK to war?

Germanshepherdsmum

Give it time.

I don't think it will happen because security around him will be water-tight.

As it has been around others who have been knocked off by snipers.

I agree with grandtante and M0nica. Hitler took over Austria and the Sudetenland before invading Poland. If he had not been opposed at that point he probably would have carried on.

Putin invaded Chechnya and the Crimea before Ukraine. If he hadn’t been opposed at that point he might well have carried on too.

I hate war, but maybe sometimes it is the lesser of two evils.

Maizie, I had heard your explanation before. If Pres. Putin thinks that all former Soviet countries wish to return to the Soviet era. He's on a hiding to nothing. Countries will not comply. Though I do wonder where that leaves us......

I also agree with others that Britain is not at war.

As a military mum and mum inlaw this is very concerning to me. My son and daughter inlaw have both done Afghan and Iraq hopefully this one not added to their cvs. Yes I no joined to protect our country etc but when you the parent sitting at home worrying you not Don’t see it the same way.

With regard to LIz Truss, I saw a nice saying on mumsnet yesterday "Walk quietly but carry a big stick". I like that better than sabre rattling...

Coco51

I don’t know why the UN isn’t sending neutral multi-national peacekeeping forces in. As Russia is a founder member of the UN Putin would have to think very carefully before continuing his butchery in Ukraine

To send in Peace Keepers both sides need to have, at least in the first instance, agreed to peace.

Putin will not stop as it is not in his nature to stop. The Western democracies cannot afford not to help drive him back and, hopefully, break the Russian economy. If they don't stop him now how will they stop him from moving out of Ukraine into other European countries? He believes Russia is entitled to an empire.

There are three inter-related and mutually reinforcing principles for peacekeeping

1. Consent of the parties
2. Impartiality
3. Non-use of force except in self-defence and defence of the mandate

MaizieD

With regard to LIz Truss, I saw a nice saying on mumsnet yesterday "Walk quietly but carry a big stick". I like that better than sabre rattling...

I suspect that may come from the letters page in yesterday's Guardian. Truss would do well to pay heed to what is written there:

www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/apr/28/liz-truss-careless-talk-fans-the-flames-of-war-in-ukraine

A big stick can be far more damaging to someone than a sabre. So whether you prefer swords or sticks, it is just a choice of weapon, not a choice between an aggressive or non aggressive item to carry.

It is a distinction without a difference.

M0nica

A big stick can be far more damaging to someone than a sabre. So whether you prefer swords or sticks, it is just a choice of weapon, not a choice between an aggressive or non aggressive item to carry.

It is a distinction without a difference.

The relevant bit is about walking quietly. Something Truss would do well to try and do.

volver

M0nica

A big stick can be far more damaging to someone than a sabre. So whether you prefer swords or sticks, it is just a choice of weapon, not a choice between an aggressive or non aggressive item to carry.

It is a distinction without a difference.

The relevant bit is about walking quietly. Something Truss would do well to try and do.

Here, here

You must get a different edition of the Guardian from me, OakDryad, it's in today (Friday)'s letter page ?

I see it's quoted there as 'talk quietly, rather than 'walk quietly, which does make more sense ?

Anyway, I think it's ridiculous to up the ante verbally in an exercise in competitive threatening.. Far better to both leave your opponent guessing, and, give them a bit of wriggle room.

Thanks, volver, for saving me from having to point out MOnica's misinterpretation...

Yes definitely. Wasn’t she nicknamed by staffers the human grenade quite early in her political career?

I think “wriggle room” is vital. Putin will not want to appear to have lost. Diplomacy, not threats has got to be the way in the end, but I hope many thousands more lives will not continue to be lost beforehand.

That's true dinahmo. As do the Russians. But by doing it now, the military are strategically placed to take action should that become unavoidable. Incidentally this year is the first in my adult life that I am not either a military wife or military mum and I feel so much for them all just now.

The absolute last thing we want is for Putin to declare war on the west, but I still think he is an evil bully, and if bullies aren’t stopped they will carry on. I just wish there was a solution that doesn’t involve more death and destruction.

Agree with you for an unprecedented third time volver.
Anyone remember the days when Thatcher’s handbag was feared?

The quote is Roosevelt's description of his "big stick diplomacy" he also described his style of foreign policy as "the exercise of intelligent forethought and of decisive action sufficiently far in advance of any likely crisis"

"Putin may be a monster and a liar and we are right to send aid to the people he oppresses, but a strategist should look beyond insults to assess risks and probabilities on the ground. This moment of maximum danger demands all the judgment and skill that narrowly resolved Cuba in 1962. We should remember then that both sides had to climb down." (The Guardian - Simon Jenkins)

I don't always agree with Jenkins (nor the Guardian editorials come to that), but I think he's right here.

Is Truss a strategist? Or is she playing a dangerous game to, as Jenkins seems to be suggesting, 'excite the electorate'?

"It is hard to imagine a more delicate and dangerous time for such antics than now. Ukraine is seeing some of the most appalling atrocities since the second world war and the conflict in the former Yugoslavia. There is no conceivable excuse for what Putin is doing to his neighbour. But the burning issue is not the awfulness of war. It is what can be done to stop it."

*MaizieD said: Walk quietly but carry a big stick". I like that better than sabre rattling

I never queried the 'walking quietly' , but the difference if you also carry a big stick, compared with also carrying a sabre remains as I said, a distinction without a difference.

M0nica

*MaizieD said: Walk quietly but carry a big stick". I like that better than sabre rattling

I never queried the 'walking quietly' , but the difference if you also carry a big stick, compared with also carrying a sabre remains as I said, a distinction without a difference.

Still completely missing the point, MOnica.

Sorry for jumping in earlier MaizieD. Just watching from the sidelines now

Dickens

"Putin may be a monster and a liar and we are right to send aid to the people he oppresses, but a strategist should look beyond insults to assess risks and probabilities on the ground. This moment of maximum danger demands all the judgment and skill that narrowly resolved Cuba in 1962. We should remember then that both sides had to climb down." (The Guardian - Simon Jenkins)

I don't always agree with Jenkins (nor the Guardian editorials come to that), but I think he's right here.

Is Truss a strategist? Or is she playing a dangerous game to, as Jenkins seems to be suggesting, 'excite the electorate'?

^"It is hard to imagine a more delicate and dangerous time for such antics than now. Ukraine is seeing some of the most appalling atrocities since the second world war and the conflict in the former Yugoslavia. There is no conceivable excuse for what Putin is doing to his neighbour. But the burning issue is not the awfulness of war. It is what can be done to stop it."^

We should remember then that both sides had to climb down."

If Truss is listening to advice it may be that they are pushing up the hill so that they don't have to come down so far.