AGAA4
Iam64
The press is reporting Vance said “if you want real security guarantees, to ensure Putin does not invade Ukraine again, the very best security guarantee is Americans economic upside in the future of Ukraine. That is a way better security guarantee than 20,000 troops from some random country that hasn’t fought a war in 30 or 40 years”
Downing Street slapped down the VPs comments “the PM and this country are full of admiration for UK troops who served in recent years in Iraq and Afghanistan alongside the US and other allies (daily Mail )
Vance is now saying he didn’t mean UK or FranceAn insult to the UK and our armed forces. Vance is getting too big for his boots. He has been called an attack dog and the description fits him perfectly.
I think he is saying what he thinks to be true, and it may well be.
He has been called an attack dog
An attack dog for peace?
You do realise that all our weapons are old, almost defunct and old technology.
As I understand it we have around 70, 000 troops. Figures vary as to what percentage are battle ready.
To illustrate, Israel has pulled the most technically advanced ship (destroyer Ill find the name later if you want it) out of the range of the Houthis drones which can travel 100s of mph and carry bombs capable of similar destruction to a small nuclear war head. The ship is next to useless. Too big for a start.
For that matter so are nuclear bombs, if any old country can arm itself with these types of weapons.
Doesn't it make sense to find as many ways to buy time to re defend ourselves?
Isn't a cease fire in Ukraine one road to decreasing the likelihood of WW3?
Too many people are being led by their emotions and the wordsmiths are playing a good game.
None of us like to be thought of as lacking in some manner, do we?
I see no one has commented on V.Zelenskky baiting Trump with his threat of the '
ocean not being enough to separate you from the trouble one day'
A reference to drones which could be launched from Europe Ukraine or Russia or elsewhere, and reach a target in USA in 3 hours.
How should that be viewed?
So far no one has a decent defence against such weapons.
Without USA investment in some fashion we never will have.
Isn't it better to have a cool head about the rhetoric being spewed at us, and analyse what the results of acting on such words are?
The childhood rhyme sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me, springs to mind.


