| Ryuu96 said: I have strong concerns about a "peace-keeping" force though, what is to stop the UK from simply withdrawing troops if they think things are getting too heated? What is to stop the next leaders from withdrawing them because they stupidly believe Russia won't attack (for the 3rd time)? Anything less than NATO is still worthless Imo, unless this is the most iron-clad security agreement second only to NATO with explicit terms that any attack on Ukraine is an attack on the UK and will be responded to with military, soldiers, actual attacks from the UK. But even then I have my doubts there wouldn't be some get out clause or simply, a politician ignoring it, because who will stop them? The thing with ignoring NATO is that if that happened it would pretty much destroy the whole idea of NATO so that's a lot harder to ignore than individual security agreements and Ukraine already had one of those which did absolutely nothing to stop the invasion. Putin can wait out any "peace-keeping" forces, especially if sanctions were lifted on Russia allowing them to rebuild their military. And secondly, the stolen territory needs to return to Ukraine. |
Perhaps the various powers of the world are wanting to be rather machivellian, and use this war to exhaust russia. If so, then they would want Ukraine to continue fighting and regain its lost territory.
I personally wish that Ukraine gets everything back, since anything lost seems like a win for the biggest bully in the world.
Essay Pro