Close Menu
    Vereinigtes Königreich

    Starmer warnte, dass die Ukraine mehr als 50.000 Soldaten vor Ort benötigen werde


    Starmer warnte, dass die Ukraine mehr als 50.000 Soldaten vor Ort benötigen werde

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/uk-troops-forces-ukraine-starmer-nato-trump-b2896006.html

    Von tylerthe-theatre

    View 16 Comments

    16 Kommentare

    1. Safe-Avocado4864 on

      So, we need to put more than half our army to protect a peace that will never get agreed to without a clause saying we won’t put any of our army there? Did the world used to make sense?

    2. FlaviousTiberius on

      I’m assuming any peacekeeping force will be made of multiple countries not just ours?

      To be honest I couldn’t imagine Russia really attempting again, they’ve already been grinding for four years, trying to go at it again with the European powers would be nutty even by Russia’s standard.

    3. ash_ninetyone on

      This is where NATO/EU+UK peacekeeping efforts come into play as a whole.

      At least NATO – US.

    4. Krabsandwich on

      All depends what the plan is, sending small numbers of troops for Ukrainian Army training deployed way behind the front in places like Odessa or Lviv not intended or equipped for combat is a pretty doable tasking.

      Throw in some air defence units to protect critical infrastructure in Western Ukraine and its pretty commitment light, if you want to be more proactive then at least a reinforced combat brigade where the price and risk goes up quite a bit.

      If you are talking of 50k then we are looking a massive peace time deployment with a big price tag and risk attached and the Government better find the cash pronto because we will need to recruit train and equip them.

    5. thehighyellowmoon on

      Did the journalist not pick up the actual number from Sir Richard in the article was 40,000? The 50,000 is detailed as troops that were sent to Kosovo, 30 years ago.

    6. Half_A_ on

      The peacekeepers wouldn’t really be there to hold the frontline, though. They’d be there to essentially guarantee that any future attack on Ukraine is an attack on NATO.

    7. Darkone539 on

      This is why only have British and French troops is unworkable. We do not have the numbers.

      If nobody else steps up we shouldn’t touch this. Europe has had the manpower. They are just unwilling to follow this plan.

    8. Somnioo on

      Listen to the wargames podcast with the old secretary of defence Ben Wallace – if you are to trust his comments the current UK military couldn’t even muster a single fully supported division in its current state let alone 50,000 boots on ground.

      Our only real defence is the nuclear deterant. If anyone ever fires missiles at the UK it’s in our best interest to immediately escelate to a nuclear response as we simply cannot win or realistically partake in conventional war in any meaningful way in the modern warfare environment (on our own anyway).

    9. Euclid_Interloper on

      The point of a reassurance force isn’t to get into trench warfare with Russia. Ukraine has those capabilities and experience already.

      What British forces would likely be doing, in the event of Russia breaking the ceasefire, is providing sharp-edge capabilities like air defence, intelligence, electronic warfare, precision strikes etc.

      Our personnel would primarily be there to act as a force multiplier.

    10. Revolutionary-Mode75 on

      if whole Europe join that around 2000 troops per country.  UK can currently cover that number we regularly had more troops in Afghanistan facing an actual hostile force.

    11. Proud_Organization64 on

      I don’t see Russia signing a peace deal in the first place as European troops in Ukraine would put it further from its goal of taking Ukraine. And it probably won’t play well at home for Putin. Russia was supposed to win this war in a matter of days. A peace deal with Ukraine and Zelensky intact constitutes a failure.

    12. wretchedheadplate on

      This is all theatre, putin will never agree to a ceasefire, especially one which entails European troops in Ukraine

    13. Significant-Crow-974 on

      The U.K. just might be able to contribute up to 5 soldiers on the ground out of the 50000 needed. But hurry, because defence cuts will mean that we might actually provide 3.
      We will not be able to provide ammunition for the rifles though as we used them for training last week.

    14. Anyales on

      10 Typhoons would have been enough to stop the current invasion, why would we 50000 troops there?

      If a war with Russia broke out we wouldn’t he fighting like Ukraine is fighting now. What a strange analysis 

    15. MonitorPowerful5461 on

      Why? They’re not to fight Russia; they’re to deter Russia from invading in the first place

    16. LOLinDark on

      The Russians won’t attack again so this will be an uneventful and dull tour other than learning from Ukrainian veterans. That’s an opportunity.

    Leave A Reply