A former British MP that held a position in Britain’s Ministry of Defense said on Tuesday that NATO should consider sending troops into Ukraine.
“I think that is something we now have to consider, certainly if you were to put a NATO force in there,” Gerald Howarth told Sky News when asked if he was suggesting NATO boots on the ground in Ukraine.
Howarth acknowledged that sending a NATO force into Ukraine would mean “NATO vs. Russia,” a scenario that could quickly escalate into World War III and likely nuclear war.
Howarth was a Member of the British Parliament from 1997 to 2017 and served as the Minister for International Security Strategy in the Ministry of Defense from 2010-2012, a junior ministerial position that no longer.
According to multiple media reports, Britain did send troops into Ukraine after the Russian invasion, but not as part of an official NATO force to fight Russia, as Howarth suggested. The Times of London reported in April 2022 that soldiers from Britain’s Special Air Service (SAS) were training Ukrainian troops in Kyiv on how to use anti-tank weapons provided by London.
In June 2022, The New York Times also reported that British special operations forces were inside Ukraine training Ukrainian soldiers, along with commandos from France, Canada, and Lithuania. The report also said the US has a CIA presence on the ground in Ukraine.
British Royal Marines have also operated inside Ukraine post-invasion, according to a senior Royal Marines officer. In December, Lt. Gen. Robert Magowan wrote in the Royal Navy’s official magazine that about 350 Marines were deployed to Ukraine for two missions in 2022.
The first mission came before the invasion, in January, when the Marines helped evacuate British diplomatic staff. The second mission came in April when the Marines were deployed to provide security for diplomatic personnel when the British embassy was re-opened in Kyiv.
But Magowan said the mission went beyond embassy security without offering any details. He said in both “phases, the commandos supported other discreet operations in a hugely sensitive environment and with a high level of political and military risk.”
… and here we go!
Yes the country that will run out of ammunition within the start of a serious conflict wants to send troops in warzone where war is being fought on an industrial scale.
One has to wonder how this man ever got a position as Defence Minister… this is just about the worst idea I have seen in this war and I include Putin’s decision to start it in the first place.
Putin obliged.
Do the public of Nato countries really want their soldiers to die for Zelensky.
Believe me, there are many bots among the populace who buy the lines the propaganda ministers spew.
No, but we are being told we do.
The public probably don’t, but most EU governments are thinking it would be a lucrative business.
Forget about the soldiers dying. The REA. question is do THEY want to be nuked for some American Neocon scheme to try to weaken Russia….?????
What the fuck is up with the current “….but they acknowledge that doing so would lead to a world war…” talking point?
I have seen several of these in the last few days, some expert saying we really should be considering acts that will start a world war, *oh and it probably means nuclear war*, like nuclear war is some unfortunate side effect.
These asshats are so committed to their politics that they think those stupid politics will outlive civilization? Like we’re going to carve “8 billion dead, but we freed Ukraine and preserved dollar hegemony!” into a mountain so the cockroaches can read it in a few million years?
As you pt out it seems to be scripted from HQ, so probably meant to scare Putin into something rash.
Well, there’s that to consider. Because every action of the US appears specifically designed to goad Russia into doing something rash, which would provide the US its needed excuse for violent reaction.
As, for example, the explosion of Nord Stream. It was a real shock and awe.
Yes, imagine the response from the US if something similar happened.
“The first mission came before the invasion, in January, when the Marines helped evacuate British diplomatic staff. The second mission came in April when the Marines were deployed to provide security for diplomatic personnel when the British embassy was re-opened in Kyiv.”
In other words, ukro-nazzis were incapable of providing security guarantees to the British diplomatic staff.
They probably didn’t want to.
What’s the point of speculating?
US President Biden declared on Wednesday that “the United States will be sending 31 Abrams tanks to Ukraine”.
In March 2022 he compared the idea of sending ‘offensive equipment’ for Ukraine to “World War 3”.
https://dailycaller.com/2023/01/26/flashback-biden-abrams-tanks-ukraine-wwiii-ukraine/
But Joe said the Abrams are “defensive”. Similar to him only selling “defensive” weapons to the Saudis.
I find Biden and his lackeys in the state department extremely offensive, myself.
Ah, the poodle awakens!
Ground troops? Is that like ground round (when the Russian artillery gets through with them) ?
“Howarth acknowledged that sending a NATO force into Ukraine would mean “NATO vs. Russia,” a scenario that could quickly escalate into World War III and likely nuclear war.”
Not “could”, will. But another guy getting close to reaching his expiration date is cool with it.
The brits are like the polish in their hatred, only they still (and always will have) pretensions of grandeur and crooked teeth.
Is there anyone who is under any illusion this is not a proxy war now? Anyone?
When Russia finally sinks that island, there will be 50% less evil in the world.