Kier Starmer's proposal is boots on the ground AFTER THE WAR IS OVER - about how to END the Ukraine war not start a new one - if it works - the war ends - if not - war continues until next solution
[Click on column of dashes to the left for menu, will add contents, comments disabled when first posted - see instructions at end of post for how to contact me until I enable comments]
There's a path to peace. It is to do with strengthening Ukraine and making sure they have security guarantees for when the war is over. And then dealing with the issue that Putin doesn't want peace, seems pretty clear, so needs to be persuaded.
That means putting Ukraine in a strong place. It's like when there are bullies at school you don't solve bullying problems by telling the victims to do what the bully says. They need a way to stand up to the bully.
That is the only real path to peace here. At last that is how Europe sees it.
This is just about how to END the war not about starting a new war. If it succeeds the war ends soon. If it fails the war continues for a while longer.
The boots on the ground idea is for AFTER THE WAR IS OVER COMPLETELY That is the main thing that most people seem to misunderstand.
TEXT ON GRAPHIC
Kier Starmer’s “Boots on the Ground” are for
AFTER THE WAR IS OVER
with an AGREED PEACE TREATY
Ukraine has plenty of soldiers to keep out Putin.
Ukraine will need help for
patrols of the Black Sea to protect grain shipments from Russia
patrols of the air because the European F-35 fighter jets are so much better
US will be a valuable partner for air patrols
Background image: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ukrainian_combat_boots.jpg
There is no way the UK or any NATO ally is going to send troops to Ukraine to fight with Russia.
There is no way that NATO will take part.
Poland wanted to send international peacekeepers to rescue the citizens of Mariupol in a humanitarian mission in 2022, not a NATO mission. This was back when the main road to Mariupol was still under Ukrainian control, but Russians were firing at any civilians that tried to evacuate - many still tried and most that tried got out but some were killed. The Russians shelled convoys of buses and they confiscated the buses.
Poland wanted to send peacekeepers that would be armed only for self defence to escort civilians safely out of Mariupol.
But nobody else would join them and it never happened. As a result 10s of thousands of Mariupol citizens died and are now buried in mass graves that you can see from satellite around Mariupol.
With this history it is highly unlikely that any of Ukraine's allies will directly join the fighting in Ukraine. They also won't send any international peacekeepers until the war is well and truly over.
They are willing to send peacekeepers to other places where they are at greater risk for instance the border with Lebanon and Israel. But not to Ukraine and won't do until the war is over - it is a very clear settled pattern that they are not likely to change out of sensitivities of the allies to any appearance of confrontation with Putin.
They are ultra ultra cautious here.
It is only about continuing with supplies for Ukraine.
One of the main things Ukraine wants right now is air defences because Putin attacks civilians in Ukraine every day - as well as needed for their soldiers on the front line to protect them too.
Kier Starmer has promised to make 5,000 air defence missiles in Belfast to send to Ukraine - they will build their own launchers and control stations for them in Ukraine itself.
So at least they can be a little safer from Russian missiles because of UK's help.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/historic-16bn-deal-provides-thousands-of-air-defence-missiles-for-ukraine-and-boosts-uk-jobs-and-growth
One of the main things Ukraine wants right now is air defences because Putin attacks civilians in Ukraine every day - as well as needed for their soldiers. Kier Starmer has promised to make 5,000 air defence missiles in Belfast to send to Ukraine - they will build their own launchers and control stations for them in Ukraine itself. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/historic-16bn-deal-provides-thousands-of-air-defence-missiles-for-ukraine-and-boosts-uk-jobs-and-growth
It is for after the war is over. Always is. Zelensky says that he has plenty of his own soldiers. However Ukraine has almost no naval experience. So I expect the main way the UK can help AFTER THE WAR IS OVER is to police the Black Sea to protect Ukrainian grain exports from Russia.
As for planes in the air, again once the war is over with a clearly demarked safe area of Ukraine the UK would surely patrol it with F-35s just as NATO does for its Baltic state members. I.e. similar to NATO protection but as a coalition of the willing rather than all of NATO.
The US has always played a central role. But Biden helped NATO to change its focus to European rather than US leadership.
QUOTE STARTS
"We discussed a plan today to reach a peace that is tough and fair, that Ukraine will help shape, that's backed by strength, to stop Putin coming back for more," Starmer said. "I'm working closely with other European leaders on this, and I'm clear that the U.K. is ready to put boots on the ground and planes in the air to support a deal, working together with our allies, because that is the only way that peace will last."
Mr. Trump called Starmer a "very tough negotiator." Starmer, for his part, called his visit a "very good and very productive" one, noting Mr. Trump's family roots in Scotland.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-uk-keir-starmer-ukraine-war-russia-europe-tariffs/
The headquarters have always been in Brussels in Belgium. Other parts of NATO are now coordinated in Germany instead of the USA
It is absolutely clear that Putin is in no position to ever attack NATO. He can't even liberate Sudzha after 7 months of fighting, a small RUSSIAN city of 5,000. And he still can't protect Moscow from Ukrainian propeller driven drones that take hours to get there travelling at the speed of a fast car.
He is not in any way a capable adversary for NATO and is only able to advance at all in Ukraine at loss of thousands of Russian lives because we don't give our most modern up to date technology to Ukraine in at least two important areas, our F-35 fighter jets and our longer range conventional missiles like the Tomahawk which the US uses to attack the Houthi rebels in Yemen.
Zelensky has said that if he had Tomahawk cruise missiles it would end the war. He could force Putin to the negotiating table to do a deal with him. You've surely seen my attempt at working out what he meant and the main vulnerability is the prestige loss of Ukraine sinking his Black Sea Fleet and Caspian flotilla leaving not a single warship in either sea for the first time since 1783. This wouldn't win the war and if Zelensky just did it, Putin would fight on. But if used as leverage, if Zelensky say was to sink one ship as a demo and then say "we must negotiate or the rest will be gone too" then I think that is what Zelensky meant as a lever that would bring Putin reluctantly to the negotiating table. Ukraine would offer Putin to keep his fleet + get back Kursk oblast in return for territory in Donbas back say to as far East as the outskirts of Donetsk and then down south to the Azov Sea coast including Mariupol returned to Ukraine. Putin gets to keep Crimea. I think an agreement like that is one that Putin might go for if Ukraine had the Tomahawks or developed its own native equivalent.
The F-35s are even more powerful - those would win the war for Ukraine by tomorrow, there would be almost nothing left of Russia's air defences or artillery or counter artillery within occupied Ukraine after just one mission by the F-35s like the one that Israel used against Iran.
But Ukraine's allies are very reticent of showing their power to this extent in confrontation with Putin so they won't send Ukraine these capabilities.
However Putin knows that NATO has this capability and that he can't defend against it.
Estonia for instance has access to all that plus air defences, artillery, tanks if needed etc on day 1.
Given that just the Tomahawks are enough leverage to end the war in Ukraine's favour and NATO has far more than just the Tomahawks it's clear that Putin is never going to attack NATO in reality.
And we have generals like General Radakin and General Petraeus sharing the same assessment that Putin will never attack NATO so long as it stays together because it would lose and lose quickly. Lose here does NOT mean an nuclear war or retaliation., It just means pushed out of NATO, over in hours most likely.
The latest measures in the UK’s support for Ukraine to achieve peace through strength, the deal will also provide a major boost to the UK economy and support 700 existing jobs at Thales in Belfast, which will manufacture more than 5,000 lightweight-multirole missiles (LMM) for Ukraine’s defence. The deal will see production of LMMs at Thales’s factory treble and will also benefit companies in the Thales Supply Chain across the UK – putting more money in working people’s pockets.
...
Today’s deal marks a historic step for industrial relations between the UK and Ukraine, building on the 100 Year Partnership signed recently by the Prime Minister and President Zelenskyy in Kyiv. The contract will enable Ukraine to draw on £3.5bn of export finance to acquire military equipment from UK companies, boosting both the UK’s and Ukraine’s defence industrial bases and support investment in further military capabilities.
...
Thales Northern Ireland will deliver the contract – worth an initial £1.16bn with the potential for around a further £500m of work to be added – in collaboration with a Ukrainian industry partner, which will manufacture launchers and command and control vehicles for the missiles in Ukraine.
See also my
How to see Putin will NEVER attack NATO - “Because Russia will lose, and lose quickly” - Admiral Radakin - and Putin isn't even trying to protect Russia from NATO
The media seems to treat Russia as if it was the far more powerful Soviet Union. But modern Russia is nothing like the Soviet Union. It’s got an economy similar to Italy. Most of the GDP of the Soviet Union ended up in NATO. Most of their defence industrial base ended up there too. It does have more people than Italy, but if it fought NATO, it is no mat…
Also
Why we do NOT risk a world war from: Ukraine, the Middle East, China, North Korea, or anywhere else in the world - next to impossible - and longer term are headed for a future without any war
For a first overview look at the graphics, read the bullet points summary, and read the section titles in the contents list - then dive into more detail in any section of interest. If you are on the laptop you can also navigate to any section by clicking on the column of horizontal dashes you see to the left of this page.
also
Sky News' military analyst, Sean Bell to young kids: “we are NOT on the verge of World War 3” and “we are NOT about to have a nuclear confrontation” - shortened version
I hope this helps some of the scared people we help,
Also
Peace in Ukraine only delayed with paused mineral deal - never risk of a war with NATO - Europe will step up to support Ukraine as it is doing already - it can do this without US support
Ukraine’s mineral deal with the US is off for now. But it’s only paused, US is still interested and Zelensky thinks it still has a future.
Also
Why did Trump say FALSELY that Zelensky is prepared to risk a world war? Opinion: likely he asked once more for strong levers to bring Putin to the negotiating table
[Click on column of dashes to the left for menu, will add contents, comments disabled when first posted - see instructions at end of post for how to contact me until I enable comments]
CONTACT ME VIA PM OR ON FACEBOOK OR EMAIL
You can Direct Message me on Substack - but I check this rarely. Or better, email me at support@robertinventor.com
Or best of all Direct Message me on Facebook if you are okay joining Facebook. My Facebook profile is here:. Robert Walker I usually get Facebook messages much faster than on the other platforms as I spend most of my day there.
FOR MORE HELP
To find a debunk see: List of articles in my Debunking Doomsday blog to date See also my Short debunks
Scared and want a story debunked? Post to our Facebook group. Please look over the group rules before posting or commenting as they help the group to run smoothly
Facebook group Doomsday Debunked
Also do join our facebook group if you can help with fact checking or to help scared people who are panicking.
SEARCH LIST OF DEBUNKS
You can search by title and there’s also an option to search the content of the blog using a google search.
CLICK HERE TO SEARCH: List of articles in my Debunking Doomsday blog to date
NEW SHORT DEBUNKS
I do many more fact checks and debunks on our facebook group than I could ever write up as blog posts. They are shorter and less polished but there is a good chance you may find a short debunk for some recent concern.
I often write them up as “short debunks”
See Latest short debunks for new short debunks
I also tweet the debunks and short debunks to my Blue Sky page here:
I do the short debunks more often but they are less polished - they are copies of my longer replies to scared people in the Facebook group.
I go through phases when I do lots of short debunks. Recently I’ve taken to converting comments in the group into posts in the group that resemble short debunks and most of those haven’t yet been copied over to the wiki.
TIPS FOR DEALING WITH DOOMSDAY FEARS
If suicidal or helping someone suicidal see my:
BLOG: Supporting someone who is suicidal
If you have got scared by any of this, health professionals can help. Many of those affected do get help and find it makes a big difference.
They can’t do fact checking, don’t expect that of them. But they can do a huge amount to help with the panic, anxiety, maladaptive responses to fear and so on.
Also do remember that therapy is not like physical medicine. The only way a therapist can diagnose or indeed treat you is by talking to you and listening to you. If this dialogue isn’t working for whatever reason do remember you can always ask to change to another therapist and it doesn’t reflect badly on your current therapist to do this.
Also check out my Seven tips for dealing with doomsday fears based on things that help those scared, including a section about ways that health professionals can help you.
I know that sadly many of the people we help can’t access therapy for one reason or another - usually long waiting lists or the costs.
There is much you can do to help yourself. As well as those seven tips, see my:
BLOG: Breathe in and out slowly and deeply and other ways to calm a panic attack
BLOG: Tips from CBT
— might help some of you to deal with doomsday anxieties
PLEASE DON’T COMMENT HERE WITH POTENTIALLY SCARY QUESTIONS ABOUT OTHER TOPICS - INSTEAD COMMENT ON POST SET UP FOR IT
If you have potentially scary questions about any other topic please post here: https://robertinventor.substack.com/p/post-to-comment-on-with-off-topic-29a Post to comment on, with off topic potentially scary comments - or send me a private message - or use our group on Facebook
The reason is I often aren't able to respond to comments for some time and the unanswered comment can scare people who come to this post for help on something else
Also even when answered the comment may scare them because they see it first.
It works much better to put comments on other topics on a special post for them.
It is absolutely fine to digress and go off topic in conversations here - this is specifically about things you want help with that might scare people.
PLEASE DON’T TELL A SCARED PERSON THAT THE THING THEY ARE SCARED OF IS TRUE WITHOUT A VERY RELIABLE SOURCE OR IF YOU ARE A VERY RELIABLE SOURCE YOURSELF - AND RESPOND WITH CARE
This is not like a typical post on substack. It is specifically to help people who are very scared with voluntary fact checking. Please no politically motivated exaggerations here. And please be careful, be aware of the context.
We have a rule in the Facebook group and it is the same here.
If you are scared and need help it is absolutely fine to comment about anything to do with the topic of the post that scares you.
But if you are not scared or don’t want help with my voluntary fact checking please don’t comment with any scary material.
If you respond to scared people here please be careful with your sources. Don’t tell them that something they are scared of is true without excellent reliable sources, or if you are a reliable source yourself.
It also matters a lot exactly HOW you respond. E.g. if someone is in an area with a potential for earthquakes there’s a big difference between a reply that talks about the largest earthquake that’s possible there even when based on reliable sources, and says nothing about how to protect themselves and the same reply with a summary and link to measures to take to protect yourself in an earthquake.
Thanks!