UK says it will back Poland if decides to send jets to Ukraine | Hacker News Reader

UK says it will back Poland if decides to send jets to Ukraine

reuters.com

35 pointsmudro_zboris17 comments

Same UK that said it would back Ukraine if Russia invaded? And then 2 days later was like “nope, best we can do is hopes and prayers (and some cheap weapons)”?

That is a very surprisingly jaded take on the aid that the UK has supplied, and in my opinion incorrect. As per the details outlined here[0], the UK has supplied the following in military aid alone (see linked article for financial, and humanitarian aid).

> Trained 22,000 Ukrainian troops since 2015 as part of Operational Orbital

> Delivered 20 armoured vehicles since 2015.

> Delivered "thousands" of NLAW anti-armour weapons (~£20,000 each)

> Sale of two Sandown-class minehunters.

> £1.7bn agreement to support the acquisition of eight missile craft and one frigate.

> Deployment of RC-135W Rivet Joint surveillance aircraft to provide information on size and position of Russian forces.

> Unspecified further military aid, on 28 February 2022.

> ISTAR (intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition, and reconnaissance) support, both standalone and in partnership with the US.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign_aid_to_Ukraine...

I don't get it. Isn't there some sort of convention or international law prohibiting providing weapons in armed conflicts?

You believe that there is an international law that states that an oppressor should be left alone?

The UK is not a signatory to any treaty that would prohibit providing conventional weapons to Ukraine.

>Same UK that said it would back Ukraine if Russia invaded?

The UK was always very clear that the backing to Ukraine would be in the form of the supply of weapons to Ukraine and sanctions on Russia. Nothing more was ever promised.

Direct combat involvement would lead to WW3. As bad as things are for Ukraine a nuclear wasteland is worse.

Nuclear armed states don't fight eachother directly.

These jets (proposed MIGs) will not make a difference. The SUs will dominate them in the air and they are not good for ground attacks.

Like the no-fly zone, the public has attached to ideas that make little sense and risk escalation.

I agree: we need to remind people to play the long term game. While direct kinetic action would save lives, for like a day, the escalation would be far worse over the course of the following weeks. We're allowing Russia to corrupt it's own economy and enslave itself to China. There's still more we can do: offer Russian businesses a place in the western world, get Europe off Russian gas/oil, and sanction Belarus for being complicit with Russia and a 100 more incentives. Lastly we need to find a way to allow Russia to exit, basically incentivize the offramp.

However, the US is not willing, at the moment, to take possession of the planes and then give them to Ukraine.

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-60657155?ns_mchan...

I wonder if it's fear or bureaucracy.

It's not like this act of musical chairs is going to fool anyone. The US is still hoping that sanctions (alone) will put enough pressure on putin to negotiate a deal. They really don't want a shooting war.

Oh very nice, Poland is building a missiles base 100 miles from Moscow sending war planes to an active combat zone will for sure help de-escalate.

I don't see the first being an issue; If it's in their territorial boundaries. I think they need not to be caught off-guard like Ukraine. Poland was an important Soviet boundary, and it would _seem_ Putin's primary motivation is geopolitics and restoration of Soviet-era boundaries... (I have trouble believing that statement but it's the only explanation that makes any sense for current events).

The second... probably risks escalation and I think your point is valid.

So was the case during the so called "Cuban missile crisis", Cuba is about the same distance from Florida as this missile base is from Moscow.

>"I would support the Poles

yay

>United Kingdom could not offer aircraft that the Ukrainians would be able to use.

oh, that kind of "support"

>We would protect Poland

so ‘in the event of any action which clearly threatened Polish independence, and which the Polish Government accordingly considered it vital to resist, His Majesty’s Government would feel themselves bound at once to lend the Polish Government all support in their power.’ ? That was Neville Chamberlain on 31 March 1939 in the House of Commons. Didnt age too well considering what followed.

Is that the same UK that said it would back Poland in 1939?

We'll probably have the same outcome in 2022.

Ace Combat: the Ukraine war

First mission: ghost of Kyiv.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com