God forbid that a UK Railway union be more interested in matters relating to the UK and it's railways, than some foreign war a continent away.
Like the ones quoted by
@greatkingrat in post #16?
And last time I checked, Ukraine is in Europe.
Our continent.
Why is it embarassing? It's refusing to take sides in a squabble between two Eastern European right wing nationalists. What good has come for us ordinary folk out of taking sides in this?
From a moral standpoint? A basic human decency standpoint? I haven't personally met any Ukrainians who have had their lives upturned by this war (I have seen a Ukrainian-registered car here in Clydebank though), but I for one I'm glad we're 'taking sides' on this. And broadbrushing Ukraine as a right-wing nationalist is conveniently side-stepping the progress they were and are making in improving matters and rooting out corruption. Ukraine isn't perfect, but they ain't Belarus fgs (they
would be if certain members here had their way).
I can't believe some folk don't think the war in Ukraine is anything to do with us. It has had a literal effect on our economy, and Putin gaining ground in Europe will likely not be to our benefit. So it is hugely disappointing that the RMT have chosen not to show support for Ukraine.
Quite. It's staggering to be honest.
Oh dear, there seem some very militant people on this forum.
Please, for your own sake, look in the mirror before casting that aspersion. And for the record, if I or others here are 'militant' for taking the moral high ground in a completely unjustified war that's killed scores of innocents and displaced countless others, so be it.
For what it is worth I cannot support our pouring billions into a dispute which is not ours
Given how we in the West (specifically the UK and US) failed to act when Crimea was invaded, effectively ignoring the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances of 1994 in the process (as
@deltic notes above), then afterwards appeased the tyrant responsible or otherwise turned a blind eye to him which only emboldened him further, it is very much our dispute (and that's not even getting into the effects the war has had ecomonically, we have already lost billions in that regard). We gave the Ukrainians our word that we could be relied upon to preserve their independence and security in an emergency, and we failed them miserably in 2014.
and a leader of Ukraine who is almost as bad as Putin.
What utter drivel. Remind me, who was it that ordered the full-scale invasion of one of it's sovereign neighbours and then tried to spin a pathetic narrative justifying it? Who is it that has a long history of brutality, suppression, foreign interference, spinning false narratives and increasingly brazen attacks on foreign soil? Answer: it ain't Zelenskyy.
It surely is time they sat down at the table and came to a sensible agreement about the disputed territories in the east who have been in conflict for many years.
Russia has no right to any of Ukraine's territory. Period. The only reason those eastern terrorities have been in conflict for many years is thanks to Russia's constant interference and meddling. This conflict could - and damn well should - end today with Putin withdrawing every last member of his armed forces from Ukrainian territory and returning to pre-18th March 2014 border postions, but he won't; it's virtually the only thing keeping him from falling out the nearest window for one thing (can't enjoy his vast ill-gotten fortune then, can he?)
Besides, why on earth would Ukraine, or anyone else for that matter, agree to any demands Russia makes in any such hypothetical sit-downs when they have a history of going back on such agreements when they think no-one is paying attention, the grain deal fisaco being only the latest example of this.
