Aside from that whole "losing their empire afterwards" bit?
The British maneuvering around Poland & post WWI land grabs to start a nice fight between USSR & Nazi Germany using the Danzig corridor as a wedge did what the British owners wanted-
I am a fairly well trained historian; know the details and I still feel a deep sorry for Poland for what they went through during and after WWII. Ukraine was drawn into a similar trap. Now, over ten million of their people are outside of the country and additional millions are prevented from crossing the border. Militarily, their situation is tending toward the hopeless. They could have been a lot better off to discard their “comedian with limited talent” before this war and work out a deal with Russia. I clearly recall a British military attaché’s letter to his homeland, just before WWI broke out. He was stationed in Moscow, urging Nicholas II to attack Germany. He wrote: “It’s a madhouse here, a madhouse!” characterizing the disoriented Russian leadership.
"feel a deep sorry for Poland for what they went through during and after WWII"
The Polish leadership was so full of hate and spite against the Soviets, that they believed their non-agression pact with Germany signed in 1936 will keep them safe and opposed tooth and nail an alliance against Germany that would have included the Soviets. It opposed a Soviet army to transit Poland to support Czechoslovakia in 1938: heck, they took a piece of that country too. Nah, they got the full measure of what they deserved.
And Ukraine, choosing to make their identity not only "not-Russian" but "anti-Russian" is also getting exactly what they deserve, a very good spanking.
And the “media” in the UK of course playing their part well whipping up frenzy and several tv shows glorifying the British army/airforce/navy troops with personal characters like “Johnny is a good old geezer only interested in keeping peace and being a bit of a cheeky chappie and fighting vladi the baddie” righty ho.
Why in the world would ANY eastern European country trust the British or the French? They don't exactly have a good track record in keeping security guarantees in that part of the world. Romania in 1916 and Poland in 1939 spring to mind, and I'm not even Polish or Romanian.
Actually, in 1916, the French mission in Romania managed to salvage with good training the beaten and in retreat Romanian army such that in 1917, the biggest battles and defeats of Germans happened on that front: Marasti, Marasesti, and Oituz. Yes, the Russians were also providing support. It was the Russian revolution that deprived the Romanian front of necessary force, by Russians going home, that led to armistice, not the abandonment of France, nevermind UK.
OK, with that much detail you are probably correct, but the Romanian decision to enter that war was certainly encouraged by the British Empire. And how many Romanians ended up dying when they could have just sat it out?
Well, they ended up with Transylvania. I’ll let Romanians decide if it was worth it; not for me to say.
They ended up with Transylvania and Basarabia and Northern Bucovina.
The Brits encouraged via Queen Mary, granddaughter of Queen Victoria. But the French pushed likely more, given their troops and lands were bearing the brunt of German forces
East India Company lives! How much agency does Trump really have? Judging by the City of London actions, they must believe it will be easy to manipulate Trump into ultimately doing what they desire. Empire rules directly through the deep state structures. If Trump does not fall in line, they will engineer crisis to which he must react. This assumes he believes he still possess significant agency. He could be just an actor in an elaborate theater production.
British Empire grafted itself to the US of A, reducing the Republic to a Potemkin Village facade. The last president who believed he had the agency spelled out by the Constitution was JFK. I don’t believe Trump is like JFK. I suppose we’ll see soon find out how different he really is.
For years there was a short video on YouTube: A well rounded young UK woman was showing off her curves on her living room sofa and whining about the great need to nuke Russia. I cannot find that video anymore, likely it was removed. On the other hand every populist expression in the UK is censored and properly punished. Once you scratch the surface the UK political leadership comes forward as a most corrupted, degenerated construction, even by EU standards. They are detached from reality and they refuse to remember that they lost an Empire after WWII, overnight. It is Nigel Farage and similar Men they need in the leadership before they manage Poland into a disaster again.
I did not know that. Generally the populist view is to get the government completely out of health care as anything they touch rots to the core. However, the beauty of populism is that variations in opinions are tolerated.
Well Farage wants to completely abolish the NHS and have a US-style healthcare system and that’s literally the last healthcare system any nation should take inspiration from.
Whether Poland can elevate itself into the ranks of a European Great Power through the resolution of the Ukraine War will be interesting to observe. If it succeeds, it will likely be at the expense of Germany, whose weak military and shrinking economy are increasingly not one expects of a Great Power.
The UK's stance should not surprise anyone, as it has for centuries sought to maintain a balance of power on the European continent, with no nation rising to the fore to dominate the continent. As a leading voice within NATO after the US, the UK likely sees the greatest gains arising from the continuation of NATO's "attrit Russia" strategy. So long as the Ukraine War continues, Europe remains divided even within the EU, which is consistent with what the UK wants for Europe.
Germany, France, and the UK see an opening to do some Great Power flexing independent of the US by backing Zelenskyy's government, which wants Ukraine completely outside Russia's sphere of influence. Within the EU, the "sudden" need for rearmament also dovetails with Brussels desire to be the capital of an increasingly federalized Europe, one in which France and Germany compete for political influence by leading coalitions within the EU polity.
What does Russia want? In the simplest terms, Russia wants to be acknowledged as a European Great Power. In part this is a defense issue, as a combination of territorial control and an expanded sphere of influence is how Russia keeps other powers away from the centers of Russian politics (Moscow and St Petersburg). In part it is nationalist ambition--Russia has been an influential voice in European affairs since the 18th century, and Putin along with the ultranationalists want to be counted as an influential voice once again.
Ultimately, the Ukraine War is a continuation of the Great Power Competition that has defined European geopolitics for centuries, and seems likely to define European geopolitics for centuries to come.
"Russia wants to be acknowledged as a European Great Power" Actually, what Russia wants is to be left be and do its business with the world and raise the living standards of its population, have some peace. But nah, the US combine wanted to pry open that federation and have its tentacles sucking dry the wealth of that nation, as it did in the 1990s, with impunity - was the greatest high Wall Street ever had. The good 1990s of the US were based on someone else's immiseration. Russia doesn't want a repeat of such times, forget about great power status.
Their involvment in Syria started over 50 years ago. And it looks that they were not willing to die if Syrians were not willing to die.
Remember that French started sending Storm Shadow missiles to Ukraine. It is called tit for tat.
The CSTO is to counteract NATO, same as Warsaw treaty was, it is all reactive.
Yes, when land was for grabbing and everyone was doing it and it was not too hard, they were into it as well. Now, they want to really be left in peace. And it kind of help if they are well armed, well resourced, competent, and self sufficient and have strategic depth.
Andrew you are spot on. Your view of Trump's ultimate policy goal regarding Germany and Russia is probably correct: The job of reintegrating Russia in the world economy while at the same time preventing a too close integration of Russia and Germany is going to be nuanced and difficult.
Regarding Trump's aggressive anti-EU policy in general, I think that it is for dividing and weakening Trump's US and international foes, the professional managerial class that make up the US and EU deep state. He views Ukraine as the armed wing of the International Deep State.
The UK needs this war to prevent its inevitable collapse. Trump already knows the UK plan and is well ahead of Starmer. Which is why Poland is more than eager to align with the US. The US offers much more in the way of weapons especially the new technology that it’s creating. The UK offers none of that. Trump is also killing the liberal globalists who are trying to make Davos the capital of the world. They are using all the tools they have in their toolbox and being smacked at every turn. Trump spent the 4 years out of office and studied not only US domestic policy. He also dug into how things are being run in Europe. He knows peace is the beginning of the collapse of most European countries and when one falls the next one will quickly after that. Then the US can start filling in the hole they are in too. Possibly following suit and killing the dollar going to a digital currency like Bitcoin which would also destroy the Fed and re-start the way we look at everything. There won’t be anymore debt spending. That’ll be amazing. Tough in the short term of course but in the long run we will all be better off.
UK is cutting dissability assistance worth about 5 billion GBP per year, and probably more cuts will come. And even if they increase their military budget to 5%, they won't be able to increase their army much, just about 15,000 more soldiers. Likely not fix their nuclear subs shooting blanks, and only buying bigger tug boats to pull their aircraft carriers. It is a rocky pirate island drifting hoplesly in the ocean, and there is nothing they can do.
Remind me what happened last time Britain backed Poland against a resurgent regional power?
As far as the british were concerned, it went swimmingly.
@Feral Finster
Aside from that whole "losing their empire afterwards" bit?
The British maneuvering around Poland & post WWI land grabs to start a nice fight between USSR & Nazi Germany using the Danzig corridor as a wedge did what the British owners wanted-
Except for the part where USSR survived?
The empire was long a drag, and the Cold War afterward allowed british bois to play at being big kids, standing all stirrign and brave next to Master
I am a fairly well trained historian; know the details and I still feel a deep sorry for Poland for what they went through during and after WWII. Ukraine was drawn into a similar trap. Now, over ten million of their people are outside of the country and additional millions are prevented from crossing the border. Militarily, their situation is tending toward the hopeless. They could have been a lot better off to discard their “comedian with limited talent” before this war and work out a deal with Russia. I clearly recall a British military attaché’s letter to his homeland, just before WWI broke out. He was stationed in Moscow, urging Nicholas II to attack Germany. He wrote: “It’s a madhouse here, a madhouse!” characterizing the disoriented Russian leadership.
I agree. It’s basically the same British playbook. Britain has misled the Ukrainians just like it misled the Poles 75 years earlier
"feel a deep sorry for Poland for what they went through during and after WWII"
The Polish leadership was so full of hate and spite against the Soviets, that they believed their non-agression pact with Germany signed in 1936 will keep them safe and opposed tooth and nail an alliance against Germany that would have included the Soviets. It opposed a Soviet army to transit Poland to support Czechoslovakia in 1938: heck, they took a piece of that country too. Nah, they got the full measure of what they deserved.
And Ukraine, choosing to make their identity not only "not-Russian" but "anti-Russian" is also getting exactly what they deserve, a very good spanking.
And the “media” in the UK of course playing their part well whipping up frenzy and several tv shows glorifying the British army/airforce/navy troops with personal characters like “Johnny is a good old geezer only interested in keeping peace and being a bit of a cheeky chappie and fighting vladi the baddie” righty ho.
Why in the world would ANY eastern European country trust the British or the French? They don't exactly have a good track record in keeping security guarantees in that part of the world. Romania in 1916 and Poland in 1939 spring to mind, and I'm not even Polish or Romanian.
Actually, in 1916, the French mission in Romania managed to salvage with good training the beaten and in retreat Romanian army such that in 1917, the biggest battles and defeats of Germans happened on that front: Marasti, Marasesti, and Oituz. Yes, the Russians were also providing support. It was the Russian revolution that deprived the Romanian front of necessary force, by Russians going home, that led to armistice, not the abandonment of France, nevermind UK.
OK, with that much detail you are probably correct, but the Romanian decision to enter that war was certainly encouraged by the British Empire. And how many Romanians ended up dying when they could have just sat it out?
Well, they ended up with Transylvania. I’ll let Romanians decide if it was worth it; not for me to say.
They ended up with Transylvania and Basarabia and Northern Bucovina.
The Brits encouraged via Queen Mary, granddaughter of Queen Victoria. But the French pushed likely more, given their troops and lands were bearing the brunt of German forces
East India Company lives! How much agency does Trump really have? Judging by the City of London actions, they must believe it will be easy to manipulate Trump into ultimately doing what they desire. Empire rules directly through the deep state structures. If Trump does not fall in line, they will engineer crisis to which he must react. This assumes he believes he still possess significant agency. He could be just an actor in an elaborate theater production.
British Empire grafted itself to the US of A, reducing the Republic to a Potemkin Village facade. The last president who believed he had the agency spelled out by the Constitution was JFK. I don’t believe Trump is like JFK. I suppose we’ll see soon find out how different he really is.
For years there was a short video on YouTube: A well rounded young UK woman was showing off her curves on her living room sofa and whining about the great need to nuke Russia. I cannot find that video anymore, likely it was removed. On the other hand every populist expression in the UK is censored and properly punished. Once you scratch the surface the UK political leadership comes forward as a most corrupted, degenerated construction, even by EU standards. They are detached from reality and they refuse to remember that they lost an Empire after WWII, overnight. It is Nigel Farage and similar Men they need in the leadership before they manage Poland into a disaster again.
Nigel Farage? That prick? The man who openly wants to privatise the NHS.
I did not know that. Generally the populist view is to get the government completely out of health care as anything they touch rots to the core. However, the beauty of populism is that variations in opinions are tolerated.
Well Farage wants to completely abolish the NHS and have a US-style healthcare system and that’s literally the last healthcare system any nation should take inspiration from.
Recently Farage took side with replacing the present structure with an "insurance based system. https://bylinetimes.com/2025/01/27/nigel-farages-latest-nhs-comments-spark-fresh-scrutiny-of-reform-uks-health-policy/
It seems his main idea is to get away from the present system. And his political opponents might be trying to limit his growth using the same subject? https://ca.news.yahoo.com/exclusive-labour-plans-nigel-farages-124117589.html
I really do not follow UK things closely.
And the SNP here in Scotland are more than happy to follow in Westminster’s footsteps…
A pity in Scotland.
Whether Poland can elevate itself into the ranks of a European Great Power through the resolution of the Ukraine War will be interesting to observe. If it succeeds, it will likely be at the expense of Germany, whose weak military and shrinking economy are increasingly not one expects of a Great Power.
The UK's stance should not surprise anyone, as it has for centuries sought to maintain a balance of power on the European continent, with no nation rising to the fore to dominate the continent. As a leading voice within NATO after the US, the UK likely sees the greatest gains arising from the continuation of NATO's "attrit Russia" strategy. So long as the Ukraine War continues, Europe remains divided even within the EU, which is consistent with what the UK wants for Europe.
Germany, France, and the UK see an opening to do some Great Power flexing independent of the US by backing Zelenskyy's government, which wants Ukraine completely outside Russia's sphere of influence. Within the EU, the "sudden" need for rearmament also dovetails with Brussels desire to be the capital of an increasingly federalized Europe, one in which France and Germany compete for political influence by leading coalitions within the EU polity.
What does Russia want? In the simplest terms, Russia wants to be acknowledged as a European Great Power. In part this is a defense issue, as a combination of territorial control and an expanded sphere of influence is how Russia keeps other powers away from the centers of Russian politics (Moscow and St Petersburg). In part it is nationalist ambition--Russia has been an influential voice in European affairs since the 18th century, and Putin along with the ultranationalists want to be counted as an influential voice once again.
Ultimately, the Ukraine War is a continuation of the Great Power Competition that has defined European geopolitics for centuries, and seems likely to define European geopolitics for centuries to come.
"Russia wants to be acknowledged as a European Great Power" Actually, what Russia wants is to be left be and do its business with the world and raise the living standards of its population, have some peace. But nah, the US combine wanted to pry open that federation and have its tentacles sucking dry the wealth of that nation, as it did in the 1990s, with impunity - was the greatest high Wall Street ever had. The good 1990s of the US were based on someone else's immiseration. Russia doesn't want a repeat of such times, forget about great power status.
Russia wants many things. Being "left alone" is not among them.
Hence their involvement in Syria.
Hence their involvement in sub-Saharan Africa.
Hence their creation of the Collective Security Treaty Organization.
Russia has had Great Power ambitions for centuries, and Great Power status for much of that time. Arguably they are a Great Power now.
Pretending otherwise is either propaganda or delusion. What it is not is reality.
Their involvment in Syria started over 50 years ago. And it looks that they were not willing to die if Syrians were not willing to die.
Remember that French started sending Storm Shadow missiles to Ukraine. It is called tit for tat.
The CSTO is to counteract NATO, same as Warsaw treaty was, it is all reactive.
Yes, when land was for grabbing and everyone was doing it and it was not too hard, they were into it as well. Now, they want to really be left in peace. And it kind of help if they are well armed, well resourced, competent, and self sufficient and have strategic depth.
Andrew you are spot on. Your view of Trump's ultimate policy goal regarding Germany and Russia is probably correct: The job of reintegrating Russia in the world economy while at the same time preventing a too close integration of Russia and Germany is going to be nuanced and difficult.
Regarding Trump's aggressive anti-EU policy in general, I think that it is for dividing and weakening Trump's US and international foes, the professional managerial class that make up the US and EU deep state. He views Ukraine as the armed wing of the International Deep State.
The UK needs this war to prevent its inevitable collapse. Trump already knows the UK plan and is well ahead of Starmer. Which is why Poland is more than eager to align with the US. The US offers much more in the way of weapons especially the new technology that it’s creating. The UK offers none of that. Trump is also killing the liberal globalists who are trying to make Davos the capital of the world. They are using all the tools they have in their toolbox and being smacked at every turn. Trump spent the 4 years out of office and studied not only US domestic policy. He also dug into how things are being run in Europe. He knows peace is the beginning of the collapse of most European countries and when one falls the next one will quickly after that. Then the US can start filling in the hole they are in too. Possibly following suit and killing the dollar going to a digital currency like Bitcoin which would also destroy the Fed and re-start the way we look at everything. There won’t be anymore debt spending. That’ll be amazing. Tough in the short term of course but in the long run we will all be better off.
UK is cutting dissability assistance worth about 5 billion GBP per year, and probably more cuts will come. And even if they increase their military budget to 5%, they won't be able to increase their army much, just about 15,000 more soldiers. Likely not fix their nuclear subs shooting blanks, and only buying bigger tug boats to pull their aircraft carriers. It is a rocky pirate island drifting hoplesly in the ocean, and there is nothing they can do.