Britain is to lend Ukraine an additional £2.26bn and allow Kyiv to spend the money on weapons to fight off the Russian invasion as part of a wider $50bn (£38.5bn) loan programme expected to be confirmed by G7 members later this week.
The loans will be repaid using interest generated by the $300bn of frozen Russian assets held in the west, with the extra funds promised as the US heads towards a presidential election where support for Ukraine is a divisive issue.
Rachel Reeves said: “The profits being made on those assets aren’t being kept for Russia to use in the future. They’re now being used to fund Ukraine.” The chancellor made the announcement alongside the defence secretary, John Healey.
Yes sources on all the things you listed would be great.
Sure, here you go.
Here is one about millions of Ukrainians being imprisoned in Ukraine, held as Zelensky’s hostages, since the start of the war: https://theconversation.com/why-banning-men-from-leaving-ukraine-violates-their-human-rights-178411
Here is ex-AFU colonel talking about how Zelensky turned Pokrovsk into a concentration camp: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7AXSB_WnYV0
As for the kidnappings, this shit happens every single day, there are so many videos and articles IN WESTERN MEDIA about this, how some people are still pretending this does not happen is beyond me… There is even a word for that now - busification. One moment you walk on a street minding your own business, and another moment you’re being packed in a van by people in masks. Just enter it in your favourite search engine.
https://uadraftmuseum.ch/
https://files.catbox.moe/6vasrt.mp4
https://files.catbox.moe/ur24tz.mp4
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2024/10/03/ukraine-is-employing-increasingly-controversial-methods-for-mobilization_6728127_4.html
And yes saying the leader of Ukraine is “genociding” Ukrainians is a meth head take on the situation. It almost sounds like you recently learnt that word and are applying it to everything.
So, how would you name it instead? OK sure, maybe “genocide” is too sensational, would “exterminate” be better? Or maybe simple “mass murder of hundreds of thousands (if not millions…)” is better?
EDIT: Although, considering that they started talking about genociding FOURTEEN YEAR OLDS “if such a need would arise” - I’ll continue calling this for what this is - a fucking genocide.
Just cause some “deep state” cornball says something on youtube, that doesn’t make it real.
Just cause some dude says something about drafting 14yos, that doesn’t mean it’s actually happening.
Your sources are garbage, misleading, and definitely do not qualify as “genocide”.
Eh, and that’s what I am talking about it…
Nothing would convince you. If Zelensky suceeds in wiping out every single Ukrainian from the face of Earth you will still find some excuse why it’s not genocide, or why it was good… :/
Just because it’s not CNN or the NYT saying it (they would never go against the state department unless public opinion has already massively shifted) doesn’t mean it’s a bad source.
Le monde is one of the most “reputable” sources in Europe and they’re corroborating, is a good source only a US source? For a conflict on the other side of the world? There’s literally video evidence of the kidnappings.
Just for some constructive feedback, you shouldn’t use the term “genocide” when it isn’t applicable, because it just leads to people obsessing over the fact that you used that term rather than considering the actual point that you were making.
