© Strategic Culture Foundation
The death of a British paratrooper reported this week was the
first public admission by Britain's authorities that a serving member of its armed forces has been killed in Ukraine.The timing of the official disclosure and its very public, emotive nature raise questions about the motives of the British authorities. The news of the death comes at a critical moment when London and other European capitals seem desperate to sabotage efforts by U.S. President Trump to find a peaceful settlement to the nearly four-year conflict.
Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer led
tributes in the British Parliament on Wednesday to Lance Corporal George Hooley, who was described as a "hero" who "served our country in the cause of freedom and democracy."
The British media were
plastered with fond photos and sentimental commendations of the dead paratrooper.
Britain's Minister of Defense [sic] John Healey
added: "George's tragic death reminds us of the courage and commitment with which our outstanding armed forces serve every day to protect our nation."
How exactly British soldiers in Ukraine are "protecting" Britain is not explained.The
Sun newspaper went further to whip up anti-Russian feelings when it subsequently
reported that the Kremlin made "disgusting" comments about the death of the soldier.
Moscow had simply dared to ask what the British soldier was doing in Ukraine in the first place, and pointed out that British personnel have been participating in "terrorist" attacks on Russian civilian centers along with Ukrainian military units. That much is fact. Ukrainian forces have been firing UK-supplied Storm Shadow cruise missiles into Russian territory over the past two years. These missiles could not be operated without British personnel on the ground. Similarly, American-made HIMARS and ATACMS, which have also targeted Russian territory, have also necessarily involved U.S. personnel for operation.
Comment: