The UK has committed to delivering at least 150,000 drones to Ukraine by the end of 2026 as part of a major support package. British-made drones have struck military and industrial targets inside mainland Russia for the first time, inflicting billions in damage. The government has authorised Ukraine to use these weapons against Russian territory in self-defence.
Ukraine’s supporters carried the room, and Yes won 158 votes to 117. The floor’s highest-rated argument was not about battlefield technique but obligation: “We have a responsibility to help Ukraine,” followed by the warning that defeat would allow Russia to move further into Europe.
The winning side framed drones as deterrence rather than mere retaliation. Its other strongest voice argued that “If Russia defeats Ukraine, Putin will be emboldened to invade more countries”; others invoked Russia’s partnerships with China and North Korea, the danger of a wider war, and the belief that “bullies only understand one thing”.
The No case was more divided, but its sharpest voices centred on escalation and British involvement. One voter’s sardonic alternative — “Can’t we deploy them in the English Channel instead?” — sat beside the more serious objection that attacking Russia “puts us at war by proxy”; other No arguments cast the policy as a NATO-led regime-change project, questioned Ukraine’s leadership and alleged that aid was being misused.
The two sides often answered different questions: Yes voters debated what happens if Russia is allowed to prevail, while No voters asked whether Britain should deepen its direct role and neglect its own defences. One No voice said, “We are already funding Ukraine to our own detriment,” and called for more ships, aircraft and drones at home; the exchange also produced dismissive claims about money laundering and a Yes retort accusing opponents of swallowing Russian propaganda.
The room therefore endorsed escalation as support, but not with a settled theory of risk. Its clearest instinct was that the cost of letting Ukraine lose outweighed the danger of striking harder.
Should new public infrastructure projects include dedicated funding for civil defence shelters?
Defence · 606 votes · 60% voted No
Should the UK stop working with the US on the replacement of Trident in favour of a European joint venture?
Defence · 597 votes · 55% voted No
Should the UK defend the Falklands from its requested recovery from the Argentine President?
Defence · 606 votes · 92% voted Yes
Is the government right to tell the army to stop non-essential training exercises to save money?
Defence · 593 votes · 79% voted No
Is delaying a firm date for 3% defence spending the right choice?
Defence · 567 votes · 72% voted No
Should a form of national service be introduced to help fix a divided nation?
Defence · 572 votes · 58% voted No
In the event of an armed conflict and assuming you are physically able, would you voluntarily join the UK military?
Defence · 429 votes · 62% voted No
Can the UK still recruit, retain and defend itself militarily if national unity has weakened?
Defence · 291 votes · 64% voted No
10 Opinions
We are already funding Ukraine to our own detriment. The UK requires at least 4 battlecruiser sized ships 8 cruiser sized and many more frigates and destroyers. Plus many more aeroplanes and drones the army navy and RAF need bolstered
Russia is engaging China and N Korea, embolded by Trump and Brexit. He will start WW3 if he thinks it will benefit him. Ukraine needs our support
YES Simply because bullies only understand one thing.. I'll bet Putin is now wishing he'd not started his invasion of Ukraine. And as it goes on & he's realising that other unite against him, he'll slowly but surely wind his neck in. If we let him get away with it, like we have in the past, he'll keep invading someone else.. Also as the Russian public & conscripts realise all is not as claimed on their TVs there's always a chance they may sort Putin out once & for all
If Russia defeats Ukraine, Putin will be emboldened to invade more countries.
As with all well intentions ,it started off supply arms to defend themselves. Now it's to attack Russia. That puts us at war by proxy. We should make up our minds,Europe as well, are we going to war through Ukraine or not.
Stop sending the midget Chief SNIFFER our money amazing how brainless ppl are to actually believe Russia is the enemy . That Russia wants to conquer Europe ?? Have y'all seen the state of Europe 😂 seems a huge money washing operation to me . I don't want my tax money going to that Crim Zelensky .!
No. We should not be involved. This is US/NATO desire to bring about regime change in Russia, steal its resources and re-install the Rothschild Banking system which Putin got rid of. A never ending war for the Global Elite. I don’t think Russia is our enemy but Ukraine run by a coke sniffing kleptomaniac stealing £Billions of aid for his elite is not our friend. Our government & Ministers are criminally engaging in money laundering with our taxes. Prosecute & jail them.
Can't we deploy them in the English Channel instead?
We have a responsibility to help Ukraine. If Ukraine fails Russia will move further into Europe. We cannot afford for Ukraine to lose.