Starmer's treachery

The US may be the biggest ally in terms of military might, but whilst the US is ruled by the orange rapist it is one of the least reliable...

Who are the countries sending military assets to help out in Cyprus?

The most reliable ones - European countries!
Spain has publically and honourably denounced USA's attack.

Trump says he'll place a tade embargo on Spain.
Spain has politely pointed out he can't do that because the trade deal is not with Spain, it's with the EU.
Another typical tantrum from Trump.
 
We don't need to take foreign policy advice from the US President. The last time we did that it was called the Iraq war
Guess which hypocritical idiot that quote is from?
 
Trump is annoyed that the UK wouldn't allow the US to use Diago Garcia or US bases in the UK to launch strikes on Iran so their bombers had to fly marathon round trips.

Starmer could have just declined to involve UK forces directly, and the US would have accepted that. But no, he also had to tell the US that they couldn't use the long established bases that they pay us a considerable amount to use. He knew it wouldn't prevent the US from attached Iran anyway, so all he did was succeed in ****ing of our ally, and then had to U-turn when Iran attacked us anyway.

I don't think the ongoing dispute over the Chagos islands had any actual bearing on whether we allowed the US to use them or not. That was traitorous, spineless Stamer's decision.
There were 300 British military personnel in the Bahrain US base.
Starmer either didn't know, or had forgotten, or was trying to be duplicitous.
British forces were already assisting USA in its illegal attack against Iran.
 
Pakistan has nuclear weapons...

Since many describe them as 'Islamic extremists', how come they get the idea of detterence?
I wouldn't call Pakistan islamic extremists.

There is difference between being a muslim and being an islamist extremist. But you like to conflate someone that doesn't like islamic extremists as automatically anti muslim and in that assumption you are categorically wrong.
 
I wouldn't call Pakistan islamic extremists.
Pakistan is widely considered to have a significant, albeit complex, issue with extremism, driven by a combination of religious radicalization, political instability, and the historical, selective support of militant groups by state actors. The country faces high risks of terrorism, sectarian violence, and, in some regions, militant influence
And they have nuclear weapons, and we don't see any prospect of anyone attacking them, nor of them using their nuclear deterrence,
 
Of course Iran was no direct threat to us. They've got no force projection capability.
So why were there 300 British military personnel in the Bahrain US base being complicit in an illegal attack on Iran, on Saturday when USA and Israel launched their attack?
 
Back
Top