US & Israel attack Iran

cookster said:
Fuck me.
This is what we're up against.
Click to expand...

when he was floundering he tried talking over the ex-diplomat - its funny how many of the people who bigged up Matt Goodwin are also expert military strategists isn't it?

Seen loads on X asking why that Frigate hasn't been sent yet - they seem to think its like driving a car - just turn the key and go. I mean you need fuelling, food, arming and a crew (who are probably scattered around the country on leave ) and get the orders, charts and then you are ready to go. I'd imagine fuelling a warship makes charging a 10 year old EV look fast.
 
Ban-jani said:
Ok, I don’t disagree with that, I just gave up on the notion of the UN doing anything or “international law” actually being anything adhered to.
Click to expand...
Its a crying shame. And down to the cowardice and self interest of world leaders for decades.
 
Pre Iraq - Blair "we have the confirmation it is legal to join the American action from the Attorney General"
Everyone who disagreed then and to this day - "you can't do it - you can't go into an illegal war"

Today - Starmer - "we have shown you the AG's legal position and we cannot join an illegal action and join the Americans"
Everyone who disagrees and wants war - "you can't do that its dithering and indecision - we must set aside the fact thats its illegal and join America"
 
If Trump says he is having issues about where their airforce can fly from then make the job easy for him - can't use British airbases in the UK, Akrotiri nor Diego Garcia - makes the equation easier for him to work out. Two can play his game.
 
Ramping up again here. A number of missiles intercepted and reports (unconfirmed) of a drone attack on US infrastructure in Dubai.
 
bluethrunthru said:
If Trump says he is having issues about where their airforce can fly from then make the job easy for him - can't use British airbases in the UK, Akrotiri nor Diego Garcia - makes the equation easier for him to work out. Two can play his game.
Click to expand...
Starmer is in a very difficult position and I sympathise with him. He quite clearly doesn’t agree with the attack, he quite clearly thinks it is against international law, but he’s also now having to sit back and watch some of our key strategic allies, some being home to lots of Brits, get bombed.

He’s damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t. I was very much in the camp of telling the US to get fucked, but can we continue to do that when other allies are being hit?

I think Starmer’s initial stand of saying no, changing that due to circumstance and then taking up defensive positions to defend our bases, is probably the right balance.
 
bluethrunthru said:
Pre Iraq - Blair "we have the confirmation it is legal to join the American action from the Attorney General"
Everyone who disagreed then and to this day - "you can't do it - you can't go into an illegal war"

Today - Starmer - "we have shown you the AG's legal position and we cannot join an illegal action and join the Americans"
Everyone who disagrees and wants war - "you can't do that its dithering and indecision - we must set aside the fact thats its illegal and join America"
Click to expand...

It’s not even been passed by Congress in his own country, he’s had his wings clipped by the courts on his tariffs being illegal. Same could happen again with this.

Sir Keith is right on this one, we should be no where near assisting them. This dickhead was trying to invade NATO territory a few weeks back and insulting British troops who have died in Afghanistan and Iraq. He’s under minded Europe and sold Ukraine out as far as Russia is concerned.
 
After Trump’s comments today,could it be us next on the list for regime change,after all we do have WMD’s,perhaps he’s got to sort out Greenland,Canada and Cuba first,they are ahead in the queue
 
I've just watched a video from LBC of an interview with Ian Dale and a Professor of Law from Oxford University about the legality of the current action. Dale tries to be clever but the Prof wipes the floor with him. When the Prof clearly defines what steps and on what basis action can be justified Dale resorts to 'well sometimes the law is an ass'. When Dale also tries to claim he cannot think of any wars since 1949 which have followed the necessary protocols the Prof reels them off. Do have to be a fat, smug, ill-informed arse to work for LBC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top