- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Is this because of AUKUS?
Guys, I’m starting to think that the US is dropping bombs somewhere
Those are “defensive” bombs!
Soooo WWIII it is then?
The US government can not be trusted. The UK government can not be trusted. The Iranian government can not be trusted. The Israeli government can not be trusted.
I think I am starting to see a pattern.
No war but a class war.
Countries whose names start with vowels can’t be trusted?
Austrians right about now
Heck, Australians too
And maybe the aliens idk
Yeah, our government’s tonguing the Netanyahu-owned Orange Anus, too.
Is there any government that can be trusted? I feel like no matter what system or ideology is used, a society is always going to end up with a weird ruling class that’s corrupt, power hungry, and is fond of using authoritarian tactics.
Isn’t that curve the basic nature of capitalism, since the beginning of money and commerce that has been discussed since ancient Greek.
Mother anarchy loves her children
if i was president you can trust me 👍👍👍👍 lol
No current country deserves humanity, perhaps some future government will.
Goddam UK, didn’t Starmer say he WOULDN’T allow this?
This is participation in war crimes!No, after Iran started targeting the gulf states and Cypress the UK shifted its position to allowing the US to use the UK’s bases for missions targeting Iran’s long range strike capabilities but not anything else. This video is consistent with that.
It’s funny how Ukraine has done that against Russia without ever using bomber planes and without even having bunker buster bombs.
So I maintain that it remains a no. USA does not need bombers to defend itself. In fact all it needed to not even have to defend itself, was to not wage an illegal war on Iran.
USA and Israel should not be aided in their illegal war in any way IMO.I agree, for the most part, the UK should have as little to do with this as possible. Though there is the consideration of protecting the Gulf states we have a commitment to.
But my point is that this isnt going against the stated UK government position as lots of people (including you) are saying in this thread.
It would be more out of character for Starmer to keep his word.
All the little pedos gotta stick to the script
Yes they lie to pit working class British against working class Americans.
What a surprise… No one could have seen this coming.
I may be naive, but I honestly didn’t think UK would allow this, when Starmer clearly stated the war on Iran is illegal. Especially not after USA has been caught in several war crimes.
Yall are naive as shit. The fucking pedophiles are against their buddy pedophiles they’ve been fucking kids with? Do you really believe that shit?
Didn’t he literally say he’d allow their use for “defensive” strikes? He’s never really been hiding it.
How is a bunker buster on a bomber defensive?
Defensive is to scramble planes to shoot down missiles. An attack is not defensive in my book.Edit: A word.
Yeah but that’s because you’re using logic, reasoning, and commonly understood meanings of words. In Kid Starver’s authoritarian mind none of those things matter.
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. His heart sank as he thought of the enormous power arrayed against him, the ease with which any Party intellectual would overthrow him in debate, the subtle arguments which he would not be able to understand, much less answer. And yet he was in the right! They were wrong and he was right. The obvious, the silly, and the true had got to be defended. Truisms are true, hold on to that! The solid world exists, its laws do not change. Stones are hard, water is wet, objects unsupported fall towards the earth’s centre.
- 1984, George Orwell
Absolutely, the idea that “preemptive” strikes are defensive is Orwellian.
Also how does UK know what target they will hit? Will it be a kindergarten killing innocent children? Will it be a refinery constituting chemical warfare on civilians? There is no plausible reason to believe these strikes are purely defensive.
Yeha that’s why “defensive” is in quotes, but the idea is that America is only allowed to use UK bases to bomb Iran’s offensive capabilities.
That’s still going too far IMO. USA had the option to stay out, we should not aid them in their illegal wars.
IMO defensive would involve them not leaving the USA.
Yes, that’s a good way to define it.
Every strike is a defensive strike
No it’s not.
It is in kid starvers twisted mind
The best defense is a good offense…
Wasn’t that also when he was admitting that the UK was helping do the preemptive strikes?
I
could be wrong but I think the way foreign litany bases work is that they are in the thinnest legal sense “sovereign foreign territory.” To which I mean, the activities conducted on these bases are outside the control of the country who’s land they occupy.Edit: I was wrong, amd the US are just tennants on the land which makes this a very questionable thing that they are doing.
This is a common misconception (it doesn’t actually apply to embassies either, from which the myth arose). Every military base of a nation within another nation’s territory is governed by a status of forces agreement (SOF); usually a large general SOF for all locations in the territory and also a narrower SOF that applies to that site specifically.
Thank you for the correction! That makes what they’re doing against the SOF rules/law, then?
Nnnnope. They are RAF bases, with a nominal RAF CO. The USAF are tenants.
That does not sound like a good idea. I would expect a country would want to maintain sovereignty of their own territory.
Of course embassies have something similar to what you describe, but if an embassy is breaking the law, the diplomats can be expelled.
Starmer the flim flam man. He stands for nothing and will go with anything, he has no morals.
Probably in the Epstein files. (The UK leaders).
So UK bases are just a valid military targets now lol
Enter an “always has been gif”… I mean, who in his right mind would think that military installations would NOT be valid targets?
Iran considers UK military bases to be valid targets anyway.
I would assume anything the epstein empire (america/israel) have bombed are now legitimate targets in any country that loads bombs onto their planes. This would suggest junior schools, hospitals, shopping malls all have targets on them and there’s nothing you can do about it. americans voted for WWIII. congrats.
If you’re Iranian. So are all your neighbors, including hotels, and any ship in nearby waters.
So they’re just loading the bombers right by the fence where journalists can see? Probably an order from Trump to stir up things up because the UK said they couldn’t launch attacks from the UK.
Herr Schtarmer
Fascists helping fascists. The new Axis of evil.
But Britain says its not involved /s
