- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
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.
Countries whose names start with vowels can’t be trusted?
Austrians right about now
Heck, Australians too
And maybe the aliens idk
Goddam UK, didn’t Starmer say he WOULDN’T allow this?
This is participation in war crimes!All the little pedos gotta stick to the script
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
So UK bases are just a valid military targets now lol
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.
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.
Didn’t he literally say he’d allow their use for “defensive” strikes? He’s never really been hiding it.
Every strike is a defensive strike
No it’s not.
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.
Nnnnope. They are RAF bases, with a nominal RAF CO. The USAF are tenants.
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.
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.
