• Saapas@piefed.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Seems from the article that they’re there to help their allies in the Gulf. And Cyprus/the Cyprus bases.

      USA would like to get them dragged more into the war though as in making attacks and whatnot.

      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 day ago

        They are very clearly participating and directly facilitating attacks on Iran. Let’s not try to spin this as anything other than that.

        • Saapas@piefed.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          What would be the spin in what I said? British got dragged into this because of their alliances to Gulf states, their bases in Cyprus etc. It’s not like they came there to help the US in this war, even though their actions do help them out.

          Anyone defending against Iranian strikes, even when defending themselves, is in effect helping the US out but it’s not like they’re doing that in order to help out the US.

          • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            1 day ago

            The British actively allow the US to use their bases for refuelling and staging attacks. These are absolutely actions that directly help the US in the war. Anyone participating in a war of aggression is doing the opposite of defending themselves.

            • Saapas@piefed.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              1 day ago

              The British actively allow the US to use their bases for refuelling and staging attacks.

              Right but we were talking about them sending more troops to Middle East, like the title says.

              Anyone participating in a war of aggression is doing the opposite of defending themselves.

              I’m talking about the Gulf states too or anyone who would be defending against Iran’s strike. By the act of defending yourself you would be helping out the US without your reason for the action being helping out the US, you know?

              • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                1 day ago

                And those troops will obviously be used to support military activities against Iran. They’re not going to just sit there and jerk off. Gulf states are direct participants the same way brits are. They’re hosting US bases that are used for striking Iran. Calling that defending yourself is the height of idiocy.

                • Saapas@piefed.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  24 hours ago

                  And those troops will obviously be used to support military activities against Iran.

                  From the article it sounds like they’re there to defend the Gulf allies and Cyprus/Cyprus base.

                  Calling that defending yourself is the height of idiocy.

                  Easy there partner, I’m making the point that anyone even defending yourself against the missile would be helping the US even when it wasn’t their intention.