| F*** off Starmer 20:05 - Feb 28 with 3028 views | Zx1988 |
Perhaps you could grow a backbone and show some evidence for your alleged 'respect for international law', rather than brown-nosing Trump and Netenyoohoo, and warning Iran not to fight back.
Venezuela was pretty much a dry run for this, wasn't it? Launch an unprovoked attack on a sovereign nation, and test the waters before hitting 'go' on the Big One. [Post edited 28 Feb 20:06]
|  |
| |  |
| F*** off Starmer on 20:30 - Feb 28 with 2591 views | ITFC_Forever |
Like Cameron, May, BJ, Truss, Rishi or any other PM would have done any different. |  |
| |
| F*** off Starmer on 20:32 - Feb 28 with 2572 views | Zx1988 |
| F*** off Starmer on 20:30 - Feb 28 by ITFC_Forever |
Like Cameron, May, BJ, Truss, Rishi or any other PM would have done any different. |
I'd have reserved a similar reaction for all of them as well, but Starmer's background makes this especially egregious. | |
| |
| F*** off Starmer on 20:33 - Feb 28 with 2556 views | redrickstuhaart |
Our planes should not be in the sky there. Defensive or otherwise.
Its not defensive, tbh, if it is in response to unprovoked agression.
Shameful. | |
| |
| F*** off Starmer on 20:47 - Feb 28 with 2503 views | ElderGrizzly |
Starmer was very careful to ensure we were in line with France and Germany before speaking.
It’s what he should do given our role in European defence |  | | |
| F*** off Starmer on 21:00 - Feb 28 with 2411 views | Swansea_Blue |
| F*** off Starmer on 20:30 - Feb 28 by ITFC_Forever |
Like Cameron, May, BJ, Truss, Rishi or any other PM would have done any different. |
I suspect a lot of us were hoping for better than Cameron, May, BJ Truss and Rishi!
You’re right though. It was an odd statement from Starmer in some ways. Part of it seemed to be making a case for military action like you’d expect to hear if we’d initiated an attack. They’re not very good at comms at all. |  |
| |
| F*** off Starmer on 21:12 - Feb 28 with 2354 views | Zx1988 |
| F*** off Starmer on 20:47 - Feb 28 by ElderGrizzly |
Starmer was very careful to ensure we were in line with France and Germany before speaking.
It’s what he should do given our role in European defence |
I know that Britain's star is on the wane these days, but we really should be above waiting to see what France and Germany think, before deciding whether or not to call out a blatant breach of international law. | |
| |
| F*** off Starmer on 21:33 - Feb 28 with 2250 views | Swansea_Blue |
| F*** off Starmer on 21:12 - Feb 28 by Zx1988 |
I know that Britain's star is on the wane these days, but we really should be above waiting to see what France and Germany think, before deciding whether or not to call out a blatant breach of international law. |
We’ve got to tread carefully now Palantir have our personal data and all our military equipment can be controlled from the US! | |
| |
| F*** off Starmer on 21:35 - Feb 28 with 2245 views | ElderGrizzly |
| F*** off Starmer on 21:12 - Feb 28 by Zx1988 |
I know that Britain's star is on the wane these days, but we really should be above waiting to see what France and Germany think, before deciding whether or not to call out a blatant breach of international law. |
We didn’t. We released a joint statement
[Post edited 28 Feb 21:36]
| | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| F*** off Starmer on 21:41 - Feb 28 with 2198 views | redrickstuhaart |
| F*** off Starmer on 21:35 - Feb 28 by ElderGrizzly |
We didn’t. We released a joint statement
[Post edited 28 Feb 21:36]
|
That statement has settled my vote for the next GE.
Utterly absurd and disingenuous. I expected better from Starmer.
Criticising Iran for hitting out having been subject of unprovoked attack with no mention of the illegality of the attacks which started it. And then sending our planes to help.
Demanding Iran negotiate. When they are not the agressor and the US have stopped negotiating, in deference to their genocidal Israeli mates?
Feck off Starmer. [Post edited 28 Feb 21:42]
| |
| |
| F*** off Starmer on 21:47 - Feb 28 with 2148 views | ITFC_Forever |
| F*** off Starmer on 21:00 - Feb 28 by Swansea_Blue |
I suspect a lot of us were hoping for better than Cameron, May, BJ Truss and Rishi!
You’re right though. It was an odd statement from Starmer in some ways. Part of it seemed to be making a case for military action like you’d expect to hear if we’d initiated an attack. They’re not very good at comms at all. |
Well yes… | |
| |
| F*** off Starmer on 22:07 - Feb 28 with 2089 views | Swansea_Blue |
| F*** off Starmer on 21:41 - Feb 28 by redrickstuhaart |
That statement has settled my vote for the next GE.
Utterly absurd and disingenuous. I expected better from Starmer.
Criticising Iran for hitting out having been subject of unprovoked attack with no mention of the illegality of the attacks which started it. And then sending our planes to help.
Demanding Iran negotiate. When they are not the agressor and the US have stopped negotiating, in deference to their genocidal Israeli mates?
Feck off Starmer. [Post edited 28 Feb 21:42]
|
It’s a bizarre statement echoing Starmer’s full statement. ‘We didn’t take part, but we’re supporting, honest’. It’s like the hanger-overs cheering on the class bully while suggesting the victim should stop throwing punches back. All a bit odd.
There’s no mention of the fact the attacks breach both international law and the US Constitution. Not that Iran is in any way innocent of course. They’re a horrendous regime who’ve funded terror against the West. I’m not sure bombing them with no plan for the future is the way forward though (as discussed previously). | |
| |
| F*** off Starmer on 22:28 - Feb 28 with 1996 views | redrickstuhaart |
| F*** off Starmer on 22:11 - Feb 28 by DJR |
We didn't participate but we're cheering them on from the side lines.  |
We are participating. And engaging in Trump/ Putin style statements urging the nation under attack to stop being so unreasonable to and to negotiate, when that is plainly not a current option. | |
| |
| F*** off Starmer on 22:59 - Feb 28 with 1875 views | ElderGrizzly |
| F*** off Starmer on 21:41 - Feb 28 by redrickstuhaart |
That statement has settled my vote for the next GE.
Utterly absurd and disingenuous. I expected better from Starmer.
Criticising Iran for hitting out having been subject of unprovoked attack with no mention of the illegality of the attacks which started it. And then sending our planes to help.
Demanding Iran negotiate. When they are not the agressor and the US have stopped negotiating, in deference to their genocidal Israeli mates?
Feck off Starmer. [Post edited 28 Feb 21:42]
|
Who would you vote for out of interest, based on what is a no-win situation for a western Government. | | | |
| F*** off Starmer on 23:01 - Feb 28 with 1864 views | reusersfreekicks |
| F*** off Starmer on 21:41 - Feb 28 by redrickstuhaart |
That statement has settled my vote for the next GE.
Utterly absurd and disingenuous. I expected better from Starmer.
Criticising Iran for hitting out having been subject of unprovoked attack with no mention of the illegality of the attacks which started it. And then sending our planes to help.
Demanding Iran negotiate. When they are not the agressor and the US have stopped negotiating, in deference to their genocidal Israeli mates?
Feck off Starmer. [Post edited 28 Feb 21:42]
|
There are no terms available to Iran that any nation would accept.
Starmer knows that |  | | |
| F*** off Starmer on 23:13 - Feb 28 with 1833 views | redrickstuhaart |
| F*** off Starmer on 22:59 - Feb 28 by ElderGrizzly |
Who would you vote for out of interest, based on what is a no-win situation for a western Government. |
I can no longer vote for Starmer. The dishonesty and utterly disgraceful position he has just taken on this is beyond the pale. Not in my name.
I probably won't. Which is a position I abhor. But now understand. | |
| |
| F*** off Starmer on 07:26 - Mar 2 with 1286 views | DJR |
| F*** off Starmer on 21:41 - Feb 28 by redrickstuhaart |
That statement has settled my vote for the next GE.
Utterly absurd and disingenuous. I expected better from Starmer.
Criticising Iran for hitting out having been subject of unprovoked attack with no mention of the illegality of the attacks which started it. And then sending our planes to help.
Demanding Iran negotiate. When they are not the agressor and the US have stopped negotiating, in deference to their genocidal Israeli mates?
Feck off Starmer. [Post edited 28 Feb 21:42]
|
War is Peace?
"The UK has agreed to a US request to use British military bases for "defensive" strikes on Iranian missile sites, Sir Keir Starmer has said."
Another Starmer U-turn but I imagine getting Trump on board when it comes to Diego Garcia plays a significant part. And maybe this U-turn was always part of the plan. [Post edited 2 Mar 7:30]
|  | | |
| F*** off Starmer on 07:56 - Mar 2 with 1181 views | NthQldITFC |
| F*** off Starmer on 22:07 - Feb 28 by Swansea_Blue |
It’s a bizarre statement echoing Starmer’s full statement. ‘We didn’t take part, but we’re supporting, honest’. It’s like the hanger-overs cheering on the class bully while suggesting the victim should stop throwing punches back. All a bit odd.
There’s no mention of the fact the attacks breach both international law and the US Constitution. Not that Iran is in any way innocent of course. They’re a horrendous regime who’ve funded terror against the West. I’m not sure bombing them with no plan for the future is the way forward though (as discussed previously). |
The squirming and bullsh!tting of the American and Israeli representatives on Radio 4 this morning, with regard to legality was a truly shameful illustration of how low civilisation has sunk in the last decade or so.
I echo your last paragraph of course. |  |
| |
| F*** off Starmer on 08:19 - Mar 2 with 1108 views | Churchman |
| F*** off Starmer on 22:07 - Feb 28 by Swansea_Blue |
It’s a bizarre statement echoing Starmer’s full statement. ‘We didn’t take part, but we’re supporting, honest’. It’s like the hanger-overs cheering on the class bully while suggesting the victim should stop throwing punches back. All a bit odd.
There’s no mention of the fact the attacks breach both international law and the US Constitution. Not that Iran is in any way innocent of course. They’re a horrendous regime who’ve funded terror against the West. I’m not sure bombing them with no plan for the future is the way forward though (as discussed previously). |
Yes, Iran is run by a truly horrendous regime. Stone Age with how it treats its own people and others. It’s a big supplier of drones to Russia of course and these have been used en masse to smash Ukraine. I presume arrangements with them are reciprocal and I’ll be interested in Putin’s take on this.
In terms of regime change I cannot see that happening. Iran’s leadership has an iron grip on the country that’s been there since the Shah was kicked out. I too am struggling with the concept of bombing them with no clear plan for the future. It’s never worked and I cannot see how it ever will.
Back to weeds like Starmer and the other unimportant countries, it’s no good hiding behind ‘international law’, Courts, UN or any other post 1945 structure. They are gone. Finished. In the bin.
On a lighter, musing note, I can’t imagine the new Iranian leader is going to do cartwheels of joy over his ‘promotion’. I’d imagine the first things he’d do is look up, order a bigger hat and check his life assurance. |  | | |
| F*** off Starmer on 08:28 - Mar 2 with 1054 views | ZedRodgers |
Funny old game eh
|  |
| |
| F*** off Starmer on 13:28 - Mar 2 with 731 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
You can quite rightly disagree with the bombings, but calling it unprovoked sounds a little offensive to the families of the 40,000 civilians the Iranian regime has just massacred. Not to mention the 100,000’s murdered across the region by their proxies, in constant attacks on their neighbours. This isn’t some benign sovereign nation as implied by your OP. Whatever your view on their motives, no one should be upset for the Iranian regime or Republican Guard. That they are lashing out at civilians across the region shows what they are all about.
*I say this as someone who thinks the invasion of Iraq was criminal and Blair escaped lightly. Very unlikely we’ll see any boots on the ground. [Post edited 2 Mar 13:32]
| | | |
| F*** off Starmer on 13:43 - Mar 2 with 661 views | redrickstuhaart |
| F*** off Starmer on 13:28 - Mar 2 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
You can quite rightly disagree with the bombings, but calling it unprovoked sounds a little offensive to the families of the 40,000 civilians the Iranian regime has just massacred. Not to mention the 100,000’s murdered across the region by their proxies, in constant attacks on their neighbours. This isn’t some benign sovereign nation as implied by your OP. Whatever your view on their motives, no one should be upset for the Iranian regime or Republican Guard. That they are lashing out at civilians across the region shows what they are all about.
*I say this as someone who thinks the invasion of Iraq was criminal and Blair escaped lightly. Very unlikely we’ll see any boots on the ground. [Post edited 2 Mar 13:32]
|
The regime is awful. So is Russia. And many others. IrAn have not launched military attacks and were in negotiations which trump never had any intention of seriously pursuing. | |
| |
| F*** off Starmer on 13:56 - Mar 2 with 593 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| F*** off Starmer on 13:43 - Mar 2 by redrickstuhaart |
The regime is awful. So is Russia. And many others. IrAn have not launched military attacks and were in negotiations which trump never had any intention of seriously pursuing. |
They have used the ‘Axis of Resistance’ to for carry out their attacks on Syria and Yemen as well as western assets. Cognitive dissonance to claim otherwise- just because Russia used irregular forces to take Crimea and Donbas (prior to the current war) doesn’t mean they’ve not attacked anyone.
Those negotiations had nothing to do with the wanton slaughter of their own people either. At what point does intervention become acceptable - many Iranians have called for intervention to stop the slaughter of civilians. I don’t think the current actions will be enough to topple them without another uprising or coup from the army. Even Russia haven’t slaughtered, tortured and blinded 10,000’s of their own unarmed civilians- not sure awful even covers it. | | | |
| F*** off Starmer on 14:34 - Mar 2 with 507 views | redrickstuhaart |
| F*** off Starmer on 13:56 - Mar 2 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
They have used the ‘Axis of Resistance’ to for carry out their attacks on Syria and Yemen as well as western assets. Cognitive dissonance to claim otherwise- just because Russia used irregular forces to take Crimea and Donbas (prior to the current war) doesn’t mean they’ve not attacked anyone.
Those negotiations had nothing to do with the wanton slaughter of their own people either. At what point does intervention become acceptable - many Iranians have called for intervention to stop the slaughter of civilians. I don’t think the current actions will be enough to topple them without another uprising or coup from the army. Even Russia haven’t slaughtered, tortured and blinded 10,000’s of their own unarmed civilians- not sure awful even covers it. |
Nothing to do with cognitive dissonance. You are putting up straw men. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
