Trump has attacked Iran

The Uk is in a weak military position.

Military personel have been saying it for a decade or more.

The fly in the ointment will always be Netanyahu though.

AGAA4

The irony is that Trump's attack on Iran now means that Iran will definitely build a nuclear weapon.
There is still doubt from experts in the US that there was imminent danger from Iran.
Also Trump acted illegally by not seeking approval from Congress.
By dancing to Netanyahu's tune he has put the whole world in danger and Iran will make sure now that they have a nuclear weapon.

Indeed, nothing will make them more determined now, and they certainly do have the excuse that they need them as the USA, Israel and 'the West' (the UK at least) are in cohoots. Do't they have the right to defend themselves?

As for saying that some of us are scaremongering and enjoying it- this is truly sick.

I think what we mustn’t forget is that we (the world) does not know what Trumps strategy is.

If say that the Americans have successfully got rid of irans nuclear capability, now is not the time for further warfare, now is the time for negotiations.

There is at least a hope that this may be his strategy, as he will not be supported by a large majority of the USA if he makes the mistake that Bush did.

Quote Maremia Mon 23-Jun-25 08:31:20
That 'the majority of the people support his stance' does not negate Claremont's opinion that Netanyahu has been wanting to do this for decades. There is plenty of videod evidence to support Claremont's assertion.

An opinion is not an assertion

The irony is that Trump's attack on Iran now means that Iran will definitely build a nuclear weapon.
There is still doubt from experts in the US that there was imminent danger from Iran.
Also Trump acted illegally by not seeking approval from Congress.
By dancing to Netanyahu's tune he has put the whole world in danger and Iran will make sure now that they have a nuclear weapon.

Yes WWM2, glad that the UK will begin to form closer defence bonds with Europe, now that the USA is so unreliable.

Our world is being held to ransom by power mad men.

That 'the majority of the people support his stance' does not negate Claremont's opinion that Netanyahu has been wanting to do this for decades. There is plenty of videod evidence to support Claremont's assertion.

*utterly!

Starmer is playing this right I think. He cannot totally distance himself from the US as this would be to the detriment of the UK longterm in so many ways. He is engaging in conversation with Trump whilst at the same time not endorsing his action and stressing the need for negotiation.
I do not envy Starmer his job at this moment, but thank goodness it is him who is at the helm now.

Wyllow3

No proof they have got all the uranium at all. Trump parading the stage makes me sick.

My Iranian woman artist friend was part of that time when they were out on the streets, headscarf less, men and women mixing feely, although she said it was different in rural areas. The regime will just get more hard line.

Trum and Netanyahu postering, Gaza forgotton

Absolutely, all of this is absolutely and uttering heartbreaking and sickening!

Does that make me a weak supporter of terrorism? No, it most certainly does not!

Trump announced that Iran's nuclear programme was 'completely and totally obliterated',
but now Vance is saying that the USA will 'permanently dismantle that nuclear programme over the coming years'.
So, perhaps the bombing mission was not as successful as was thought.

Smileless2012

I don't agree that Claremont is catastrophising or goading; I agree with her post.

I also agree.

I certainly think that we are dependent on the USA, but not sure it is because we are weak.

It is all part of the post war agreement NATO etc. It also suited the USA to be top dog as it were.

As this agreement is beginning to break down it makes us look weak, but it just means that we need to form new alliances and Europe seems our best chance. We can then form a strong alliance of military interdependence if ever needed. Hopefully never.

As for the U.K. joining the USA in the war. Well, Trump has gone it alone so far. And if it stops at this (doubtful) then no, but even if it proliferates it is by no means a done deal that we will join in. There is always hope😕

Claremont

We let Israel do this totally illegally. Many other dangerous states have nuclear arms. Russia took all the ones that were on Why sUkraine soil, in exchange for a promise not to attack.

As said before, nuclear proliferationw as always the massive worry, and this illustrates it very well. Who are the good guys who should be allowed to have nuclear arms. Who decides that and on what basis? The good guys often become the bad ones, and vice versa.

Why should it be tolerated that Israel develops its own nuclear weapons, illegally and with the support of the USA, and to some extent, the UK.

Precisely!

He’ll drag half the world in with him. We will follow him because we are weak and depend on the US. No doubt the UK will follow him, too, for the same reason

I have been musing on that.
Not come to any definite conclusions.

Yes I read that. It is a puzzle though, as the IAEA seemed to be expected a rise in the readings.

If they moved the stuff I wonder where it went? I guess they always had contingency measures in hand.

The thinking now is that Trump has guaranteed that Iran will now go hell for leather to develop a nuclear bomb.

I guess China or Russia could supply them with the extra uranium.

Whitewavemark2

One thing that I couldn’t understand yesterday, was that the radiation levels had not altered since the apparent destruction of the sites.

Now I suspect we may have the answer.

Satellite images showed numerous lorries on the days to the run up of the bombing, which suggests that the enriched uranium was being moved to an undisclosed destination.

This is all supposition on my part, but it is one idea to answer the conundrum of no rise in the radiation levels.

I’m probably wrong, but it keeps me thinking😊

One theory is that the nuclear reactors had been shut down incase there was an attack, also the enriched uranium would be in massively strong containers that only a direct hit from a large bomb would breach.

At least Trump will now be able to blame Iran for the USA economy rather than his incompetence. How convenient it all is.

One thing that I couldn’t understand yesterday, was that the radiation levels had not altered since the apparent destruction of the sites.

Now I suspect we may have the answer.

Satellite images showed numerous lorries on the days to the run up of the bombing, which suggests that the enriched uranium was being moved to an undisclosed destination.

This is all supposition on my part, but it is one idea to answer the conundrum of no rise in the radiation levels.

I’m probably wrong, but it keeps me thinking😊

Claremont

Iran is planning to close the Straights of Hormuz, which will cause massive economic damage to the West and the UK, as the majority of oil trades go via that route.

Closing the Gulf would cause major problems in China who are dependant on the oil, as well as a loss of revenue to Iran. It’s more likely that US ships will be targeted.

ronib

Not so good to read of a close alignment with Russia and Iran developing…..

Iran has close relationships with both Russia and China.

USA recognises this as it has asked China to intervene should Iran decide to close the Strait of Hormuz.

Not so good to read of a close alignment with Russia and Iran developing…..

Good to see Macron, Merz and Starmer working together and in agreement. Albanese seems to be saying much the same thing?