Trump Rebukes Starmer?

LemonJam

Susieq62: "Well done to the Spanish leader and I hope that Starmer stands firm !! Enough is enough !!"

I thought the Spanish Leader's speech was well pitched- ending with :NO to War"

He is ensuring his country’s security from attacks 👍

Oreo

GrannyGravy13

Oreo

Iran have sent missiles into Turkey now.

The USA has a military base in Turkey, Iran are targeting all US bases within the range of their missiles and drones.

But inevitably some missiles will go off target as they have in other countries targeted by Iran.

Missiles/drones deployed by any country can go rogue for a handful of reasons.

Susieq62: "Well done to the Spanish leader and I hope that Starmer stands firm !! Enough is enough !!"

I thought the Spanish Leader's speech was well pitched- ending with :NO to War"

GrannyGravy13

Oreo

Iran have sent missiles into Turkey now.

The USA has a military base in Turkey, Iran are targeting all US bases within the range of their missiles and drones.

But inevitably some missiles will go off target as they have in other countries targeted by Iran.

Maremia "Some folk in the USA have renamed the attack as 'Operation Epstein Fury'

Ive read that too- you can understand why.

Oreo

Iran have sent missiles into Turkey now.

The USA has a military base in Turkey, Iran are targeting all US bases within the range of their missiles and drones.

Whitewavemark2

Ain’t that the truth

No, it patently isn’t.

Totally agree

Ain’t that the truth

Some folk in the USA have renamed the attack as 'Operation Epstein Fury'.

'Please do not rely on the US Government to help you at this time' is the message on the hotline, and Trump has the nerve to criticise Starmer.

The USA has a history of interfering in the politics of other countries and making them less stable as a result! Anybody who thinks that DT has the Iranian people in his heart are sorely mistaken! He only wants power at the expense of anything or anybody who gets in his way ! This is not my war neither was the war in Iraq in my name! I despair if anybody on here supports the actions of Trump and Netanyahu , they are beyond evil in my view! Well done to the Spanish leader and I hope that Starmer stands firm !! Enough is enough !!

Iran have sent missiles into Turkey now.

Nik1ta
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

LJ. I don’t believe my comment is either misguided or misplaced. I did not seek to justify the legality or otherwise of Trumps action. I was simply pointing out that the Iranian regime can’t be trusted to abide by any treaty or laws; it is a pariah state. Neither did I comment on Trump’s motives or perceived outcomes, although it is too early to say whether regime change will happen. I doubt that unless the IRGC is eliminated.
Of course there are other regimes that do not accord with western values, but few of them are as evil and prominent in promoting terrorism. I also didn’t suggest war between the UK and Iran was inevitable, but war between Israel and Iran clearly was entirely foreseeable and inevitable for as long as Iran remains committed to obliterating Israel.
As soon as Trump moved his two carrier groups near Iran this outcome was a distinct possibility and Starmer did nothing to protect UK territory in Cyprus or our interests in the Gulf. It will take a fortnight for our destroyer to reach Cyprus. Even the Greek and French ships will be there before ours! WhetherTrump “consulted” us or the EU is unknown but I would be surprised if we were not informed as soon as the decision was made. No, Starmer is not responsible for Trump’s actions but he shows a distinct lack of foresight and cojones. Canada (no fan of Trump) and Australia have both supported US action whist we sit on the fence. Typical Starmer.

LemonJam

Niklta 16.45 - your post makes little sense overall.

No poster has agreed with the Iran repressive regime. You view that "international law is a western concept that means nothing" to Iran" then repeated Iran has "no regard whatsoever for international law" carries no weight whatsoever as in fact it was Trump who disregarded International Law by striking Iran NOT the other way round. Your rationale is therefore contradictory. misguided and misplaced.

If Trump's prime aim was to achieve regime change- he has certainly not achieved that. Neither has he presented any realistic plan on how he intends to achieve that aim and in what timescale.

Trump stated last year that he "obliterated" Iran's nuclear capability- on Trump's basis so what nuclear threat therefore is the US currently facing from Iran to justify Trump's Iran strike?

There are many regimes around the world that do not align with European or UK values. This in itself does not make between the UK and those countries "war inevitable at some point" - heaven forbid! That also does not give the UK legal justification to take arbitrary strikes against such countries whenever it crosses and expect UK allies to immediately offer unwavering support as requested- that is an absurd position.

Starmer has in fact made a decision for the US to have access to certain UK air bases, on certain conditions. I disagree his position makes the UK look weak. We are not Trump's lackeys and he didn't consult the UK, the EU or indeed his own Congress before he decide to strike. Trump is responsible and accountable for his Iran strike actions- not Starmer.

Niklta, you are right and LemonJam is wrong, your rationale is absolutely spot on. I do feel that if some posters on here had to live under the Iranian regime they would regard
Trump as their saviour! Its easy to criticise from the safety of their sofas.

LemonJam If Trump's prime aim was to achieve regime change- he has certainly not achieved that. Neither has he presented any realistic plan on how he intends to achieve that aim and in what timescale.

Trump stated last year that he "obliterated" Iran's nuclear capability- on Trump's basis so what nuclear threat therefore is the US currently facing from Iran to justify Trump's Iran strike?

Perhaps his aim is to distract from Epstein. Always.

Arab states, in much closer proximity to Iran, have found themselves on the front line with this US/Israel war and they are angry. This is a war the Arab governments didn't want and tried to prevent. The question remains whether the Arab states are going to be drawn in and if so how. Are they similarly "vacillating" are their leaders "an embarrassment"? No -they are weighing up risks and their national and international interests- in order to make a decision whether to be drawn in to what it has called the "treacherous Iranian attacks".

This no doubt is Iran's strategy- to raise the stakes for it's Arab neighbours in the hope they will increase pressure on the US to end its war. fingers crossed they are able to successfully persuade and lobby Trump- Trump and his family have many fingers in many Arab financial pies and money may be a positive motivator. Time will tell whether that works.

So far the Arab states have refused to let the US use their skies and territories to launch attacks on Iran- also not US lackeys.

Niklta 16.45 - your post makes little sense overall.

No poster has agreed with the Iran repressive regime. You view that "international law is a western concept that means nothing" to Iran" then repeated Iran has "no regard whatsoever for international law" carries no weight whatsoever as in fact it was Trump who disregarded International Law by striking Iran NOT the other way round. Your rationale is therefore contradictory. misguided and misplaced.

If Trump's prime aim was to achieve regime change- he has certainly not achieved that. Neither has he presented any realistic plan on how he intends to achieve that aim and in what timescale.

Trump stated last year that he "obliterated" Iran's nuclear capability- on Trump's basis so what nuclear threat therefore is the US currently facing from Iran to justify Trump's Iran strike?

There are many regimes around the world that do not align with European or UK values. This in itself does not make between the UK and those countries "war inevitable at some point" - heaven forbid! That also does not give the UK legal justification to take arbitrary strikes against such countries whenever it crosses and expect UK allies to immediately offer unwavering support as requested- that is an absurd position.

Starmer has in fact made a decision for the US to have access to certain UK air bases, on certain conditions. I disagree his position makes the UK look weak. We are not Trump's lackeys and he didn't consult the UK, the EU or indeed his own Congress before he decide to strike. Trump is responsible and accountable for his Iran strike actions- not Starmer.

Nik1ta

Iran is the most evil regime since the Nazis and Stalin. It is run by repugnant misogynistic old men with a medieval religious ideology. It represses and murders its citizens and spreads terrorism throughout the world. It has no regard whatsoever for international law and if it had nuclear weapons then Israel would probably cease to exist. It has no intention of abiding by any nuclear nonproliferation and its leaders despise the West. Its regime is a serious threat to world peace and sadly this war was inevitable at some point. It is naive to try to negotiate with such a regime to whom international law is a western concept that means nothing. Starmer’s vacillation about the use of our bases simply makes us look weak, which of course we are!

Exactly!
International law means nothing to Iran so it isn’t a level playing field.The US and Israel are doing the right thing for themselves but also for all the countries who dither and shake at the thought of it.
Starmer was an utter embarrassment at PMQ’s today.The Naval ship HMS Dragon will apparently not arrive off Cyprus for a fortnight.

Smileless2012

America is also run by a repugnant mysogynistic man Nik.

Quite.

I believe that Starmer is right to be involved at the level he is. Its all very well doing the "but we are people of principle" like Spain, but in reality I think Starmer was quite right not to get involved until it became quite clear our citizens, others areas like Cyprus - and I might add, probablefuture economic matters - got shockingly rapidly drawn in

When you have the left carping about any involvement at all, we should sit on the sidelines:
and the right shockingly following Trump, who would have led us into another Iraq

I think Starmer has hit the right note.

Starmer not a Winston Churchill???
Well - Trump is not a F D Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Carter, Reagan, Obama or even a George W Bush!!
For that matter, there hasn’t been a worse USA president during my lifetime.

Well Trump is his boss!🤣

Nik1ta

Iran is the most evil regime since the Nazis and Stalin. It is run by repugnant misogynistic old men with a medieval religious ideology. It represses and murders its citizens and spreads terrorism throughout the world. It has no regard whatsoever for international law and if it had nuclear weapons then Israel would probably cease to exist. It has no intention of abiding by any nuclear nonproliferation and its leaders despise the West. Its regime is a serious threat to world peace and sadly this war was inevitable at some point. It is naive to try to negotiate with such a regime to whom international law is a western concept that means nothing. Starmer’s vacillation about the use of our bases simply makes us look weak, which of course we are!

Agree with you, a really well written piece, thank you.

I agree Mrs.Matt.