Keir Starmer has demanded that the Iranian regime ends retaliatory strikes on neighbours in the Middle East in response to a pre-emptive attack by the US and Israel
Is there really an applicable difference between joining in on the attack and defending the person doing the attacking? That’s like holding someone’s hands behind their back while someone else punches them. For all intents and purposes you are part of the attack.
Did anyone here actually read what he said, or just reading the headline and jumping to their own conclusion that the UK is joining in on the attacks?
Is there really an applicable difference between joining in on the attack and defending the person doing the attacking? That’s like holding someone’s hands behind their back while someone else punches them. For all intents and purposes you are part of the attack.
It doesn’t say the UK is defending Israel, it says defending allies.
Defending Bahrain or Jordan from incoming missiles is completely different to attacking Iran.
We are absolutely not defending the US. Think about it. Why would the world’s largest military need the UK to defend them?
The UK is stopping Iran firing missiles are countries that aren’t involved.
The bully rarely needs the lackey to hold the victim’s arms. But the lackey knows its the best way to keep the bully from turning on them.
Also who are these innocent countries?
The US turned on us a long time ago. Our PM has been very clear that the attack on Iran is not legal.
Iran has already launched a missile towards Cyprus. Tell me, how were they involved?
Tell that to Starmer because he certainly doesn’t act like it.
Why bring up Cyprus? I thought we were talking of innocent countries.
Have you read any of your comments?
Reading the article, we didn’t on reddit and we ain’t gonna start now!