I need to say this out loud

I don’t agree with nuclear proliferation but I do think it’s a double standard that Iran cannot have them (though according to the IAEA, currently they don’t). Which countries have them openly? Which countries refuse to sign the non-proliferation treaty? Which countries have attacked other countries in our lifetimes? Which countries have fabricated reasons to go to war with others, citing weapons of mass destruction? Has it helped? Which countries have actually used nuclear weapons and what justification was I given for this in my history lessons? Do I really “know” the truth about the situation or are we operating out of received ideas?

I think it is wise not to rush in. I think that I
don’t have the full picture and anyone that says they do is making a mistake. But what I do feel sure of is that we have been lied to over and over throughout our lives and comforted with the notion that we are the good guys. Standing outside of it all, it’s hard to maintain that illusion.

War is always a failure. It should be the absolute last resort.
I completely agree.

It’s not that it’s upsetting me, and I’m not a heavy user. But unfortunately it also
shapes public opinion and disinformation is a powerful tool. We have a heavy legacy in this world and at school we didn’t necessarily learn the full picture. We get to sit and chat about wars while the vast majority of us don’t have to truly face the brutal reality. War is always a failure. It should be the absolute last resort.

I don't know who you mean by "we"? Lots of people do care about Iranians and their freedom.

I wouldn't say it was the highest priority of Trump or Netanyahu, not at all. But the uprising of the Iranian people and the harsh response by the Iranian regime did facilitate the war.

Iran developing nuclear capabilities is probably the biggest reason for the war, in my opinion. They can't be allowed to develop one while the regime is committed to destroying Israel and they hate the US too.

From Hegseth’s map it seems fairly conclusive that the US was responsible but they’re “looking into it “

I don’t think that this war is being pursued because we care about Iranians and their freedom. I have to admit I’ve watched people close to me grieve their loved ones in Myanmar for years as the military bombed villages, and they wonder why can’t the US help? It’s noble to talk about saving Iran but let’s be honest. This isn’t about liberation. And in this world full of state inflicted horror, how do we pick who deserves saving?

We still don't know if the school being bombed was caused by the US/Israel or Iran though it seems pretty obvious to "real people" to use your phrase that it would have been an accident whoever caused it.

The balance of probability suggests it was caused by the US I believe, though you can't stop people wildly speculating on social media.

I don't use much social media because it's a cesspit as far as I can see in my limited experience of it. If it's upsetting you then maybe you should limit your exposure to it too.

You’re probably right. Like the thousands of
comments on social media pushing the narrative that Iran bombed its own schoolgirls. Or that it’s absolutely fine and normal to sink a shipful of men in international waters and not rescue survivors. Surely this is not how real people
think?

Didn't read the whole post because the first few sentences were so disingenuous. Do you really expect anyone to believe that you had no idea there would be people in the UK both pro and anti the war in Iran? Did you not know that lots of UK people have been absolutely horrified by what the Iranian regime has been doing - killing its own civilians in huge numbers for protesting?

Quite apart from the huge problem of people who would do that to their own population pursuing nuclear capabilities.

Be more honest and maybe its worth debating.

Yes I know ...they don't seem genuine OPs because I can't understand why you wouldn't even once return to your own thread if you care enough about a topic to start a thread about it.

Just reading the thread I’m taken aback, to say the least. I wasn’t expecting to see ANY support for this war of aggression. Let alone full-on warmongering. So I’m truly interested - those of you who are for this war, where do you get your news? Newspapers? TV news? Someone close to you? How often do you completely change your mind when you get new information? Are you aware of who owns or controls the paper you read, the news channel you view, and what their aims and views are? Lastly, did you study history and how much do you know about our past involvement in Iran? 1953?

I ask because after a 17 year absence, I’ve had a year back in the U.K. and the brainwashing and propaganda appears really flagrant to me. Sure with the internet I could read UK news too but then there’s the subliminal stuff, the newspaper headlines you kind of half glimpse at the news stands, the radio, the TV, the people you know - and their opinions. My family members were at first resistant to the idea that they were not independently forming their own opinions, but the fact that we also speak several languages and have lived in an international context for a while made them stop and think. They’re now extremely alert to the manipulations of the media. Personally I look around and I see people every day picking up certain newspapers with highly manipulative and questionable, and I’m not surprised so many feel the way they do.

And idk after watching two years of horror in Gaza, have we normalised bombing children? Something that we can’t wait to sign up for?

Next time someone presents you with facts about Iran that don’t match your perceptions, sit with it. Compare it to past US and U.K. involvement in Iran and the motivations that lay behind that. And maybe this post is just part of the whole machine, just like the Telegraph headline stating “Britain backs war”.

Do we, though? Do we really want that?

My pet hate is the threads that start along the lines of:

"I don't know much about the news / events in the Middle East/ conflict in Iran etc] but can someone please explain to me why [insert emotive reason- such as why is Trump bombing a cats and dog rescue home or say why the Iranian IRGC are torturing children etc]"

They then get both sides stirred up , create further division, anger and entrenchment of polarised views and are then never heard of again.

Those sort of posts are common on MN - OP makes a controversial post then is never seen again 🤷🏼‍♀️

Seems the OP has lost interest in going to war?

Spain is not getting involved no. We should join them. This is an illegal war. Really good interview with a Spanish minister on C4 news today

I think the European NATO and Canada will, with no doubt.
They are making their way to Cyprus. France, Spain and Italy. I am sure more. But those sent ships. It is my understanding that ours is not there yet.
Europe will defend each other.
But US.... I think Trump will just make some hurtful remark and laugh at us, or worst, send Vance to do it!

We can stay away and say " oh, not our war", etc.
However, I really doubt if UK would get ANY military help is someone would attack us. Definitely zero from USA. And probably nothing from NATO too. That's the problem.

Interesting timeline of events from Declassified UK

What is Britain doing in Iran?
On Saturday morning, the US and Israel launched an illegal war of aggression against Iran.

While that is not how the events of recent days have been reported across the media, there is simply no other way to describe what has happened.

The Iranian government was in the process of negotiating with the US on its nuclear programme and, according to the Omani mediators, progress was being made.

Normalisation between Washington and Tehran is precisely what keeps Israel’s prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu up at night.

For over three decades, he has been claiming that Iran was on the cusp of attaining a nuclear weapon, even as Israel remains the only power in the region to actually possess them.

In 1992, Netanyahu declared Iran would “become autonomous in its ability to develop and produce a nuclear bomb”. In 2015, during the development of the Iran nuclear deal, Netanyahu told the US Congress that negotiations would “not prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons”.

That deal went ahead nonetheless, and Iran was complying with its obligations to limit activities which could lead to the production of weapons-grade uranium or plutonium.

But in 2018, just one week after Netanyahu delivered a presentation claiming “Iran lied, big time” about its nuclear activities, US president Donald Trump pulled out of the deal.

The US and Israel went on to bomb Iran in June 2025, with Trump claiming the strikes had “completely and totally obliterated” Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities.

Despite this, Trump has tried to resurrect the nuclear angle once again in his attempt to justify the current war on Tehran. “An Iranian regime armed with long-range missiles and nuclear weapons would be a dire threat to every American,” he said this week.

The problem for Trump and Netanyahu, insofar as international law is concerned, is that a foreign state does not pose an “imminent threat” just because they say it does.

Which brings us to the legality of Britain’s ever-growing involvement in the war.

The UK government allowed US forces to transit through Royal Air Force bases during the build-up to the operation but did not allow British bases to be used in the initial attack.

Starmer then announced on Sunday that the US could use RAF bases – particularly Diego Garcia and Fairford, which are the most operationally useful to the US – to launch what he said were “defensive” operations against Iranian missile launchers and depots.

Downing Street said on the record that the decision to take “limited defensive action” had been made in response to a “request” from the US.

According to law professor Adil Haque: “Since the US may not use force against Iran in collective self-defense of the Gulf States, the UK may not assist the US in using force against Iran under any circumstances”.

In other words, Britain’s decision to provide “defensive” support to the aggressor would appear to make it complicit in the crime of aggression.

“It is not possible for the UK to facilitate US strikes that are aimed at defending the Gulf states without also facilitating US strikes that are part of its unlawful campaign”, Haque added.

In any case, it remains unclear how the UK government can ensure US strikes launched from RAF bases are meeting its definition of “defensive”, particularly in light of the reported lack of intelligence sharing between London and Washington.

In the days since Starmer committed British bases to these “defensive” operations, the US has continued to telegraph its war crimes to the world.

US war secretary Pete Hegseth said on Wednesday that the US and Israel were aiming for “uncontested airspace” over Iran “in under a week” to unleash “death and destruction from the sky all day long”. This comes amid the carpet bombing of Tehran, a city of around 10 million people.

A US submarine also struck an Iranian naval vessel in international waters, thousands of miles from Iran, and fled the scene without making any attempt to pick up survivors.

Starmer said on Monday he had learnt from the “mistakes of Iraq”. Providing material support to the US as it conducts an illegal war in the Middle East would indicate he hasn’t.

Oh where to start?

Do you have any evidence or links to back up your statements that:
It was the US that bombed the school and not a misfired Iranian missile or a falling SAM.
That the attack is about oil, because financially this makes no sense at all.
The rather tenuous linkage to the Epstein files.

Or are your comments just based on an informed personal opinion.

We are not sure where the missile that struck the school came from, as a verified matter. At least as of yesterday morning.
If they have managed to verify it by now, then please correct me.

Bombing iranian school kids to save the iranian people.. make it make sense.. At least Trump is after the oil and take attention away from the Epstien files, whats your excuse? just lack of common sense?

I never thought this would happen but I absolutely agree with Starmer. We should not have blindly followed the US into this. It’s Trumps mess to sort out.

The Iranian regime was clearly horrific, as are many others around the world, including most urgently that of Russia, and the lives it has destroyed pursuing a war against Ukraine.

At the same time, the US turning its back on a rules based international order to instead start conflicts with whoever happens to be their villain of the week is appalling. We are all less safe as a result. They have thrown a lit match into the tinderbox of the Middle East with no strategy, no clear aim, just a desire to flex their muscles and see what happens.

Im very glad the UK is standing as far back from this as it feels able to in the circumstances.

The guardian reports that some kurdish groups may want or have joined in the attacks. Others do not want to.
To be honest, far too many names and regions I do not know!!!!!
And a group from the North I had never heard of.

I also am happy with the UKs response to keep us out of offensive actions.