The US has bombed Fordow and other sites.

[MistressoftheDarkSide]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2025/jun/22/israel-iran-war-live-trump-says-us-has-attacked-nuclear-sites-in-iran-including-fordow

The UK has always been the lapdog of the US. There's no precedent for a UK PM telling America to piss off. We've already sent RAF jets under some sort of vague 'stabilising' justification that no lay person seems to understand. Starmer has said he knew about Trumps decision. That's not a neutral position. That makes us a target for terrorist reprisals. Millions of pounds of our money is going to arming Israel and Ukraine against the wishes of the vast majority and now millions more will be poured into the coffers of the war machine while we all face working til we're worn out at 68/69 to fund it. And the migrant crisis that war hugely contributes to creates a battle for housing, healthcare and resources that make life an uphill struggle. It's a terrible time to be a UK citizen and taxpayer. We are powerless. Remember the giant Don't Attack Iraq protests? Decisions had already been made, Blair had already assured the US he was with them (I paraphrase). The same will have happened here.

Aye- and if Iran manages to get a ballistic missile onto an American warship with mass casulaties what next - Iran is full of weapons, munitions and radiaoctive material if the country breaks down then a lot of angry nutters with stuff will be looking for revenge. A lot of these types don't fear death like we do.

Israel has crippled quite a lot of their capabities.

Why do you say that?

Here's the peace loving president again:
https://x.com/TrumpWarRoom/status/1850654992975454219

The inconsistency of some posters is astonishing.

A few weeks ago they were railing against and scaremongering about Starmer planning to provide peacekeepers to Ukraine. Now they are cheering on the 🍊 warmongerer.

Only if you believe the threat exists because of claims made by proven liars.

Surely if you bomb sites with nuclear material the radioactive stuff will leak and blow everywhere? What an clusterf* just to boost Trumps ego after that dismal military parade. Did Congress have to approve his actions?

And if the escalation brings known nuclear powers into the conflict then the imminent threat increases exponentially.

You are misunderstanding. I’ve already said not just BBC plus I do not want further escalation from here, but do see the nuclear threat as a major risk which doesn’t just disappear.

You can’t say with certainty we wouldn’t have even worse consequences from an emboldened nuclear Iran.

And what makes you to believe that John Mearsheimer and Jeffrey Sachs are unbiased sources of truth?
John Mearsheimer in particular is pushing Putin's narrative about West being guilty in war in Ukraine. I wouldn't trust a word he's written.

The Times reported the planes left from the states.

I don’t think we fully understand yet the impact these strikes will have had. What if some of the nuclear material has been damaged? The consequences could be devastating for the whole region and perhaps further afield. There are conflicting reports on how successful the attack has been and a botched job could be significantly worse for everybody.
I think Trump has made a terrible mistake and we will now see increased terrorist activity in the US and Europe as a consequence.

Yes that was my one question before this, how will others react. Perhaps checking with China. Idk what’s happening behind the scenes.

I think Trump has made a terrible mistake and we will now see increased terrorist activity in the US and Europe as a consequence.

Honestly we shouldn't be harbouring terrorist sympathisers in the first place.

Yes, why would a country with other hostile states right next door want a big military capability? It's a real mystery 🤔🤡

Yes, I am pretty shocked people don't understand this. And I have no particular love for Israel.

Concern over Iran's nuclear program did not start with Trump for goodness sake - programs monitoring Iran have been in place for decades. Both Democrat and Republican presidents have treated them much the same, and Europe has generally been supportive of that.

And it's not like Trump has been a warmonger, compared to other presidents (Obama, as an example) he's been less likely to pursue conflicts than most. And yet all of a sudden people are speaking as if he's always been fomenting war? The same people complaining in his last term that he was trying to negotiate with places like N. Korea, or the Russians.

Iran has clearly been ramping up for a while, Hamas's attack on Israel was the kick off of that. I'd guess that something else has happened that has led to this further escalation, whatever caused Trump to leave the G7 conference early.

The Times reported 1pm UK time

I think genocide was used before that. The Armenian genocide was earlier as was the Circassian genocide.

I am not misunderstanding. I repeat what I said above.
You need to own your opinion and the consequences.
You can't simply state that you do not want further escalation from here, having condoned Israel's attack and now the US attack. They have literally provoked inevitable violence. There is now no scenario in which we don't have further violence.

I'm thinking of Iraq type terrorism - low level IEDs that sort of stuff. There's 2500 US troops in Iraq and if the Iranian regime falls there's nothing to stop these groups attempting to take out some of them and never mind trucks and knives and all that stuff in Europe. It's bad enough already and then's the small boats .....

Everyone has their biases. However, these two men are hugely experienced, knowledgable and respected in the field.

I agree with what JM has said re Russia. His is not 'pushing Putin's narrative, as you say. He understands the history of the conflict and previous agreements that were made and subsequently broken.

Let’s us in Europe at least keep bloody religion, superstition and other stupidities out of this. Let us stick with the reason that has been humanity’s tool for survival since we evolved.

Jeremiah was, whether contemporaneously or soon after the fact, referring to the events of his own time. When Israel, Judah, the city states of ‘Phoenicia’ / aka Canaan, the Philistines and everyone else in that region, were the small weak middle states, the fighting ground between the great powers of Egypt and the powers between and to the north of the two rivers. That area has always, always been fought over.

We need reason not superstitious crap to survive. Bloody Romans what did they ever do for us.

This is under human control. More specifically, war is under men’s control. Not the fates or gods or whatever other justification men like to give to their controlled followers.

You should probably crack open some history books around the development of nuclear weapons. With the US, they were one of the countries first racing to produce the atomic bomb, and then following that there was a period of the Cold War, where various powers were creating huge nuclear arsenals.

No one was thrilled about Russia doing this, but they were one of the major world powers.

There have in fact been significant attempts at disarmament and reducing the amount of weapons held in general, and part of that has been limiting the number of countries that hold them. It's not really a principled metric, it's pragmatic, about maintaining a balance of power among nations who hold such weapons so they are unlikely to be used.

The UK, US, and Europe, have always been unhappy about some nations having nuclear capabilities, but particularly worried about Iran, and North Korea developing them.

Iran's Foreign Minister on Sky news comes across as the voice of reason calling for the UN to convene an urgent meeting of the Security Council, talking about International Law, UN treaties.

I’m fine with my posts. No need to ‘own’ anything. It’s a risk now but measured against greater threat in a couple of years then I agree with those who state Iran having nuclear weapons is a major threat.

You think it’d be ok, I don’t and most leaders are concerned and have been for a while whether they want talks or not.

ETA the main difference is you are somewhat certain Iran won’t use them, I and others are definitely not.

I'm thinking of Iraq type terrorism - low level IEDs that sort of stuff. There's 2500 US troops in Iraq and if the Iranian regime falls there's nothing to stop these groups attempting to take out some of them and never mind trucks and knives and all that stuff in Europe. It's bad enough already and then's the small boats .....

Yes this is a worrying factor, I do agree there.