Kemi just called us all stupid..again

[beguilingeyes]

Badenoch is on BBC News standing in front of an armoured vehicle (she's not sitting in a tank yet, but give her time).
When told that the majority of Britons don't want to be involved in this war, she said that we would be if we understood what it meant.
She's happy to have a conversation with the PM, obviously he's too stupid too.
Only she has the intellect required to want to bomb people.

what about special forces or spooks etc or groups like Task force 141 etc if they had intel and we could not wait for congress then what should they have done ?

I don't know.

I explained what the US Constitution states on the declaration of war, a word used by Trump.

https://yougov.com/en-gb/articles/54243-uk-public-opinion-on-the-us-iran-conflict

unless the public have studyed the war and reasons in detail why do we consider public opinion ? for iran

im only asking why do we

I think you’ll find it’s cost the us a billion dollars a day.

would you say that if iran had a nuke and used it ?

plus it would cost alot more if iran did have a nuke etc and used it

But they don't, and haven't. Trump was boasting six months ago that they'd blown Iran's nuclear programmes apart. Was he lying then? Is he lying now? This all sounds suspiciously like Iraq's mythical WMD that no one could find.

52% voted for Brexit..but this hasn't stopped the Labour supporters on here calling them thick and racist, so why does this poll matter?

Also when others make a spelling or typo error you call it out but when you do it's "hilarious "

How do you know how I vote or my posting history? I have never interacted with you in the short time you've been on MN. Unless you have decided to have a go at me under cover of a new name? Brave!

Anyway. This is the poll. Only 8% want the UK to join in attacks on Iraq 🤣 Iran.

I think the poll matters right now because it shows that Badenoch, Farage and the right-wing media are at odds with public sentiment on the UK being dragged into joining Israel and the US in attacking Iran. Public opinion generally supports Starmer’s stance - apparently, unlike Blair, they remember the catastrophic consequences of what ‘being there for an ally’ and what that actually means. And people also see Netanyahu and Trump for what they are.

For those who claim there’s a strategy by the US, I’m fascinated to hear what it is. The Pentagon claimed there was no imminent threat from Iran. Rubio said the US went in quickly once they learnt Israel was going to attack (he’s now denying saying this even though it’s on record). Leavitt said it was based on a ‘feeling’ Trump had. Hegseth said Iran tried to assassinate Trump. Trump has said several contradictory things to different reporters, which don’t really tally with the truth or rational thinking - standard. Many senators came out of the briefing saying they were horrified and terrified by the lack of aims, objectives, a plan. Americans are stranded in the region, Kuwait shot down three US aircraft in ‘friendly fire’, etc. because the government didn’t think to consider the safety of their own people first before they attacked. So what’s the strategy, what’s the thought out plan? Because I’m watching and listening to Trump and Hegseth, and I feel like I must be living in an alternative reality to those who think there is one.

both could be true they did do that then 6 months later someone else got them another weapon etc

Well, we did actually leave the EU in the end so there's that. Nobody managed to opt out of the political consequences of the vote.

And the same principle applies here. Kemi is very much out of step with the country on this one. So too are the Reform lot actually, but they're less out of step with their own supporters so it's arguably not as damaging a position for them to take.

Respectfully, I don’t think there’s much stomach for debate on hypothetical weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East - there are enough real and factual horrors to be dealing with currently, and we also remember Iraq.

For those who claim there’s a strategy by the US, I’m fascinated to hear what it is.

As well as reducing Iran’s proxy war and terrorism capabilities and possibly toppling a barbaric regime, the wider strategy would be to stop China having access to cheap sanctioned oil from Venezuela and Iran to give the US leverage, especially regarding rare earth resources in order to shape future world power balance . I know there’s this tendency for left wing commentators to simplify everything into bad right wing nasty white men and lovely nice oppressed people, but the real world simply isn’t like that. This strategy would have been one of the options in planning for years, if not some version for decades.

The reason it’s in the UK’s interests to back the US, is because it’s in the UK’s interests for the US to hold the balance of power. This virtue signalling, ‘oh but he says some politically incorrect things and doesn’t tax everything that moves’ is just childish nonsense, and as you’ll see from how this falls out after Labour’s utterly pointless approach, will only further impoverish the people of the U.K. and make us internationally irrelevant. Sometimes it seems like that is the aim of modern day left wing politics.

Also just to clarify for those who don’t even understand who the belligerents are in this conflict, it’s Iran who have bombed Iraq not the US or U.K.

Or Trump could be a serial liar who likes blowing up things because he thinks he's king of the world. There are reports this morning that they've destroyed a desalination plant. Which is a war crime.

@Blueharmonica What are your thoughts on Russia now benefitting from this ‘strategy’ now that Trump has had to allow India to start buying Russian oil again? I mean, I know Trump has a record of appeasing Putin, but was it always part of their plan to directly benefit Russia?

I think you’re referring to Trump being politically incorrect and tax; my concerns about him are far more serious and wider than that - his incompetency, being a convicted felon, the level of corruption, the Epstein Files, and so on and so on.

I’m not taking the rage-bait on the left-wing comments, but I will say that there’s a deep irony in your accusations of simplification, and bad vs good - most people (left leaning or otherwise) seem to currently believe that many things can be true at the same time: the Iran regime is heinous; Netanyahu is a war criminal who has influenced the US action in Iran; Trump is a global threat who lacks thorough understanding of history or geopolitics; the US administration is dangerous and incompetent and the UK should not be bullied/dragged into any illegal conflict that is without a clear plan.

In this war Nuke = WMD. It is the scary thing to get us behind the war. It doesn't exist.

and whats the source of the intelligence that they destroyed such a plant ? what confidence level is attached to the intelligence ?

I’d have a lot more respect for Starmer if he just told Trump to go fuck himself. We can resume work on repairing the “special relationship” once the despicable racist paedophile has left the White House.

So our wars in the Middle East have consistently made things worse both for the people there and here for the last 100 years but this time it will help and I'm stupid not to recognise that. Uhuh.

even more than 100 years as we had the crusades and fighting over whos book was correct

Of course she was wrong!

She is now very busy with backpedalling

how ?