Starmer’s Latest Political Snafu: The Iran War

[Hol]

The Labour prime minister’s indecision and the abject state of the British military have created an embarrassing display.

Forty-four years ago, Margaret Thatcher sent a British task force 8,000 miles to liberate the Falkland Islands. They had been invaded by Argentina. Last week Britain wasn’t even able to send a frigate to protect British personnel and their families in Akrotiri in Cyprus against Iranian drones.

The HMS Dragon was still in dock in Portsmouth even as Iran was attacking the UK’s base on the Mediterranean island. The French, Britain’s historic rival, had to step in with a gunboat to deter further aggression. The humiliation of the British military and Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer’s government was complete. Had Thatcher still been around, she would have sacked the defense secretary and half the military top brass.

From the start of this war, the state of Britain’s leadership has been dire. “This is not Winston Churchill,” said Donald Trump last week after Starmer refused to allow the U.S. to use British air bases to refuel planes headed for the Gulf. The prime minister had said the America-Israeli action was illegal under international law. (Britain’s closest military allies in the Commonwealth, Canada and Australia, seemed to think the strike against the weaponry of Iran’s regime was legitimate.) But after the American-Israeli success in taking out Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and leaders of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, Starmer changed his tune. He conducted what has become a typical U-turn and agreed to let U.S. warplanes land at Diego Garcia and Fairford in Gloucestershire. Suddenly, international law wasn’t a problem.

…

But right now the prospect of Britain participating in any military action seems pretty remote. The last 40 years have seen a rejection of military values in Britain in favor of elite self-flagellation over the supposed evils of the Empire. In a YouGov poll last year, only 11 percent of young Britons said they would definitely fight for their own country, let alone someone else’s.

If Argentina decided to launch a second invasion of the Malvinas, as they call the Falklands, they would likely find it a walkover.

Starmer’s Latest Political Snafu: The Iran War

The Labour prime minister’s indecision and the abject state of the British military have created an embarrassing display.

www.theamericanconservative.com

 

[Andy C]

They are allies on paper only. Cowards run the UK.

 

[Hol]

The sinking of Europe​

Europe could have made this war its war. Iran is not a distant threat. It is a regime that has projected violence into Europe for decades—through networks, proxies, kidnappings, and terror operations. It has openly declared its hostility toward the West.

When Israel and the United States launched their strike against Iran on Saturday, February 28, the President of the European Commission responded the only way Europe knows how: by scheduling an “urgent” meeting… for Monday.

In a world that moves at military speed, Europe answers at bureaucratic pace. Slow. Procedural. Irrelevant.

It has always been this way. The difference now is that it matters. Because Europe’s problem is no longer just inefficiency. It is something deeper.

Europe is not only strategically unarmed. It is morally disoriented. A large part of European public opinion would rather see Israel and the United States fail than accept the legitimacy of force. Another, smaller but influential group has embraced a different illusion: that wars can no longer be won. That victory is impossible. That negotiation—always negotiation—is the only acceptable outcome.

Both positions lead to the same place: surrender.

The sinking of Europe

Europe could have made this war its war. There has not been a regime in recent decades that has projected its violence on European soil with such intensity as the Iranian one. It has financed networks, promoted attacks, kidnapped European citizens and openly declared its hostility towards the West.

voz.us