Close Menu
    Welt

    Der britische Premierminister steht zu seiner Entscheidung, sich den US-israelischen Angriffen auf den Iran nicht anzuschließen


    Der britische Premierminister steht zu seiner Entscheidung, sich den US-israelischen Angriffen auf den Iran nicht anzuschließen

    https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/british-premier-stands-by-decision-not-to-join-us-israeli-strikes-on-iran/3846994

    Share.
    View 16 Comments

    16 Kommentare

    1. KungFuBucket on

      The UK generally requires a clear legal basis for military action. That usually means:

      – Self-defense under international law
      – A UN Security Council resolution
      – Or collective defense of an ally under specific treaty obligations

      Unlike NATO Article 5 (which applies if a NATO member is attacked), there is no automatic treaty obligation requiring Britain to strike Iran.

      Parliamentary politics also matter. The British government often seeks parliamentary backing for major military operations.

      So it’s really not surprising all things considered. And quite frankly with how Trump has treated most of our allies over the last year, I don’t think any of them will be joining in Trump’s war either.

    2. iwantback on

      Can someone ELI5 to me how come the strike on the British base in Cyprus does not count as casus belli or invoke the NATO article 5? Isn’t that British soil?

      I am not hoping for it, at all. I am confused and curious.

      Edit: Thank you for the answers.

    4. Jackadullboy99 on

      This war is ILLEGAL. Plain and simple… why is this not the top headline?

    5. Sbrubbles on

      Good for the British not wasting their tax dollars on american adventures in the middle east (this time, in any case)

    6. Gentle_Snail on

      >”We are not joining the US and Israeli offensive strikes. The basis for our decision is the collective self-defense of longstanding friends and allies and protecting British lives,“ he said.
      >

      >.. However, Starmer drew a distinction between the start of the conflict and the current situation, adding: „It is clear that Iran’s outrageous response has become a threat to our people, our interests and our allies, and it cannot be ignored.“

      Starmer was right to refuse to join in the war, and he was also right to then start helping with missile defence after Iran began attacking random countries. 

    8. VardaElentari86 on

      Good. I dont think we should get involved unless it’s in some diplomatic way (not that diplomacy has any effect on Trump or Netanayu)

    9. LungHeadZ on

      I draw the conclusion that our involvement would only stand as a political act. Our help is not needed in the literal sense, that they cannot do it without us.

    10. nu1stunna on

      Such a coward. The Islamic Republic has overrun their country. History won’t look kindly at the UK. They’ve interfered in almost every country when they shouldn’t have, but the one time they should, they throw their hands in the air.

    11. RedBreadRetention on

      Good. I remember the Iraq war, Afghanistan and Libya. How better off are any of those places now?

    13. MenuPerfect35 on

      This is the right decision by the British. The fall out from getting into a full-blown war in Iran especially with talk about Turkey being next is going to be wild. Not to mention there’s millions and millions of muslims in Europe and no doubt there are quite a few sleeper cells and angry young men out there. Don’t let America drag Europe down with them

    14. johnnycyberpunk on

      The way Hegseth has been bragging I don’t understand why they need any other country’s help….

      And the way Trump has been treating our traditional allies I can’t believe any of them would bother regardless.

    16. Different_Net_6752 on

      What MAGA doesn’t understand is that the rest of the world isn’t ever going to trust the United Stars again. 

    Leave A Reply