Will Hutton @williamnhutton · 14h Refusing Trump permission to use British bases in Fairford Gloucestershire, Cyprus and Diego Garcia to mount a unilateral attack on Iran against international law takes some courage. Few mourn the murderous Ali Khamenei. But international law must be kept alive even in dark days
“ Refusing Trump permission to use British bases in Fairford Gloucestershire, Cyprus and Diego Garcia to mount a unilateral attack on Iran against international law’
Is this refusal “hearsay” or is their actual evidence? A lot of news agencies caveat it when repeating it.
There was a lot of weight leaned on HMG by the Gulf states in the last 24 hours. The decision to allow use of UK bases has marginal impact as the US planned without them anyway. Cyprus is handy for air patrol over Jordan and Israel if the US chose to station there and handy for refuelling and US facilities in the UK are already in active use as part of this conflict.
That decision, however, should be seen the in context of the rather negative feedback received from the Gulf states and less about the US leaning on London.
Starmer said only Diego Garcia and RAF Fairford bases to be used by the US.
Did Starmer say that? Or not mention which bases, and poor journalism mentions those two?
All media including the super close to #10 ones are running with this exact statement e.g Pippa Crerar and of course the "BBC Understands"....,
Keir Starmer has given US permission to use UK bases at RAF Fairford and Diego Garcia to launch “defensive” airstrikes against Iran - and destroy its missiles “at source” to prevent them firing across region.
i.e. that is what #10 has told all of them.
There could be reason UK government won’t share with journalists which ones. Journalists could all be “intelligent guessing”. All their “intelligent guessing” could be wrong. Anyhows, the point of this is it’s harder to do the defensive thing on the fireworks whilst they are airbourne, easier to do the defensive thing by blowing them up whilst still in the box, and that idea comes with time pressure - so we can expect to measure activity at Fairfield very soon? Or the activity is at a different base. No activity at Fairfield could also mean the US didn’t come back asking for this, it’s a unilateral gesture/suggestion from UK government.
If they were guessing, they would surely guess Cyrprus, as that has been used loads of times for missions in the Middle East. Also, they all have the same quote word for word, which says #10 told them this is the case.
I firmly believe media quote each other. A story, or rumour, only has to appear in one place, and they all quote it, regardless how dubious it might be.
What made me suspicious in the first place, when the Times first published it, it didn’t come across in the Times story as though told by the UK, it sounded like the US angle. Surely the two countries were in constant discussions at all different levels, I don’t think the first time bases are asked to be used is in a Tuesday night FaceTime between the two leaders. Starmer’s “offer” announced this evening but thrashed out much earlier, sounds voluntary to me, not result from a recent request.
BREAKING: Keir Starmer says the U.K. has given the US permission to use British bases to launch strikes on Iran
weak, weak, weak....
Did he genuinely think that "staying out of it" would work? Given past UK actions, the likes of Iran will still see the UK as part of the evil empire.
He is arguing it is "defensive" not "offensive", so that is the difference now. Pin head dancing.
My Persian friends here in LA tell me there is an old saying there:
"if you stub your toe on a rock, you can be sure an Englishman left it there"
They also tell me that the regime calls the US "the great Satan", and the UK "the little Satan".
Candidly, I'm insulted.
Israel is the Little Satan, shirley.
Nope
The US/UK/Great/Little Satan thing was one of Khomeni’s signature pieces from his death-by-boredom speeches in the 80s.
I demand an upgrade.
If Keir only manages one thing, I would like it to be getting the UK upgraded from "Little Satan" to -say- "Medium-Sized Satan".
The Iranian mullahs have always distrusted the UK, basically they think the Brits are a bit crafty and they dont have to dip far into their own history to get evidence. The Iranians believe there are current links between British Intelligence and arab separatist groups in the Khuzestan region.
Speaking of separatists, I wonder what the Iranian Kurds are upto right now
2) Tell everyone we weren't involved and hope they leave us alone.
3) oh dear, they didn't leave us alone. They're shooting missiles at us.
4) claim that the only way to stop this and protect British citizens is to destroy the missiles at source.
5) allow the Americans to use our bases to destroy the missiles at source.
6) refuse to help destroy the missiles at source, even though we just said destroying them at source is the only way to end the threat to British citizens.
7) tell everyone we're not involved and hope they'll leave us alone.
Correct approach.
Britain should stay as far as possible from the mad king's war because nobody knows what the plan is if such a thing exists and even if it does nobody knows whether that will still be the plan tomorrow.
When attacked as collateral from the said mad king's war the UK response can't really be nothing. But it should be the closest available option to nothing, which is what is described here.
On the plus side The Madness of King Trump should be one heck of a movie in 30 years. I predict 10 Oscars.
There was a lot of weight leaned on HMG by the Gulf states in the last 24 hours. The decision to allow use of UK bases has marginal impact as the US planned without them anyway. Cyprus is handy for air patrol over Jordan and Israel if the US chose to station there and handy for refuelling and US facilities in the UK are already in active use as part of this conflict.
That decision, however, should be seen the in context of the rather negative feedback received from the Gulf states and less about the US leaning on London.
Starmer said only Diego Garcia and RAF Fairford bases to be used by the US.
Did Starmer say that? Or not mention which bases, and poor journalism mentions those two?
All media including the super close to #10 ones are running with this exact statement e.g Pippa Crerar and of course the "BBC Understands"....,
Keir Starmer has given US permission to use UK bases at RAF Fairford and Diego Garcia to launch “defensive” airstrikes against Iran - and destroy its missiles “at source” to prevent them firing across region.
i.e. that is what #10 has told all of them.
There could be reason UK government won’t share with journalists which ones. Journalists could all be “intelligent guessing”. All their “intelligent guessing” could be wrong. Anyhows, the point of this is it’s harder to do the defensive thing on the fireworks whilst they are airbourne, easier to do the defensive thing by blowing them up whilst still in the box, and that idea comes with time pressure - so we can expect to measure activity at Fairfield very soon? Or the activity is at a different base. No activity at Fairfield could also mean the US didn’t come back asking for this, it’s a unilateral gesture/suggestion from UK government.
If they were guessing, they would surely guess Cyrprus, as that has been used loads of times for missions in the Middle East. Also, they all have the same quote word for word, which says #10 told them this is the case.
I firmly believe media quote each other. A story, or rumour, only has to appear in one place, and they all quote it, regardless how dubious it might be.
What made me suspicious in the first place, when the Times first published it, it didn’t come across in the Times story as though told by the UK, it sounded like the US angle. Surely the two countries were in constant discussions at all different levels, I don’t think the first time bases are asked to be used is in a Tuesday night FaceTime between the two leaders. Starmer’s “offer” announced this evening but thrashed out much earlier, sounds voluntary to me, not result from a recent request.
While i agree lots of journalists do this, but for big stories " BBC understands" is never guessing or quoting others, its come from the top
There was a lot of weight leaned on HMG by the Gulf states in the last 24 hours. The decision to allow use of UK bases has marginal impact as the US planned without them anyway. Cyprus is handy for air patrol over Jordan and Israel if the US chose to station there and handy for refuelling and US facilities in the UK are already in active use as part of this conflict.
That decision, however, should be seen the in context of the rather negative feedback received from the Gulf states and less about the US leaning on London.
Starmer said only Diego Garcia and RAF Fairford bases to be used by the US.
Did Starmer say that? Or not mention which bases, and poor journalism mentions those two?
All media including the super close to #10 ones are running with this exact statement e.g Pippa Crerar and of course the "BBC Understands"....,
Keir Starmer has given US permission to use UK bases at RAF Fairford and Diego Garcia to launch “defensive” airstrikes against Iran - and destroy its missiles “at source” to prevent them firing across region.
i.e. that is what #10 has told all of them.
There could be reason UK government won’t share with journalists which ones. Journalists could all be “intelligent guessing”. All their “intelligent guessing” could be wrong. Anyhows, the point of this is it’s harder to do the defensive thing on the fireworks whilst they are airbourne, easier to do the defensive thing by blowing them up whilst still in the box, and that idea comes with time pressure - so we can expect to measure activity at Fairfield very soon? Or the activity is at a different base. No activity at Fairfield could also mean the US didn’t come back asking for this, it’s a unilateral gesture/suggestion from UK government.
If they were guessing, they would surely guess Cyrprus, as that has been used loads of times for missions in the Middle East. Also, they all have the same quote word for word, which says #10 told them this is the case.
I firmly believe media quote each other. A story, or rumour, only has to appear in one place, and they all quote it, regardless how dubious it might be.
What made me suspicious in the first place, when the Times first published it, it didn’t come across in the Times story as though told by the UK, it sounded like the US angle. Surely the two countries were in constant discussions at all different levels, I don’t think the first time bases are asked to be used is in a Tuesday night FaceTime between the two leaders. Starmer’s “offer” announced this evening but thrashed out much earlier, sounds voluntary to me, not result from a recent request.
While i agree lots of journalists do this, but for big stories " BBC understands" is never guessing or quoting others, its come from the top
No. I don’t go along with u-turn based on new legal opinion all made up on the hoof in last couple of days. I wouldn’t be surpised if “we won’t be joining you in offensive capacity, nor can you can use our bases for offensive strikes making us legally culpable, but you can use the bases for defensive strikes” was the clear UK position given to US at every level in every channel many weeks ago, that prompted the US administration planting the bases story in the Times alongside Chagos u-turn on truth social, in pique, but also to pressure “more” from the UK government.
There was a lot of weight leaned on HMG by the Gulf states in the last 24 hours. The decision to allow use of UK bases has marginal impact as the US planned without them anyway. Cyprus is handy for air patrol over Jordan and Israel if the US chose to station there and handy for refuelling and US facilities in the UK are already in active use as part of this conflict.
That decision, however, should be seen the in context of the rather negative feedback received from the Gulf states and less about the US leaning on London.
Starmer said only Diego Garcia and RAF Fairford bases to be used by the US.
Did Starmer say that? Or not mention which bases, and poor journalism mentions those two?
All media including the super close to #10 ones are running with this exact statement e.g Pippa Crerar and of course the "BBC Understands"....,
Keir Starmer has given US permission to use UK bases at RAF Fairford and Diego Garcia to launch “defensive” airstrikes against Iran - and destroy its missiles “at source” to prevent them firing across region.
i.e. that is what #10 has told all of them.
There could be reason UK government won’t share with journalists which ones. Journalists could all be “intelligent guessing”. All their “intelligent guessing” could be wrong. Anyhows, the point of this is it’s harder to do the defensive thing on the fireworks whilst they are airbourne, easier to do the defensive thing by blowing them up whilst still in the box, and that idea comes with time pressure - so we can expect to measure activity at Fairfield very soon? Or the activity is at a different base. No activity at Fairfield could also mean the US didn’t come back asking for this, it’s a unilateral gesture/suggestion from UK government.
If they were guessing, they would surely guess Cyrprus, as that has been used loads of times for missions in the Middle East. Also, they all have the same quote word for word, which says #10 told them this is the case.
I firmly believe media quote each other. A story, or rumour, only has to appear in one place, and they all quote it, regardless how dubious it might be.
What made me suspicious in the first place, when the Times first published it, it didn’t come across in the Times story as though told by the UK, it sounded like the US angle. Surely the two countries were in constant discussions at all different levels, I don’t think the first time bases are asked to be used is in a Tuesday night FaceTime between the two leaders. Starmer’s “offer” announced this evening but thrashed out much earlier, sounds voluntary to me, not result from a recent request.
"I love rumours! Facts can be so misleading, but rumours, true or false, are often revealing!"
There was a lot of weight leaned on HMG by the Gulf states in the last 24 hours. The decision to allow use of UK bases has marginal impact as the US planned without them anyway. Cyprus is handy for air patrol over Jordan and Israel if the US chose to station there and handy for refuelling and US facilities in the UK are already in active use as part of this conflict.
That decision, however, should be seen the in context of the rather negative feedback received from the Gulf states and less about the US leaning on London.
Starmer said only Diego Garcia and RAF Fairford bases to be used by the US.
Did Starmer say that? Or not mention which bases, and poor journalism mentions those two?
All media including the super close to #10 ones are running with this exact statement e.g Pippa Crerar and of course the "BBC Understands"....,
Keir Starmer has given US permission to use UK bases at RAF Fairford and Diego Garcia to launch “defensive” airstrikes against Iran - and destroy its missiles “at source” to prevent them firing across region.
i.e. that is what #10 has told all of them.
There could be reason UK government won’t share with journalists which ones. Journalists could all be “intelligent guessing”. All their “intelligent guessing” could be wrong. Anyhows, the point of this is it’s harder to do the defensive thing on the fireworks whilst they are airbourne, easier to do the defensive thing by blowing them up whilst still in the box, and that idea comes with time pressure - so we can expect to measure activity at Fairfield very soon? Or the activity is at a different base. No activity at Fairfield could also mean the US didn’t come back asking for this, it’s a unilateral gesture/suggestion from UK government.
If they were guessing, they would surely guess Cyrprus, as that has been used loads of times for missions in the Middle East. Also, they all have the same quote word for word, which says #10 told them this is the case.
I firmly believe media quote each other. A story, or rumour, only has to appear in one place, and they all quote it, regardless how dubious it might be.
What made me suspicious in the first place, when the Times first published it, it didn’t come across in the Times story as though told by the UK, it sounded like the US angle. Surely the two countries were in constant discussions at all different levels, I don’t think the first time bases are asked to be used is in a Tuesday night FaceTime between the two leaders. Starmer’s “offer” announced this evening but thrashed out much earlier, sounds voluntary to me, not result from a recent request.
My comment on that is that the Times tends afaics to be the primary source of "Anonymous General (or identified 'expert') says that UK forces are shit" stories of which we see a steady trickle.
On the "they quote each other" - of course, circulation or clicks has been more important than accurate reporting since 2006, or possible 1896 when the Daily Mail started, or before that with the Spectator, Punch and the Georgian pamphlet publishers.
As I noted before, US bases are important for bringing in munitions for a sustained campaign, as they were at desert storm, and Diego Garcia is a secure storage location, unlike the USA Gulf bases.
So yes we need multiple sources and the statement from SKS to be sure.
IMO it is a bad mistake to get caught up in what remains a vanity war by Trump to distract from his political problems. If true, it is a bad decision by Starmer, especially. given our limited defence capability against attack drones.
There was a lot of weight leaned on HMG by the Gulf states in the last 24 hours. The decision to allow use of UK bases has marginal impact as the US planned without them anyway. Cyprus is handy for air patrol over Jordan and Israel if the US chose to station there and handy for refuelling and US facilities in the UK are already in active use as part of this conflict.
That decision, however, should be seen the in context of the rather negative feedback received from the Gulf states and less about the US leaning on London.
Starmer said only Diego Garcia and RAF Fairford bases to be used by the US.
Did Starmer say that? Or not mention which bases, and poor journalism mentions those two?
All media including the super close to #10 ones are running with this exact statement e.g Pippa Crerar and of course the "BBC Understands"....,
Keir Starmer has given US permission to use UK bases at RAF Fairford and Diego Garcia to launch “defensive” airstrikes against Iran - and destroy its missiles “at source” to prevent them firing across region.
i.e. that is what #10 has told all of them.
There could be reason UK government won’t share with journalists which ones. Journalists could all be “intelligent guessing”. All their “intelligent guessing” could be wrong. Anyhows, the point of this is it’s harder to do the defensive thing on the fireworks whilst they are airbourne, easier to do the defensive thing by blowing them up whilst still in the box, and that idea comes with time pressure - so we can expect to measure activity at Fairfield very soon? Or the activity is at a different base. No activity at Fairfield could also mean the US didn’t come back asking for this, it’s a unilateral gesture/suggestion from UK government.
If they were guessing, they would surely guess Cyrprus, as that has been used loads of times for missions in the Middle East. Also, they all have the same quote word for word, which says #10 told them this is the case.
At least we know now why Trump u-turned on his stance towards the Chagos deal. Given that he’s conceded that this operation has been under planning for months, and they clearly need DG for something critical.
From the ABC News Chief Washington correspondent: .
Pres Trump told me tonight the US had identified possible candidates to take over Iran, but they were killed in the initial attack.
"The attack was so successful it knocked out most of the candidates," Trump told me. "It's not going to be anybody that we were thinking of because they are all dead. Second or third place is dead."
I have been laying the Greens most seats to an average of about 10/1, but a controversial war could see them actually do it. They’re 11/2 now, I thought that crazy, but maybe not
They have, to my view, an oversimplified stance on difficult geopolitical issues, but that is the kind of thing most people like, nice and straightforward, and despite the view of many on here the Greens seem to be generally positive regarded by a lot of people, or seen as harmless at any rate, so can easily pick up new voters once they get momentum.
I'm still with my view since way back that the Greens are very good locally, but have never had a realistic head on some national questions.
One thing I do note is the Right (including some on PB) picking up another fake narrative from MAGA. MAGA tries to paint democrats as "an alliance of marxists and islamists", which is now being used by the likes of Matt Goodwin and Farage post the Gorton and Denton byelection.
Goodwin and Farage have started using the "sectarian voting" line as they have referring back to the 2024 Election (which is tricky as Labour did not do well amongst Muslims in 2024), whilst Reform themselves own that description. Goodwin is trying to cover his backside, whilst Farage is groping for a line to get his supporters back in the silo.
Why does the US need UK bases to mount attacks on Iranian rocket sites, when it didn’t need them to assassinate the country’s leadership? Because the former requires heavy bunker-busting bombs?
There was a lot of weight leaned on HMG by the Gulf states in the last 24 hours. The decision to allow use of UK bases has marginal impact as the US planned without them anyway. Cyprus is handy for air patrol over Jordan and Israel if the US chose to station there and handy for refuelling and US facilities in the UK are already in active use as part of this conflict.
That decision, however, should be seen the in context of the rather negative feedback received from the Gulf states and less about the US leaning on London.
Starmer said only Diego Garcia and RAF Fairford bases to be used by the US.
Did Starmer say that? Or not mention which bases, and poor journalism mentions those two?
All media including the super close to #10 ones are running with this exact statement e.g Pippa Crerar and of course the "BBC Understands"....,
Keir Starmer has given US permission to use UK bases at RAF Fairford and Diego Garcia to launch “defensive” airstrikes against Iran - and destroy its missiles “at source” to prevent them firing across region.
i.e. that is what #10 has told all of them.
There could be reason UK government won’t share with journalists which ones. Journalists could all be “intelligent guessing”. All their “intelligent guessing” could be wrong. Anyhows, the point of this is it’s harder to do the defensive thing on the fireworks whilst they are airbourne, easier to do the defensive thing by blowing them up whilst still in the box, and that idea comes with time pressure - so we can expect to measure activity at Fairfield very soon? Or the activity is at a different base. No activity at Fairfield could also mean the US didn’t come back asking for this, it’s a unilateral gesture/suggestion from UK government.
A credible reason for a delay could be to get what drone defences we have in place in Cyprus.
There's nothing to stop Iran sending a Ukraine War style salvo of 100 or 200 Shahed drones at Akrotiri, never mind the one or two possible "sighting shots" we have had. AFAIK the base is not even hardened. The distance is only about 1000 miles.
One hopes that land-based Dragonfire has been under development.
There was a lot of weight leaned on HMG by the Gulf states in the last 24 hours. The decision to allow use of UK bases has marginal impact as the US planned without them anyway. Cyprus is handy for air patrol over Jordan and Israel if the US chose to station there and handy for refuelling and US facilities in the UK are already in active use as part of this conflict.
That decision, however, should be seen the in context of the rather negative feedback received from the Gulf states and less about the US leaning on London.
Starmer said only Diego Garcia and RAF Fairford bases to be used by the US.
Did Starmer say that? Or not mention which bases, and poor journalism mentions those two?
All media including the super close to #10 ones are running with this exact statement e.g Pippa Crerar and of course the "BBC Understands"....,
Keir Starmer has given US permission to use UK bases at RAF Fairford and Diego Garcia to launch “defensive” airstrikes against Iran - and destroy its missiles “at source” to prevent them firing across region.
i.e. that is what #10 has told all of them.
There could be reason UK government won’t share with journalists which ones. Journalists could all be “intelligent guessing”. All their “intelligent guessing” could be wrong. Anyhows, the point of this is it’s harder to do the defensive thing on the fireworks whilst they are airbourne, easier to do the defensive thing by blowing them up whilst still in the box, and that idea comes with time pressure - so we can expect to measure activity at Fairfield very soon? Or the activity is at a different base. No activity at Fairfield could also mean the US didn’t come back asking for this, it’s a unilateral gesture/suggestion from UK government.
If they were guessing, they would surely guess Cyrprus, as that has been used loads of times for missions in the Middle East. Also, they all have the same quote word for word, which says #10 told them this is the case.
At least we know now why Trump u-turned on his stance towards the Chagos deal. Given that he’s conceded that this operation has been under planning for months, and they clearly need DG for something critical.
The B-2 bombers flew from the US, and straight back again afterwards without landing. They would have planned to use DG, instead had to rely on tankers based out of the Azores.
There was a lot of weight leaned on HMG by the Gulf states in the last 24 hours. The decision to allow use of UK bases has marginal impact as the US planned without them anyway. Cyprus is handy for air patrol over Jordan and Israel if the US chose to station there and handy for refuelling and US facilities in the UK are already in active use as part of this conflict.
That decision, however, should be seen the in context of the rather negative feedback received from the Gulf states and less about the US leaning on London.
Starmer said only Diego Garcia and RAF Fairford bases to be used by the US.
Did Starmer say that? Or not mention which bases, and poor journalism mentions those two?
All media including the super close to #10 ones are running with this exact statement e.g Pippa Crerar and of course the "BBC Understands"....,
Keir Starmer has given US permission to use UK bases at RAF Fairford and Diego Garcia to launch “defensive” airstrikes against Iran - and destroy its missiles “at source” to prevent them firing across region.
i.e. that is what #10 has told all of them.
There could be reason UK government won’t share with journalists which ones. Journalists could all be “intelligent guessing”. All their “intelligent guessing” could be wrong. Anyhows, the point of this is it’s harder to do the defensive thing on the fireworks whilst they are airbourne, easier to do the defensive thing by blowing them up whilst still in the box, and that idea comes with time pressure - so we can expect to measure activity at Fairfield very soon? Or the activity is at a different base. No activity at Fairfield could also mean the US didn’t come back asking for this, it’s a unilateral gesture/suggestion from UK government.
A credible reason for a delay could be to get what drone defences we have in place in Cyprus.
There's nothing to stop Iran sending a Ukraine War style salvo of 100 or 200 Shahed drones at Akrotiri, never mind the one or two possible "sighting shots" we have had. AFAIK the base is not even hardened. The distance is only about 1000 miles.
One hopes that land-based Dragonfire has been under development.
UAE alone has shot down more than 500 Iranian drones in the last 48 hours.
They’re cheap ($80k) and plentiful (possibly 50k of them in stock), designed not so much for causing damage on the ground (they don’t have massive warheads), but to exhaust the air defence capabilities of the enemy.
Morning all. Thankfully a quiet night in the sandpit, at least for my little part of it.
Roads are eerily quiet, as schools have been closed and everyone told to work from home where possible today and tomorrow.
I'm pleased that you are safe.
It’s all good, nothing like as bad as Ukraine. In Dubai itself there’s only been a handful of incidents, mostly falling debris. A couple of hits on the airport after it had been closed, and military or O&G facilities.
Local military here all working very well so far.
If anyone does know of anyone in the Gulf, the Foreign Office are encouraging people, especially tourists to register with them.
At the moment there’s some airspace open in Saudi and Oman, and stories of people travelling over land to leave UAE, Bahrain, Qatar. A lot of multinational companies will have well-rehearsed contingency plans for this sort of event, which we all knew would come one day!
This is the Trump playbook to a T. Make up claims of voter fraud and "threats to democracy". Reform have been compliaining about the wrong sort of postal voting for years, but have never produced any actual evidence of fraud. Goodwin didn't lose because of Commonwealth citizens voting. I remain lost what role cousin marriages supposedly played in his defeat.
(Also, Reform have clarified that their policy of only British citizens can vote isn't actually that only British citizens should be able to vote. They want to keep the vote for Irish citizens.)
FFS, why?
Ireland went independent well over a century ago.
Time to end this bullshit.
I imagine one would have to renegotiate the GFA. It is a silly anomaly that citizens of any territory that once belonged to the British empire should have the right to vote here.
The Commonwealth issue is subtly differnt to the Ireland issue, in that Irish citizens are not considered 'aliens', and have the same rights as British citizens.
The former -the Commonwealth issue- is all the more anomolous, in that a British citizen living lawfully in India with a visa has no right to vote there. As far as I am aware, there would be no treaty issues associated with ending the right of Commonwealth citizens to vote, and -simply- if you want to vote... become a British citizen.
Ireland is harder, because I believe we've enshrined the rights of Irish citiziens in the UK in that agreement. It's probably worth revisiting, but feels less .. urgent. One could probably also find a compomise that fits inside the the spirit of the GFA, perhaps allowing Irish citizens resident in Northern Ireland (or vice versa) to continue to exercise the right to vote, while eliminating from those who are not Northern irish.
Yes, in Northern Ireland is reasonable, since that allows both sides to effectively claim it while allowing citizens to choose either.
But in Britain? No, and I don't know of any Treaty issue.
As far as I know its not reciprocal there either. As far as I know, if I moved to the Republic of Ireland I would not be able to vote. If I am wrong and its reciprocal then fair enough, but if it is not it is well past time to end it.
As almost always you are wrong.
British people have the right to reside and vote in the Republic of Ireland.
Any time I am wrong I am prepared to put my hand up and say so, I said "as far as I know" but did not check it. If it is reciprocal, then that is fair enough, and I am happy to take it back and draw a line under it. I was wrong.
The rest of the Commonwealth though should lose their votes. It is not reciprocal with them (unless there's any remaining odd exceptions on a case by case basis).
EDIT: Actually we were both wrong.
British citizens can vote in General Elections, but can not vote in either Referenda or Presidential Elections. So it is a mix of both, a grey area.
Fucking hell @BartholomewRoberts . You went on this rant before and I explained it to you then. You really don’t listen do you? You are so cement headed that even when you’re wrong and have that explained to you you don’t accept it. You just carry on with your prejudices. Link below
It’s not a grey area as we don’t have presidential elections, for obvious reasons, and referenda in Ireland are required to change the constitution which is, again, a requirement we don’t have. Ours are ad hoc.
Also, saying Irish citizens can’t vote in UK elections requires everyone in Northern Ireland to identify (at least impliedly) as British.
Sometimes you are wrong. Just accept it. Passage of time after it having been explained to you doesn’t make you magically right again,
There was a lot of weight leaned on HMG by the Gulf states in the last 24 hours. The decision to allow use of UK bases has marginal impact as the US planned without them anyway. Cyprus is handy for air patrol over Jordan and Israel if the US chose to station there and handy for refuelling and US facilities in the UK are already in active use as part of this conflict.
That decision, however, should be seen the in context of the rather negative feedback received from the Gulf states and less about the US leaning on London.
Starmer said only Diego Garcia and RAF Fairford bases to be used by the US.
Did Starmer say that? Or not mention which bases, and poor journalism mentions those two?
All media including the super close to #10 ones are running with this exact statement e.g Pippa Crerar and of course the "BBC Understands"....,
Keir Starmer has given US permission to use UK bases at RAF Fairford and Diego Garcia to launch “defensive” airstrikes against Iran - and destroy its missiles “at source” to prevent them firing across region.
i.e. that is what #10 has told all of them.
There could be reason UK government won’t share with journalists which ones. Journalists could all be “intelligent guessing”. All their “intelligent guessing” could be wrong. Anyhows, the point of this is it’s harder to do the defensive thing on the fireworks whilst they are airbourne, easier to do the defensive thing by blowing them up whilst still in the box, and that idea comes with time pressure - so we can expect to measure activity at Fairfield very soon? Or the activity is at a different base. No activity at Fairfield could also mean the US didn’t come back asking for this, it’s a unilateral gesture/suggestion from UK government.
A credible reason for a delay could be to get what drone defences we have in place in Cyprus.
There's nothing to stop Iran sending a Ukraine War style salvo of 100 or 200 Shahed drones at Akrotiri, never mind the one or two possible "sighting shots" we have had. AFAIK the base is not even hardened. The distance is only about 1000 miles.
One hopes that land-based Dragonfire has been under development.
UAE alone has shot down more than 500 Iranian drones in the last 48 hours.
They’re cheap ($80k) and plentiful (possibly 50k of them in stock), designed not so much for causing damage on the ground (they don’t have massive warheads), but to exhaust the air defence capabilities of the enemy.
They're tough to deal with, both at source and at the sharp end.
Israeli aircraft now operating in Iranian airspace. US deployed B-2s to strike underground ballistic missile sites. Hearing from US sources Shaheds are so far the most dangerous threat. They’re getting through AD. https://x.com/michaeldweiss/status/2028128216561430896
The greater problem is if the bombardment is months (or years) long, rather than a few days.
And the worst defended base in the region is possibly ours on Cyprus.
This is the Trump playbook to a T. Make up claims of voter fraud and "threats to democracy". Reform have been compliaining about the wrong sort of postal voting for years, but have never produced any actual evidence of fraud. Goodwin didn't lose because of Commonwealth citizens voting. I remain lost what role cousin marriages supposedly played in his defeat.
(Also, Reform have clarified that their policy of only British citizens can vote isn't actually that only British citizens should be able to vote. They want to keep the vote for Irish citizens.)
FFS, why?
Ireland went independent well over a century ago.
Time to end this bullshit.
I imagine one would have to renegotiate the GFA. It is a silly anomaly that citizens of any territory that once belonged to the British empire should have the right to vote here.
The Commonwealth issue is subtly differnt to the Ireland issue, in that Irish citizens are not considered 'aliens', and have the same rights as British citizens.
The former -the Commonwealth issue- is all the more anomolous, in that a British citizen living lawfully in India with a visa has no right to vote there. As far as I am aware, there would be no treaty issues associated with ending the right of Commonwealth citizens to vote, and -simply- if you want to vote... become a British citizen.
Ireland is harder, because I believe we've enshrined the rights of Irish citiziens in the UK in that agreement. It's probably worth revisiting, but feels less .. urgent. One could probably also find a compomise that fits inside the the spirit of the GFA, perhaps allowing Irish citizens resident in Northern Ireland (or vice versa) to continue to exercise the right to vote, while eliminating from those who are not Northern irish.
Yes, in Northern Ireland is reasonable, since that allows both sides to effectively claim it while allowing citizens to choose either.
But in Britain? No, and I don't know of any Treaty issue.
As far as I know its not reciprocal there either. As far as I know, if I moved to the Republic of Ireland I would not be able to vote. If I am wrong and its reciprocal then fair enough, but if it is not it is well past time to end it.
As almost always you are wrong.
British people have the right to reside and vote in the Republic of Ireland.
Any time I am wrong I am prepared to put my hand up and say so, I said "as far as I know" but did not check it. If it is reciprocal, then that is fair enough, and I am happy to take it back and draw a line under it. I was wrong.
The rest of the Commonwealth though should lose their votes. It is not reciprocal with them (unless there's any remaining odd exceptions on a case by case basis).
EDIT: Actually we were both wrong.
British citizens can vote in General Elections, but can not vote in either Referenda or Presidential Elections. So it is a mix of both, a grey area.
Fucking hell @BartholomewRoberts . You went on this rant before and I explained it to you then. You really don’t listen do you? You are so cement headed that even when you’re wrong and have that explained to you you don’t accept it. You just carry on with your prejudices. Link below
It’s not a grey area as we don’t have presidential elections, for obvious reasons, and referenda in Ireland are required to change the constitution which is, again, a requirement we don’t have. Ours are ad hoc.
Also, saying Irish citizens can’t vote in UK elections requires everyone in Northern Ireland to identify (at least impliedly) as British.
Sometimes you are wrong. Just accept it. Passage of time after it having been explained to you doesn’t make you magically right again,
No, but it was 2 years ago. I forgot in that intervening time, sorry.
I did accept it then, and I accept it now. Sorry I forgot a conversation from 2 years ago.
Hezbollah fired a barrage of missiles at Israel after midnight, according to Israeli security officials.
Really? An Iranian backed militia (indeed, arguably Iran's main militia given they have extensive influence in Iran including murdering protestors) has responded to Israel bombing Iran by bombing Israel?
Comments
Is this refusal “hearsay” or is their actual evidence? A lot of news agencies caveat it when repeating it.
If Keir only manages one thing, I would like it to be getting the UK upgraded from "Little Satan" to -say- "Medium-Sized Satan".
What made me suspicious in the first place, when the Times first published it, it didn’t come across in the Times story as though told by the UK, it sounded like the US angle.
Surely the two countries were in constant discussions at all different levels, I don’t think the first time bases are asked to be used is in a Tuesday night FaceTime between the two leaders.
Starmer’s “offer” announced this evening but thrashed out much earlier, sounds voluntary to me, not result from a recent request.
Speaking of separatists, I wonder what the Iranian Kurds are upto right now
Hezbollah fired a barrage of missiles at Israel after midnight, according to Israeli security officials.
https://news.sky.com/story/iran-latest-israel-launches-preventative-attack-defence-minister-says-13509565#11176097
On the "they quote each other" - of course, circulation or clicks has been more important than accurate reporting since 2006, or possible 1896 when the Daily Mail started, or before that with the Spectator, Punch and the Georgian pamphlet publishers.
As I noted before, US bases are important for bringing in munitions for a sustained campaign, as they were at desert storm, and Diego Garcia is a secure storage location, unlike the USA Gulf bases.
So yes we need multiple sources and the statement from SKS to be sure.
IMO it is a bad mistake to get caught up in what remains a vanity war by Trump to distract from his political problems. If true, it is a bad decision by Starmer, especially. given our limited defence capability against attack drones.
Pres Trump told me tonight the US had identified possible candidates to take over Iran, but they were killed in the initial attack.
"The attack was so successful it knocked out most of the candidates," Trump told me. "It's not going to be anybody that we were thinking of because they are all dead. Second or third place is dead."
One thing I do note is the Right (including some on PB) picking up another fake narrative from MAGA. MAGA tries to paint democrats as "an alliance of marxists and islamists", which is now being used by the likes of Matt Goodwin and Farage post the Gorton and Denton byelection.
Goodwin and Farage have started using the "sectarian voting" line as they have referring back to the 2024 Election (which is tricky as Labour did not do well amongst Muslims in 2024), whilst Reform themselves own that description. Goodwin is trying to cover his backside, whilst Farage is groping for a line to get his supporters back in the silo.
There's nothing to stop Iran sending a Ukraine War style salvo of 100 or 200 Shahed drones at Akrotiri, never mind the one or two possible "sighting shots" we have had. AFAIK the base is not even hardened. The distance is only about 1000 miles.
One hopes that land-based Dragonfire has been under development.
Roads are eerily quiet, as schools have been closed and everyone told to work from home where possible today and tomorrow.
They’re cheap ($80k) and plentiful (possibly 50k of them in stock), designed not so much for causing damage on the ground (they don’t have massive warheads), but to exhaust the air defence capabilities of the enemy.
https://x.com/modgovae/status/2028218651292393920
https://x.com/jonkarl/status/2028299468223676673?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
Local military here all working very well so far.
If anyone does know of anyone in the Gulf, the Foreign Office are encouraging people, especially tourists to register with them.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/foreign-office-travel-advice-updates
At the moment there’s some airspace open in Saudi and Oman, and stories of people travelling over land to leave UAE, Bahrain, Qatar. A lot of multinational companies will have well-rehearsed contingency plans for this sort of event, which we all knew would come one day!
Link below
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4816219/#Comment_4816219
It’s not a grey area as we don’t have presidential elections, for obvious reasons, and referenda in Ireland are required to change the constitution which is, again, a requirement we don’t have. Ours are ad hoc.
Also, saying Irish citizens can’t vote in UK elections requires everyone in Northern Ireland to identify (at least impliedly) as British.
Sometimes you are wrong. Just accept it. Passage of time after it having been explained to you doesn’t make you magically right again,
Israeli aircraft now operating in Iranian airspace. US deployed B-2s to strike underground ballistic missile sites. Hearing from US sources Shaheds are so far the most dangerous threat. They’re getting through AD.
https://x.com/michaeldweiss/status/2028128216561430896
The greater problem is if the bombardment is months (or years) long, rather than a few days.
And the worst defended base in the region is possibly ours on Cyprus.
I did accept it then, and I accept it now. Sorry I forgot a conversation from 2 years ago.
I'm shocked. Shocked, I tell you.