Iranian National Team

Iranian football team decline to sing national anthem before match
Iran's women's football team declined to sing their national anthem before their opening match of the Asian Cup in Australia last night.
In their first fixture since the war in the Middle East began, the team stood silently, facing straight ahead, while the anthem was played.

Apart from the Islamic Republic every citizen in Iran must want this evil regime wiped out. Even the neighbouring countries do too but for obvious reasons keep quiet. Mark Rutte supports the strikes too including other NATO countries. The biggest supplier by far of lethal drones to Russia so the Ukrainians must be pleased too.

You can?t make it up that Two Tier is his usual gutless self and don?t expect any favours back in return! At least Kemi has the backbone to stand up for what is right!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baggieal

Iranian football team decline to sing national anthem before match
Iran's women's football team declined to sing their national anthem before their opening match of the Asian Cup in Australia last night.
In their first fixture since the war in the Middle East began, the team stood silently, facing straight ahead, while the anthem was played.

Apart from the Islamic Republic every citizen in Iran must want this evil regime wiped out. Even the neighbouring countries do too but for obvious reasons keep quiet. Mark Rutte supports the strikes too including other NATO countries. The biggest supplier by far of lethal drones to Russia so the Ukrainians must be pleased too.

You can?t make it up that Two Tier is his usual gutless self and don?t expect any favours back in return! At least Kemi has the backbone to stand up for what is right!

---

Is it wrong what Starmer is doing though?

Trump still hasn't explained what the purpose is of this campaign? Is it to wipe out nuclear threat, or is to kill the leader of Iran, or is it something else all together?

What's the succession planning? Who's to say that an even more hardliner Islamic leader replaces the old one who is even worse. Then the threat is even greater. Let's be honest - America's intervention in foreign countries in modern times has been awful.

I think Starmer has probably got it right, let the US use our bases but don't get involved. Its not like Trump does us many favours, he does whatever he likes - and we've pandered to him more than anyone. Yet he still imposes tariffs on us and threatens his own allies for Greenland.

Trump isn't exactly going into Iran to save their people. He's someone we need to keep onside, but equally keep at a distance. The guy is deranged and I would rather we don't get into bed with him unless we have no other option.

Trump can Fu(k off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WBA123

Is it wrong what Starmer is doing though?

Trump still hasn't explained what the purpose is of this campaign? Is it to wipe out nuclear threat, or is to kill the leader of Iran, or is it something else all together?

What's the succession planning? Who's to say that an even more hardliner Islamic leader replaces the old one who is even worse. Then the threat is even greater. Let's be honest - America's intervention in foreign countries in modern times has been awful.

I think Starmer has probably got it right, let the US use our bases but don't get involved. Its not like Trump does us many favours, he does whatever he likes - and we've pandered to him more than anyone. Yet he still imposes tariffs on us and threatens his own allies for Greenland.

Trump isn't exactly going into Iran to save their people. He's someone we need to keep onside, but equally keep at a distance. The guy is deranged and I would rather we don't get into bed with him unless we have no other option.

Trump can Fu(k off.

---

Now hold on a minute - all these people bleating how the USA does not do enough over Ukraine but they are pummelling the most evil regime in the world who supplied thousands upon thousands of drones to Russia. Should they have left Iran to it to keep supplying Russia? Everybody apart from the Islamic Guard want this regime gone including all their own people and neighbouring countries. The US are doing the world a favour.

You say someone more evil could take over! Possibly but won?t be easy with all their military infrastructure flattened like a pancake!

Starmer would not even let the US use our airbases at first FFS. Other NATO countries who have balls have come out in support of the strikes!

Only our left wing government, the greens! Lib lemons and a deranged Corbyn could object. What use anyway would the UK be with one sole warship which can shoot down drones?

Starmer can do one the wet lettuce and yes he?s a laughing stock. For a lawyer he does not come across very bright and it?s a joy to see Kemi who is much brighter running circles around him!

I hope the evil regime is dust and what a joy to see ordinary Iranians celebrating the death of that old evil fart!

Tend to agree with 123 on this one. Trump and his administration have both made seemingly contradictory statements about the cause of the initial strike but it does seem that US Intel was that Israel were planning their own operation and that the response from Iran would very likely be to attack not just Israel but also Israeli allies, including, of course, US bases and facilities in the area. Trump then decided to get in first to limit such attacks. Netanyahu has come out and denied that he could possibly influence Trump (leaning into the Orange One's vanity by declaring him the greatest and most powerful world leader in the process) but I think most of us know that he is also a lose cannon when it comes to making his own decisions.

I don't think many would mourn the extremist clerical regime in Iran-including very many of its own people-and Iran poses very real terrorist threats to Western nations and fears around them developing nuclear capabilities are certainly not unfounded but Starmer is making the point that regime change should not come from the skies and that lessons should be learnt from Iraq.

Trump didn't go to Congress as he should have done before declaring war and so he has breached both US and international law. The US liberal late night tv shows of Kimmel, Stewart and Colbert, whilst all acknowledging the genuine danger Iran poses, were also all full of clips of Trump making contrary statements about Iran over the last few years. If you think the tool makers son makes too many U-turns, you should watch those!

Moreover, Trump seems to have no idea whatsoever as to what follows next, how long this now very regional war in the Middle East will last or how stability could be gained. Heggseth promised no more "woke" wars, no more long term US involvement in "nation building" in other countries as Trump himself fluctuated between talking of it being all done in 3-4 weeks and then talking of US military might being able to support the conflict indefinitely (whilst getting a dig in at Biden for allowing too many higher spec US weapons to be used by Ukraine against best buddy Vlad).

In the meantime, yes, legitimate military and terrorist targets are being hit, but so are increasing numbers of innocent civilians. No-one seems to know what will happen now that this has been ignited, let alone Trump. I believe that Starmer is only trying to put the UK on the right side of this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baggieal

Now hold on a minute - all these people bleating how the USA does not do enough over Ukraine but they are pummelling the most evil regime in the world who supplied thousands upon thousands of drones to Russia. Should they have left Iran to it to keep supplying Russia? Everybody apart from the Islamic Guard want this regime gone including all their own people and neighbouring countries. The US are doing the world a favour.

You say someone more evil could take over! Possibly but won?t be easy with all their military infrastructure flattened like a pancake!

Starmer would not even let the US use our airbases at first FFS. Other NATO countries who have balls have come out in support of the strikes!

Only our left wing government, the greens! Lib lemons and a deranged Corbyn could object. What use anyway would the UK be with one sole warship which can shoot down drones?

Starmer can do one the wet lettuce and yes he?s a laughing stock. For a lawyer he does not come across very bright and it?s a joy to see Kemi who is much brighter running circles around him!

I hope the evil regime is dust and what a joy to see ordinary Iranians celebrating the death of that old evil fart!

---

I'm not saying the Iranian leadership isn't bad. I am saying that.

But you can't just drop bombs on a country without having a plan - this is exactly what this feels like is happening.

We shouldn't just blindly follow America into wars, and particularly not when this orange freak is in power.

As for Kemi running rings around Starmer - Jeez. I'm not exactly a super fan of Starmer, but I am glad he's in the hotseat here and not any of the other party leaders right now.

The thought of the Islamic thugs in Iran getting their hands on a nuclear weapon horrifies everyone; now is possibly the last opportunity to stop that happening. You can’t keep ignoring evil regimes that threaten other countries and our own freedoms. Trump may well be an obnoxious individual but that doesn’t mean that he is always wrong. Iran should have been stopped years ago, as should Russia have been when they invaded Crimea in 2014. War is awful but eventually, a stand has to be taken against those that pose a threat to our way of life. As for Starmer, he’s utterly useless, I would go as far to say that he is a coward, certainly unfit to be our PM.

I'm certainly not denying the dangers or hatefulness of the Iranian regime but just query the reason for Trumps actions on Saturday. All the reports I have read indicated that the talks over nuclear capabilities had stalled but none suggested that Iran was planning to attack either the US or allies including Israel. Trump had also, of course, recently crowed that previous US strikes on Iran's nuclear development facilities had completely obliterated them.

It is undeniable, however, that Iran actively supports both Hamas and Hezbollah and their attacks on Israel and this seems the more likely cause of the current attacks. Netanyahu was going to get in strikes against those targets whether in Iran or Lebanon and so Trump followed suit fearing that such Israeli attacks might endanger US bases/ facilities through retaliation by Iran. The question is whether this assumption would have been the right one or are there other factors at play here? They may have been legitimate targets for Israel but were they really for the US?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kettering_baggie

The thought of the Islamic thugs in Iran getting their hands on a nuclear weapon horrifies everyone; now is possibly the last opportunity to stop that happening. You can?t keep ignoring evil regimes that threaten other countries and our own freedoms. Trump may well be an obnoxious individual but that doesn?t mean that he is always wrong. Iran should have been stopped years ago, as should Russia have been when they invaded Crimea in 2014. War is awful but eventually, a stand has to be taken against those that pose a threat to our way of life. As for Starmer, he?s utterly useless, I would go as far to say that he is a coward, certainly unfit to be our PM.

---

Who would you choose instead? Enlighten me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kettering_baggie

The thought of the Islamic thugs in Iran getting their hands on a nuclear weapon horrifies everyone; now is possibly the last opportunity to stop that happening. You can’t keep ignoring evil regimes that threaten other countries and our own freedoms. Trump may well be an obnoxious individual but that doesn’t mean that he is always wrong. Iran should have been stopped years ago, as should Russia have been when they invaded Crimea in 2014. War is awful but eventually, a stand has to be taken against those that pose a threat to our way of life. As for Starmer, he’s utterly useless, I would go as far to say that he is a coward, certainly unfit to be our PM.

---

Good reasoned post! So those who bleated about the lack of US help in Ukraine even though they contribute more to Ukraine as a percentage of their GDP than anyone - are now condemning the US for flattening the terror infrastructure and the many thousands of drones supplied to Russia. You can?t make it up!

F uck international law when this regime murdered 12,000 of their own innocent people and have contributed to killing thousands of Ukrainian civilians.

I hope the US tell Starmer to do one on any help on Ukraine now!

As it is - the UK have one warship that can shoot down ballistics or drones. One 😭😭😭. We really are a power and he upsets our greatest ally. The other NATO countries are not so stupid including Rutte!

Starmer will not have wanted to get involved or give permission to use our bases to avoid upsetting certain voters. Yet again 😂

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baggieal

Good reasoned post! So those who bleated about the lack of US help in Ukraine even though they contribute more to Ukraine as a percentage of their GDP than anyone - are now condemning the US for flattening the terror infrastructure and the many thousands of drones supplied to Russia. You can?t make it up!

F uck international law when this regime murdered 12,000 of their own innocent people and have contributed to killing thousands of Ukrainian civilians.

I hope the US tell Starmer to do one on any help on Ukraine now!

As it is - the UK have one warship that can shoot down ballistics or drones. One 😭😭😭. We really are a power and he upsets our greatest ally. The other NATO countries are not so stupid including Rutte!

Starmer will not have wanted to get involved or give permission to use our bases to avoid upsetting certain voters. Yet again 😂

---

"even though they contribute more to Ukraine as a percentage of their GDP than anyone"
This is not true, I doubt they are even in the top 10.

"F uck international law"
Says it all

"I hope the US tell Starmer to do one on any help on Ukraine now!"
Wouldn't this hurt Ukraine far, far more than it would us?

You're letting your hatred of Starmer confuse you Al and you're making incoherent points.

What is the overall goal for this war? Because it won't bring regime change. Yeah, the military infrastructure of Iran has been hit, great. But if there's no regime change they could just spend the next few years building that back up again. I'm just trying to work out the logic of it all.