Last month, Tory MP Mark Pritchard asked in parliament whether Britain “might actually be hitting the wrong target” in the Middle East.

“It might be the case”, he said, “that while we have the best of diplomatic intentions and we do not want to provoke Iran [into] a major conflict with NATO, the US or the UK, putting off that decision now will cost more lives in the future”.

While acquiescing in Israel’s possession of nuclear arms, British ministers repeatedly say that Iran should “never” be allowed to acquire such weapons. They have threatened to consider “all options” if Tehran appears close to doing so.

Over recent months, the British media has also been talking up the prospect of military action against Iran.

Sky News’ military analyst Sean Bell deliberated the utility of “a series of calibrated strikes against Iran”. He added that there is a “limit to how many diplomatic options you’ve got on the table if you want to keep trade flowing”.

Con Coughlin, the Telegraph’s defence and foreign affairs editor, declared that the “West is now at war with Iran and its proxies”, adding we “shouldn’t fear a direct confrontation with Tehran”.

  • iain@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    I can’t really blame them either. If you don’t want to be invaded by the USA and end up like Iraq or Afghanistan, you have to be able to defend yourself.

    • Alsephina@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      And Libya. Giving up their nuclear deterrence and trusting imperial core countries to improve relations with them in return instead of destabilizing and invading them like they actually did was a grave mistake.

      Basically