Britain rejects US request to use UK bases in nuclear standoff with Iran

reply to post by mr-lizard


I don't doubt that insurance firms and the like have ways and means to continue their business, but that is still a few shades away from actually buying the Oil. The massive drop in Iranian oil output in the past year is evidence enough that we're not buying up their oil and many others are also following through.

Originally posted by babybunnies

However, in the day of aircraft carriers and stealth bombers with flying distance of thousands of miles, why does the USA need to use european bases for an airstrike on Iran?

For the very reason they won't allow Israel to greenlight on Iran, because America knows that they won't win that war. Within days American casualties will shoot through the roof, USA has Iran surrounded. Iran has more targets than the USA.

And then a retaliatory attack against Israel would spell disaster for everyone really.

The UK are not allowing the USA to scapegoat them this time.

Originally posted by TheMaverick
You left out Shah Deniz project is actually in the caspian sea, the pipeline will run through Azerbaijan.

I guess we both have different opinions on the subject, so were have to disagree, and its late so i'm off to bed.

Indeed, it is in the Caspian inside Azerbaijan territorial waters. NIOC (National Iranian Oil Company) simply hold a 10% stake. It isn't Iranian Oil, however. That is the only reason it was exempted, because this would have been caught in the crossfire owing to the Iranian stake in the project, despite not actually being an Iranian project.

reply to post by stumason

As for your British quip, we still pump a fair amount of Oil and Gas, with new fields being explored. We actually pump around 1 million barrels of oil a day, roughly the same as Texas.

My British quip ? what you on about ?, I'm a born and bred Englishmen and very patriotic, you think i enjoy the fact we have next to nothing in gas and oil production.

Lower North Sea oil production is one reason for Britain's weak economic recovery and makes it harder for Osborne to balance the books, British acute energy dependency is here.
The coal mines have closed, the older nuclear power stations are on their last legs, the gush from the north sea is well over and squandered.

We import more gas and oil then we produce, alone speaks volumes and production been reducing by 17% every year, i know you like to argue the toss, and you simply refuse to accept major western oil companies are still doing business with iran despite sanctions, there are so many loopholes in the oil and gas industries.

Noor Energy, Petro Suisse, Petro Energy and Hong Kong Intertrade have already been exposed as front companies for the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) doing backdoor business this summer with the western oil companies.

So as i already said, i guess we have to disagree on this issue, you think Briton oil industries is in good shape, i think its bottomed out, you think the western oligarch's abide by these sanctions implemented on iran, i don't.

As i already said before, western oligarch's work under a different set of rules and laws to the rest of us they are a law unto themselves.

My original stances stands, UK needs to secure cheap oil/gas imports or were screwed for lack of a better word.

Thanks thats somewhat refreshing.
Surely a number of our troops will be please to know their efforts will not be spread on continuous revolving door of some (fill in the blank_) agenda!
Because many in the mobilized national guard attachments, did not sign up for that!

∞LOVE
mayallsoulsbefree∞

This is just an excuse for the US to move more naval air platforms to the area... Think about it..

The UK has been betrayed, sold out, ripped off and outright abused by the US for years.

I welcome the news that we will not be helping them and their tiny little blot on humanity lapdog Israel in their unjust and evil persecution of Iran.

Transcribed from Video in this Thread~


"You, the United States military, are the single most powerful fighting force ever assembled in the history of the world.
We, the free people of this nation, need your help in bringing down the fascist plutocracy that has usurped power, and to awaken our right and true Constitutional Republic.
When the time comes, you will be asked to assist in surrendering the sovereignty of this country over to the United Nations.
You either stand with the free people of this planet or you stand with the New World Order.
There is no middle road.
Now is the calm, yet there is a mighty storm coming to the shores or this nation.
If we band together, we can stand firm and hold our ground.
If we stand on opposing sides of the battlefield, then we will have civil war, and the blood of millions shall be shed.
All while 'THEY' sit in safety and smile at the genocide.
The choice is yours...
STAND WITH US!
It is time to take the ring of power to Mount Doom...
...and set the people free from oppression and tyranny.
Your actions will now echo in eternity... "

seems pertinent!

∞LOVE
mayallsoulsbefree∞

The last two world wars were started by Germany...in recent decades the threat of Europe cannibalising itself again..is just about unthinkable...due to greater unity..plus NATO, witch has basically made Europe one country in many respects, by default.
Therefore there is little threat to the UK from foreign countries...especially ones in the middle east..we no longer have an overseas empire that would make justifiable and easy targets...so as long as the UK...and the rest of Europe stay out of the invasion business...or empire building...there really is no threat from overseas...
Britain should consolidate with Europe further and have greater leadership in Europe..and be done with the USA once and for all. The USA is a law unto itself...and Europe with Britain as a central player, should set up as a new superpower to challenge America and China. Id even be happy to join the European union with Russia to become the number 1 super power. This is more the direction Britain should be heading in..keep you own neighborhood together instead of trying to kiss up to a distant relative across the Atlantic...I think everyone can see the direction the USA is heading in with the TSA and executive orders...more like the old soviet union than what I thought America stood for...without Britain and Europe and NATO as go to allies for middle eastern empire building and pipelines..which profit only the USA and Israel...then America might think twice before saber rattling... remember a world war three can only happen if Europe joins in...So bearing this in mind..its time Europe said No more.

Since when does England worry about International Law?

England seized the entire island of Diego Garcia and had ships come in and take allllll the people who lived there and dumped them off on hostile shores where they met their final fate. Death.

England did that illegal act violating all sorts of laws so America and England had a place to launch strikes from.

Worried about International Law....LOL! Using those cargo freighters off the coast of Argentina as aircraft carriers for a sneak attack was absolutely brilliant!!

Originally posted by LeatherNLace
In no way do I doubt the veracity of the OP source; however, I must ask....why would the US need to base nuclear weapons in the UK when the US could easily base them in Israel; a much closer and relevant geopolitical position?

Because if or when Israel get's it's insane wet dream of the West doing it's dirty work for it in Iran, there won't be an Israel left to launch the nukes from.

Iran doesn't need nukes to wipe out a small area like Israel...1000's and 1000's of devastating medium range missiles, sent in a continuous volly will completey destroy the entire place, even the Israeli missile shield won't stop the majority of them getting through.

This will not be like Iraq, lobbing the odd Scud missile here and there and being fairly easily taken out by Patriot or a similar system...this will be 100's, probably 1000's launched at a time, continuously until there are no more to launch...no anti-missile system, however good would be able to deal with something like that.

And Israel know it too. The 'nuclear accusations against Iran' are a red herring, always have been. If anyone deserves to be sanctioned / invaded under UN weapons regs, it's Israel, not Iran.

reply to post by Pervius


Diego Garcia had no permanent inhabitants when discovered by the Spanish explorer Diego García de Moguer in the 16th century and was settled as a French Colony in 1793.

The BRITISH Government Bought the Archipelago, which includes Diego Garcia, from the self-governing colony of Mauritius for £3 million to create the British Indian Ocean Territory. The Islands were depopulated involuntarily in 1971, but UK and Mauritian governments agreed in 1972 that 1,151 individuals would recieve compensation payments as exiled Ilois, however this hasn't happened yet, surprise surpirse. It was all done legally and above board however there is the moral issue of displacing people, it's still a far cry from your claim it was stolen.

Originally posted by Pervius
Since when does England worry about International Law?

England seized the entire island of Diego Garcia and had ships come in and take allllll the people who lived there and dumped them off on hostile shores where they met their final fate. Death.

England did that illegal act violating all sorts of laws so America and England had a place to launch strikes from.

Worried about International Law....LOL! Using those cargo freighters off the coast of Argentina as aircraft carriers for a sneak attack was absolutely brilliant!!

Let me guess, some vague ancestor who came from Ireland, now use any excuse to hate England although England hasn't existed for 400 years or more?

reply to post by Pervius



Island of Diego Garcia

Wow. they didn't teach us that in my school here in England. In fact your post is the first Iv heard of this place.

Originally posted by ThePeopleParty
reply to post by Pervius

 

Wow. they didn't teach us that in my school here in England. In fact your post is the first Iv heard of this place.

That's because it didn't happen.

I'm almost expecting Pervius to come back with some sort of ramble about Northern Ireland, but I'm ready for that.

reply to post by Rebroadcast


Realy? Iv just edited my post with a link but only read half way through it my self at the moment.

The guy who wrote the article, John Pilger has twice won Britain's Journalist of the Year Award.

reply to post by Pervius

Worried about International Law....LOL! Using those cargo freighters off the coast of Argentina as aircraft carriers for a sneak attack was absolutely brilliant!!

Well, what little credibility you had left went out the window with this little beauty.

It's nearly 8,000 miles from the UK to The Falklands.
The Task Force sailed there in full and open view of everyone - it could hardly be called a sneak attack now could it?
And the UK was open about it's use of several merchant navy vessels as transport and hospital ships.

And you conveniently fail to mention the FACT that the Task Force wouldn't have been required if Argentina hadn't illegaly invaded another nations sovereign land in direct contravention of International Law and then attempted to deny people their Right To Self-Determination again in breach of International Law and convention.

Did your post have any other purpose other than to spew anti-UK bile and bigotry with little regard for veracity and accuracy?

ETA
To be fair though and to add some balance - it has to be said that the Diego Garcia incident wasn't the UK's best moment in history and the government of the day showed a complete disregard for the wishes of the islanders and to be perfectly honest treat them quite disgracefully.

Originally posted by antonia
reply to post by Trolloks

 

Lol, they didn't seem to care about international law when the U.S. went after Iraq. I don't think it's any high-minded moral reason. The simple fact is getting involved in Iran would start a bigger mess and they want no part of that.

Also... the illusion of going after the bad guy still worked in the 90s and early 00s. It doesn't anymore.

In general politicians can't afford not to listen to their people because we are so focused after all the bull# they pulled off in Iraq, Afghanistan and northern Africa.

The people don't agree on a pre-emptive strike against a country who's population does NOT want to destroy the world. They are people just like us... with equally as insane and puppeteered leaders.

Originally posted by Pervius
Using those cargo freighters off the coast of Argentina as aircraft carriers for a sneak attack was absolutely brilliant!!

You obviously haven't done any research on the subject. SS Atlantic Conveyor wasn't used as an 'aircraft carrier' and neither was she deployed 'just off' Argentina. Atlantic Conveyor was used to transport Harriers and helicopters to the South Atlantic in order to be off-loaded to HMS Hermes and HMS Invincible. As per the plan all the Harriers and Sea Harrier were off loaded onto the carriers.

Sneak attack. Are you serious? The Argentines up until late May 1982 were deploying Argentine Air Force Boeing 707s on reconnaissance of the Task Force.

Image links from Argentine Air Force Boeing 707 during the reconnaissance missions against the Task Force.

img156.imagevenue.com...

img171.imagevenue.com...

Image taken from the Sea Harrier of the Argentine 707 at following link.

www.spyflight.co.uk...