Smokey and the Bandit

Brother you are missing the whole point!

So this guy Reed, as the Housing Secretary, his job is focused on building 1.5 million new homes, local council funding, and planning reforms. He has no formal role in national security, intelligence, or foreign policy. and no military experience. So why is he even opening his mouth on this subject that he knows NOTHING about! What is more concerning is the the Defense Secretary, John Healey has ZERO military experience either. He never served in the armed forces, nor did he attend Sandhurst. Before entering politics, his career was entirely in the civilian sector—working as a journalist, a disability rights campaigner, and a director for the Trades Union Congress (TUC)......what a mess!

I sense a little bit of sarcasm, in your comment, how ever it does contain some truth!

If a person is a dual nationality, surely they must be able to get 2 passports, one for each country? So what is the problem?

I wonder how long it will take for them to decide? Then if and when they do, will they give some notice, people generally plan ahead?

Ah, the old 'consensus' argument—because nothing says 'competent' like holding a meeting while the world’s oil supply hits a dead short. You call it 'ham-fisted,' I call it a $40 billion diagnostic success. While you’re worried about Japan’s 'feelings,' their PM just left the Oval Office calling Trump her 'best buddy' and signing off on the SMR nuclear deal. Japan isn't 'forgetting' anything—they're pragmatists. They know that a 'polite' president who lets the Strait stay closed is a much bigger threat to their economy than a 'bullying' one who actually gets the tankers moving. I'll take 'incompetent' results over your 'consensus' collapse any day.

Obviously over your head,dude. If being a 'troll' is what it takes to turn a trap question into a $40 billion nuclear deal and a Japanese commitment to help open the Strait, then maybe the 'presidential' types should start taking notes.

The reporter’s question was a trap designed to make Trump look like an unreliable ally for not giving Japan a "heads-up" on the Iran strikes. If he had answered the question "properly" (by talking about intelligence sharing), the reporter would have followed up with five more questions about why he doesn't trust his allies. By asking, "Why didn't you tell me about Pearl Harbor?" Trump instantly reminded the room that Japan’s own military history is built on the necessity of surprise. He essentially said: "You of all people should know that you don't call your friends before a secret mission." It wasn't a non sequitur; it was a case study in operational security delivered as a jab, which made perfect sense!

Yes, I wonder if they will blame Trump or praise him?😊

If the comment was truly a "cultural failure," Takaichi wouldn't have walked away with a $40 billion nuclear reactor deal and a joint agreement on oil stockpiling. In Trump's world, "ribbing" an ally is a sign of inclusion in the "inner circle," not an insult.

Not with that gut!!

Takaichi the Japanese PM can understand and speak English quite fluently, In fact, her English proficiency is a major part of why that Pearl Harbor exchange was so "electric." Because she didn't need the 10-second delay for an interpreter to catch up, she was able to react to his "Pearl Harbor" comment in real-time. That's why her facial expression—the wide eyes and the "icy" stare at the journalist who asked the question! What was so good was Trump processed the reporter's "Japan/Allies" prompt and instantly connected it to the most famous "surprise" in military history. To do that in the high-pressure environment of the Oval Office—with cameras rolling and the Japanese PM inches away—is a level of mental agility that his opponents often underestimate.....EPIC..!!

Correct, but if had insurance and he needed hospital treatment, for example, he should still be covered, but anything to do with flying, like..."he may book a more expensive route that avoids Dubai and attempt to reclaim the cost through travel insurance." he can forget it!

So you can't rebut my comment...fine, just say so. there is no need to deflect!

From the OP "Starmer has maintained that the UK remains a strong partner to the United States but emphasised that decisions would be guided by national interests." ........which means, he doesn't want upset the muslims and lose their vote. So he wants to keep muslim and anti-war voters happy by staying out of the fighting. But by staying out, he allows the Strait to remain closed, which sends gas prices up 131%. Problem is, if he "sits on the sidelines" and the UK starts seeing 50mph speed limits or planned blackouts, the same people he’s trying to "not upset" will be the first to turn on him because they can't afford to heat their homes......sounds like a perfect catch 22? Couldn't happen to a nicer guy?

I don't think so! According to the latest YouGov and Ipsos data from this week, Starmer's net approval rating has plummeted to -51 to -53. Only about 19% of the public approve of his performance, while a massive 72% disapprove. This puts him in the same "toxic" bracket as Rishi Sunak right before he lost the election and is dangerously close to the record lows set by Liz Truss (-70).

You are correct the USA doesn't need the oil, unlike Europe/Japan and others and the UK, who need natural gas. Because of the drone attacks, Qatar (which supplies 20% of the world's LNG) has shut down production. The UK relies heavily on this for heating and power. Starmer seems concerned that this conflict with Iran could escalate into an Iraq type war, he has explicitly mentioned the 2003 Iraq War in several statements over the last two weeks, essentially using it as a shield to justify his caution. Even though Trump, Hegseth, Rubio, JD, Ret Gen Jack Keane, Admiral Brad Cooper and many more have said that the "wider war" scenario is a ghost from the past that doesn't fit the current reality. Starmer is effectively fighting the 2003 war in his head. He’s so determined not to be "Blair 2.0" that he’s willing to risk being called "Spineless" by Trump and "Indecisive" by the Tories.

They also confirmed the killing of Gen. Gholam Reza Soleimani, the head of the Basij (the force responsible for crushing internal protests). There are reports that hundreds of commanders and guards were killed because they were gathered in "makeshift headquarters" and "combat tents" trying to stay off the grid. By hitting these gatherings, Israel effectively wiped out the middle-management of Iran's internal security in one night.

"Any deal with Iran is going to be a lot harder now than it would have been before." I think on any level Iran has shown itself, it is very difficult to deal with? Even the 2015 JCPOA was deeply flawed.

You really must stop watching CNN, it really does rot your brain!. What evidence can you provide for your comment?? Favorability for the U.S. has dropped in many Arab nations over the last few years, but it has remained remarkably high in Iran. The most recent GAMAAN survey (November 2025) found that 53% of Iranians have a favorable view of the United States. Regional Comparison: This makes the U.S. the most liked foreign country in Iran, ranking significantly higher than Russia (16%) or the United Kingdom (18%). In many neighboring countries, the population is actually more anti-American than their government; in Iran, it is the reverse. in "allied" countries like Turkey or Jordan, favorability toward the U.S. is often below 20%. Iran is literally the only country in the Middle East where the majority of the population views the U.S. favorably, despite 45 years of "Death to America" propaganda.

What an absolute load of drivel. Iran is actually one of the most pro-American populations in the Middle East.

Yes indeed that says it all, or maybe even for drawing a cartoon?

Absolutely correct, every President has said at some time or other. Total nine Presidents over 47 years.

President Trump is now sending a third aircraft carrier, the George W Bush to the region. This is the missing piece, to assist in opening up the strait of Hormuz. https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20260307-us-preparing-to-deploy-3rd-aircraft-carrier-to-region-for-strikes-on-iran/ To safely move a "convoy" through the 21-mile-wide Strait, you need at least two destroyers per tanker to intercept incoming "swarms" of drones and missiles. The Bush’s Role: The Bush isn’t traveling alone; it’s bringing a fresh "Strike Group" of Aegis-equipped destroyers. This provides the extra "capacity" needed to finally start the Operation Prosperity Guardian 2—the actual escorting of tankers.

Groups like the Hindu Council UK and Christian Daily International have warned that singling out one group is "counterproductive and divisive." They argue the law should be "even-handed" and apply to all religions equally rather than creating "special" definitions for one. Good point why just single out one group, why not include every religion in the definition?