Typical americans. They didn't invite any straight Brits to the Epstein orgies, and now they want us to cooperate? If they don't want us to shag together, then we won't fight together. Screw the yanks. Their orgies are <deleted> anyway (only slightly better than the Greeks). Italian orgies are much better.

6 hours ago, Roadsternut said:

The Prince of Wales is not "out of action".

Until yesterday, it was effectively out of action due to planned maintenance on its flight deck.

As of today, Sunday, March 8, 2026, the status has shifted from "maintenance" to "Advanced Readiness."

But whatever its too little and far too late!

10 minutes ago, Smokey and the Bandit said:

Until yesterday, it was effectively out of action due to planned maintenance on its flight deck.

As of today, Sunday, March 8, 2026, the status has shifted from "maintenance" to "Advanced Readiness."

But whatever its too little and far too late!

And that is also what Trump has just said.

This is typical Starmer pandering to the Muslim vote. He'll be gone soon, and after the next election, so will the Labour party.

3 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Why do you assume Muslim immigrants in the US are not involved in the "war"?

4 hours ago, Purdey said:

Nice to see the muslim immigrants in the USA are not involved in the war. Fully expected then to be at one point.

Muslims DO NOT CARE about right or wrong; they will just side with Muslims.

Truth or justification, etc., is ALWAYS TRUMPED by the fact that they choose the Muslim side, which is usually the wrong choice!

Can you blame him not trusting that spineless Muslim loving wet wipe. Did you see him with the Palestinian guy. Christ they were nearly humping each other. Disgusting

5 hours ago, Smokey and the Bandit said:

Until yesterday, it was effectively out of action due to planned maintenance on its flight deck.

As of today, Sunday, March 8, 2026, the status has shifted from "maintenance" to "Advanced Readiness."

But whatever its too little and far too late!

Based on what you read in an article written by a spotty 20 year old. Getting sick of these pseudo-Patriots like you continuously denigrating the Armed Forces at every opportunity.

Its far too <deleted> late, because unlike Reagan, Bush, this President didn't bother to consult with allies about what on earth he was doing. He just regards us as vassals and real estate.

British forces should only be used to defend and protect British interests. America has been reckless in exposing 300,000 Britons to harm and death. They don't care, and are in cahoots with the marxist MEK, because they are just so dumb. Its going to be the ruin of all of us.

1 hour ago, Roadsternut said:

Based on what you read in an article written by a spotty 20 year old. Getting sick of these pseudo-Patriots like you continuously denigrating the Armed Forces at every opportunity.

Its far too <deleted> late, because unlike Reagan, Bush, this President didn't bother to consult with allies about what on earth he was doing. He just regards us as vassals and real estate.

British forces should only be used to defend and protect British interests. America has been reckless in exposing 300,000 Britons to harm and death. They don't care, and are in cahoots with the marxist MEK, because they are just so dumb. Its going to be the ruin of all of us.

Oh dear,

The HMS Prince of Wales was officially on 14-day notice for maintenance until just yesterday, March 7, when it was finally moved to "Advanced Readiness" at five days' notice. Pointing this out isn't denigrating the troops; it’s identifying a clear failure of political foresight. If Starmer had prioritized readiness on February 28, the ship wouldn't have been caught halfway through a maintenance cycle while the Middle East was already under fire.

The claim that the U.S. failed to "consult" the UK also falls apart under scrutiny. In reality,

Starmer was consulted and chose to opt out of the initial February 28 strikes, explicitly denying the U.S. permission to use British bases like RAF Fairford and Diego Garcia for offensive missions.

He insisted on a "legal review" to avoid being complicit in what he called "regime change from the skies," effectively telling our closest ally "no" during the most critical opening hours of the conflict.

Trump’s anger isn't because he treats the UK as a "vassal," but because Starmer acted like a reluctant bystander while American and Omani interests were being targeted.

Furthermore, the argument that Starmer is "defending British interests" by staying out of it is a dangerous reversal of the truth. It is Iranian drones and missiles that have spent the last week hitting the airports and hotels where 300,000 Britons are currently trapped.

By refusing to join the preemptive strikes aimed at "blinding" Iranian launch sites on Day 1, Starmer arguably left those British citizens more exposed to the retaliatory drone swarms that hit Cyprus and Bahrain shortly after.

The current "deep hole" the UK finds itself in isn't a result of U.S. recklessness; it’s the direct consequence of a Prime Minister who chose legalistic hand-wringing over the immediate protection of his own people and allies.