Trump’s renewed criticism of the Chagos deal is reportedly because he is being blocked from using UK bases for a strike on Iran.

Donald Trump has withdrawn his backing for Sir Keir Starmer’s Chagos Islands deal because he has not received UK approval to use its military bases for a US strike on Iran, it has been reported.

The US president attacked the agreement to hand sovereignty of the islands to Mauritius and lease back the Diego Garcia joint UK-US military base as “a big mistake”.

His latest U-turn on his previous support for the deal is because of the UK Government’s refusal to give the White House the green light to use the Diego Garcia base or RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire for a potential military campaign against Iran, according to the Times.

  • MrSulu@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    What could possibly go wrong? The short victorious “war” rallies citizens, especially those who the nationalistic (MAGA / NRA). It diverts from domestic issues like employment, the economy, ICE raids etc. It allows low scrutiny and speedy legislation changes. All at the low low cost of lives and future threats of retaliation.

    • supamanc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      And remember how we treated the Afghani’s who helped the coalition during that war? Yeah, there will be absolutely no local support this time round.

      • plyth@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        there will be absolutely no local support

        You sure? Iran itself was eager to work with the US when Obama lifted sanctions. It’s just business. People know and don’t take it personal. After Syria, people in Iran know that they won’t get democracy. And yet they are doing some revolting.

        • supamanc@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Yeah. The US and UK abandoned those natives who supported them on the ground in Afghanistan, left them to fend fo themselves after the Taliban took control. Seeing that, why would and Iranians put themselves in the firing line to support the US?

            • supamanc@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              46 minutes ago

              There is a difference between a (somewhat) (maybe) spontaneous protest the the wider community is involved in, and treason. Supporting a foreign power in an invasion is going to get you and your entire extended friends and family group executed after a stay being tortured in a dungeon.

              • plyth@feddit.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                19 minutes ago

                Addressing an estimated 250,000 people in Munich, Reza Pahlavi - who has called for the overthrow of Iran’s Islamic regime - denounced a crackdown on recent protests there

                https://feddit.org/post/25854413

                Some people want the Shah back.

      • phaseshift@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        10 hours ago

        A petty note, but an important one… afghani is the currency not the people. They don’t like being called that.

        Source: spent a year there with some friends