Posted on 10/25/2012 5:16:42 PM PDT by markomalley
The British government rejected U.S. requests to use military bases in the United Kingdom as part of a build-up in the Gulf, citing legal concerns that a pre-emptive strike on Iran would violate international law, The Guardian reported.
Citing unnamed U.K. officials, the Guardian reported that the United States has made informal requests for access to British bases in Cypress and British territories in the Atlantic and Indian oceans as part of contingency planning for Iran.
But British ministers have responded with legal advice from the U.K. attorney general’s office that says Iran does not currently represent “a clear and present danger.”
As a result, providing assistance to U.S. forces potentially involved in a strike on Iran would violate international law, according to the Guardian.
“The UK would be in breach of international law if it facilitated what amounted to a pre-emptive strike on Iran," said a British defense official. “It is explicit. The government has been using this to push back against the Americans.”
The Obama administration has not made a formal request to the British government for military access. U.K. officials said they did not believe there was any movement toward a conflict, but that the United States was exploring the “British position” on the use of bases.
Pentagon officials did not immediately respond to request for comment on the report. A U.S. State Department official told the Guardian: "The U.S. and the U.K. co-ordinate on all kinds of subjects all the time, on a huge range of issues. We never speak on the record about these types of conversations."
The Obama administration says it wants a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear dispute, although President Obama has said he will not rule out using military force to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
Iran insists that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only, while the United States and its allies suspect Iran is seeking nuclear weapons.
Lost one. The other was a draw.
And I am related to Alexander Hamilton btw, and would have been a ‘rebel’ in 1776. British stupidity and arrogance both caused and lost that war (a war that was deeply unpopular with the British public and press btw, which is never mentioned, many British had sympathies with the American ‘rebels’)
I like America, I was just getting fired up and firing back at the posts last night.
Dont read too much into it.
p.s the British are not subjects. Thats a common misconception.
Only 4%,and they are threatening your country.Getting Sharia law in some places.
Your 4% Muslims soud a lot like our 1% Homosexuals.
Getting away with far too much for their presence.
I might say that you are becoming the 4%’s b*tch, but that wouldn’t be nice.
You might remember though that Chamberlains policies didn’t work for Britain in WW2, and his polocies won’t work with Iran now. Your country can ignore the threat for now by being alledgedly neutral, but one day it may not turn out well.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2950481/posts
Thought you might like to read this, That 4% seems to be running things.
And yes, I know there were many in Britain that supported the rebels. That's part of the reason why Franklin was successful - he had open ears in many halls in Britain and France.
BTW, I've been to Scotland and the UK probably 30 times in the last five years. Our international office is right off Trafalgar Square. I was fortunate enough to see the trooping of the colours in Green Park and that was spectacular.
Geller is a nutter, and the story is crap.
The EDL are feeding her nonsense. If the story was true, any EDL story is frontpage news in the UK, I can assure you. And it hasnt been.
Time will tell. Keep letting them gain strength.
Please learn about your subject matter before mouthing off.
There was a constant flow of equipment and intelligence information to your Brits from the United States during the Falklands War. We also provided secret bases of operation and transshipment for you. I just happened to be a part of that assistance program.
You are a second world country depending upon the United States for your defense and protection. Please accept your place in the world. Queen Victoria is long dead, and the Empire’s sun now sets on Scilly.
I am with the UK.
Don’t let Obama have his October Distraction
Alright, you got me there. :-) So on to other questions. How can we resume nationalism for each of our western culture countries—proper nationalism based on good deeds? Or will we continue to consume our own while allowing environmentalist, political regulators to crush remaining production on the soils of our own countries? I’m assuming that “empire” is over and done—that we are through with having communist/other slaves in eastern and southern cultures to produce for us.
I know my subject.
I didnt say America didnt help (maybe you should try reading), I said it has been exaggerated. By that, I mean there has been an argument that the American help tipped the balance, and that we couldnt have won the war without it.
A badly flawed argument, and one, that with American ignorance, ignores that the US wasnt our only ally in 1982, but one of several, from Chile to S Africa, France to Australia and NZ.
No, we not have an Empire, but we dont rely on America, sorry to disappoint. We are one of the few European/Western countries that didnt/doesnt rely on America. But we didnt rely on in 1950 or 1980 or now. It was and is great having you as an ally, but dont think the UK relied on the US from 1945 or does now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.