Macron: Trump air strikes against Iran ‘illegal’
Not enough is the answer to that question.
For there does come a point when the other question is “You and whose Army, Matey?”
Macron: Trump air strikes against Iran ‘illegal’
Not enough is the answer to that question.
For there does come a point when the other question is “You and whose Army, Matey?”
Opération Harmattan was the French participation in the 2011 military intervention in Libya.
Ayez l’air d’un écureuil !
(“Look, a squirrel!” – for those that can’t be bothered with a translator).
I’m pretty sure chopping people’s arms off is also illegal but, you know, *the French* . . .
Not enough:
Armee de Terre
118,600 active personnel
23,000 reserve personnel
Embarrassing for the country that invented la levee en masse. At least Britain has the excuse of being an island.
Mr Macron likened Iran’s territorial integrity to that of Ukraine
That’s Iran fucked, then.
and warned that the idea of regime change through foreign intervention was “a mistake, not to say a fault, and it has never led to greater stability”.
What, like in Syria? Wonder how the free and democratic pro-Western Syria is doing, now that Assad and the Russians have been sent packing… I’m expecting good things after Macron gave the Western backed coup his blessing – Macron hails fall of ‘barbaric’ Assad regime in Syria
At least 22 people have been killed after a suicide bomber opened fire at a church in Syria – and then detonated an explosive vest.
Oh.
Where’s PJF? I have questions.
At some point these European ‘leaders’ will realise the Donald doesn’t give a fuck what they think. Just like the rest of us…….
Is slapping a diminutive French president also illegal or just being playful.
I understand he and his Generals have offered Trump their advice on how to make a run for cover look like an “orderly strategic retreat”. Sometimes you just have to call in the experts…
And then we find that “illegal” can be a remarkably flexible concept:
https://archive.ph/OqJtg
“But international standards have changed since Putin launched his onslaught against Ukraine in 2022, and landmines turn out to have their uses after all.”
Mmm. I can think of some other circumstances in which International standards have also changed. I wonder what Lord Hermer would say?
“Cheese-eating surrender monkeys”…
Norman – oh dear, these people are maroons:
One ardent supporter was Lord Robertson, the co-author of Britain’s latest defence review. As defence secretary in 1998, he condemned landmines as neither “morally correct or militarily useful”
The claimed military uselessness of landmines was a flat out lie in 1998, but it was a lie that temporarily made our betters feel good, and that’s all that matters. So they rewarded him by letting him write the latest Strategic Defence Review. World class!
Ofc, the Western media also habitually lies, even when those lies are unnecessary and stupid. That’s how you know we’re the good guys:
Ukraine provides a tragic illustration of this inescapable truth. Over 20 years ago, the country ratified the Ottawa Convention and destroyed most of its landmines. Yet thousands of square miles of Ukrainian territory have been contaminated with these weapons anyway by the Russian invaders.
The Russians must be furious at the Russians for plonking millions of landmines in the way of the Russians and blowing up all those Russian tanks. Bloody Russians, they ruined Russia!
Talk is cheap. Macron is most likely lobbying for French influence and arms sales to whatever survives or emerges from the wreckage of Iran. Given the long connection between France and the Mullahs, he might be out of luck if Iran’s future is secular. It’s possible the French might even interfere on behalf of the Mullahs in any power struggle, in which case the Mossad has my blessing to murder some of them.
– I have questions.
It works better if you actually ask them, old chap.
. . . and blowing up all those Russian tanks.
Anti-tank mines weren’t part of the Ottawa Convention so Ukraine used them effectively from the get go. Their use of “problematic” anti-personel mines is relatively recent, following Russian use of them from the get go. No matter who wins whatever parts of Ukraine, children will be being blown up for decades.
If Robertson thinks landmines are militarily useless I invite him to stroll gaily through any area which some military or other has attempted to deny via the use of anti-personnel mines. He’d look better without legs or balls, anyway. (Though I assume he lost the latter a while ago, if he ever had them.)
One does wonder whether the Frogs have got rid of all the mines from WW2 yet.
I do understand that part of the area drenched with shells in WW1 has been more or less abandoned.
BB: The “Red Zone” is indeed abandoned, and enforced through laws. I recall the Germans had to carefully navigate through it on their excursion to Paris in 1940, and we also did on the return leg in 1944.
I do understand that part of the area drenched with shells in WW1 has been more or less abandoned.
Belgian farmers often turn up unexploded WW1 shells when they’re ploughing. They stack them neatly on the edges of their fields for the bomb disposal guys to deal with. Some of them may be filled with mustard gas.
PJF – It works better if you actually ask them, old chap.
Ah, there you are, old boy. What’s your opinion on red wine with grilled sole?
PS – imma let you finish, but the Red Grant / James Bond train fight was the BEST OF ALL TIME
Anti-tank mines weren’t part of the Ottawa Convention so Ukraine used them effectively from the get go. Their use of “problematic” anti-personel mines is relatively recent,
I don’t think that’s true at all. From the looks of things, both sides were very realistic about the obvious defensive utility of landmines from the very start. (If you don’t sow your antitank mines with AP variants, infantry could just walk over the minefield). The media keeps telling us lies of all shapes and sizes meant to demonise the Russians and lionise the Little Russians.
You might be thinking of NATO/Ukraine’s decision to use cluster munitions – which are particularly nasty child-killers because they get everywhere and look like plastic toys – against the breakaway regions of Ukraine? Which they did because NATO ran out of better munitions, not in response to anything Russia did. But it’s not really important, just a small observation.
No matter who wins whatever parts of Ukraine, children will be being blown up for decades.
Quite. Rather a foolish war, eh? We should stop it.
So, my questions are these: given the events of the last 24 hours, where President Trump appears to have successfully bullied Israel and Iran into a ceasefire (!!!), what are your thoughts on the Orange Man’s foreign policy now?
And given the catastrophic human disaster the West inflicted on Syria by bringing the retarded inbred head-choppers, clit-snippers and church-burners of ISIS back to power, has your view on the munificence of “Western alliances” evolved at all?
Not trying to be a dick or nothing (that’s just my natural personality), I’m interested in your opinion specifically because you were quite vociferous and eloquent in your views, and seemed quite pessimistic about the whole thing. But I think there’s reasons to be cautiously optimistic? If not even cheerful.
You are correct on the anti-personnel mines usage timing, and my mixup with clusters. Your description of cluster munition use “against the breakaway regions of Ukraine” is typical Steve/Russian hype; Ukraine uses them on the Russians everywhere they fight the Russians. The Russians use them on Ukranians similarly.
– Rather a foolish war, eh? We should stop it.
It’s a perfectly sensible war for Russia if we let them win it. I suggest we turn it into a foolish misadventure for them, though I suspect Trump has different plans from “THE BOSS”.
. . . what are your thoughts on the Orange Man’s foreign policy now?
You might remember that a couple of days ago I predicted Trump would force a ceasefire on Israel. They’ll now get the Ukraine treatment. Why Trump wants to snatch a victory* for the Iranian Mullahs from the jaws of defeat is an interesting question. Perhaps it’s just his peculiar cringe vanity, but the result benefitting Russia yet again cannot be ignored. Not convinced it’s entirely Trump’s foreign policy.
* Yes, surviving is a victory for them. It’s actually being celebrated in the streets.
– has your view on the munificence of “Western alliances” evolved at all?
No, it is still imperiled.
Oh, you meant the touchy feely liberal definition of “munificence” rather than the means of defense one. I don’t give a shit about that. We’re better than most, and that’s nice, but you’re never going to be goody-two-shoes in any alliance with France.
This is irrelevant to Syria. The removal of Assad wasn’t a Western regime change adventure like Lybia; the Syrian overthrow was a mix of internal revolts and Turkish interference. It happened in spite of the American presence not because of it (now the Yanks are shipping out). The Syrian Transitional Government isn’t pretty by our standards but it is very far removed from ISIS or the chaos in Lybia. It is at peace with its neighbours and isn’t a conduit for Iranian terror. Your description is wrong. The recent church outrage is noteworthy in its noteworthiness. Jihadist mass murder isn’t unknown in our country, is it?
PJF – apologies in advance if this is slightly disordered, migraine:
Your description of cluster munition use “against the breakaway regions of Ukraine” is typical Steve/Russian hype; Ukraine uses them on the Russians everywhere they fight the Russians. The Russians use them on Ukranians similarly.
Is it hypier than the MSM trying to make you believe The Evil Ruzzians are the source of all evil in the Ukraine war? The Ukrainians are/were merrily using cluster munitions against civilians in Belgorod and Kursk, the Russians only started using them in this conflict because NATO/Ukraine did.
That was my point on the landmines – the media can’t resist giving us a Narrative, rather than the truth. Irl, Ukraine aren’t the Goodies, they have released far too many videos of themselves committing war crimes for that. But Westerners are served an insulting childish narrative as if the war was a Harry Potter film.
It’s a perfectly sensible war for Russia if we let them win it. I suggest we turn it into a foolish misadventure for them, though I suspect Trump has different plans from “THE BOSS”.
Ah, so we’re going with the “stranded Japanese soldier who doesn’t know Hirohito surrendered 20 years ago” approach of winning the war.
3 and a half years is not enough to test your theory about “defeating Russia “? Dude, the Ukraine war has now lasted almost as long as WW1 and 2.
This is irrelevant to Syria. The removal of Assad wasn’t a Western regime change adventure like Lybia; the Syrian overthrow was a mix of internal revolts and Turkish interference.
Uh huh. What’s that river that runs through de Egypt called?
The Syrian Transitional Government isn’t pretty by our standards but it is very far removed from ISIS or the chaos in Lybia. It is at peace with its neighbours and isn’t a conduit for Iranian terror. Your description is wrong
Austere religious scholars, every one.
Oh, you meant the touchy feely liberal definition of “munificence” rather than the means of defense one.
I mean literally. Generosity implies we want good things for our unlucky “allies”, not ISIS (which was always a Western puppet) or To The Last Ukrainian.
Jihadist mass murder isn’t unknown in our country, is it?
So why do you support the regime that brought Mussulmen here to replace you and rape your kids? I, by contrast, hope they lose every war and the Russians kill them all x
You might remember that a couple of days ago I predicted Trump would force a ceasefire on Israel. They’ll now get the Ukraine treatment. Why Trump wants to snatch a victory* for the Iranian Mullahs from the jaws of defeat is an interesting question. Perhaps it’s just his peculiar cringe vanity, but the result benefitting Russia yet again cannot be ignored. Not convinced it’s entirely Trump’s foreign policy.
I see. Peace in the Middle East, as in Ukraine, is a bad thing, you want more bloodshed, and anybody who disagrees is a Russian patsy? Sound about right? Would you be /happier/ if people were still dying in airstrikes tho? Probably not, right?
I’m very encouraged by President Trump’s foreign policy wins, and hope we get peace for a change. We should be thinking of ways to make money, not kill each other. For example, I have a business idea that is going to make me and you richer than Croesus:
Gaza Strip Club
From the river to the sea, lapdances and parking’s free
This time next year, Rodders.