“Starmer is No Churchill”: Trump Ramps Up Attack on PM
Donald Trump tonight launched a fresh attack on Sir Keir Starmer, saying “This is not Winston Churchill we are dealing with”, as he slammed the Chagos surrender deal once more. The Mail has more.
The US President delivered a withering verdict on the Prime Minister as he continued to fume at Sir Keir for failing to back US and Israeli strikes on Iran.
Speaking in the White House, Trump said he was “not happy” with Britain as he hit out at the PM’s initial block on the US using UK bases to launch attacks on Tehran.
In an apparent reference to Diego Garcia in the Chagos Islands, the US President said: “That island… it’s taken three, four days for us to work out where we can land there.
“It would have been much more convenient landing there as opposed to flying many extra hours, so we are very surprised.”
Referring to Britain’s war-time PM, a bust of whom sits in the Oval Office, Trump added: “This is not Winston Churchill that we’re dealing with.”
The US President went on to criticise the UK’s approach to the “stupid island” as he issued a fresh blast at Sir Keir’s bid to cede sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius.
“This is not the age of Churchill. I will say the UK has been very, very uncooperative with that stupid island that they have, that they gave away and took a 100-year lease,” he told reporters in the Oval Office, as he sat alongside German Chancellor Friedrich Merz.
“Having to do with, perhaps, indigenous people claiming the island that never even saw the island before. What’s that all about? They ruin relationships, it’s a shame.”
Worth reading in full.
“That stupid island that they gave away and took a 100-year lease…” Really hoping this apparent defeatism and use of the past tense isn’t Trump backing down from kiboshing the deal.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Mene, mene, tekel, parsin.
See the Book of Daniel for details …
Hopefully for Starmer?
I hope it gives Starmer a slap before moving on.
Vaguely on topic, I was discussing Trump with a colleague. To give her credit she does engage and doesn’t get personal, but FFS. She appeared to be concerned about his bellicose tendencies. I pointed out that US Presidents have form in starting wars, probably most or all of which have ended up killing more people than any conflict Trump had initiated. Then she changed tack – it’s not the wars, apparently, it’s the way he speaks to people unkindly…we’re screwed!
TDS. You can’t fix stupidity.
I doubt she thinks of herself as left wing, definitely not a socialist, probably votes Tory, but she likes her “conservatives” to be cuddly and caring.
So ‘not’ real conservatives of old then!
The fake ones, yes
I must admit, I found Trumps initial support of Starmer incredible.
he could have saved himself a load of blather if he’d listened to the British people.
Look up the phrase: damning with faint praise.
Then consider he is “complimentary” about and to all those who badmouth him and of whom he clearly is contemptuous.
It’s a technique which makes him look a reasonable, generous man ratter than badmouthing people.
22:098 Chris Mason on BBC News just supported Starmer and justified his atrocious behaviour. Good to have an impartial broadcaster, just think if it was biased.
#1 item on BBC news page right now is the BBC sharing what the Iranian people are telling them about how terrible it all is… while Iran is launching missiles into the surrounding countries and doing the same thing?
Apparently some are countering by saying that Trump is no FDR.
Thank goodness for that! History has been unduly kind to FDR.
FDR was still prevaricating over which winner to back after Churchill had asked him to “give us the tools and we’ll finish the job”. FDR may have authorised supply of some out-dated weaponry (for which Britain was still paying off into the present century) but only entered the War when Pearl Harbor was attacked and then in Europe after Germany declared war on the USA. The same FDR who was naive to Stalin bugging his hotel suite in Yalta, despite warnings from Churchill.
Yes, but, to be fair he then agreed to to the Germany first policy for the strategic direction of the war.
Which was crucial for us.
The big difference is Iran is not just America’s problem and at the moment we rely on the USA for defence.
FDR adopted Mussolini’s State interventionist policies, created the New Deal prolonging the Great Depression by about a decade, during which people starved because they could not afford the price of food guaranteed to farmers under the New Deal.
He connived with Stalin behind Churchill’s back at Yalta to give Eastern Europe, including Poland whose sovereignty the UK went to war over, plus half of Germany to the evil dictator and Communist USSR.
Like a stopped clock, Starmer may be right twice a day and I agree he shouldn’t get us involved. We have a pathetic armed forces capability and can do little other than get British soldiers killed. Also, the Americans and Israelis are further destabilising an already unstable region and we should have no part of it.
I think they’re doing a necessary job the mullah armed with nuclear weapons would be much worse prospect than without them.
Obviously a long war followed by “nation building ” needs to be avoided like the plague, but Iran is not Afghanistan.
Bibi has been saying the Iranians are about to get a nuke for decades. Reminds me of the WMD squirrel. However, wouldn’t blame them as only nukes seems to be a barrier to an invasion.
They have spent billions on the nuclear weapon programme. They’re not doing that for fun. You appear to be in comfortable denial by assuming it will never happen.
Also, they have spent billions on the ballistic missile programme with ever increasing ranges. Then they have funded proxy military all around the Gulf and have attacked dissidents all around the world. And finally they recently murdered 15,000+ of their own citizens in cold blood.
Iran was undoubtedly building itself up to strike when it felt the moment it was right. It may have been some smaller Gulf States first, or further afield.
Ignoring them, won’t make them go away.
What has it got to do with bankrupt Britain. We would have been better off sorting out energy and food security and not importing a benefit sink population. We are not the global hegemonic power, that’s what the US thinks it is. Still, by destabilising the Middle East they are well on the way to creating a rival power in Israel in the coming decades, that’s if they don’t get their arses handed to them. A lose lose.
Food security? Have you ever heard of the Strait of Hormuz?
Because we would DEFINITELY be one of the targets. They don’t refer to the UK as “Little Satan” for nothing.
With regard to energy, food security and benefit sink population, I am in full agreement. We are wasting £10 billions on the NZ energy scam and far more on endless benefits and associated fraud.
However defending ourselves against Iran and sorting out stuff on the home front aren’t mutually exclusive.
“Death to Britain” cry the Iranians and that’s fine with you. America wants our support and we should give it.
Sticks and stones .. who cares. If they are involved in operations to actually destabilise our government you might have a point.
Honestly, it seems you need to catch up with events.
Read and watch a little more widely that the MSM.
Like it or not we ARE involved.
Iran has attacked British bases on Cyprus; the cowardly Legal Android in No.10 had made no preparations for an attack and is doing SFA to defend OUR territory.
The only decent point made so far. Defensive capabilities should have been built up. Who knows what enemy may take a pop. If we cannot afford to defend sovereign territory it really isn’t sovereign and should be given to those who can.
Who, Americans? They could have defended us but Starmer’s put that in doubt now.
So Iran and its terrorist clients – funded by $billions – have not been destabilising the region since 1979, have been at war with the US, Israel and UK since?
Starmer makes Neville Chamberlain look like Mike Tyson
At least Chamberlain bought us time to arm.
This is aimed at duplicitous shill: Megyn Kelly, but goes out to all the ”It’s not our war” peeps; ”MEGYN, YOU VERBOSE, SELF-RIGHTEOUS BITCH… You sit there in your studio, hair perfectly coiffed, spewing this limp-dicked “America First?” horseshit like you’ve ever smelled cordite or watched a brother’s body bag zip up in real time. Trump didn’t order the strike on that turbaned cockroach Khamenei because he’s some neocon glory-hound chasing Israeli approval. He did it because he’s the only adult left in the room who understands predatory pathology and the iron laws of war. Iran isn’t a “nation-state with grievances,” you psychologically illiterate twit…it’s a death cult with state power. Khamenei and his mullah mafia are textbook malignant narcissists fused with apocalyptic Shi’ite eschatology: they literally believe chaos and martyrdom accelerate the Twelfth Imam’s return. That’s not strategy; that’s a suicide pact wearing a turban, and chasing goats. They’ve screamed “Death to the Great Satan” since 1979, funded every proxy that’s killed Americans from Beirut to Baghdad to Benghazi, and were weeks away from nuclear breakout while Biden’s handlers jerked off to “diplomacy.” Trump saw the board: Decapitate the head of the snake before the fangs sink into CONUS.… Read more »
Aimed at the wilfully ignorant, smug, superior hypocrites who have lost all power of reason and now stand as equals with the nihilists. The enemy within and much much harder to defeat.