this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2026
24 points (100.0% liked)

United Kingdom

6801 readers
209 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

British Prime Minister Andy Burnham has approved the US use of some UK bases for "defensive" air strikes on Iran, in a continuation of a policy introduced by his predecessor Keir Starmer, Bloomberg News reported on Wednesday.

According to sources who spoke to Bloomberg on condition of anonymity, Starmer held a meeting of senior ministers and officials on Friday, in which it was decided that US planes could continue to use bases at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean and RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire.

The sources said that Burnham was briefed on the discussion and agreed with the decision, confirming that he would likely continue Starmer’s policy throughout the renewed US operations.

The decision comes as US bombardment targeted cities across Iran for the 11th consecutive night, with Iranian media reporting explosions in cities including Bushehr, Tabriz and Chabahar and in the provinces of Kurdistan and Ilam.

[...]

But Burnham's continuation of Starmer's policy of allowing American use of British airbases is likely to face backlash, as UK rights groups previously warned that the move could violate international law.

Starmer announced his policy in early March, arguing that the bases were to be used for defensive purposes.

He later confirmed that the agreement would be expanded to allow for the US to launch strikes from UK bases on Iranian sites targeting the Strait of Hormuz - also invoking "collective self-defence" of Gulf state allies as a legal basis for the decision.

Human Rights Watch's UK director, Yasmine Ahmed, wrote to the prime minister, highlighting that the government’s legal justification for the move failed to mention issues related to international humanitarian law (IHL).

She cited a number of instances which have raised questions around US compliance with IHL, including an air strike on Shajareh Tayyebeh primary school in the southern Iranian city of Minab, at the start of the US-Israeli assault on 28 February. Over 150 people were killed in the attack, most of them children.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] blackn1ght@feddit.uk 2 points 11 hours ago

No I don't because that's not how our democracy works. We don't vote directly for the PM, we vote in a local representitive and they vote for the leader of the party. It's either a misundestanding or just being dishonest to say that they're unelected. They were elected by their constitutency and elected again by whatever mechanism the party uses.