
Iran is a direct threat to Britain — Israel's fight is ours too
Too many politicians treat the world like a student union. Abstract, simplistic and completely disconnected from reality. The world is not a debating club. It is a dangerous place where power matters, where democracy is fragile and where enemies don't play by the rules.
That's why we need to be clear: supporting Israel is not just right — it is necessary for our own national security. Israelis are at the front line in the fight for the West and for our shared values.
First, Iran is a direct threat to the UK and has been for years. Our security services have stopped multiple Iranian terrorist plots and assassination attempts on UK soil. Its ballistic missiles can reach Europe. We should support any ally that seeks to damage Iran's nuclear programme and eliminate the threat posed by the terror-exporting Revolutionary Guards.
Anti-British sentiment is almost as central to the ayatollahs' deranged ideology as their obsessive hatred of Israel and the United States. They use the term 'Little Satan' interchangeably to refer to both the UK and Israel.
Iran uses influence through mosques, schools and fake charities to radicalise and corrupt our own population: taking advantage of our democracy to advance its theocracy.
• Iran's 'insidious propaganda network' on British soil revealed
Second, Iran and Israel are not moral equivalents. Israel is a vibrant democracy that protects women and minorities and encourages them to vote, speak and dissent. In Iran women are brutalised by a theocratic dictatorship. Their ability to travel and work is restricted. They are beaten for showing their hair. Tortured for asking questions. Executed for demanding freedom.
Anyone who can't see the difference between a liberal democracy and a terrorist regime needs to spend less time on social media and more time understanding reality.
When Iran launched its latest barrage of missiles, it didn't target military installations. It targeted city centres. High rise housing. Hospitals. Civilians. This is a war crime, plain and simple. No excuses. No spin. And still, we have western politicians giving copy-and-paste statements as if this were a playground spat between equal players in a 'cycle of violence'.
Israel's response, in contrast, is surgical. It decapitated Iran's offensive capabilities with extraordinary precision and minimal civilian casualties. Images of holes made by guided bombs in the sides of flats occupied by specific regime operatives are testament to Israel's values. When Iran attacks, millions of Israelis hide in bomb shelters. When Israel attacks, Iranian dissidents record the impact against regime targets and cheer.
Military strategists will be studying this campaign for decades as a model for how to defend your people without losing your moral compass and in compliance with international law.
Israel has a right to defend itself. Iran has been openly committed to the destruction of Israel for decades. Through its proxy, Hamas, the regime orchestrated the murder of 1,200 people on October 7 and has said it would do it again. Any democracy facing such an existential threat from a genocidal regime would and must act to defend itself.
Most Arab nations understand this; some say it openly. Many ordinary Iranians bitterly oppose their regime which for 46 years has been robbing them of their future. They know that Israel is not the problem. They condemn violence, yes, but they have no time for the delusions of the western left. They've had enough of people in Islington pretending to speak for Gaza while doing nothing for peace.
• Inside the Iranian opposition, from a rapper to the Shah's son
But of course, the usual crowd in Britain and beyond rushed to condemn Israel. They ignore the facts. Because it's not really about Israel — it's about their own moral posturing.
While Israel takes on the arrayed enemies of the West, fighting terrorism on multiple fronts, and facing Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis and Iran at once, their so-called allies condemn them.
Nigel Farage warned that 'Israel is running out of friends', while sharing discredited Hamas death toll figures to show 'why the international community struggles'. The SNP and Liberal Democrats offered vague, hand-wringing commentary with zero understanding of the world we live in. But we are up against ideologues armed with drones, not dinner party dilemmas.
Most egregious of all is the weak and morally deficient Labour government, continually singling out Israel for punishment for daring to exercise its right to self-defence.
While our ally faces an existential threat and takes on our enemies, Keir Starmer and David Lammy vacillate and equivocate, and Lord Hermer imposes his own interpretation of international law.
This moral cowardice hurts us as a nation. It damages trade ties, harms vital intelligence co-operation with Israel which keeps us safe, drives a wedge between us and our allies and empowers an Iranian regime that views Britain as its enemy. This is not what responsible governments do.
Due to this Labour government's hostility towards Israel, bilateral relations have deteriorated to such an extent that Britain was not even informed about the attack on Iran. We are no longer trusted and are viewed as unreliable. Lammy's confused antics diminish us on the global stage.
A strong nation is clear about its interests and the threats it faces. Labour does not have the moral clarity to see this. Their vision is blurred by Starmer's inability to make up his mind on anything, and his political need to pander to foolish views. It is this same weakness that drives them to undermine and surrender core British interests in the Chagos Islands.
Support for Israel is not about sentiment. It's about security, sovereignty and survival. We stand with Israel because it shares our values. Because it defends itself against terrorists who have their sights on us, too. Because if we don't stand with democracies under attack, we embolden those who hate everything we stand for. And what we see now is a weak UK emboldening its enemies.
The attack on Israel is part of a broader assault on Western values. An assault on free, democratic countries from an axis of authoritarian states. Their fight is our fight.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Guardian
32 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Netanyahu praises 'awesome and righteous might' of US strikes
Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has delivered a short speech praising Trump's strikes on Iran. Published to his social media account, Netanyahu said the action would 'change history'


The Guardian
37 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Trump's inner circle shifted view to support limited, one-off strike on Iran nuclear sites
Donald Trump's move to bomb three nuclear sites in Iran came as those inside his orbit who were opposed to US intervention in the conflict shifted their views in favor of a limited and one-off strike. The US president had been under immense pressure from Republican anti-interventionists not to engage in any action against Iran out of concern that the US might be dragged into a protracted engagement to topple Iran's leadership, or that strikes on facilities might have limited success. Some advisers both inside and outside the White House tried to dissuade him from becoming entangled in what they characterized as a conflict started by Israel. They initially suggested the US could continue to help Israel with support from the intelligence community. But in recent days, as Trump increasingly considered the prospect of strikes and told advisers he had no interest in a prolonged war to bring about regime change, some advisers shifted their public arguments to suggesting the US could do a quick bombing run if Israel could do nothing further. The evolving views gave Trump some cover to order a bombing run that targeted the three nuclear facilities in Iran. A US official said on Saturday that the strikes were complete, the B-2 bombers used in the raid were out of Iranian airspace and no further follow-up attacks were planned. However, the strikes will inevitably be seen by some as a victory for hardliners in the US who have pushed for a tough stance on Iran, a firm backing of Israel's attack on the country and direct US military involvement in that effort. The US strikes in the end were limited to Iran's nuclear uranium-enrichment sites at Natanz and Fordow, the facility buried deep underground that is seen as the most difficult to take offline, and a third site at Isfahan, where Iran was believed to have stored its near-weapons-grade uranium. It was unclear whether the bombing run did enough damage to set back Iran's ability to acquire a nuclear weapon, and whether Iran had already moved the weapons-grade uranium out of the Isfahan laboratory as some officials suggested. Trump appeared to view the bombing run as comparable to his drone strike to assassinate Gen Qassem Suleimani of Iran, one of his proudest accomplishments from his first term and one he mentioned repeatedly at campaign rallies, despite his denouncements of US military action in the Middle East. Like he did after the Suleimani operation, Trump posted a giant graphic of the American flag on his Truth Social account shortly after he described the bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities as 'very successful' in a post announcing details of the operation. The comparison appeared to be an additional effort to underscore his intentions that he does not want a wider war with Iran and was only focused on the necessary steps to ensure Iran could not develop a nuclear weapon. Whether that hope plays out could depend on large part on how Iran interprets the strikes and its ability to retaliate. If Iranian leaders perceived them to be limited, it could lead to a more measured response. But if seen as too disproportionate, and with little to lose, Iran could open frontal attacks on numerous US bases in the region.


Daily Mail
38 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Bill Maher calls for Democratic party to take action after Whoopi Goldberg's outrageous comments on The View
Bill Maher criticized Whoopi Goldberg and The View after the co-host compared life for Black Americans to the conditions faced by women under Iran 's oppressive theocracy. The Real Time with Bill Maher host called for the Democratic party to 'do something' about the popular daytime talk show after the major media figure's controversial comments. On the Friday episode, Maher, 69, initially praised what he called a return to 'sanity' by Democrats, pointing to a recent New York Times editorial that took a more measured liberal stance. 'We were talking about the trans[gender] issue before, and The New York Times really has come over on that to the sensible, liberal, not crazy woke position,' he said. 'A great first step to bringing the Democrats back to sanity,' he added before calling for a reform for the hit show. '... and a second would be we gotta do something about The View,' the longtime comedian continued. Goldberg, 69, initially sparked backlash during a heated exchange with co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin on Wednesday that saw her compare life for Black Americans to that of women in Iran. The Real Time with Bill Maher host called for the Democratic party to 'do something' about The View (pictured) after the major media figure's controversial comments Griffin, 35, outlined Iran's severe human rights abuses, including the execution of LGBTQ individuals and the imprisonment of women for appearing in public without head coverings. Goldberg pushed back, saying, 'Let's not do that, because if we start with that - we've been known in this country to tie gay folks to the back of a car. I'm sorry, they used to just keep hanging Black people.' Griffin responded, arguing that the situations in Iran and the US are not comparable. Wesley Hunt, a US Representative from Texas who was a guest on Maher's Friday evening broadcast, rejected Goldberg's characterization, pointing to his own life as a sign of progress. 'My district in the great state of Texas is actually majority white and was carried by President Trump by 25 points,' Hunt said. 'I'm a direct descendant of a slave - my great-great-grandfather was born on Rosedown Plantation. I am literally being judged not by the color of my skin, but by the content of my character.' Hunt emphasized the significance of his election: 'That's progress - because a lot of white people had to vote for me. A lot. So I don't ever want to hear Whoopi Goldberg conversation about how it's worse to be Black in America right now.' He also pointed to his family's story as a reflection of how far the country has come, noting that his father, who grew up under Jim Crow, is now the parent of a US congressman elected in a majority-white district - as a Republican. 'That's America,' Hunt said. During the segment, CNN contributor Paul Begala referenced Juneteenth - the national holiday commemorating the end of slavery - and questioned why President Donald Trump seemed reluctant to fully embrace the occasion. 'I don't want it,' Hunt replied. 'I don't want Black History Month. I don't want all these days designed to make everyone feel special. I'm an '80s baby - people are too sensitive nowadays. We're all Americans.'