Spyke

Also macron not long ago asked Iran who was backstabbed twice during negociations to engage in good faith negociations

24

na na na, he only condemns the unprovoked attacks. (of which there are approximately zero). he doesnt condemn the provoked attacks

10

I think time for Carney to be deployed to Iranian soil with just his trusty potato peeler a bible and alucky rabbitsfoot.. He'll either fix the issue of have a sudden realization of the able of not bombing or invading other countries

9

They are supporting enabling and funding the war on Iran. Of course they're viable targets.

5
lemmy.world

From a political standpoint, I can kinda understand why he said this even if he doesn't believe it. You have to remember that the most unhinged world leader in the entire world is right next door. Sure it's pretty classless and it would have been better to be silent, but with the warmongering currently going on in the US it's not a bad idea to be preemptive.

I don't agree with it and the statement pisses me off, but I'm trying to be a little objective when the US is on the warpath.

4
disorderlyreply
lemmy.world

This line of thinking would make a lot more sense if there wasn't a long, storied history of Trump completely ignoring sycophants when they're not immediately useful to him. You'd expect someone like Carney to know better. It's enough to make a person physically cringe.

8

It's definitely not the right choice, but I can see why he'd do it. Silence would have been better. If he'd have said nothing nobody would be arguing about him.

4

You reached the end

Carney condemns Iran's 'unprovoked attacks' | Spyke