British troops in Gaza?

r00fie1 said:
View attachment 68325
https://twitter.com/x/status/1731419601559277594
View attachment 68326

X

twitter.com twitter.com
View attachment 68327

X

twitter.com twitter.com
View attachment 68328

X

twitter.com twitter.com
Click to expand...

Edited my post after abit more research

Misleading, that plane is usually based in that area of the med and what’s posted does not prove the claims from the individual.

British military have admitted to flying surveillance aircraft to assist in the search for the hostages only, they may have been helping Israel further but might not.

The female captain is not a British soldier, she’s British born but an Israeli citizen and Israeli soldier.
 
Last edited:
Priv said:
Edited my post after abit more research

Misleading, that plane is usually based in that area of the med and what’s posted does not prove the claims from the individual.

British military have admitted to flying surveillance aircraft to assist in the search for the hostages only, they may have been helping Israel further but might not.

The female captain is not a British soldier, she’s British born but an Israeli citizen and Israeli soldier.
Click to expand...

If it were a British born Palestinian citizen going over to Gaza to fight against the Israeli slaughter, would she be OK when she came back home to Britain?

Equally, nothing in the press about British mercenaries going over to Ukraine?
Why does it appear OK to help "defend" one group of people, but not another? Palestinians have no air force, no army, no navy. But they have the right to self-determination and to repel the Israeli invaders and protect their people. That includes the West Bank - where there is no Hamas?
1701838949169.png "Near" !!!
ukdefencejournal.org.uk

British surveillance aircraft operating near Israel

A British RC-135 ‘Rivet Joint’, an electronic surveillance aircraft, has conducted a patrol near #Israel, the #Gaza Strip and #Lebanon.
ukdefencejournal.org.uk ukdefencejournal.org.uk


1701839011558.png
www.airforce-technology.com

UK military aircraft have provided “surveillance support” to Israel - Airforce Technology

A UK parliamentary response stated 12 aircraft had been deployed to the region as part of the UK's response to the ongoing Israel-Hamas war.
www.airforce-technology.com www.airforce-technology.com


U.S. flies ‘routine’ spy flights from UK’s Cyprus base near Gaza for ‘third party governments’​

Leaked cable raises the possibility the US is flying surveillance missions over Gaza from RAF Akrotiri and sharing the intelligence with Israel, which would further implicate Britain in war crimes in Gaza.
1701839097374.png
www.declassifieduk.org

U.S. flies ‘routine’ spy flights from UK’s Cyprus base near Gaza for ‘third party governments’

Leaked cable raises the possibility the US is flying surveillance missions over Gaza from RAF Akrotiri and sharing the intelligence with Israel, which would further implicate Britain in war crimes in Gaza.
www.declassifieduk.org www.declassifieduk.org

1701839679318.png

RAF Troodos on Cyprus is also essential to intelligence given over to the Israeli war machine.

Does anyone seriously believe, given the context of our deep involvement in Israel, we are maintaing a neutral stance of non-deploymenty whilst we supply bombs, drones, spy planes, Intelligence and other military support? Just sitting in Royal Naval boats bobbing up and down in the "med" and flying our little spy planes over Gazza? The British Government wont tell the general public, but its investigative journalists and "leaks" which build a picture of what is really happening on the ground.

["Using troops" doesnt necessarily mean "combatants" - it can also mean covert ground operations, intelligence and surveillance] (y)
 
Kosovo said:
Hamas have already killed British citizens on 7th October so doesn’t that mean it’s got something to do with us.
Click to expand...

As far as I understand it if any UK citizen is murdered abroad the local police have jurisdiction - unless they invite our police force to investigate.

I don’t know of any instance where they invite our soldiers to help them invade another country.
 
Our standard soldiers won’t be in Israel operating but SAS/SBS/SRR certainly will be.

Under no circumstances do we have any right to know what they are doing and why.
 
whinneybanksaint said:
perhaps we should defend ourselves then and take action against Hamas Terrorist sympathisers,
Click to expand...

We should defend the country against all terrorists Incl Hamas.

My point is if we choose to get involved militarily in the Israeli slaughter of innocent Palestinians then we add a risk that innocent people will be killed in the UK as a result.

If you are happy with that fine - I’m not.
 
Quicksilvera said:
Under no circumstances do we have any right to know what they are doing and why.
Click to expand...
Of course we do, via our parliamentarians.

The whole point of our poiticians is that they represent us and our interests.

If they aren't given access to information because the state decides it's not for sharing then we're heading towards an authoritarian nightmare.

As far as I'm aware we're not on a war footing. Our troops shouldn't be anywhere that parliament hasn't agreed they should be.

I'm not naive enough to think we aren't up to all sorts in every corner of the world but a politician shouldn't be castigated for asking questions in parliament.

If anything it just shows up Starmer again as this is the sort of thing the leader of the opposition should be challenging the government on. Let them publicly state that this is a UK security issue and explain what and why and how they're dealing with it.

Secrecy for the sake of secrecy just leads to over-extension and an abuse of rights. We've seen it all play out before.
 
So what's this that Israel knew of the attack a year before it happened, and about 2 days before, about $100 million of unusual trading happened in Israel.
 
Millbrook said:
I doubt it, they are very accomplished themselves. Why would they want the involvement of our Special Forces?
Click to expand...

During the Vietnam war some were seconded to the Australian army, who were involved, but were only used supposedly for teaching jungle warfare tactics to the South Vietnamese army.
 
Ziggy said:
During the Vietnam war some were seconded to the Australian army, who were involved, but were only used supposedly for teaching jungle warfare tactics to the South Vietnamese army.
Click to expand...
The relevance of this comment is exactly what?
 
The thing i would question is that Corbyn is a member of the Privy Council who get sensitive security information updates.

Is he publicly asking because he knows or is he asking because the PC haven't been informed?
 
Unravel_Morrison said:
The thing i would question is that Corbyn is a member of the Privy Council who get sensitive security information updates.

Is he publicly asking because he knows or is he asking because the PC haven't been informed?
Click to expand...
He was when he was leader of the opposition, he wont be now...
 
Scrote said:
Of course we do, via our parliamentarians.

The whole point of our poiticians is that they represent us and our interests.

If they aren't given access to information because the state decides it's not for sharing then we're heading towards an authoritarian nightmare.

As far as I'm aware we're not on a war footing. Our troops shouldn't be anywhere that parliament hasn't agreed they should be.

I'm not naive enough to think we aren't up to all sorts in every corner of the world but a politician shouldn't be castigated for asking questions in parliament.

If anything it just shows up Starmer again as this is the sort of thing the leader of the opposition should be challenging the government on. Let them publicly state that this is a UK security issue and explain what and why and how they're dealing with it.

Secrecy for the sake of secrecy just leads to over-extension and an abuse of rights. We've seen it all play out before.
Click to expand...


Biggest issue here is that as standard MPs are not security vetted to the highest level, no one has done enhanced checks on them to make sure they can be trusted with the information. So for me they absolutely should not have access to this information. Though I do think there should be a panel of cross party MPs that do get access after passing the highest level of checks.

To work for an MP or to work in Parliament you are checked but not to be an MP, which I find ridiculous. It does make me wonder how many would be deemed a security risk if they were regularly vetted to the highest level, which includes looking into family, friends and acquaintances.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top