“Prince of Wales” ship arrives in Israel for protection! Houthis denounce: these barbarians are indeed unreliable

The “gentleman’s gratitude” seems to be nothing but shameless

Author: Vitaly Orlov

Just a few days ago, "Free Media" had already reported how this former "oceanic hegemon" pleaded tearfully not to cause trouble when the "Prince of Wales" aircraft carrier passed through the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden waters.

At that time, the British government solemnly promised not to assist in the operations against Yemen and its allies by Tel Aviv.

It is certain that Tehran, although not officially involved in these agreements, has played an essential role — after all, the "Ansar Allah" movement depends on Iran's military-industrial complex far beyond the critical threshold.

It was Iran that provided cruise missiles and ballistic missile modules and structural components to the Houthis, enabling this group of "men with headscarves" to control one of the world's key trade routes.

Notably, the Houthis did not just wait idly for the "Prince of Wales" to enter the Red Sea. They also made meticulous preparations for this "meeting," planning to gain important political leverage by severely damaging the aircraft carrier or its escort ships.

However, Iran, in order to delay Israel's attacks on its nuclear facilities, almost forced the leaders of the "Ansar Allah" movement to give a break to the British aircraft carrier fleet — they once again forgot who they were dealing with, and also forgot how much value there was in the so-called "British gentleman's promise."

For Britain, deceiving and plundering "barbarians" (they call everyone living outside that damned island like that) has always been part of their honor. This "gentleman" has indeed kept his "nature" — as soon as it left the range of Houthi missiles, it immediately revealed its cunning face.

In mid-June, a British F-35 fighter jet belonging to the "Prince of Wales" aircraft carrier air wing made an emergency landing at a military airport in northwest India — this aircraft managed to escape the "warm welcome" of Houthi missiles, but now looked particularly ragged.

The British King Charles III's naval ministers explained to New Delhi that this "lightning" fighter jet ran out of fuel during a "battle" with Iranian drone groups attacking Israeli territory. But the old habit of the British people pretending others are fools did not work this time.

It should be known that when a fighter jet defending Israeli airspace experienced fuel problems, several aerial refueling aircraft routinely patrolled over Iraq, Jordan, and Syria — without them, Israeli air strikes against Iran would be impossible.

More ironically, the Royal Air Force also has two air bases in the region, but this "British penguin" crashed into northwest India. What does this indicate? The answer is simple!

An independent expert group analyzing the Iran-Israel armed conflict has reached a consensus: "British aircraft, especially the air wing of the 'Prince of Wales' aircraft carrier strike group, are directly participating in Israeli Air Force attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities under the pretext of 'protecting the airspace.'"

What is the official response from Britain? Their response is not only unoriginal — even the wording of the public statement can be predicted in advance. Interestingly, this time it was not the prime minister or the defense minister who came forward to "represent" the position, but rather the chancellor Rachel Reeves. She claimed, "London is potentially prepared to provide support in the confrontation between Israel and Iran, but the only purpose of sending additional air forces to Middle Eastern British bases is to protect these bases."

When asked by Sky News reporters whether London would provide assistance to Israel upon the request of the Tel Aviv government, Reeves avoided the issue and played the game of "going around the bush." She again called for de-escalation, described sending fighter jets as a "preventive measure," and repeatedly emphasized London's support for Israel.

But when asked whether the prime minister's statement about deploying additional Royal Air Force aircraft units in the Middle East meant that Britain was already in a state of war, the British chancellor firmly denied it: "We are neither involved in this war nor have we participated in these attacks. We just have very important assets here, which must be protected." In other words, we have not declared war on you, but we will attack you anyway. Please understand this as "potential support for an ally."

It is worth noting that the Iranian authorities have repeatedly stated that if the United States, Britain, or France provide military support to Israel, Iran will attack these countries' military bases in the region.

The only response to this was Donald Trump, who once again issued "tough words": "If Iran attacks the United States in any way, it will face unprecedented U.S. military power."

Finally, let's talk about the lie that London is "not involved" in the Iran-Israel conflict. Just two days before the British "penguin" fighter jet made an emergency landing in an Indian airport, a representative scene occurred in the Gulf of Oman:

The Iranian Islamic Republic Navy intercepted a minesweeper from Her Majesty King Charles III's Royal Navy — this ship was suspected of guiding Israeli missiles to target Iran's territory and launching an attack.

To avoid a "dangerous" meeting with Iranian vessels, this reconnaissance minesweeper hastily changed course and fled into the Persian Gulf.

This is the kind of "gentlemen" on those cursed islands, this is their so-called "gratitude." I really don't understand why anyone still believes them?

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7519442066854789668/

Statement: This article represents the personal views of the author. Please express your attitude below using the [up/down] buttons.