Posted on 04/01/2026 8:28:59 AM PDT by marshmallow
The US president said the UK has aircraft carriers "that didn’t work"
LONDON, April 1. /TASS/. US President Donald Trump doesn’t think too highly of Great Britain’s naval fleet.
"You don't even have a Navy. You’re too old, and have aircraft carriers that didn’t work," he told The Daily Telegraph, referring to the state of Britain’s fleet of warships.
In mid-March, the American leader had already voiced his disappointment with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer over London's lack of support for the military operation in Iran. In particular, he blasted the British aircraft carriers.
When asked whether Starmer should spend more on defense, Trump said: "I am not going to tell him what to do. He can do whatever he wants. It doesn't matter. All Starmer wants is costly windmills that are driving your energy prices through the roof."
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
President Trump seems to be in an even more pull-no-punches mood lately. All these antics pulled by the Europeans are going to be remembered. To the detriment of the Europeans.
Or is this a cover to explain why the personnel numbers don't add up...?
Inquiring minds want to know...
Who audits NATOs defense books.
England (and all of Europe) refuses to cooperate in Trump’s war for one reason:
They are expecting a mass exodus of millions of Iranian refugees and are actively eagerly awaiting their arrival.
And if the Dems prevail in 2028, the US will also welcome hordes of new Muslims.
Per AI, sourcing UK government info...
UK regular armed forces personnel have declined from over 200,000 in 2000 to approximately 136,120 (trained and untrained) by 1 January 2025. The total strength, including reserves, was 180,780 as of 1 July 2025. The military has experienced a consistent, long-term decline in size, with trained personnel hitting a low of 137,000 in 2025.
GOV.UK
GOV.UK
+4
Britain has likely got more boats and ships on display in museums in the country than they do in their actual Navy.
Egyptian and Iranian migrants charged with raping woman on Brighton beach
From the other day...
Gang-rape victim, 25, whose suicide attempt left her paralyzed, will die by euthanasia after yearslong court battle
It all started with her being raped by muzzies.
That’s less than half the number evacuated from Dunkirk.
Good luck in recruiting Islamists into the Royal British marines. The only thing worse than having a deficit of marine recruits is recruiting Islamists to fill the gap. If that is the solution, no ,thanks, I will live with the deficit.
Trump is the only President in our lifetime that tells the cold hard unadulterated truth. It’s rather refreshing, don’t you think chaps?
They are expecting a mass exodus of millions of Iranian refugees and are actively eagerly awaiting their arrival.
That makes ZERO sense.
If Europe cooperates with Trump, they will get millions of Iranian refugees.
The greater the war's destruction, the more refugees.
The best way to minimize the number of refugees is to try and stop, or at least minimize, Trump's war. Which is what Europe is doing by refusing to cooperate.
Meanwhile, on a UK related note for lovers of British pottery...
https://x.com/denbypottery/status/2039032015278780449
Denby just fell into administration, the UK version of Chapter 11 here.
The UK was getting Iranian refugees long before the war started...
1. He can declare victory and stop the war. (Ain't happening).
2. Send thousands of troops in. (Vietnam and Afghanistan approach)
3. Keep up strategic bombing (to no effect)
4. Nuke 'em.
Options 3 and 4 are most likely and are the options that will send the millions of refugees into the West.
Considering the traitors who are now on positions of power on the UK, those dwindling numbers are not surprising.
*in positions
The UK already has a lot of Iranians.
No way.
First, Trump won't do it.
Second, if Trump did order nukes, the military will veto him, "Commander-in-Chief" or no. And the State Dept, Intel Community, and Congress (Republicans and Democrats) will back the military on that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.