Independent British Member of Parliament Jeremy Corbyn on Tuesday accused United Kingdom Prime Minister Keir Starmer of “cowardice” for refusing to condemn the US bombing of Venezuela and abduction of its president, acts that experts agree were flagrant violations of international law.
Hours after the US attack—as leaders in the region and worldwide voiced horror and outrage—Starmer issued a statement welcoming Nicolás Maduro’s ouster, declaring that “we regarded Maduro as an illegitimate president and we shed no tears about the end of his regime.”
Starmer later insisted, as the Trump administration laid out plans to control the Venezuelan government indefinitely, that the situation was “complicated,” adding that it was “for the U.S. to justify the action that it has taken.”
Corbyn, the former leader of the Labour Party now helmed by Starmer, countered in Tribune magazine that “it’s really not that complicated: Bombing a sovereign nation and abducting its head of state is illegal.”
“It is absolutely staggering that a prime minister with a background in law cannot bring himself to say something so obvious,” Corbyn wrote. “It’s not that he doesn’t understand. He understands full well. That is the true abomination: He is choosing to desecrate the meaning of international law to avoid upsetting Donald Trump. This is the true meaning of the so-called ‘special relationship’ that government ministers are so desperate to protect: one where the United States tells us to jump, and we ask how high.”
“Twenty-three years later, another Labour prime minister is doing his best to cement the UK’s status as a vassal of the United States.”
The UK, according to the government’s foreign secretary, has been in close contact with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on the role it can play in Venezuela, citing the “work we have done over many years to build up relationships and dialogue with Venezuelan opposition parties and with the current authorities in the regime and of course our relationship with the US.”
Corbyn argued that the government’s approach is in some ways reminiscent of its conduct in the lead-up to the disastrous and illegal US invasion of Iraq more than two decades ago.
“Twenty-three years later, another Labour prime minister is doing his best to cement the UK’s status as a vassal of the United States,” Corbyn wrote. “Unlike Iraq, the UK says it is not involved in the bombing of Venezuela. Like Iraq, however, the UK is proving once again that it has no interest in standing up for international law.”
From Common Dreams via This RSS Feed.
Yes. I’ve never seen someone demand to know why they’re downvoted. On my end downvotes are disabled. Studies show it has a negative impact on peoples mental health. The fact that you had to know why you were being downvoted seems to align with those findings.
Regardless, your take is bad. Assessing someone based on their appearance is bad, and you should stop doing it.
I’m just seeing the death of discussion through downvoting, so few comments, and when there are comments (especially in political subs) they tend to be ad hominem attacks.
Let’s be clear, I’m not judging him based on immutable characteristics, just his presentation, everyone does this subconsciously or consciously every day, for some it doesn’t matter but when your trying to win votes and change opinions it’s not a good idea.
That’s exactly why I like turning them off. I wish I could enforce that on the comms as a federated setting per community. That way people have to comment if they don’t like something.
I doubt you’ll convince dotWorld to change the setting for the instance. I’ll tell you it’s much nicer in spaces without down votes.
With the introduction of AI slop and the usual Mis/disinformation downvotes are sometimes handy. However as we have seen here the downvote button means different things for different people.
“I know it’s superficial, but if you don’t look like someone who takes care of yourself, it’s hard to imagine you taking care of a country.”
Wait, are you Jeremy Corbyn? I did wonder what you were up to these days.
We are all Jeremy Corbyn. You are also Jeremy Corbyn. This is what “Long Corbyn” means, everyone joins hands once it’s done and makes one really long Jeremy Corbyn.
You know what, fair play, you’ve actually made my insomnia enjoyable this evening.
I still maintain he would have won in 2019 if he tidied himself up a bit… and maybe objected to Brexit earlier than the the week before the election… ok I’ll quit while I’m still being mostly positive.
TBH I think what sunk him was his inability to take actual control of his party and purge the right wing of Labour who were constantly sabotaging him from the inside. Brexit definitely did him no favors, too.
Glad you liked the Long Corbyn joke! Have a good one.