Top News

Does he support Donald Trump's decision to bomb Iran's nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan? He hasn't really said.

He didn't actually condemn the strikes. But he didn't back them either.

Yes, he called Iran's nuclear programme "a grave threat to international security" and added: "Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon, and the US has taken action to alleviate that threat."

Did he support that action? Well... no.

Behind the scenes, Downing Street made it clear this wasn't an endorsement. Just a vague, legalistic statement.

Which isn't what the country needs when it's on the brink of a terrifying global conflict.

One thing Labour did confirm: the UK wasn't involved in the strike.

So despite recognising the threat, and agreeing it must be stopped, our government wants no part in stopping it. Even though we're now a target for the mullahs. Given our history, we can't pretend to be neutral now.

This is our Prime Minister. A British PM.

I won't drag in Winston Churchill here - that would just be cruel. Any comparison would be laughable.

In or out of power, we knew whose side Churchill was on. Ours. That's not the case with Sir 'Fear' Starmer.

Starmer's vanishing act fits a wider, troubling pattern.

From day one, he's seemed more comfortable serving other nation's interests than his own. The Chagos Islands deal with Mauritius abandoned British sovereignty to tick international law boxes.

It's been called one of the most unpatriotic actions ever carried out by the British government.

Lucky Chagossians get a tax cut. UK taxpayers pick up the tab. It will cost us a cool £30billion.

Sir Fear was under no pressure to do that, but he surrendered anyway.

He also agreed to send hundreds of millions to Brussels and gave EU trawlers access to UK waters until 2038. British fishermen were sold out again, because Starmer wants to be liked in Paris, not Grimsby.

On energy, Labour has raced to kill off North Sea oil and gas drilling.

While families struggle with soaring bills, we'll spend tens of billions importing the very fuel we're banning at home.

Nobody else is mothballing their own resources. Starmer is.

Now deputy PM Angela Rayner looks set to wave through a Chinese super-embassy by the Tower of London, despite US concerns that it will operate as a spy hub.

These aren't accidents. They're political choices. And now he's made another one on Iran.

Yes, the public has little appetite for another Middle East war. But that's not what's driving Starmer's silence.

Labour's support among British Muslims is fracturing over Gaza. For months, Starmer has tried to dodge that row.

Now, he's afraid to deepen it by backing the US on Iran. So instead of leadership, we get legalese.

Foreign Secretary David Lammy says it's "not a binary question". Defence minister Luke Pollard refused three times to answer simple question about Iran bombing.

And Starmer? Missing in action. Again.

He's retreating behind vague language and legal advice from his mentor Lord Hermer, the controversial Attorney General who recently drew parallels between the UK's proposed withdrawal from the ECHR and Nazi Germany.

This is what you get when you elect a lawyer.

One who only seems at ease shaking hands at international summits, not standing up for Britain.

He says the right things on Ukraine. But even there, he's quietly fiddling the defence budget, reclassifying domestic spending as "military" to fake a funding boost.

No wonder Trump didn't bother telling us before hitting Iran. Washington doesn't see us as serious players anymore. We're ranked alongside the French, whose president quickly slammed the attacks as illegal.

Come the next global crisis - and one is coming - Britain will need a leader. Instead, we've got Sir Fear Starmer.

Nobody knows what he thinks. Maybe not even him.