Is Nigel Farage full of ‘two-faced U-turns’? Readers discuss

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage (R) reacts as he and Scottish leader Malcolm Offord arrive on stage for a press conference as Reform UK Scotland hosts its 2026 Scottish Conference in Bishopton, suburban Glasgow, Scotland on March 19, 2026. (Photo by ANDY BUCHANAN / AFP via Getty Images)
Readers discuss the Iran war, Farage’s back-and-forth over his stance on the UK’s involvement and the regime in Iran (Picture: AFP or licensors)

Do you agree with our readers? Have your say on these MetroTalk topics and more in the comments

'Tens of thousands of Iranians were murdered over recent months for demonstrating'

I am pleased to see a robust response from Martin (MetroTalk, Wed) to my letter the previous day advocating the forceful removal of the Nazi regime in Iran.

I wouldn’t disagree with his view on Donald Trump’s inarticulacy but I fail to see a response to my fundamental point that the mullahs, driven by messianic fervour, will never stop trying to construct a nuclear weapon and then use it on Israel, the heart of world Jewry as they see it.

Yes, Israel has a significant nuclear arsenal but it is a deterrent that, sadly, does not deter the mullahs. And yes, our own military capabilities have so diminished that we can achieve nothing without US support – as the sorry spectacle of HMS Dragon only departing for Cyprus on Tuesday, more than a week after our base there was attacked by an Iranian drone, demonstrates.

Martin wants evidence of malign Iranian activities in Britain. Last week, four alleged Iranian spies were arrested on suspicion of intelligence gathering on Jewish individuals. Last year the Director General of MI5 talked of having responded to 20 ‘potentially lethal’ Iran-backed plots.

If Martin wants ‘democratic leaders’ who ‘put the needs of their population first’, I applaud him. But exactly how will this be achieved? I presume he supports Green Party leader Zack Polanski’s preference for diplomacy.

Forgive me for being a little sceptical of the outcome when tens of thousands of Iranians were murdered over recent months for demonstrating in favour of democracy. Chris Shepherd, London

‘Two-faced U-turns, and saying what people want to hear – Farage is getting more and more like a career politician every day’

Nigel Farage, Trump’s number one fan, is struggling to decide Reform UK’s policy on the war in Iran. On the one hand, he wants to buddy up to Trump; on the other, he knows most of us don’t want to join another war in the Middle East.

So he’s trying to have it both ways. Previously he said that ‘the gloves need to come off’ and criticised Sir Keir Starmer for not doing more to attack Iran.

But now he’s saying ‘let’s not get involved in another foreign war’ and ‘it’s no to boots on the ground’.

Two-faced U-turns, and saying what people want to hear – Farage is getting more and more like a career politician every day. Caitlyn, Nottinghamshire

Reader warnms against confusing ‘anti-war sentiment with support for the Ayatollahs’

(FILES) In front of a large portrait of Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's surface-to-surface Shahab-2 (L) and two Sayyad-1 surface-to-air missiles (C) and Zelzal (R) missile are on display on September 26, 2007, in a square south of Tehran. Witnesses said on February 28, 2026, that loud cheers echoed across parts of Tehran and residents took to their windows to applaud and play celebratory music after reports of Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's death. (Photo by Atta KENARE / AFP via Getty Images)
This reader says eing anti-war doesn’t been support for the regime in Iran (Picture: Copyright: AFP or licensors)

Got a question about UK politics?

Send in yours and Metro’s Senior Politics Reporter Craig Munro will answer it in an upcoming edition of our weekly politics newsletter. Email alrightgov@metro.co.uk or submit your question here.

Chris Shepherd’s letter (MetroTalk, Tue) contains several areas of bogus moral equivalence. He confuses anti-war sentiment with support for the Ayatollahs, particularly singling out the Green Party.

He fails to provide evidence that Iran has actually manufactured a nuclear bomb and is an imminent threat to the US.

Indeed, the only nuclear power in the Middle East is Israel and even Trump’s own administration has all but admitted this is all for Israel.

Other tyrannical regimes exist – Saudi Arabia, for example, represses its own citizens using arms sold by the UK and persists in executions. But Saudi Arabia hosts US military bases on its territory.

North Korea has nuclear weapons and is in no danger of being imminently invaded. In fact, Trump has been mooted to hold talks with Kim Jong Un next month.

Failed military interventions do not seem to represent any lessons for Trump or for Shepherd. The Afghanistan invasion cost $2trillion and two decades of death and destruction. Trump’s war on Iran has no legal mandate and the main beneficiary is Vladimir Putin, for whom increased petrol prices have boosted his ailing economy.

There is no doubt that Iran’s rulers are brutal in the extreme but many calling out for retribution failed and fail to be vocal regarding the ongoing genocide in Gaza and other human rights abuses.

It would be appropriate to remind readers and Mr Shepherd of Judge Robert Jackson’s final words at the Nuremberg trials in 1946. ‘To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.’ Anna Romano, Worksop

Reader says ‘Iran is a country that has been known to state-sponsor terrorism’

I wonder where Chris H from London (MetroTalk, Thu) gets his data to dismiss the idea that conflict in the Middle East can be correlated to an increase in terror attacks here in the UK.

It only needs a short amount of research to be proven, especially with Iran, a country that has been known to state-sponsor terrorism.

People like to suggest attacks happen because groups despise us and our beliefs – fuelling more hatred between groups and solving nothing.
Natasha, Leeds

‘Western politicians love to swoop in and depose enemy governments, without ever stopping to think about the chaos and destruction they leave behind’

President Donald Trump speaks during the Commander-in-Chief's Trophy presentation with the Navy Midshipmen football team in the East Room of the White House, Friday, March 20, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
This reader says Trump hasn’t considered the legacy of the Iraq war (Picture: AP)

Six weeks after the invasion of Iraq in 2003, George W Bush declared ‘mission accomplished’ and claimed ‘major combat operations in Iraq have ended’.

It would take another 15 years of war, infighting and terrorist insurgency before Iraq would see something that looked like peace – although even since then protesters are massacred.

Now, two weeks after launching attacks on Iran, Trump has said that the war is ‘complete, pretty much’. If we apply the same logic from the Iraq War, this means fighting in Iran will be over by 2041.

Western politicians love to swoop in and depose enemy governments, without ever stopping to think about the chaos and destruction they leave behind.

Yes, the Ayatollahs are evil, and Saddam Hussein was a monster. But conflict creates more conflict and with no leadership, these countries are left to collapse into a lawless mess, dominated by terrorists and warlords.

Trump and Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu have destroyed any stability there was in Iran. If we want to see peace, someone needs to bring some stability back.
Rob Slater, Norfolk

Do you agree with our readers? Have your say on these MetroTalk topics and more in the comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *