I suspect we mostly agree on this subject. But perhaps differ on how useful attempting to keep the US as an ally whilst under the presidency of Donald Trump may be.

So “treading carefully” purely to appease Trump and keep him as an ally that would help us in a time of need is a fool’s errand.

Have you seen how he’s handled this illegal war? He is erratic, volatile and unpredictable.

Also, as a neurologist, I’m very confident he is suffering with dementia.

There is literally nothing you can do to have Trump remain on your side. He will always do what he wants to do, and what serves him best, nobody else.

Look at how he spoke about UK troops in Afghanistan. They DIED helping the US, yet he denigrated them like they were dirt on his shoe.

Trump is not reliable in any sense of the word, regardless of what you do for him.

You can build up years of goodwill with Trump through sycophantic means, and as soon as you disagree with him or ask him to do something he doesn’t want to, all that goodwill counts for absolutely nothing.

Therein lies the problem.

Not allowing the bases for ANY purposes avoids any ambiguity, and hence prevents us from being considered a co-belligerent in this war.

I disagree with them being used for defensive. It isn’t defensive for the UK, since Iran weren’t targeting us until we became involved.

How is allowing US to use UK bases getting it right?! Other European countries aren’t even allowing US aircraft to use their airspace, never mind allowing them to land, refuel, and load up bombs which are being used to carpet bomb Tehran on their own bases.

Now we’re actively involved. Iran agrees.

He’s not ALWAYS going to blindly back him, that is not the claim. Some things are entirely indefensible, like Starmer’s handling of Mandelson.

O’Brien could hardly come out and support Starmer on that one could he.

But he’ll give Starmer a free pass wherever possible.

Then you clearly haven’t been paying attention.

People are allowed to be anti-Starmer, and at the same time be able to form educated reasoning. The two can coexist. But thanks for trying to suggest they can’t.

But you’re clearly the JOB oracle, so I doff my cap to you.

If Starmer had said no to using any base from the start, and stuck to it, then O’Brien would be saying how this was absolutely the only decision that could have possibly been made.

He literally bases his opinion, not on principle, but on how far up Starmer’s arse his head is. Fickle.

Do not tag me in anything on this cesspit of an app.

Do not quote me.

Do not repost anything I’ve put on Twitter.

Do not use my name anywhere on this deplorable app.

Bluesky is a rancid echo chamber full of sanctimonious performative egocentrics.

This is my second & final post on this hell site

Marc has since deleted his post. That’s quite the admission of guilt.

It’s almost as if his post was based on fantasy rather than fact.

It’s almost as if he’s got absolutely no evidence to corroborate his nonsense.

So he’s a charlatan as well as a misogynist? Great combo.

SARS-CoV-2 isn’t just a respiratory virus. Its neurological and immunological consequences are real, measurable, and ongoing.

It targets the brain, impairs cognition, erodes empathy, and subtly reshapes populations.

Ignoring it doesn’t make it harmless, it makes the world more dangerous.

Point to emphasise: None of the deniers provide citations or studies.

Every claim is assertion, not evidence.

Not a single citation was provided to support these assertions. This isn’t debate, it’s denial in disguise.

Peer-reviewed science contradicts them repeatedly.

Claim: “Brain damage? Sneaky, invisible, nobody can see it, so they blame everything on COVID.”

Fact: Neurological harm doesn’t require visible physical symptoms. Brain scans, fMRI studies, and post-mortem analyses confirm damage in people with mild/no symptoms.

Claim: “No compounded risk of infections or cancers.”

Fact: SARS-CoV-2 impairs immune memory in some patients and is linked to increased risk of complications.

Chronic inflammation and immune disruption are known risk factors for cancer, it’s scientifically reckless to say “zero risk.”

Claim: “No lymphopenia, no immune dysfunction, no long COVID.”

Fact: Multiple peer-reviewed studies show SARS-CoV-2 does cause lymphocyte depletion, immune exhaustion, and long-term neurological effects.

Denial ≠ evidence.

All the “there’s no evidence SARS-CoV-2 causes brain damage” takes I’ve seen are weak, unscientific, and often just opinion masquerading as fact.

Let’s break this down with actual facts, rather than mere conjecture. 🧵