There is far more justification for a US invasion of Britain than any Middle Eastern country since the Gulf War.

Were leftists to win power in the next British election, the country's fate as a nuclear-armed Islamo-Communist state will be sealed. Such a regime would be a direct threat to America and, in many ways, leftist Britain already is a threat to America, with their constant attacks on American companies and citizens' sovereignty.

A second British civil war is unlikely, especially if the technocratic surveillance-censorship regime implanted by the Starmer government is not overturned. So, the only plausible way to liberate Britain would be foreign intervention.

I hope the Trump administration and US military leadership have developed a long-term plan to deal with this eventuality.

I cannot overstate how dangerous it is for America to have a nuclear-armed Woke North Korea across the Atlantic. British leftists are incredibly anti-American and the Muslims that Britain imports en masse are even more so.

National security risks aside: The rights violations and atrocities committed by the British state against the British people are more than enough justification to invade Britain. Protecting human rights has been the pretext for every war in recent American history, and the British people have infinitely more value than the MENA goat herders America ostensibly fought to save from tin pot dictators.

The grooming gang epidemic alone easily fits the official definition of genocide, and when you factor in the great replacement, two-tier suppression of natives, rampant corruption of police, bureaucrats, politicians, and intelligence services, etc., it is obvious that modern Britain is the most evil state in Western history.

In Britain, 16 year olds can work, pay taxes, join the military, consent to sex, get married (with parental permission), drive, etc., but apparently using tiktok is a bridge too far.

The Starmer regime is currently trying to pass a law (Representation of the People Bill) that will give 16 & 17 year olds the right to vote in national elections.

Such a policy is obviously self-serving, as youth in Britain lean left-wing, but will they vote for the party that just banned them all from using social media?

The Green Party, Labor's biggest competitors, support the social media ban and demand stronger regulation (censorship) of social media companies.

Digital ID through the back door.

UK government statement on forthcoming device- and OS-level "child safety" spyware and censorship (distinct from the under 16s social media ban I posted about earlier):

"Under the new plans, Big Tech companies like Apple and Google must activate built-in features or implement technical solutions on smartphones and tablets to detect and block nude images for children, the Prime Minister announced in a speech at London Tech Week today (Monday 8 June)."

"Adults will still be able to take, share or view nude content through an age verification process."

"If companies do not act within 3 months, the government will bring forward legislation to force them to activate the technology. This will include fines for companies. Nothing is off the table"

The Starmer regime will likely try to force these restrictions upon PC operating systems, such as Windows, and eventually ISPs.

Signal criticized the requirements as "dystopian" and explicitly called out the grooming gang coverup:

"The UK government’s demand that all content on all devices sold or used in the UK be scanned on the presumption of nudity will not safeguard children. It endangers us all."

"We know that mass surveillance and censorship capabilities never remain narrowly scoped. Once created, they will be expanded, forming a dangerous tool that will be wielded both in the UK and abroad to censor and surveil whatever they might consider 'threats' or 'harmful content.' Its scope will be defined by the whims and proscriptions of the government to detect nudity today and political speech tomorrow."

Remember: Libtards and tradcucks in America are trying to implement similar totalitarian laws under the guise of "saving the children." See here and here.

Ethnic breakdowns of grooming gang suspects from studies conducted 2011 to 2020. The most recent reports from this list put the figures at approximately 85-95% non-white and ~85% muslim.

https://t.me/racerealismchannel/365

In Britain, 19,000 children were raped by grooming gangs in a single year.

Considering this only includes *identified* victims, I think the Grooming Gang Inquiry Report figure of at least 250,000 victims is likely accurate.

Every institution in Britain was involved with either the perpetration or coverup of this industrial scale child rape — cops, hospitals, schools, social services, state media, etc. You'd probably have to capitally punish at least half of the public sector to fix that country.

I doubt that grooming gangs were covered up to "preserve social cohesion" or because everybody was terrified of being called "racist." We know British cops were, and probably still are, raping kids. How likely is it that people higher up the British political system are implicated? Starmer covered up 13,000 cases and they made him prime minister. How do grooming gangs related to broader criminal underworld in Britain? Money laundering, fraud, narcotics, etc.?

It's clear that grooming gangs are primarily operated by ethno-religious mafias, and that South Asian muslims commit the vast majority of these heinous crimes, but I don't believe a coverup of this scale would be conducted merely in the name of "anti-racism."