I agree, for the most part, the UK should have as little to do with this as possible. Though there is the consideration of protecting the Gulf states we have a commitment to.
But my point is that this isnt going against the stated UK government position as lots of people (including you) are saying in this thread.
No, after Iran started targeting the gulf states and Cypress the UK shifted its position to allowing the US to use the UK’s bases for missions targeting Iran’s long range strike capabilities but not anything else. This video is consistent with that.
While I agree that the banning of any demonstration in support of Palestine Action is an authoritarian overreach by the UK, I dont think its as bad as masked paramilitary goons dragging people off without explanation and executing them them in broad daylight while members of the government stand up and say that said paramilitary goons have full legal immunity,
Did Cypress attack Iran? Did Dubai, Jordan, the UAE? They were all struck by Iran and only after that did the UK allow the US to use its bases. Based on your “if you get hit first then hitting back is legitamate” why does that apply to Iran but not those countries?
I completly agree that Iran attacking Isreal after being attacked is fair, but i dont see how you can make that argument without saying the Gulf states have the right to defend themselves too.