As petrol prices soar, readers give their opinions

Do you agree with our readers?

Have your say on these MetroTalk topics and more in the comments

Reader questions 'why' are petrol stations increasing prices

Why are petrol stations and heating oil companies raising their prices as the US and Israel continues its war on Iran?

The increase in the cost of Brent Crude has gone up – however, those increases are applied to the future purchase of crude oil.

There is absolutely no reason for these instant over-the-top rises, except for the greed of the oil/gasoline industry.

It is profiteering – so why is the government allowing these increases?

Instead, BP et al are able to ‘steal’ from their customers and the government spends taxpayers’ money to compensate these same customers.

This is yet another example of incompetence.

Will the citizens of the UK actually ever get a government that doesn’t misuse their taxes?

Steve, Milton Keynes

Reader says there has been a ‘crackdown by the UAE government on people sharing content’

It is the latest instance of a crackdown by the UAE government on people sharing content showing how the Gulf state has been hit by Iranian retaliations to the US/Israeli attacks.

Is this what’s going to happen over there, people are going to be sent to prison for a sending a text?

Robby, via email

Warning on Europe’s division

It sends a bad message to the rest of the world, especially Russia.

While there is little Europe’s Nato members can add to the conflict in the Middle East and not everyone agrees with Donald Trump, the blocking of the Strait of Hormuz is something else.

According to United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, it is an international waterway open to vessels of every nation.

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.

If Iran decides to block it with mines or other means, it is for the UN to order Iran to allow ships to pass or send a UN-backed force to protect the ships.

This should include China and Japan.

This is a separate issue to the conflict and I believe it is wrong for Britain and the EU to shy away from their responsibility to protect their interests, ie gas and oil supplies from allies in the Gulf.

One hundred years ago, Britain ruled the waves and would not have hesitated to send warships – although it is true back then their opponents lacked the military means to oppose the British navy.

But even if the world has changed and Iran and other potential adversaries possess sophisticated weapons, the Western allies have a duty to help keep the shipping lanes open.

Peter Fieldman, via email

On the Middle East, reader says ‘it is crucial to study the history of the region to understand how Western interference has shaped ideology today’

Perhaps he imagines Iraq to be one of these successes.

And as far as justified humanitarian interventions go, Sudan
has seen genocide on a greater scale than Gaza yet there does not seem to be a plan for an intervention any time soon.

Regarding the instability of the Middle East, it is crucial to study the history of the region to understand how Western interference has shaped ideology today.

It is fair to say the Middle East is kept in a state of instability and fomentation by Western governments.

This does not excuse the excessive brutality of the present Iranian regime but it is highly unlikely that Trump and Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu desire is to promote a strong democratic opposition – if so, there is no justification for the recent US bombing of Evin prison in Tehran when many prominent political dissidents may have
been killed.

Similarly, is the bombing of the Minab primary school a necessary prerequisite for regime change?

Or is it something that ‘can be lived with’, as Trump declared?

Anna, Nottinghamshire

When have there been ‘successful military interventions’ in the Middle East?

The history books tell us that outside interventions in the Middle East produce chaos not democracy – Suez, Iraq, Syria… Why believe that Trump’s attack will be any different?

The last US-backed war against Iran, led by Saddam Hussein’s Iraq in 1980, lasted eight years, and resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, including an estimated 100,000 civilians, mostly Iranian.

Nothing was achieved.

Iran’s regime stayed in power.

The war was an exercise in futility.

What makes anyone think this war will be any better?

Yet our prime minister, Sir Keir Starmer, is committing us more and more to this war.

That was no surprise – to have opposed the war completely would have been to question Britain’s membership of Nato and the presence of US bases all over the country.

The British people were not asked what we thought.

BMG polling released on March 6 found 47 per cent opposed the UK taking part in air strikes – with just 22 per cent in favour.

A more recent YouGov poll found that half of us oppose letting the US use RAF airbases – only 13 per cent were strongly in favour of allowing it.

On March 13, Starmer said that people ‘want to see us doing all we can to de-escalate’.

In the next breath he told us that he had just escalated the war – ‘Last night, RAF Typhoons extended their action to Bahrain.’
Over the weekend, Lib Dem leader Ed Davey said the UK should not be at ‘Donald Trump’s beck and call’, but being at Trump’s beck and call is what Nato membership means.

So, if we want no part in this war, we have to get out of Nato and expel US bases from our country.

Will Podmore, London