Debate contribution: Illegal US and Israeli Attacks on Iran

Debate contribution by Mr Gerry Carroll on 16 March 2026.

MLA

Mr Gerry Carroll

Party at the time

People Before Profit Alliance

Date

16 March 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Illegal US and Israeli Attacks on Iran

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5449375

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I will address the motion and the amendments. The motion addresses some of the key issues in the very challenging and disturbing global situation, and it also outlines that the main aggressor in the world today is the United States. Despite all the scaremongering about China and other states across the world, while, historically, the US is a weaker empire and has suffered defeats in Afghanistan and elsewhere, it is still the biggest military power in the world and probably in world history. As an illustration of how big it is, the US spends at least $1 trillion a year on what it calls "defence" but everybody else calls "a military budget". That puts into context the scale of the US as a military power. Despite the focus on the US being a bringer of freedom and democracy — people will parrot that stuff in the coming days and this year with the anniversary of the Declaration of Independence — it is worth asking what the US spends that money on. The US is the biggest exporter of terror across the world, as well as terrorising its own black and brown communities with its Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) paramilitary gang. On the first day of the war with Iran, we saw what the so-called US defence support for human rights meant. We saw a school in Minab in southern Iran blown to bits, and 165 schoolchildren were killed. They count; they matter, even if they do not matter to some of the parties in the Chamber this evening. The motion calls those attacks illegal, which they absolutely are, but they are more than that: they are completely unwarranted, immoral and unprovoked. It is hypocritical and hard to stomach when parties in the House denounce and declare their opposition to terrorism but will then exchange shamrocks with Donald Trump tomorrow and shake his hand. He is the terrorist in chief across the world, so shame on them and their hypocrisy. At least 1,440 Iranians have been killed, and almost 20,000 people have been injured. There has been no mention of those people by the parties to my right. There are about 10 million people who have been affected by poisoned air following the US bombing of oil facilities next to the Strait of Hormuz. Almost 1,000 Lebanese people have been killed by the Israeli state, and there has been no mention of those people either. Given all the focus and money spent on AI technology, sophisticated weaponry and other devices, it is quite remarkable that the decision of the Iranian state to close the Strait of Hormuz shipping route can cause so much financial havoc, panic and chaos to people here and across the world. However, obviously, the DUP cheered that on, and the closure is responsible for the price rises because of the bombing. It also illustrates that we need to move away from our reliance on fossil fuels, but, again, the DUP cries "green panic" when it hears that. Many of us knew that the genocide would not be confined to the Palestinians in Gaza, and Israel has been central to the violence in recent days, never mind the past 50 or 60-plus years. Israel and America started this war, and that is why the UUP's amendment is quite delusional. It is as though no sanctions have been placed on Iran or bombs dropped on Iranian cities. When was the last time that the Iranian people or Government bombed a city in America?

In the short time that I have, I will say that the reason that there is an Islamic republic in Iran is that its people were ruled by a brutal shah, who was backed by the US and Britain. They therefore created their own state. Would it be my state? Is it a socialist state?

I am answering the question, yet you are shouting at me. You need a short history lesson, but I do not have time to give one. It is up to the people of Iran to determine their Government and the future of their state. It is a bit rich to hear about theocracy and oppression from the party that supports theocracy and biblical interpretations of the oppression of women and many other minorities. People will find that rich and hypocritical, but I have no time to get into —.

Yes. Go ahead.

I agree. I also point to the Christian fanatics, if not fascists, in the US Government who cheer on, support and agree with Netanyahu. I have a few seconds left. There are problems, to put it mildly, with the Alliance Party's amendment, although I recognise some of what Kate Nicholl said. Alliance, alongside other parties, defended the Ukrainian people's right to defend themselves against invasion and bombing by Russia, and rightly so. Its amendment No 2, however, equivocates on that point on Iran and fails to recognise the key aggressor. Ukrainians are therefore allowed the right to self-defence, but Iranians are not. The amendment repeats the myth about nuclear weapons. The IAEA —

— says that there is no chance of Iran developing —

— nuclear weapons.

859 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Second assessment

Jev’s answers did not settle this record, so a second model, claude-opus-5-5, read the same text (without the MLA’s name or party) and gave its reasons on 21 October 2026. How the second assessment works

Verdict

Not flagged

Public interest or divisiveness

Mixed

Against the published rubric

Most of the speech takes a strong side on a foreign conflict, citing casualty figures, legality, sanctions, energy prices and nuclear claims, and criticising other parties' amendments and positions. The rubric does not treat that as culture-war activity unless it maps the conflict onto communities here or portrays a people or faith as a group in a hostile way. One passage comes close: accusing a local party of supporting "theocracy and biblical interpretations of the oppression of women and many other minorities" is an identity-based jab that ties a party's religious outlook to bigotry. It is brief and secondary, and the rest of the partisan attack ("hypocrisy", "delusional") is aimed at parties' foreign-policy stances, not at a community.

Public interest or divisiveness

The contribution mainly engages with the substance of the motion: the legality of the attacks, civilian deaths, effects on fuel prices and the case for each amendment. It is also heavily laced with partisan point-scoring, including claims that Iranian children "do not matter to some of the parties in the Chamber", and a religion-based dig at one party. Both elements are substantial, but the divisive material is incidental to a foreign-policy argument and does not set communities in Northern Ireland against each other.

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:13 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification