Theresa May expels 23 Russian diplomats in retaliation for Sergei Skripal poisoning

a reply to: oldcarpy

At some stage there going to have to remove the recovery vehicle of the recovery vehicle, an endless merry go round

I guess it makes perfect sense for a person to use a plunger to remove screws.

Whoops.

I will believe some of these had actual Russian state sanctioned involvement when our politicians, media, heck, even military intelligence can at least get the name of the division that handles this, right.

Or when they stop using methods that are actually very out dated, but only became public knowledge recently.

Or when the accusations actually see a third party court, and evidence gets tested.

I am done with the, bad guy did this...trust us, we say so...

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
Expelling a few spies and not letting harry n wills go watch a few football games is hardly punishing the Russians.

I heard some talk that they were considering a full on cyber attack against the Russians, that would be more like it. Or start going after the money of Vlad and his pals.

This just seems week.

A Government minister said on Tuesday that Ms May would seek an "economic war" against Mr Putin, targetting assets and money in the UK.

The minister said: “What happens will be an economic war, these will be economic measures.

“Russia’s economy is only half that of the UK, a lot of it concentrated in a few people’s hands. Well, we’ll do our bit to make it smaller if they want to carry on like this.

From The Independent article I mentioned few posts ago;

Things will get pretty by the end of this weak...

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: nwtrucker

i therefore lean to this being a false flag event, although not 100% certain of that.

With the way the state media of Russia is responding I really doubt that. Tie that in with Putins remarks in 2010 that traitors would kick the bucket and choke on their silver.... It seems a bit to convenient.

Not to mention there is a history of incidents like this.

Why would someone do a sloppy false flag that could deteriorate geopolitics just to spite Trump?

Edit: I don't buy into this Russia big bad wolf one every subject. I just look at each issue,this one looks like them. Though they do get blame for more than they should possibly.

Ummm...except everything you just stated...falls flat on it's face...

Tell me...why would the British refuse to supply Russia with a sample of this..."nerve agent"...as they are obliged to do under the Chemical weapons convention...instead all we have is grandstanding by that old bag over across the pond...

It is the height of ignorance for anyone to assume that Russia's agents are this incompetent...and that Russia would point the finger at themselves by this obviously farcical act...

I thought you were more of a critical stinker than that...





YouSir

Satire?

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: pavil

A professional hit doesn't leave such traces.

Unless its a false flag attack designed to build false pretexts against perceived enemies.

Then it needs to point straight back to the intended target.

It cannot be discounted knowing all the players potentially involved.

What can't be discounted?

That Russia would use a nerve agent that would point back to them? Try and kill a non threatening ex agent in another country with it? That the UK would refuse to show proof who did it or even what the agent was?

Or that Germany recently granted construction permits to build Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline from Russia to Germany...

reuters.c om

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Expelling a few spies and not letting harry n wills go watch a few football games is hardly punishing the Russians.

No it's not but they've got to do something.

One wonders what a tiny country like Britain could do to a country 70 times its size with the world's biggest nuclear arsenal.

Nothing Britain could do would harm Russia in the least, but to therefore do nothing would be to ignore the fact that a state sponsored crime has been committed on its streets.

It's a terrible situation for the government.

a reply to: CJCrawley

It's not the size of our nation but the advances of tech we have and what responses we'd use such as cyber warfare for example and the use of economic sanctions.

Now, if we're talking a Russian invasion, well we'd have a very big challenge alone and it would probably be the bloodiest war in Europe for a long time and our end game would most likely be the threat or use of our nuclear arsenal if attacked with the same. For such a small but powerful island nation on the world stage adding that with its historical significance in the world I doubt any of our allies would allow such and jump to our aid.

It not us that Russia would be scared of us but the implications of bringing the big powers to stage. Which the UK has a big influence on those big powers.

So, in reality, we're not so tiny only demographically tiny.

a reply to: vinifalou

Now thats a bit poor considering it was an MI6 clean up operation. MI6 are cleaning house.

a reply to: CJCrawley

Don't under-estimate this tiny island.

I understand what you are saying but in terms of force projection and technology he UK is still gives Russia a challenge.

Also if it was to go that far the UK would probably have good grounds to invoke article 5 of NATO. Bye bye Russia.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: CJCrawley

Don't under-estimate this tiny island.

I understand what you are saying but in terms of force projection and technology he UK is still gives Russia a challenge.

Also if it was to go that far the UK would probably have good grounds to invoke article 5 of NATO. Bye bye Russia.

Good Lord, we are talking the killing of a spy and you want to start a war? It's not like he was some major figure, no offense to his family.

There should be ample evidence to put forth that is was the Russians. Hell where was Steele while this was going on, he is supposed to have such great Russian Intelligence contacts.

Reagan released the recordings of the KAL 007 Airliner shoot down. That kinda of public proof goes a LOOOONG way to proving your case.

Im sure many other IA's around the work could make or procure the same nerve agent.

a reply to: YouSir

ummm...except everything you just stated...falls flat on it's face...

Maybe. But at the end of the day we're all armchair historians.... Except we try to say what I'd and what will happen.


The world is just as strange as it's always been. Who knows what really happened in England. It's anyone's guess.

We're all just trying to make sense of it.

a reply to: pavil

Good Lord, we are talking the killing of a spy and you want to start a war? It's not like he was some major figure, no offense to his family.

I was only responding to another member who was talking about war.

I do not think this should or will lead to war.

Please next time read my posts in the context of what I am responding to.

Russia did actually destroy its nerve agent capabilities according to the OPCW Yet a concerted effort is being made to turn facts on their head.

OPCW itself, which in September 2017 declared that the independent global agency had rigorously verified the completed destruction of Russia’s entire chemical weapons programme, including of course its nerve agent production capabilities. OPCW Director-General, Ahmet Üzümcü, congratulated Russia with the following announcement: “The completion of the verified destruction of Russia’s chemical weapons programme is a major milestone in the achievement of the goals of the Chemical Weapons Convention. I congratulate Russia and I commend all of their experts who were involved for their professionalism and dedication. I also express my appreciation to the States Parties that assisted the Russian Federation with its destruction program and thank the OPCW staff who verified the destruction.”

The crux of it is this: At this point, neither the US nor Britain have offered any actual evidence as to why the OPCW’s verification process regarding Russia’s dismantlement of its chemical weapons capability should be disbelieved. They have provided no evidence that Russia retains any Novichok stockpiles. The OPCW is, of course, the same agency whose independent investigations the West is relying on to determine culpability in major chemical weapons attacks in Syria. Why, then, would the OPCW’s conclusions on Syria be considered gospel truth, while its conclusions on Russia be rejected?

source

Satire:

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

I understood that. I was commenting on the drift of that type of post on this thread.

I'd like to see what proof the UK actually has. It's a Nerve agent that's been around since te 1990's. I Doubt the Russians are the only one who can make it. Again its not like this spy had relevant dirt to spread and had to be killed immediately. Not putting it past the Russians, but I need more evidence that just "take our word for it". If I were the Russians and I wanted him dead, I would have been sneakier than leaving a calling card. Looks like his whole family was picked off one by one if you read his wiki. Just show me what proof there is.

As we have seen time and time again, Governments blatently lie to their citizens.

This will be fun during the FIFA Fooball World Cup to be held in Russia this year!
en.wikipedia.org...

Would be amusing if tit-for-tat diplomacy means no British journalist will be allowed inside Russia to cover one of the biggest sporting events on earth.

Satire:

originally posted by: halfoldman
Would be amusing if tit-for-tat diplomacy means no British journalist will be allowed inside Russia to cover one of the biggest sporting events on earth.

Money always wins. They will just hire non-British journalists to go in their place, assuming they don't already have non-British journalists on staff.

There is no political # storm big enough to deny Brit's their football news.

Satire: