Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Thu Apr 26 14:04:54 2018

Utopia Talk / Politics / Russia can play this game too
Paramount
Member
Wed Mar 28 06:32:19
So yeah, why doesn't Britain prove that they didn't poison Skripal?


Russia to Britain: Prove your own spies did not poison Skripal

MOSCOW (Reuters) - The Russian Foreign Ministry on Wednesday demanded London prove British spies did not poison a former double agent in England, saying in the absence of such proof it would regard the incident as an attempt on the lives of Russian citizens.

Ties between London and Moscow are badly strained by the poisoning of former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in Salisbury. Britain alleges Russia was to blame, but Moscow says it had no involvement.

“An analysis of all the circumstances ... leads us to think of the possible involvement in it (the poisoning) of the British intelligence services,” the foreign ministry said in a statement.

“If convincing evidence to the contrary is not presented to the Russian side we will consider that we are dealing with an attempt on the lives of our citizens as a result of a massive political provocation.”

http://www...t-poison-skripal-idUSKBN1H41DL
Paramount
Member
Wed Mar 28 06:34:51
If Britain can't prove that they didn't poison Russian citizens, then I guess Britain can present solid and concrete evidence that Russia did it. It's not too much to ask for, right?
jergul
large member
Wed Mar 28 06:38:46
Proving a negative is always a bit awkward.
Paramount
Member
Wed Mar 28 06:43:35
Didn't Britain ask Russia to prove that they didn't poison Skripal?
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Wed Mar 28 06:49:22

Britain has no reason while Russia has a habit of playing the revenge card.

jergul
large member
Wed Mar 28 06:50:17
Its more that it offered Russia two options:

Either you poisoned Skripal, or you have been producing and storing a nerve agent in a crap way and someone stole some of it.

Which do you chose? Not that it matters, because you are culpable either way.

But culpable is actually a legal term. Lets see if any of the victims take it to court and are awarded damages.
Paramount
Member
Wed Mar 28 08:52:48
"Britain has no reason"

lol, they are just being their normal anti-Russian self and are continuing with the Western anti-Russian agenda, and wants to fuck with Russia because of Ukraine/Crimea, and maybe because to please elements in the US, among other things.


Why would Russia want to kill him? And why in London? If Russia wanted him dead they could have let him rot in jail, or kill him in easily in Russia. And if they really wanted him dead, he would have been dead. It doesn't make sense to pardon him, set him free from jail, only to kill in London. Or maybe that (killing him in London) was supposed to be a part of whatever plan Russia has?
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Wed Mar 28 09:08:11
"Britain has no reason while Russia has a habit of playing the revenge card."

the seb is strong in this one.
obaminated
Member
Wed Mar 28 09:39:39
Mountmes philosophy seems to be solely contrarian.
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Wed Mar 28 12:14:19

swordtail, so what motive does England have?

When you have no evidence then all you have left is motive.

jergul
large member
Wed Mar 28 12:54:22
What motive does the UK have to accuse Russia?

Easing Brexit negotiations.
Provide a distraction from its close ties to Cambridge Analytics (a company that most definately meddled in the US election).
Bolster May's chances of political survival.
Provide a framework for UKs post brexit security.

A bit more substantial than killing a pensioned spy (The fellow is way past Russian retirement age. Like poisoning a 81 year old by western standards).
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Wed Mar 28 14:11:46

I thought we were talking about assassination, not accusations.

jergul
large member
Wed Mar 28 14:59:27
HR
We do not actually know it was an assasination. The only thing we know for sure is that May is accusing Russia.

The first question to ask is if the May could have ulterior motives for making such a claim.
Paramount
Member
Wed Mar 28 15:32:19
No one is dead yet, so it isn’t an assasination yet.

The police says now that they beleive the couple were poisoned at their front door:


Skripals were poisoned at their home, police believe

Specialists have identified the highest concentration of the nerve agent on the front door of the address.

"At this point in our investigation, we believe the Skripals first came into contact with the nerve agent from their front door," deputy assistant commissioner Dean Haydon, Senior National Coordinator for Counter Terrorism Policing said.

http://new...r-home-police-believe-11307561


First the police said that they beleived the daughter might have had her luggage poisoned while being on a trip in Russia.

Now it is the front door.

Sounds like the police beleives a lot of things and does not actually know a whole lot of what really happened. The only thing they seem to know is that Putin did it. Except that they don’t have any proof of it of course.


They also found the nerve agent at a pub. If the nerve agent is so dangerous, how come no one else at the pub got poisoned?

But the police at the park bench got poisoned? Why did he get poisoned?
Sam Adams
Member
Wed Mar 28 15:48:22
If russia didnt already have a huge list of priors, perhaps there could be some benefit of the doubt.

But that is not the case. Russia is untrusted by virtually everyone. How many nations have kicked out russians over this? 30?
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Wed Mar 28 19:30:37

jergul - HR
We do not actually know it was an assasination. The only thing we know for sure is that May is accusing Russia.


I doubt they thought they were smelling glue. Due to the sophisticated method that they were attacked, I can only assume someone tried to assassinate them whether it be England or Russia is what needs to be determined.

I read or hears somewhere that Russia has a habit of taking revenge on traitors.

Hot Rod
Revved Up
Wed Mar 28 19:41:25
*-I read or heard
Paramount
Member
Thu Mar 29 02:00:20
I can see how a lot of individual people and countries can take revenge on traitors. It happens all da time. Or someone gets easily offended... and then boom.
jergul
large member
Thu Mar 29 05:42:53
HR
Why would you think the attack was sophisticated? Current theory is now exposure in the hall entry (suggesting letter contamination).
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Mar 29 06:24:10

The poison itself indicates a measure of sophistication.

Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Mar 29 06:26:11

I don't think you can make it by mixing some household cleaners and supplies together.

jergul
large member
Thu Mar 29 08:58:37
HR
A measure of sophistication meaning you might need a BSc in chemistry and access to a garage style laboratory?

Or perhaps as advanced as actually needing access to a commercial or educational facility?

We don't know what poison was used really.
Daemon
Member
Fri Mar 30 03:44:26
From a news service for schools:

"We launched The Day for schools and colleges to help explain current affairs in short articles written and illustrated with great care by our own staff writers and graphic artists; to be a serious briefing service for everyone, not just the people at the top of the pyramid; to help replace the conversation many do not have at home; to pick out the underlying issues that are shaping the world; and to help readers ask good questions rather than believe they have the answers.

Our mission is to help students think about what they can see and hear around them in the news day by day;"




http://the...-on-mission-to-poison-the-west

‘Toxic’ Putin on mission to poison the West

Is Putin Europe’s most dangerous leader since Hitler? He stands accused of ordering brutal assassinations and cyberattacks, as well as plotting the downfall of Western democracy.

This Sunday Vladimir Putin will stand for re-election as the President of Russia. In a nation with no credible opposition, and where dissenters can be assassinated, the result is beyond doubt.

And so the West must prepare for another six years of Putin at Russia’s helm. Many expect severe troubles ahead. Yesterday the The Daily Telegraph’s front page bore a warlike exhortation for Britain to “bolster” its defences, while the The Financial Times claimed Putin imperils “peace and democracy in Europe”.

The danger Russia poses was put into sharp relief by the attempted assassination of former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia. Yesterday the leaders of France, Germany, the US and the UK released a joint statement condemning Russia’s attack as a “clear violation” of international law which “threatens the security of us all”.

The statement makes particular mention of the deadly Novichok nerve agent the attackers used, claiming it was the “first offensive use of a nerve agent in Europe since the Second World War”.

Despite this incriminating evidence and international outrage, Putin merely smirks and denies everything.

And while he sits on stockpiles of nuclear warheads and chemical weapons, some think Putin’s ability to deny the brazenly obvious makes him even more dangerous.

When Russia invaded Crimea in 2014 (the first forcible land grab in Europe since 1945) Putin rubbished reports of heavily armed Russian soldiers operating in the region, saying they were “local volunteers”.

Russia has also been implicated in a “digital blitzkrieg” of cyberattacks against European nations; the destruction of a Malaysian Airways plane (killing 298 people); and attempts to hack the US presidential election.

For journalist Owen Matthews, Russia’s casual denial of involvement in these acts amounts to an “assault on the very idea that truth itself can exist”. And if nothing is true, then Putin can never be brought to account.

But does all of this make Putin the most dangerous European leader since Hitler?

Vlad guy

Nonsense, some argue. Putin is a personality cult puffed up by cowardly, yet high-profile, attacks on neighbours and rogue individuals. In truth, he is enfeebled by a stuttering economy and dwindling oil revenues — ruling his populace by fear rather than consent. Putin lashes out through weakness, not strength.

He must not be underestimated, others respond. Russia has invaded sovereign nations, tried to destabilise liberal democracies, and been implicated in violent assassinations — all on Putin’s watch. Throw in nuclear brinkmanship and the fostering of violent Russian nationalism, and Putin undoubtedly resembles one of Europe’s greatest threats.
Paramount
Member
Fri Mar 30 06:20:13
"When Russia invaded Crimea in 2014 (the first forcible land grab in Europe since 1945)"

Didn't the Crimean population hold a referendum and voted to belong to Russia?
jergul
large member
Sat Mar 31 14:49:22
Seb
Russia told the UK to trim down another 23 diplomats (unnamed) to give "parity" within a month.

Time now to recall your ambassador for consultations and put the embassy in caretaker mode for a defined number of months?
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Sat Mar 31 15:12:23

jergul - We don't know what poison was used really.


I'm not sure what it is called but I heard on FOX that it was invented by Russia.

jergul
large member
Sat Mar 31 16:21:36
HR
MOSCOW, March 30. /TASS/. Russia has convened an extraordinary session of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) Executive Council to more fully use the possibilities of this structure as London failed to provide materials on the incident in Salisbury, Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.

"This [convening of the OPCW session] is linked to the situation in Salisbury. Russia seeks an impartial and objective investigation," Peskov said, noting that Moscow rejects the accusations against it in connection with the poisoning of former Russian military intelligence officer-turned-British mole Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia, who is a Russian citizen.



"All this certainly gives grounds for active steps in the framework of the only competent international organization on this issue," Peskov stressed.

Russia seeks to "more fully use the possibilities of the organization [OPCW] since unfortunately our country is deprived of a chance to get materials on this case from the country where this incident occurred," he noted.

Earlier, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov announced that Russia was convening an extraordinary session of the OPCW Executive Council in connection with the March 4 incident in Salisbury.

Former Colonel of Russia’s Main Intelligence Directorate Sergei Skripal, who had been sentenced in Russia for spying for the UK, and his daughter Yulia were poisoned with a nerve agent on March 4 and found unconscious on a bench in Salisbury, England. Claiming that the substance used in the attack had been a Novichok-class nerve agent developed in the Soviet Union, London rushed to accuse Russia of being involved in the incident. Moscow rejected all of the United Kingdom’s accusations, saying that a program aimed at developing such a substance had existed neither in the Soviet Union nor in Russia.


More:
http://tass.com/politics/996897
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Sat Mar 31 18:39:11

Or the actions of the desperate.

jergul
large member
Sun Apr 01 05:38:24
Why would Russia be desperate?
jergul
large member
Sun Apr 01 05:39:21
Or were you talking about the UK? Brexit does put it under a lot of pressure and creates a need to ground a future security alignment on...an external enemy perhaps?
jergul
large member
Sun Apr 01 05:42:55
All kinds of odd things are slipping through the cracks because of the poisoning.

The UK has agreed in principle to a hard border south of Northern Ireland if all else fails.

Meaning NI remains part of the EU border union (Schengen and Customs), the rest of the UK does not.

That this did not cause the government to fall (its minority partners are Northern Irish nationalists) explains alone why the UK would harness all the brimestone at its disposal towards an external power.

Distract the nationalists with nationalist flag-waving so the government does not fall.
Rugian
Member
Sun Apr 01 06:08:41
"The UK has agreed in principle to a hard border south of Northern Ireland if all else fails.

Meaning NI remains part of the EU border union (Schengen and Customs), the rest of the UK does not."

You are literally talking nonsense.
Rugian
Member
Sun Apr 01 06:09:57
"That this did not cause the government to fall (its minority partners are Northern Irish nationalists)"

Again, you are literally talking nonsense. DUP are unionists.
jergul
large member
Sun Apr 01 06:21:39
Ruggy
I chose the term specifically. They are pro-UK nationalists. Or are you disputing that they are nationalists?

It does not answer the question of who poisoned the former agent. It answers why May would go bat-shit crazy over the incident.

She distracted the nationalists (pro-UK) with flagwaving as a hard-border option is agreed on in principle.

She saved her government from falling. Yay.
Rugian
Member
Sun Apr 01 06:43:45
jergul,

You did the opposite of choosing your words carefully. First you claimed that the UK agreed to a hard border if all else fails. Then you claimed that NI would stay in the customs union, which would be the direct opposite of a hard border. After that, you characterized the DUP as nationalists, when everyone else in the world normally refers to them as unionists. Your entire post was absolutely incomprehensible to anyone with a reasonable level of sanity.

As to your broader point, you can argue that May is saber-rattling to distract from internal governing troubles, sure. Regarding the events of the past month though, there's nothing in particular that seriously threatened the government. The UK rejected the EU's backstop and negotiations on the border issue are ongoing. There's been zero speculation of the DUP triggering a collapse.
jergul
large member
Sun Apr 01 07:19:45
A hard border running south of NI. Like I said.

"Soon after the December deal it became clear the UK believed alignment would only need to apply to a narrow range of areas.

By contrast the EU took a much more expansive view.

That was confirmed in February when the EU published its legal interpretation of the deal.

In effect it concluded that the backstop would have to mean Northern Ireland staying in the EU customs union, the single market for goods and the VAT area.

The language of the EU text also described the backstop as applying "in respect of Northern Ireland" rather than the UK as a whole.

That made it unacceptable to unionists and Theresa May said no prime minister could ever agree to it.
So what is happening now?

The prime minister has re-committed to agreeing a backstop option and the two negotiating teams have begun working on this."

Rugian
Member
Sun Apr 01 07:40:12
"A hard border running south of NI. Like I said."

Oh my god, just admit when you make a cock-up already.

Anyway, the UK has agreed to a backstop. A backstop can be anything they want it to be. They have rejected the EU's version.

The DUP are not stupid (creationism aside). They know that they're getting a better deal in government than they'd ever get outside of it, and they wouldn't pull out of the coalition unless it was clear that the coalition had failed them. That hasn't happened yet.

Nothing has happened in the past month or so that would cause unionists to defect from May's side en masse. If there does come a point where the DUP is itching to get out of the coalition, it's not right now.

If you really want something to cry false-flag over, try the southern French attacks (right as the rail strikes were about to start).
jergul
large member
Sun Apr 01 08:21:09
Ruggy
You seem to think there is a equity in power between the UK and the EU.

They have not rejected the EUs version. They have just rejected what the EUs version means. But not to the EU (there May reaffirms her commitment to the backdrop).

I am incidentally not claiming false flag attack, I am suggesting May is fighting for her political survival and should be considered a cornered beast in any and all contexts.

A hard brexit or a hard border south of NI or a Norwegian variant where the UK follows all directives and rules, but no longer is represented.

The government will survive exactly as long as other distractions keep the focus away from the 3 available alternatives.
Rugian
Member
Sun Apr 01 11:29:40
jergul,

I'm confused. If you are not claiming false flag, then why were you stating earlier that May had much more to gain from the attack than Russia did?

Perhaps we are misunderstanding each other. How about we establish our position by agreeing to the following statements:

1. Russia in all probability did this.
2. The UK is probably not working with conclusive hard evidence to definitively prove that Russia did this.

jergul
large member
Sun Apr 01 17:54:13
Ruggy
May has a lot to gain by going batshit crazy.

1. Our only source of information is the UK government.
2. The UK government has gone batshit crazy.

The only thing we know for sure is that three people were exposed to chemicals that made two of them very ill.

So two counts of attempted murder.

The rest is May making hay.

Seb
Member
Sun Apr 22 18:41:50
Jergul, the Irish backstop was agreed ages ago.

May can get away with this because Brexit were cannot afford to create scope for a remain.

As long as we leave next year on any terms,they can build from there.

And if they are going to cause govt to fall it will be may next year to maximise chance of hard Brexit.
Seb
Member
Sun Apr 22 18:44:11
In short you are badly misreading UK politics.

There's almost no pressure on May at all.
jergul
large member
Sun Apr 22 18:50:54
Seb
The government was not in agreement with the EU on what the backstop means. The EU is angling the issue to having EU courts arbitrate in the case of disagreement during the exit process (ie a court overruling UKs intepretation).

DUP cannot cause the Government to fall. I do not see a no confidence vote being floored or passing before the UK formally leaves the EU (it would have to be something odd like DUP and the entire conservative bench voting no confidence on itself).
jergul
large member
Sun Apr 22 18:51:22
The 2011 changes do not seem well thought out.
jergul
large member
Sun Apr 22 18:53:53
May under no pressure? Lol, I see absolutely no roadmap (beside perhaps a shooting war with Russia) that will see May survive politically (defined as leading the conservative party after the next election).
Seb
Member
Mon Apr 23 02:13:26
Jergul:

Might flagged this at the time. You are overthinking this, and focusing in the wrong way.

Mogg and his ilk are not going to bring down the govt until the last minute (maximises chance of a no deal exit).

The last thing they want to do is demonstrate that the best available brexit is worse than membership and then force a general election.

That might lead to extended A50 process (i.e. not leaving) or a public change of heart (which might mean continued membership on worse terms).

The conservatives overall weakness makes the Brexit hardliners very weak.

The hardliners view is put up with whatever it takes to be formally out - even a two year period of very bad exit terms.

Once legally out, they'll use that retroactively to blame the pain of brexit on the left wing of the Tory party and use the "injustice" to push a much less integrated future deal (which the EU isn't discussing in any detail until after we leave).

So right now, may is safe and under no pressure at all.

Sure, May isn't going to survive personally beyond brexit, but that's got little to do with brexit negotiations and everything to do with botching the last election and losing a majority.

She's toast, but there's nothing - absolutely nothing - she can do about it; until May next year, she has a fairly free hand and as long as she can spin Brexit she'll have another couple of years to focus on a pet issue for legacy and anoint a successor.

Meanwhile, outside of a few backbenchers that are actually pretty ignorable because most Tory MPs quietly hate them; labour is supporting brexit in principle and Corbyn's personal rating is 15 points behind May's.

So who is going to bring down the govt? Not the DUP, not the brexit hardliners, certainly not the govt. The BBC and popular media is barely reporting on brexit.

I can't think of a govt that's had a ride this easy in my lifetime. That's not to say it's strong. But when everyone else is weaker still, weak can get stable.

The idea she's concocting foreign intrigues for tactical distraction purposes is fairly out there.


jergul
large member
Mon Apr 23 04:55:46
The idea is that she is pushing foreign narratives way beyond the evidence for domestic purposes.

It would be nice if you could stop making a straw man of that point sometime soon. I have repeated it often enough.

She is fighting for her political life (you may think she is toast, but does May think she is irredeemably lost?).
Seb
Member
Mon Apr 23 07:35:10
Jergul:

The idea is wrong. Just leaked Heywood is anointing Sedwill as successor not Robbins.

The Skripal response isnt a political thing.

She's certainly trying to boost her credibility in the party, but there is no external pressure on her.




jergul
large member
Mon Apr 23 07:45:46
Seb
Of course it is political. Corbyn would have taken a different, evidence-based, and less provocative course. To name a different political "thing".

In the same way that attaching herself by the hip to Trump is political (and distasteful for more than visual reasons). Macron at least has some kind of policy idea behind bombing Syria illegally and on highly dubious evidence.
jergul
large member
Mon Apr 23 07:46:48
The lack of external pressure simply has to do with letting the Conservatives own Brexit. There is a clear time limit to that immunity.
Seb
Member
Mon Apr 23 11:25:40
Jergul:

If you mean Cornyn would have ignored the evidence officialdom has presented, yarp. But that would be his politics trumping process.

You forget the role of JIC to stop sofa government.

So you agree, no pressure on May?

It's perfectly possible to let Tories own brexit while opposing brexit.

I must say it's a novel strategy to get the government to "own" a policy by whilling your MPs to support it and sacking frontbenchers who call for a second referrendum.

You probably need to accept that Cornyn supports brexit. He always did historically oppose the EU.
jergul
large member
Mon Apr 23 11:32:35
Seb
I meant that he would not push the narrative farther than the available evidence allowed.

The process actually involves police work and courts when not politised. You know. The Rule of Law.

The correct time to oppose Brexit would be to shoot down any idea of a referendum. Too late now. For endless number of reasons. Corbyn is quite correct. So not only do I accept that, I embrace it.

He is also not the one who orchestrated a referendum in the first place to cater to rabid wings within the conservative party.

You are left with a Norwegian solution as your best case.

Poor you.

show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share