Former Russian double agent seriously ill in Salisbury.

[dowie]

Be better if Panos answers that, but as a reader it feels like a nudge to think about motive/s and the bigger picture. The so-called "Grand Chessboard" as Zbigniew Brzezinski put it (title of a book of his*). I've seen quite a few posts in this thread along the lines of "Nobody other than Russia has a motive for this." Which is pretty blinkered.

I was just making a point that you can't have it both ways... if there is no connection implied then it is irrelevant. You might as well point out that both countries have clear skies and lots of sand... so what?

If there is a connection implied then it is grasping a bit... I realise the tin foil hatters are out in force in this thread but it gets a bit silly.

 

[Nasher]

TLDR; the US and by extension its allies like the UK and Israel, have very powerful motives for ramping up pressure on China and Russia, and seeking to isolate and weaken them. And it's obviously not an easy thing like to overcome Iraq or Libya fairly quickly. If there was deception in those, and there was, expect a lot more v Russia/China. The "Fusion Doctrine" all over the headlines today will be part of this.

Having worked in government and with defense, the UK state just doesn't operate like that and there is no way they would poison someone. UK intelligence officers are recruiters, they buy people and information because defectors (it's not like 007). Bumping people off just isn't how they do things and they never have used tactics like that. They don't train people for that. I can't imagine modern day US intelligence does either since they use similar methods.

IMO this is Russia or someone working for them. To me, to suggest that a western security or intelligence service would do something so messy and dangerous is just ridiculous. It looks like most of the world agrees with that.

 

[Danny75]

Having worked in government and with defense, the UK state just doesn't operate like that and there is no way they would poison someone. UK intelligence officers are recruiters, they buy people and information because defectors (it's not like 007). Bumping people off just isn't how they do things and they never have used tactics like that. They don't train people for that. I can't imagine modern day US intelligence does either since they use similar methods.

Having worked in one compartment does not give you full access to all compartments, especially that dealing with state-sanctioned assassinations. People are regularly assassinated by US and UK forces, whether it's the SEALs or SAS or some other group. Not sure why it would have to be an intelligence officer carrying it out. Nor do I believe, if they were, that all intelligence officers would be let in on it. Porton Down poisoned thousands, some willingly, some unwillingly.

IMO this is Russia or someone working for them and as we can see much of the world agrees with that.

I think it's 160 countries who haven't expelled Russian diplomats, if the figure is accurate. And among those who have, we've heard from the Czech president that despite expelling some diplomats to show solidarity with the UK, he has not been presented with any evidence and he wants to see it. As for the US State Department, when asked if they have seen evidence, their position was "I haven't personally seen evidence but why should we doubt Britain's word." This is rather different from saying "we have. I haven't personally but I'm told we have."

Let's remember as well that when we throw around names like "UK, Russia, US" etc as I do myself, it often just means the leadership not what the rest of the world is actually thinking. There is a lot of scepticism about this within Britain itself, that is not proportionally reflected by those in Westminster who are less free to say what they believe, less free to ask questions, and have been shown the same evidence everyone else has, which is zero.

 

[Nasher]

Having worked in one compartment does not give you full access to all compartments, especially that dealing with state-sanctioned assassinations. People are regularly assassinated by US and UK forces, whether it's the SEALs or SAS or some other group. Not sure why it would have to be an intelligence officer carrying it out. Nor do I believe, if they were, that all intelligence officers would be let in on it. Porton Down poisoned thousands, some willingly, some unwillingly.





I think it's 160 countries who haven't expelled Russian diplomats, if the figure is accurate. And among those who have, we've heard from the Czech president that despite expelling some diplomats to show solidarity with the UK, he has not been presented with any evidence and he wants to see it. As for the US State Department, when asked if they have seen evidence, their position was "I haven't personally seen evidence but why should we doubt Britain's word." This is rather different from saying "we have. I haven't personally but I'm told we have."

Let's remember as well that when we throw around names like "UK, Russia, US" etc as I do myself, it often just means the leadership not what the rest of the world is actually thinking. There is a lot of scepticism about this within Britain itself, that is not proportionally reflected by those in Westminster who are less free to say what they believe, less free to ask questions, and have been shown the same evidence everyone else has, which is zero.

Special forces don't use nerve gas. If they wanted someone gone, you would never hear about it and they certainly wouldn't be getting treated in hospital.

 

[jpaul]

If there is a connection implied then it is grasping a bit... I realise the tin foil hatters are out in force in this thread but it gets a bit silly.

Irrelevant/tenuous content agreed, but do you trust the governments account and conclusions completely ?

Bumping people off just isn't how they do things ....I can't imagine modern day US intelligence does either since they use similar methods

agree, but some questionable behaviour is not so far from home eg. Guantanamo Bay, and the Mossad's behaviour ?

 

[Nasher]

Irrelevant/tenuous content agreed, but do you trust the governments account and conclusions completely ?


agree, but some questionable behaviour is not so far from home eg. Guantanamo Bay, and the Mossad's behaviour ?

But it's all legal in one way or another. While what these people do is secret, there is always someone above them auditing them. That's how things get exposed. Where as in Russia it gets swept under the carpet.

 

[dowie]

Irrelevant/tenuous content agreed, but do you trust the governments account and conclusions completely ?

Not blindly, but it seems the most plausible and various allies agree after seeing the relevant INT. I guess Comrade Corbyn does have his questions despite also being a privy council member and having seen the same intelligence reports... then again he's a fairly stupid individual.

 

[Danny75]

Special forces don't use nerve gas. If they wanted someone gone, you would never hear about it and they certainly wouldn't be getting treated in hospital.

I sort of agree. Although you can never guarantee it 100%. But you'd also have to say the same about the Russians. If they wanted someone gone immediately, that is.

I've seen no evidence that a nerve agent of the type described (10 times more powerful than VX) was used on March 4th. The facts (including the policeman driving himself to hospital) at the moment tend to point to an incapacitating agent which the Skripals were heavily exposed to and Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey lightly exposed to. Subsequent to that, who knows. Were the OPCW allowed in straightaway to take samples from not only the Skripals but Bailey? The answer to that is no. Will subsequent samples be taken from Bailey? We don't know. Nor do I know if there would still be any trace, depending on the extent of his recovery (very little word on that). Were samples taken from Bailey during the time he was sick? We don't know either, only that there's no word of this being handed to the OPCW, which is suspicious. "All three were exposed to it but you can only have samples from two of them. Righty-ho, off you go then."

 

[Slam62]

I sort of agree. Although you can never guarantee it 100%. But you'd also have to say the same about the Russians. If they wanted someone gone immediately, that is.

I've seen no evidence that a nerve agent of the type described (10 times more powerful than VX) was used on March 4th. The facts (including the policeman driving himself to hospital) at the moment tend to point to an incapacitating agent which the Skripals were heavily exposed to and Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey lightly exposed to. Subsequent to that, who knows. Were the OPCW allowed in straightaway to take samples from not only the Skripals but Bailey? The answer to that is no. Will subsequent samples be taken from Bailey? We don't know. Nor do I know if there would still be any trace, depending on the extent of his recovery (very little word on that). Were samples taken from Bailey during the time he was sick? We don't know either, only that there's no word of this being handed to the OPCW, which is suspicious. "All three were exposed to it but you can only have samples from two of them. Righty-ho, off you go then."

really?

Putin has sent a message loud and clear, he went to a lot of trouble.

 

[jpaul]

The lack of conjecture in the media remains surprising;
if there is currently obfuscation of the facts because revealing details would hinder the investiagtion, then let's acknowledge that as a valid motivation, as opposed to media silence.

Another point I saw raised is - if it's Putin, this will have stymied any future agent swaps.

 

[StriderX]

Because we can't regime change every country that needs it, we should leave fascist dictators in power then.

Lets focus on this little thing here.

So because we cant change regimes say, in SA or Qatar or UAE or whatever, you're point is to actually leave them in power? You can't pick and choose in geopolitics when you're just an observer of events. (I notice you actually say the opposite, which is a contradiction, which is unhelpful)

So either we do leave them all in power or we destroy them all. There is no middle ground, that middle ground is called willful ignorance, and it's why Yemenese children are blown to pieces with British hardware.

 

[Nasher]

I sort of agree. Although you can never guarantee it 100%. But you'd also have to say the same about the Russians. If they wanted someone gone immediately, that is.

I've seen no evidence that a nerve agent of the type described (10 times more powerful than VX) was used on March 4th. The facts (including the policeman driving himself to hospital) at the moment tend to point to an incapacitating agent which the Skripals were heavily exposed to and Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey lightly exposed to. Subsequent to that, who knows. Were the OPCW allowed in straightaway to take samples from not only the Skripals but Bailey? The answer to that is no. Will subsequent samples be taken from Bailey? We don't know. Nor do I know if there would still be any trace, depending on the extent of his recovery (very little word on that). Were samples taken from Bailey during the time he was sick? We don't know either, only that there's no word of this being handed to the OPCW, which is suspicious. "All three were exposed to it but you can only have samples from two of them. Righty-ho, off you go then."

Russia has quite a history of botching it. This isn't the first time they quietly poisoned someone, tried to make it look like natural causes, but got found out. Not just in the UK either.

Litvinenko even described the ones that served him radioactive tea before it killed him. They were Russian and one of them is now a Russian MP.

 

[stopper]

ignore

 

[dowie]

I've seen no evidence that a nerve agent of the type described (10 times more powerful than VX) was used on March 4th. The facts (including the policeman driving himself to hospital) at the moment tend to point to an incapacitating agent which the Skripals were heavily exposed to and Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey lightly exposed to.

eh? Why do they? You've seen no evidence either way, the government hasn't released any evidence publicly so you've got no basis for your assumption there re an "incapacitating agent", especially given that the people who have seen the evidence are going along with the government's stance.

 

[Minusorange]

So it seems that the Russians tried to kill his door also

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43577987

 

[xxalxx]

How many posts do you need to have on here before Governments and the OPCW confide in you so that you are ITK, is it more that the Members Market?

 

[Rroff]

How many posts do you need to have on here before Governments and the OPCW confide in you so that you are ITK, is it more that the Members Market?

Over 50K trust me.

So it seems that the Russians tried to kill his door also

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43577987

Gives a whole new meaning to the letter box thing.

 

[Trusty]

Be better if Panos answers that, but as a reader it feels like a nudge to think about motive/s and the bigger picture. The so-called "Grand Chessboard" as Zbigniew Brzezinski put it (title of a book of his*). I've seen quite a few posts in this thread along the lines of "Nobody other than Russia has a motive for this." Which is pretty blinkered.




20 years on, the situation is different. China and Russia are coming in hot economically (the former, although the latter, spurred on by sanctions etc, has embarked on a self-sufficiency project that could leave it standing in better stead than just about anyone else) and militarily (both). Wanted genuine discussion about a "multi-polar" world but it hasn't happened. At least not by agreement. It's happening by effect.

TLDR; the US and by extension its allies like the UK and Israel, have very powerful motives for ramping up pressure on China and Russia, and seeking to isolate and weaken them. And it's obviously not an easy thing like to overcome Iraq or Libya fairly quickly. If there was deception in those, and there was, expect a lot more v Russia/China. The "Fusion Doctrine" all over the headlines today will be part of this.

How are Russia coming in hot economically? They have a population of like 140m and gdp of $1.2t, they're economy is based on a finite resource as well. China I would agree with, Russia, not so much. What you say about the petroyuan is true, it's going to cause problems, but what about if the dollar was backed by the gold standard as well? From my research, that's very much in the works. It's also worth reading up on China's one belt one initiative. Ask yourself why Trump & S.Korea have spoken to NK, and why Kim recently visited Xi. How much is Putin worth? Think Panama Papers. Could other Asian leaders be fed up with Putin? You think Putin is in bed with China, I disagree.

 

[Danny75]

​

How are Russia coming in hot economically? They have a population of like 140m and gdp of $1.2t, they're economy is based on a finite resource as well. China I would agree with, Russia, not so much.

I knew the way that sentence ended up could cause misunderstanding but never got round to tidying it up. I'll rephrase it like so:

China and Russia are coming in hot. The former economically. And both militarily. As an afterthought I added the part about Russia's self-sufficiency goal.

​

What you say about the petroyuan is true, it's going to cause problems,

I didn't. That was Panos. But do agree.

but what about if the dollar was backed by the gold standard as well? From my research, that's very much in the works. It's also worth reading up on China's one belt one initiative.

Might do. Thanks.

You think Putin is in bed with China

No. I don't feel they trust each other, but they also know western powers would love to see them both weakened.

 

[ubersonic]

I think it's 160 countries who haven't expelled Russian diplomats, if the figure is accurate.

And? Does it really matter that the second/third world isn't involved?

I have seen Russia shouting about the 160 countries thing and it's just smoke and mirrors, they are trying to pain the picture that because 160 minor countries have not been show the evidence that it's somehow flawed.

It was good enough to satisfy all the important countries, it was good enough to make all the major NATO players agree for the first time this century, it was good enough to make Jeremy Corbyn agree. That's good enough for me, I don't really care if Gambia haven't agreed because they haven't been shown anything lol.