Russian nerve agent attack

Just give it time. Won't be long before the blunt tools on here will be saying some version of that.

 

Apply the following logic - "I don't understand, but I don't trust the government so the thing I imagine must be the truth, regardless of facts" - and you get somewhere close to this weird mindset.

 

So what's the news on my bet? Has he run away again?

I have decided that I can't help you....I enjoy friendly debate and I am happy to concede whenever I am wrong, but you are just rude. I did say neither of us could win a bet because we will never know the facts.

Lol food poisoning. Next time I have a dodgy curry I will have the restaurant and home demolished

The international inspectors have come out and agreed with the UKs findings.

The international inspectors have come out and agreed with the UKs findings.

They're in on it too.

Our government is world class at massive all-encompassing conspiracies. If anything, we conspired it too well.

They're in on it too.

 

Our government is world class at massive all-encompassing conspiracies. If anything, we conspired it too well.

The international inspectors have come out and agreed with the UKs findings.

Funny that, it's almost as if these conspiracy theorists were just making it all up?!

The problem with pretty much everything that is going on at the moment is that it involves doubt, difficult moral and legal decisions, shades of grey. For a lot of people, this is troubling and won't fit in to their world view. For example all Tories are evil; Corbyn is a traitor; There is a malevolent force or group that controls the world etc. It is easier to subscribe to a single unwavering narrative than accept the world is complicated and you have no real control.

No doubt people will still find holes to pick and create new weird and wonderful reasons to not blame Russia though.

They're in on it too.

 

Our government is world class at massive all-encompassing conspiracies. If anything, we conspired it too well.

Our fatal flaw was making all the evidence look too convincing. It's all so obvious!

Yes yes, very predictable sarcastic responses from you two.

All the OPCW have confirmed is that they agree with Porton Down's assessment of the type of nerve agent used. They haven't confirmed where it was made and who by.

So this isn't actually a new development at all, and it doesn't provide any further 'evidence' against Russia on top of the purely circumstantial case we already had.

The international inspectors have come out and agreed with the UKs findings.

What, that it is military grade and could be manufactured by any country with the resources?

What, that it is military grade and could be manufactured by any country with the resources?

What does "military grade" actually mean anyway. Just says to me that it wasn't cooked up in a garden shed somewhere.

Certainly doesn't seem very efficient, then again neither do a lot of the smart bombs and missiles that get used around the globe these days. I mean look at last April's cruise missile attack in Syria. 59 Tomahawks on an airbase that was functioning again within a couple of days. 59 Tomahawks must cost a packet of dollars for what seems to be a very limited result. One wonders if they weren't "soft" versions really, just for show and effect.

Funny that, it's almost as if these conspiracy theorists were just making it all up?!

 

The problem with pretty much everything that is going on at the moment is that it involves doubt, difficult moral and legal decisions, shades of grey. For a lot of people, this is troubling and won't fit in to their world view. For example all Tories are evil; Corbyn is a traitor; There is a malevolent force or group that controls the world etc. It is easier to subscribe to a single unwavering narrative than accept the world is complicated and you have no real control.

 

No doubt people will still find holes to pick and create new weird and wonderful reasons to not blame Russia though.

Quite. This is more-or-less the point made by Verbal in the Corbyn thread about how the far-left functions. Obviously it applies to the far-right and other extreme folk too.

For anecdotal evidence of the susceptibility of people to this sort of non-thinking approach, I give you Donald Trump's Twitter account.

Yes yes, very predictable sarcastic responses from you two.

 

All the OPCW have confirmed is that they agree with Porton Down's assessment of the type of nerve agent used. They haven't confirmed where it was made and who by.

 

So this isn't actually a new development at all, and it doesn't provide any further 'evidence' against Russia on top of the purely circumstantial case we already had.

The OPCW constitutionally cannot say who delivered a chemical weapons attack, even though they may know exactly who did it. They may only confirm the chemical makeup of the substance used in an attack.

Until recently, a joint UN-OPCW panel was empowered to make judgments on who the culprit was - until the Russians vetoed the panel's reconfirmation after a number of decisions ascribing chemical attacks in Syria to - guess who? - Assad.

Funny, that.

Yes yes, very predictable sarcastic responses from you two.

 

All the OPCW have confirmed is that they agree with Porton Down's assessment of the type of nerve agent used. They haven't confirmed where it was made and who by.

 

So this isn't actually a new development at all, and it doesn't provide any further 'evidence' against Russia on top of the purely circumstantial case we already had.

The scientists and intel services must know for sure.

Is that the same must know as the Iraqi WMDs or more must know?

How do you actually 100% prove it was from Russia? It doesn't come in a tin with made in Russia on it. I assume it must have the trademarks of a Russian made substance. The scientists and intel services must know for sure.

Well this is the problem isn't it. We can never prove it beyond any doubt, and Putin knows that only too well.

He's obviously played a blinder here, because whatever accusations we make, he will always have plausible deniability. Especially given the massive PR victory that BoJo handed him last week. That episode means he can point to the fact that we can't even get our own story straight as 'evidence' that we are just making it up as we go along.

If it was the Russian state that did it, and I have said all along that it probably was, then unfortunately our government have been outmaneuvered by someone far smarter than any of them, I'm sorry to say.

The OPCW constitutionally cannot say who delivered a chemical weapons attack, even though they may know exactly who did it. They may only confirm the chemical makeup of the substance used in an attack.

 

Until recently, a joint UN-OPCW panel was empowered to make judgments on who the culprit was - until the Russians vetoed the panel's reconfirmation after a number of decisions ascribing chemical attacks in Syria to - guess who? - Assad.

 

Funny, that.

Yes and they are apparently the ones now trying to block the OPCW from carrying out an investigation into the attack on Douma.

How do you actually 100% prove it was from Russia? It doesn't come in a tin with made in Russia on it. I assume it must have the trademarks of a Russian made substance. The scientists and intel services must know for sure.

Well this is the problem isn't it. We can never prove it beyond any doubt, and Putin knows that only too well.

 

He's obviously played a blinder here, because whatever accusations we make, he will always have plausible deniability. Especially given the massive PR victory that BoJo handed him last week. That episode means he can point to the fact that we can't even get our own story straight as 'evidence' that we are just making it up as we go along.

 

If it was the Russian state that did it, and I have said all along that it probably was, then unfortunately our government have been outmaneuvered by someone far smarter than any of them, I'm sorry to say.

It is becoming a bit concerning that Putin wants to show his strength, what happens if he conjures something up in the Balkan states. Latvia has a large Russian populace and they are very pro Putin and it wont be long until they start to agitate to get reunited. Reminds me a bit of the way it all started with Adolfs land grab by default in the late 30's

Is that the same must know as the Iraqi WMDs or more must know?

Probably not to be fair. Most from that time have probably moved on.

Being this is a domestic issue to one over seas, it could well be a different agency pushing this. The ones that regularly foil attacks on the UK

Plus the speculation that his daughter could have been an agent too. If that is the case then we can be certain it was Russia. Whilst that may not be true, I'm sure the security services will have more evidence that we are not aware of that would make them sure. I simply don't believe they are accusing Russia with this level of certainty without being sure themselves.

Probably not to be fair. Most from that time have probably moved on.

 

Being this is a domestic issue to one over seas, it could well be a different agency pushing this. The ones that regularly foil attacks on the UK

I know the conspiracy cretins won't get this, but the dodgy dossier suffered from at least two problems that are not present in the nerve agent investigation. One is that the dossier was compiled directly under political direction from No10 (alongside 'C' from the SIS), and safeguards have been put in place since to prevent this after the Chilcot inquiry.

The other, actually more significant factor was that the conviction that Saddam had huge stockpiles of WMDs came almost entirely from the 'human intelligence' of a single informant known as Curveball, who turned out to be a wild fantasist. His descriptions of the physical appearance of Saddam's WMDs were so lurid - and so strikingly similar to the green blobs in the Nicholas Cage/Sean Connery movie The Rock - that a number in MI6 were deeply sceptical long before the dossier became a public issue. And, once again, the Chilcot inquiry put safeguards in place to mitigate against any repeat of this ludicrous over-reliance on a single humint source.

With the Salisbury attack, there is no dodgy dossier because the attack has already happened, and no Curveball because it's pretty clear the intelligence community have been building a picture of what happened in Salisbury based on a wide range of intelligence sources (including eavesdropping of various kinds). Whether they can pin down the attack to Putin himself, or the gang around him or rogue FSB, is still open to question.

But the conspiracy loons can weave their webs of coloured string to a wall-full of photos all they like, in order to reach laughable conclusions about food poisoning, etc., but such theories only work inside their own simplistic heads.

Russia deny there was an chemical attack on Douma. Still planks will believe this

I think that basically the rest of the world have stood behind us ,means that Putin has not outsmarted us. He is in damage limitation mode.

It is becoming a bit concerning that Putin wants to show his strength, what happens if he conjures something up in the Balkan states. Latvia has a large Russian populace and they are very pro Putin and it wont be long until they start to agitate to get reunited. Reminds me a bit of the way it all started with Adolfs land grab by default in the late 30's

We have the nuclear option now which would have done for Adolf

Probably not to be fair. Most from that time have probably moved on.

 

Being this is a domestic issue to one over seas, it could well be a different agency pushing this. The ones that regularly foil attacks on the UK

Same in principle though, we’re being told by a government with an agenda that there is evidence but we are not allowed to see it and it turned out there wasn’t any. Wether it is the same people or agency is irrelevant - we were lied to before so it makes sense to be sceptical this time around.

It obviously probably was Russia but the type of agent used is far from being proof. You don’t have to be a conspiracy nut to know that despite what our resident simpleton thinks.

I think that basically the rest of the world have stood behind us ,means that Putin has not outsmarted us. He is in damage limitation mode.

It is becoming a bit concerning that Putin wants to show his strength, what happens if he conjures something up in the Balkan states. Latvia has a large Russian populace and they are very pro Putin and it wont be long until they start to agitate to get reunited. Reminds me a bit of the way it all started with Adolfs land grab by default in the late 30's

Not a chance, I know a few Latvians and some of them despise Russia. The Russian population now is only about 1/4 I believe, nowhere near enough to push for some sort of unification. The large majority of them prefer being in the EU and the opportunities for work and travel within the EU. As far as I'm aware, Latvia also lacks the concentrations of ethnic Russians that Ukraine has in the Crimea and Donbass regions.

If any of them want to poison Jack Wiltshire tonight, they have my blessing.

Russia deny there was an chemical attack on Douma. Still planks will believe this

Interesting to contrast the current reaction to the gassing to events in the 80s during the Iran-Iraq war. Saddam Hussein gassed hundreds of Iranians with hardly a mention in the western media. When Robert Fisk of The Times reported on visiting the area and seeing the aftermath of the gassing, the Foreign Office contacted the editor of The Times complaining that Fisk was being "unhelpful".

Of course, we were were supporting Saddam at the time so the gassing was being done by the good guys which made everything OK.

Interesting to contrast the current reaction to the gassing to events in the 80s during the Iran-Iraq war. Saddam Hussein gassed hundreds of Iranians with hardly a mention in the western media. When Robert Fisk of The Times reported on visiting the area and seeing the aftermath of the gassing, the Foreign Office contacted the editor of The Times complaining that Fisk was being "unhelpful".

 

Of course, we were were supporting Saddam at the time so the gassing was being done by the good guys which made everything OK.

Distortion. The gassing of the Kurds was one atrocity amongst many in the Iran-Iraq war on which killed over 1 million. Halabja directly contributed to political will to create the Convention on Chemical Weapons in 1992.

I wonder what the reaction of the OPCW will be...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/russia-trace-of-western-made-nerve-agent-seen-in-uk-samples/2018/04/14/c76a8b30-3ff7-11e8-955b-7d2e19b79966_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.536d93b328d2

Not a chance, I know a few Latvians and some of them despise Russia. The Russian population now is only about 1/4 I believe, nowhere near enough to push for some sort of unification. The large majority of them prefer being in the EU and the opportunities for work and travel within the EU. As far as I'm aware, Latvia also lacks the concentrations of ethnic Russians that Ukraine has in the Crimea and Donbass regions.

I wonder what the reaction of the OPCW will be...

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/russia-trace-of-western-made-nerve-agent-seen-in-uk-samples/2018/04/14/c76a8b30-3ff7-11e8-955b-7d2e19b79966_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.536d93b328d2

The Swiss lab does scientific analysis for OPCW, and confirmed the Porton Down analysis.

You'll notice in that article that there's not a single quote from the lab themselves - only Lavrov's allegations, which of course were designed to be picked up by conspiracy loons in the West. And that's exactly what's happened.

Once the lab actually did get asked for a comment, it was to flat-out reject Lavrov's charge.

So two conclusions.

One, don't put so much faith into the truthfulness of a key representative of a brutal rogue state.

And two, conspiracy theories exist to allow idiots the illusion of intelligence.

The Swiss lab does scientific analysis for OPCW, and confirmed the Porton Down analysis.

 

You'll notice in that article that there's not a single quote from the lab themselves - only Lavrov's allegations, which of course were designed to be picked up by conspiracy loons in the West. And that's exactly what's happened.

 

Once the lab actually did get asked for a comment, it was to flat-out reject Lavrov's charge.

 

So two conclusions.

 

One, don't put so much faith into the truthfulness of a key representative of a brutal rogue state.

 

And two, conspiracy theories exist to allow idiots the illusion of intelligence.

Never mind the conspiracy loonies or the fools who believe anything their government is telling them. I trust neither Lavrov nor your BoJo telling the truth so it would be helpful when the OPCW would confirm if there are traces of BZ in the samples and wether it's true that BZ has never been used by the Russians.

In Dutch media the only reaction of the Swiss lab is "that they can't react on Lavrov's comments because it's up to the OPCW to do this". Though they did say they have every confidence in the British lab who said it was novichok, I wouldn't call this a flat-out rejection of Lavrov's charge. Do you have a link to the comment you're referring to?

The Swiss lab does scientific analysis for OPCW, and confirmed the Porton Down analysis.

 

You'll notice in that article that there's not a single quote from the lab themselves - only Lavrov's allegations, which of course were designed to be picked up by conspiracy loons in the West. And that's exactly what's happened.

 

Once the lab actually did get asked for a comment, it was to flat-out reject Lavrov's charge.

 

So two conclusions.

 

One, don't put so much faith into the truthfulness of a key representative of a brutal rogue state.

 

And two, conspiracy theories exist to allow idiots the illusion of intelligence.

You are, of course, correct to be extremely skeptical of anything that the Sergei Lavrov claims. After all, we have already seen how Foreign Secretaries can't be trusted to tell the truth about this issue, haven't we.

But the Swiss lab have not 'flat-out rejected' Lavrov's assertion at all. Their response is ambiguous at best, and appears to be very carefully worded so as not to confirm or deny what he is saying.

https://twitter.com/SpiezLab/status/985243574123057152

I'm not saying I believe Lavrov any more than I believe Johnson. They are both proven liars, so the truth is I have no idea who to believe.

I notice Jeremy's brother ,Piers, says that the chemical attack in Syria was fake news and that the reason the kids were crying was down to the kids having water thrown over them. An interesting take on it. I thought kids loved water thrown over them, they normally laugh

I thought kids loved water thrown over them, they normally laugh

Being gassed can spoil your mood.

Novichok is a convulsant and BZ a paralytic. Its quite possible BZ was administered as an antidote to Novichok.

Being gassed can spoil your mood.

Another investigative journalist dead in Russia. Its a pity people like Bexy can't see the reality of the Putin regime. Drawing equivalence between Johnson who is a buffoon who overstates because he's out of his depth and Lavrov who is an integral part of a sustained concerted campaign of repression is risible.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43781351

Another investigative journalist dead in Russia. Its a pity people like Bexy can't see the reality of the Putin regime. Drawing equivalence between Johnson who is a buffoon who overstates because he's out of his depth and Lavrov who is an integral part of a sustained concerted campaign of repression is risible.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43781351

All part of the narrative that Corbyn has his supporters follow. The West is bad/evil. Russia (and Syria) are not great/misunderstood

I find it staggering how Jezza can go on record and demand concrete proof for something yet can quite happily allude (negative hard proof by the way) that UK forces are conducting war in Yemen.

The man is incredible!

Another investigative journalist dead in Russia. Its a pity people like Bexy can't see the reality of the Putin regime. Drawing equivalence between Johnson who is a buffoon who overstates because he's out of his depth and Lavrov who is an integral part of a sustained concerted campaign of repression is risible.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43781351

Oh FFS Batman, have you really not got the message after all these years about using strawman arguments!? Your simplistic reasoning that anybody who questions the mainstream narrative must therefore be a Britain-hating, Russia-loving traitor is so utterly f*cking moronic, but I have come to expect nothing less from someone who is clearly incapable of seeing the world in anything other than binary, black and white terms.

Yes, Buctootim, I can see the reality of Putin's regime. I fully acknowledge that he is an extremely devious dictator, playing a dangerous game with the world. I have never doubted that. Unfortunately for the rest of us, and it saddens me that I have to ad this caveat that this in no way suggests that I support him, he is very good at the game he is playing. The disinformation that comes out of Moscow to muddy the international waters is the result of many years of deception, corruption and, sadly, is very successful. So no, I do not accept at face value the blatant propaganda they push.

Unfortunately, neither do I accept the propaganda that is put out by our own government at the moment. Just because the Russians are clearly untrustworthy, doesn't make our own government a shining beacon of truth and virtue. There are so many aspects of the current narrative that don't add up or make sense, that to accept it without question based on nothing more than blind patriotism is ridiculous.

Syria has quite obviously become a proxy war between Russia and the west. Yes, it's quite obvious that Putin is using it to push an imperialist agenda. But if you accept that, then you also have to accept that the US/UK are doing the same. Anybody who believes the action that May took along with Trump and Macron is based on genuine humanitarian concerns and protecting Syrian civilians from the use of chemical weapons is a foolish simpleton.

What do you think the UK end game is. Seeing as we only have a bloody nose?

Russia are clearly backing their man for their own gains.

 

Syria has quite obviously become a proxy war between Russia and the west. Yes, it's quite obvious that Putin is using it to push an imperialist agenda. But if you accept that, then you also have to accept that the US/UK are doing the same. Anybody who believes the action that May took along with Trump and Macron is based on genuine humanitarian concerns and protecting Syrian civilians from the use of chemical weapons is a foolish simpleton.

Russia wants Syria for a Med naval base. Its ally is Iran and the are now a dangerous counterpart to us in the West. I don't understand why Russia wants to be like it is, if they followed the Chinese route of being financially strong as a world power will achieve a lot more. They hardly need more land.

What do you think the UK end game is. Seeing as we only have a bloody nose?

 

Russia are clearly backing their man for their own gains.

Of course they are, and so are we. Do you really need to even ask the question?

Isn't it just an amazing coincidence that all of the middle-eastern countries in which we have intervened in recent years have large oil and gas reserves that western energy companies would love to get their hands on?

So just doing a limited attack on the chemical weapons facilities makes us have Imperialist reasons??? I don't get that theory.

Russia wants Syria for a Med naval base. Its ally is Iran and the are now a dangerous counterpart to us in the West. I don't understand why Russia wants to be like it is, if they followed the Chinese route of being financially strong as a world power will achieve a lot more. They hardly need more land.

So what then was the point of launching a missile attack on a facility that the OPCW recently declared to be free of any chemical weapons? Seems to me it was sending a message to Russia that we won't just sit back and accept the expansion of their global reach into resource-rich regions.

It absolutely wasn't about saving ordinary Syrians from the horrors of chemical weapons, because if our government actually cared that much they wouldn't have sold them the chemicals in the first place and then denied entry to Syrian refugee children.

So what then was the point of launching a missile attack on a facility that the OPCW recently declared to be free of any chemical weapons? Seems to me it was sending a message to Russia that we won't just sit back and accept the expansion of their global reach into resource-rich regions.

 

It absolutely wasn't about saving ordinary Syrians from the horrors of chemical weapons, because if our government actually cared that much they wouldn't have sold them the chemicals in the first place and then denied entry to Syrian refugee children.

IMHO it was sending a message to Assad, that they are happy for him to fight his civil war, but not using chemical weapons.

Sorry but I disagree. Our government simply cannot claim the moral high ground here...

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/revealed-uk-government-let-british-company-export-nerve-gas-chemicals-to-syria-8793642.html

It absolutely wasn't about saving ordinary Syrians from the horrors of chemical weapons, because if our government actually cared that much they wouldn't have sold them the chemicals in the first place and then denied entry to Syrian refugee children.

Exactly. May said that it was the pictures of the children that convinced her to go ahead. But she was quite happy to refuse to take in 3000 Syrian children when local authorities had plans to accept them and the Commons had approved it. Probably didn't want to upset the Daily Mail.

Sorry but I disagree. Our government simply cannot claim the moral high ground here...

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/revealed-uk-government-let-british-company-export-nerve-gas-chemicals-to-syria-8793642.html

I hate this, "we're just as bad as them," argument.

We aren't using chemical weapons against our own civilians in our own streets. Neither are we giving military support to a government which is. With regards to that story, I'm much more inclined to believe our government was simply incompetent in accurately moderating the sales of these chemicals, by a third party, rather than maliciously selling chemical weapon ingredients to a dictator.

Also, journalists who criticise our government don't keep dying in tragic accidents/suicides/heart attacks.

I hate this, "we're just as bad as them," argument.

 

We aren't using chemical weapons against our own civilians in our own streets. Neither are we giving military support to a government which is. With regards to that story, I'm much more inclined to believe our government was simply incompetent in accurately moderating the sales of these chemicals, by a third party, rather than maliciously selling chemical weapon ingredients to a dictator.

 

Also, journalists who criticise our government don't keep dying in tragic accidents/suicides/heart attacks.

I'm not for a second suggesting we are just as bad as people who would use chemical weapons against their own people. Merely pointing out that it's pretty hypocritical for our PM to be moralising about the use of such weapons when it was her own predecessor's government that authorised the export of them.

May jumped because Trump told her to and she is too weak to stand up to him. Ask yourself this - Was Donnie's decision to attack Syria borne out of some altruistic sense of protecting the Syrian people from chemical attack? Was it f*ck!