Russia's at it again

It does. It's the biggest and almost exclusive data source about banking system.
And it's crippling effects are blown out of proportions. It will hurt of course. But ultimately as i've written just now while Europe, China and UK&US as well buy russian gas and oil there is little they can do to hurt Russia economically. For example, 4 years after sanctions and Russia still has more than 400 billions in international reserves.

Ultimately, its the price of oil that will hurt the Russian economy the most. If 50% or so if Russian funds come from the sale of oil and gas and the prices remain depressed, then that's bad for Putin and the Russian state. Everything was great when oil was at 100-110, but recently it has been between 30-65 and there's a good chance we are going back to the 40s soon, so that will hurt. When you combine that with sanctions and other means then that is not a good thing for Putin.
 
Undoubtedly a nod to the Iraq war.

I thought the line was the 45 minute claim was a Blair 'sex up'. Now are we to believe it's what the intelligence service believed and Blair acted in good faith based on that information? This is quite the revelation.
I'm pretty sure that's been the Iraq War apologist line since no WMDs were found, that Blair was going off what the intelligence service said. I'm not sure what point you think you're making here.
 
I'm pretty sure that's been the Iraq War apologist line since no WMDs were found, that Blair was going off what the intelligence service said. I'm not sure what point you think you're making here.

There's a difference between the colossal feck up that was Iraq and this case where Russia's most likely doing something it's got an extended history of doing. And unlike in Iraq no on here is calling for outright war, which would clearly be catastrophic.
 
Time to post this again - 'Inside The War Room' By BBC. Hypothetical scenario of confrontation with Russia.



If shit kicked off we'd all be fecked either way.
 
It's worrying how easily people have accepted the claim that Russia was responsible for the recent "assassination" (although I guess it's no surprise, given the way Russia has been used as a prop in American politics of late).

Regardless, should it prove to have been Russia, I think we can all agree that the real crime was in not using a drone, it's 2018 after all. That and not having an existing weapons contract with us before bringing death to our streets.

The timing of this sorry mess is also rather...regrettable. I guess the latest abuse scandal will be dealt with at a later date.
 
It's worrying how easily people have accepted the claim that Russia was responsible for the recent "assassination" (although I guess it's no surprise, given the way Russia has been used as a prop in American politics of late).

Regardless, should it prove to have been Russia, I think we can all agree that the real crime was in not using a drone, it's 2018 after all. That and not having an existing weapons contract with us before bringing death to our streets.

The timing of this sorry mess is also rather...regrettable. I guess the latest abuse scandal will be dealt with at a later date.
What are we getting out of pretending it's Russia?
 
What are we getting out of pretending it's Russia?

I didn't say we were pretending, although who knows? Perhaps the government simply has no idea who did it.

In either case the motives are numerous. Firstly, it's not great optics to potentially have a political assassination on your doorstep. There's basic political capital in just being able to "solve" the mystery, not to mention in taking a hard line response. This will be used to grandstand, to inflate the threat of a "weak" Labour government and to no doubt justify legislative actions.

It also should be remembered that a lot of money is being spent to push the narrative that Russia is an existential threat to the west, by America in particular (our allies) for numerous reasons, with the most obvious being as to create a way for the DCCC to attack Trump without actually promising to change anything.

Again. Could still have been Russia. But after Iraq, have we not learned to have suspicion? All governments kill and lie to further their agenda.
 
I suspect it's the russian after all, but if there's a slight possibility of it being someone else england will have egg on their face.

Tbf they're in a hard spot. Denying russian involvement isnt an option either, so did prematurely accusing the russian.

I have no idea what proove they have in hand but it's a difficult situation i must say
 
But those 23 are not pen pushers are they....they are ones that have been identified as spies by our intelligence agencies.

Of course they were pen pushers. They came on official diplomatic missions so they’re already marked as potential intelligence agents without any confirmation necessary. They wouldn’t be able to carry out any important field work as such. Their job would be to process the information gathered by the real spies operating here, the ones that no one knows about. I bet they’re not even all FSB.
 
I suspect it's the russian after all, but if there's a slight possibility of it being someone else england will have egg on their face.

Tbf they're in a hard spot. Denying russian involvement isnt an option either, so did prematurely accusing the russian.

I have no idea what proove they have in hand but it's a difficult situation i must say

Even if it wasn't Russia who carried out the assassination, they have breached international law by losing control of their chemical weapons.

I'm curious as to which body, apart from Russia, people think would have been able to carry out such an attack?
 
Even if it wasn't Russia who carried out the assassination, they have breached international law by losing control of their chemical weapons.

I'm curious as to which body, apart from Russia, people think would have been able to carry out such an attack?

Either the Jews, the Ukrainians or the Tartars I'd guess?
 
Even if it wasn't Russia who carried out the assassination, they have breached international law by losing control of their chemical weapons.

I'm curious as to which body, apart from Russia, people think would have been able to carry out such an attack?

Anyone is capable if they wanted to. It isnt hard to kill a 60 year old civilian in his home for any highly trained operatives / black ops specialist
 
Seriously though, if Corbyn was prime minister and he felt he couldn't trust his intelligence services, who precisely would he take counsel from in these matters? Or would be only believe a nation is a threat to national security if said nation signed a confession admitting such? Beyond this specific example, if Corbyn and followers mistrust British intelligence services, then who exactly will they source their information from in order to make an assessment on such matters?

Will everything a Prime Minister Corbyn is told by the intelligence services be dismissed by some angry semi-retired geography teacher in a cardigan holding a placard with the 'B-Liar' pun emblazoned on it, shouting "IRAQ"?
 
I can't believe Corbyn handed May a boost like this just when everything was going well for him. Its almost akin to Stevie G slipping against Chelsea. She can play the patriot card hard and often now.
 
Anyone is capable if they wanted to. It isnt hard to kill a 60 year old civilian in his home for any highly trained operatives / black ops specialist

Not with such a chemical weapon that has 'signatures' that links it to the Russians. It would either be the Russians or a body with access to the blackest of black markets. Then you have to have the audacity to carry out such an execution. It really is a very small amount of agents that could carry this out.
 
Not with such a chemical weapon that has 'signatures' that links it to the Russians. It would either be the Russians or a body with access to the blackest of black markets. Then you have to have the audacity to carry out such an execution. It really is a very small amount of agents that could carry this out.

Tbf if it's anyone other than russian they must have an agenda on making the russian the scapegoat.

Probably north korean? Eyeing for something to distract the european ahead of the summit? Enemy of putin? Terrorist? Russian and us has many enemies.

Unless the russians wants the world to know its them using a highly specific method of execution is abit dodgy
 
Tbf if it's anyone other than russian they must have an agenda on making the russian the scapegoat.

Probably north korean? Eyeing for something to distract the european ahead of the summit? Enemy of putin? Terrorist? Russian and us has many enemies.

Unless the russians wants the world to know its them using a highly specific method of execution is abit dodgy

I thought North Korea tbh. They have form for this type of execution.

The thing is with Putin's Russia is though is that they do want the world to know that they will do stuff like this. It is part of Putin's posturing to his own people trying to project an image of boldness and importance on the world stage. It all deflects from their economy which actually shows they are a long way behind many states in terms of global importance.
 
Russia really doesn't seem to care that one of its own citizens (Yulia Skripal) was murdered abroad. What a strange reaction...

It's pretty obvious Russia carried out the assassination and did so in such a way for it to be obvious it was them. Same as Litvinenko.
 
I can't believe Corbyn handed May a boost like this just when everything was going well for him. Its almost akin to Stevie G slipping against Chelsea. She can play the patriot card hard and often now.
Yep. Papers today - Sun and Mail - are hammering over it, calling him a traitor. I think it's on issues like this - who he has associated with/where his allegiances lie, where he is most vulnerable to attack.

What's the consensus on this then? Probably Russia but, if not, North Korea?
 
Perhaps the newspapers should save their outrage for the Prime Minister you can have dinner with if you pay £50000...you know, the same Prime Minister that's ending free school meals for children.
 
Yep. Papers today - Sun and Mail - are hammering over it, calling him a traitor. I think it's on issues like this - who he has associated with/where his allegiances lie, where he is most vulnerable to attack.
Oh no, I'm not sure how he's going to survive without the Sun and Mail's unquestionable backing...
 
Don't get your knickers in a twist people. Countries do this all the time. Britain and America are constantly murdering people they consider a threat using drones, the Russians have done thier own version of the same thing in the UK.


There will be no conflict, just a bit of diplomatic hoo haa to make it look like we care and then slowly everything will return to normal.

If Britain doesn't want other countries traitors being killed on its soil then Britain should stop harbouring other peoples traitors. London is full of people like that, its the go to destination for political criminals.
 
Neatly taken the focus off the government's Brexit shambles, hasn't it? How convenient.
 
Oh no, I'm not sure how he's going to survive without the Sun and Mail's unquestionable backing...
To be fair, they have stopped short of accusing him of the murders. Maybe they can blame plastic particles in water on him instead.
 
Neatly taken the focus off the government's Brexit shambles, hasn't it? How convenient.

Are you implying that the UK government framed Russia by assassinating a double agent spy with a chemical weapon on its own territory to get Brexit through quietly?

I suppose it has slightly more credibility than Russia's claim that we did it because we are bitter about them hosting the World Cup.
 
Have any details about the nerve agent used emerged?
I would guess that's why they appear sure it's Russian.
 
Have any details about the nerve agent used emerged?
I would guess that's why they appear sure it's Russian.

Yes its something called Novichok (newcomer) No. 5. A military grade nerve agent developed by the Soviets in the cold war that they kept secret until one of the scientists blew the lid on it.
 
Jezza said:
The attack in Salisbury was an appalling act of violence, which we condemn in the strongest terms.

Nerve agents are abominable if used in war. It is utterly reckless for them to be used in a civilian environment.

The Prime Minister said on Monday and again today that Russia was either directly responsible or it was culpable because it lost control of this nerve agent.

The Russian authorities must be held to account on the basis of the evidence and our response must be both decisive and proportionate.

The attack in Britain has concerned our allies in the European Union, Nato and in the United Nations, and their words of solidarity have strengthened our position diplomatically.

We have a duty to speak out against the abuse of human rights by Putin’s Government and its support, both at home and abroad, and pay tribute to the many campaigners in Russia for human rights. And we must do more to address the dangers posed by the Russian state’s relationship with unofficial mafia-like groups and corrupt oligarchs.

We need to expose the flows of ill-gotten cash between the Russian state and billionaires who became stupendously rich by looting their country and subsequently using London to protect their wealth. We welcome the Prime Minister’s clear commitment today to support the Magnitsky amendments to sanction human rights abusers, as we have long been calling for.

Britain should build an international consensus to strengthen the chemical weapons convention, and ensure that such a horrific attack never happens again.

doesn't even call to nuke them, what a fecking pussy