You'd almost think reading some comments that people are relieved the Russians have returned to their traditional role of the "bad guys". I mean, having Russia on our side never felt right did it ?
So we have the perfidious Europeans, the nasty Russians, the duplicitous (fill in the bad guys of the week) but we true British, incorruptible, always end up coming out best. We're always right, never wrong, always principled.
It's like being back in the 80s in so many ways but people knew where they were then and the world was simpler then, wasn't it ?
No point trying to deal with the complicated 21st century when the 20th was so much easier.
So Stodge - if Russia is behind this attack - how would you view their actions and what should we do in response (if anything)
Fair point. I do think, though, that in giving anyone citizenship we guarantee their security and that in this kind of case that requires rather a close watch to be kept over them by the spooks.
I can't recall any exchanged spy being murdered before. Quite why the Russians have decided to abandon the "rules" I've no idea. The argument that Skripal was still providing information is bogus in my opinion, as it has always been the case that agents are debriefed to get as much intelligence from them as possible. It's also hard to see how Skripal could be getting any new intelligence, given he's been living in the UK continuously. Skripal's only real use to us would have been for historic information and general consultation.
Basically for unknown reasons it looks like the Russians have changed the rules.
Fair point. I do think, though, that in giving anyone citizenship we guarantee their security and that in this kind of case that requires rather a close watch to be kept over them by the spooks.
I can't recall any exchanged spy being murdered before. Quite why the Russians have decided to abandon the "rules" I've no idea. The argument that Skripal was still providing information is bogus in my opinion, as it has always been the case that agents are debriefed to get as much intelligence from them as possible. It's also hard to see how Skripal could be getting any new intelligence, given he's been living in the UK continuously. Skripal's only real use to us would have been for historic information and general consultation.
Basically for unknown reasons it looks like the Russians have changed the rules.
Sorry, but are you real? Ever heard of Leon Trotsky? Ice pick in the ear?
The Tories should batter them with this. I bet they won’t, in the same sad way that Theresa May won’t make continued participation in the defence of Eastern Europe conditional on a reasonable trade deal.
If only she were more ruthless.
1.Order Order is not a reliable source
2. If it were true Labour working for a soft BREXIT is probably acceptable to Lab leavers and Remainers.
"Order Order is not a reliable source" is up there in the with Hirohito's "A situation has developed not necessarily to Japan's advantage'
Fair point. I do think, though, that in giving anyone citizenship we guarantee their security and that in this kind of case that requires rather a close watch to be kept over them by the spooks.
I can't recall any exchanged spy being murdered before. Quite why the Russians have decided to abandon the "rules" I've no idea. The argument that Skripal was still providing information is bogus in my opinion, as it has always been the case that agents are debriefed to get as much intelligence from them as possible. It's also hard to see how Skripal could be getting any new intelligence, given he's been living in the UK continuously. Skripal's only real use to us would have been for historic information and general consultation.
Basically for unknown reasons it looks like the Russians have changed the rules.
Fair point. I do think, though, that in giving anyone citizenship we guarantee their security and that in this kind of case that requires rather a close watch to be kept over them by the spooks.
I can't recall any exchanged spy being murdered before. Quite why the Russians have decided to abandon the "rules" I've no idea. The argument that Skripal was still providing information is bogus in my opinion, as it has always been the case that agents are debriefed to get as much intelligence from them as possible. It's also hard to see how Skripal could be getting any new intelligence, given he's been living in the UK continuously. Skripal's only real use to us would have been for historic information and general consultation.
Basically for unknown reasons it looks like the Russians have changed the rules.
Sorry, but are you real? Ever heard of Leon Trotsky? Ice pick in the ear?
Could you please identify - just to the nearest year will do - the period during which it was possible to believe that Putin was not a complete and utter horp?
I would say the sinking of the Kursk in 2000, and the Russian failure to quickly make use of the freely offered help from several nations. That was eye-opening. For a supposed ally to be so wary of assistance to potentially save many lives should have started alarm bells ringing.
@Foxy, suspect in reality the Labour leadership will be likely to proclaim that they'd respect the deal.
If they don't they can be painted as Remainers trying to overturn the outcome of Brexit and, simletaneously, as weak actors trying to give away the powers we gain back.
They can respect it while working on the upgrade. No deal is ever permanent.
The EU could have used some of that flexibility sooner rather than react to anyone suggesting a different path like they were a populist heretic.
Why? We are the ones leaving. We have no "right" to demand anything...
I was referring to before we left, quite clearly, and not merely in their attitude toward us. Nor did I say we had a 'right' to demand anything afterwards. So I presume you meant to reply to a different post, otherwise your response makes no sense.
Fair point. I do think, though, that in giving anyone citizenship we guarantee their security and that in this kind of case that requires rather a close watch to be kept over them by the spooks.
I can't recall any exchanged spy being murdered before. Quite why the Russians have decided to abandon the "rules" I've no idea. The argument that Skripal was still providing information is bogus in my opinion, as it has always been the case that agents are debriefed to get as much intelligence from them as possible. It's also hard to see how Skripal could be getting any new intelligence, given he's been living in the UK continuously. Skripal's only real use to us would have been for historic information and general consultation.
Basically for unknown reasons it looks like the Russians have changed the rules.
Fair point. I do think, though, that in giving anyone citizenship we guarantee their security and that in this kind of case that requires rather a close watch to be kept over them by the spooks.
I can't recall any exchanged spy being murdered before. Quite why the Russians have decided to abandon the "rules" I've no idea. The argument that Skripal was still providing information is bogus in my opinion, as it has always been the case that agents are debriefed to get as much intelligence from them as possible. It's also hard to see how Skripal could be getting any new intelligence, given he's been living in the UK continuously. Skripal's only real use to us would have been for historic information and general consultation.
Basically for unknown reasons it looks like the Russians have changed the rules.
Sorry, but are you real? Ever heard of Leon Trotsky? Ice pick in the ear?
Trotsky was an exchanged spy? Who knew?
Juncker. And it's further evidence of his perfidy that he kept it to himself.
Fair point. I do think, though, that in giving anyone citizenship we guarantee their security and that in this kind of case that requires rather a close watch to be kept over them by the spooks.
I can't recall any exchanged spy being murdered before. Quite why the Russians have decided to abandon the "rules" I've no idea. The argument that Skripal was still providing information is bogus in my opinion, as it has always been the case that agents are debriefed to get as much intelligence from them as possible. It's also hard to see how Skripal could be getting any new intelligence, given he's been living in the UK continuously. Skripal's only real use to us would have been for historic information and general consultation.
Basically for unknown reasons it looks like the Russians have changed the rules.
Fair point. I do think, though, that in giving anyone citizenship we guarantee their security and that in this kind of case that requires rather a close watch to be kept over them by the spooks.
I can't recall any exchanged spy being murdered before. Quite why the Russians have decided to abandon the "rules" I've no idea. The argument that Skripal was still providing information is bogus in my opinion, as it has always been the case that agents are debriefed to get as much intelligence from them as possible. It's also hard to see how Skripal could be getting any new intelligence, given he's been living in the UK continuously. Skripal's only real use to us would have been for historic information and general consultation.
Basically for unknown reasons it looks like the Russians have changed the rules.
Sorry, but are you real? Ever heard of Leon Trotsky? Ice pick in the ear?
Trotsky was an exchanged spy? Who knew?
Juncker. And it's further evidence of his perfidy that he kept it to himself.
Could you please identify - just to the nearest year will do - the period during which it was possible to believe that Putin was not a complete and utter horp?
I would say the sinking of the Kursk in 2000, and the Russian failure to quickly make use of the freely offered help from several nations. That was eye-opening. For a supposed ally to be so wary of assistance to potentially save many lives should have started alarm bells ringing.
The Kursk was an advanced weapon of war, do you think any country would willingly allowed foreign nationals sight of secret technology? Ok, most of the stuff was seriously sub standard, and had already been well publicised in the Russian media (and picked up by most of the other countries informational gatherers) but still, pride...
You'd almost think reading some comments that people are relieved the Russians have returned to their traditional role of the "bad guys". I mean, having Russia on our side never felt right did it ?
So we have the perfidious Europeans, the nasty Russians, the duplicitous (fill in the bad guys of the week) but we true British, incorruptible, always end up coming out best. We're always right, never wrong, always principled.
It's like being back in the 80s in so many ways but people knew where they were then and the world was simpler then, wasn't it ?
No point trying to deal with the complicated 21st century when the 20th was so much easier.
I'm somewhat confused as to your point, dear Stodge, which is unusual given your generally characteristic succinct clarity.
Of course things are complicated, and of course all of us treat things more simply than is in fact the case, what does that have to do with anything? I detect very little relief from people should it be the case that Russia are murdering people in our streets. If that is what happened how are people 'not trying to deal with the complicated 21st century', and if it isn't what happened how is a media frenzy which not unreasonably suspects the Russian state given past actions, nature of the attack and the victims, also not trying to deal with the complicated 21st century? At worst it would be jumping to a conclusion, but you appear to be making some kind of societal point a la nostalgic yearning for the cold war, and I am not sure where you are getting that from. And the bit about us never being wrong I also don't get, since even though we clearly are sometimes, that doesn't mean all nations are the same when it comes to moral equivalence.
Could you please identify - just to the nearest year will do - the period during which it was possible to believe that Putin was not a complete and utter horp?
I would say the sinking of the Kursk in 2000, and the Russian failure to quickly make use of the freely offered help from several nations. That was eye-opening. For a supposed ally to be so wary of assistance to potentially save many lives should have started alarm bells ringing.
The Kursk was an advanced weapon of war, do you think any country would willingly allowed foreign nationals sight of secret technology? Ok, most of the stuff was seriously sub standard, and had already been well publicised in the Russian media (and picked up by most of the other countries informational gatherers) but still, pride...
OK, but Litvinenko 2006 was something of a clue, surely?
The Kursk was an advanced weapon of war, do you think any country would willingly allowed foreign nationals sight of secret technology? Ok, most of the stuff was seriously sub standard, and had already been well publicised in the Russian media (and picked up by most of the other countries informational gatherers) but still, pride...
In the end the Russians did allow Norwegian divers and mini-subs to do so, but it was too late by then. I can't recall if the British mini-sub was used in the end. The point is that for a supposed new ally to be so distrusting even when many lives were at stake should have raised concern. Clearly Russia under Putin had a different view of the west than Russia under Yeltsin.
Sorry, but are you real? Ever heard of Leon Trotsky? Ice pick in the ear?
Trotsky was not an exchanged spy.
Trotsky had been a very senior member of the Communist Party. True, many within the party had regarded him as being a serious pain in the backside. But you do not send an operative of a wet section half way round the world to eliminate them unless you thought it necessary "pour encourager les autres"...
Of course with that profile and all those numbers after her name, Ms joannem07254906 may be a bot herself.
Without meaning to attempt any doxxing, I'd reckon that her birthdate is 25th July 1996, and that 40 is a special number for her (house number, or perhaps her IQ).
Or the fist 8 digits of her mobile number 0725 490 6xxx
You'd almost think reading some comments that people are relieved the Russians have returned to their traditional role of the "bad guys". I mean, having Russia on our side never felt right did it ?
So we have the perfidious Europeans, the nasty Russians, the duplicitous (fill in the bad guys of the week) but we true British, incorruptible, always end up coming out best. We're always right, never wrong, always principled.
It's like being back in the 80s in so many ways but people knew where they were then and the world was simpler then, wasn't it ?
No point trying to deal with the complicated 21st century when the 20th was so much easier.
So the Russians are killing people on our streets and they're not really the bad guys?
Always the same on here after any kind of attack - terrorist or otherwise. You can't hear anything through the deafening noise of knees jerking all over the place. SeanT will be along in a minute to recommend compulsory deportation of all Russians, Muslims, Remoaner traitors to save little England from going to hell in a handcart. Might it not be a good idea to wait a bit, assess the evidence, respect the legal process and make a considered response in due course?
So Stodge - if Russia is behind this attack - how would you view their actions and what should we do in response (if anything)
First of all, we don't know with certainty this was a Moscow-sanctioned action. Until and unless we do, throwing around all kinds of accusations isn't helpful.
What should happen is what I suspect IS happening - a thorough investigation based on the compilation of evidence to establish a case against one or more individuals. IF that individual is on British soil and is not protected by diplomatic immunity, an arrest can be made and the subject prosecuted. It's entirely possible any suspect has already left the country.
I accept it would be much more difficult if any suspect were found to be part of the Russian diplomatic staff.
Again, IF it is clearly established that the Russian Government was directly implicated, the measures would involve sanctions and the expulsion of numbers of diplomatic staff but we can't do until and unless we have proof of an officially-sanctioned action.
It's entirely possible a pro-Putin individual did this without official sanction. If so, we can condemn it but to be frank unless we can find the culprit or he is handed over, we won't be able to do much at all.
Sorry, but are you real? Ever heard of Leon Trotsky? Ice pick in the ear?
Trotsky was not an exchanged spy.
What was he?
Presumably thesedays he would be termed a dissident?
So noone of any importance whatsoever?
Why do you quote him?
If you ascribe some importance then tell me what it is.
What are you talking about? You asked what Trotsky was in response to someone saying he was not an exchanged spy, I provided a potential response. I wasn't making any sort of point about it, I was answering a question.
You'd almost think reading some comments that people are relieved the Russians have returned to their traditional role of the "bad guys". I mean, having Russia on our side never felt right did it ?
So we have the perfidious Europeans, the nasty Russians, the duplicitous (fill in the bad guys of the week) but we true British, incorruptible, always end up coming out best. We're always right, never wrong, always principled.
It's like being back in the 80s in so many ways but people knew where they were then and the world was simpler then, wasn't it ?
No point trying to deal with the complicated 21st century when the 20th was so much easier.
So the Russians are killing people on our streets and they're not really the bad guys?
Always the same on here after any kind of attack - terrorist or otherwise. You can't hear anything through the deafening noise of knees jerking all over the place. SeanT will be along in a minute to recommend compulsory deportation of all Russians, Muslims, Remoaner traitors to save little England from going to hell in a handcart. Might it not be a good idea to wait a bit, assess the evidence, respect the legal process and make a considered response in due course?
One problem is that any sanction against the legion of wealthy Russian new aristocracy in London and their dirty money hits our economy, as that is where the dirty money is being spent.
You'd almost think reading some comments that people are relieved the Russians have returned to their traditional role of the "bad guys". I mean, having Russia on our side never felt right did it ?
So we have the perfidious Europeans, the nasty Russians, the duplicitous (fill in the bad guys of the week) but we true British, incorruptible, always end up coming out best. We're always right, never wrong, always principled.
It's like being back in the 80s in so many ways but people knew where they were then and the world was simpler then, wasn't it ?
No point trying to deal with the complicated 21st century when the 20th was so much easier.
So the Russians are killing people on our streets and they're not really the bad guys?
Always the same on here after any kind of attack - terrorist or otherwise. You can't hear anything through the deafening noise of knees jerking all over the place. SeanT will be along in a minute to recommend compulsory deportation of all Russians, Muslims, Remoaner traitors to save little England from going to hell in a handcart. Might it not be a good idea to wait a bit, assess the evidence, respect the legal process and make a considered response in due course?
It is absurd to pretend Moscow assassinating people in the UK is equivalent to the EU being tough in a trade negotiation. It is equally ridiculous to say retaliatory action against a foreign government responsible is equivalent to blaming all Muslims for a terrorist attack.
Those arguing "wait and see" are just like the NRA after a mass shooting. You actually want no response, but know that is an awful argument, so instead you just want to push things into the long grass until media attention moves on.
I'm somewhat confused as to your point, dear Stodge, which is unusual given your generally characteristic succinct clarity.
Of course things are complicated, and of course all of us treat things more simply than is in fact the case, what does that have to do with anything? I detect very little relief from people should it be the case that Russia are murdering people in our streets. If that is what happened how are people 'not trying to deal with the complicated 21st century', and if it isn't what happened how is a media frenzy which not unreasonably suspects the Russian state given past actions, nature of the attack and the victims, also not trying to deal with the complicated 21st century? At worst it would be jumping to a conclusion, but you appear to be making some kind of societal point a la nostalgic yearning for the cold war, and I am not sure where you are getting that from. And the bit about us never being wrong I also don't get, since even though we clearly are sometimes, that doesn't mean all nations are the same when it comes to moral equivalence.
Slightly tongue in cheek, perhaps my friend but the key point is the media seems to have it in for Johnny Foreigner at present - the EU, the Russians, the Irish though strangely not so much the Saudi Crown Prince who, considering his involvement in the horrendous Yemeni Conflict, seems to be above much criticism apart from the most muted.
I'm left with the disquieting thought that blaming other people for everything is easy. I happen to think the West has completely mishandled its dealings with Russia since 1989 and the result of that stupidity is not only Putin but the uncomfortable truth NATO and Russian troops are eyeballing each other in the Baltic States.
I didn't enjoy the Cold War and don't want to spend my latter years fearing nuclear annihilation as much as I did in my earlier years.
So Stodge - if Russia is behind this attack - how would you view their actions and what should we do in response (if anything)
First of all, we don't know with certainty this was a Moscow-sanctioned action. Until and unless we do, throwing around all kinds of accusations isn't helpful.
Nor is it unhelpful - because as you imply the actually important stuff happens out of our view during the investigation, and any media or public speculation surely has no bearing on events at all, so why imply people speculating must be cold war enthusiasts?
It's a major news story with suspicious, lurid details, speculation is inevitable, what grounds do you have for thinking this is about people yearning for the certainty of good brits evil soviets of the 1980s? People generally that is, since obviously there are going to be random weirdos like that, as there are for any extreme position, but that is not necessarily indicative.
Isn't it a little rich Amber Rudd trying to take the moral high ground? Isn't this what spies are supposed to expect?
Perhaps instead of haranguing the Russians she could tell Mi5 that if they must recruit Russians to spy for them at least they could take the trouble to keep them safe
No, it is not. Sometimes you simply don't seem to have a moral compass, Roger.
And as for you silly point about MI5, this is a guy who was pardoned by the Russian state, and even in the distorted perspective of that state, not a target. If you think it even vaguely acceptable that a foreign state conduct assassinations in our country, then you are quite simply an idiot.
The Kursk was an advanced weapon of war, do you think any country would willingly allowed foreign nationals sight of secret technology? Ok, most of the stuff was seriously sub standard, and had already been well publicised in the Russian media (and picked up by most of the other countries informational gatherers) but still, pride...
In the end the Russians did allow Norwegian divers and mini-subs to do so, but it was too late by then. I can't recall if the British mini-sub was used in the end. The point is that for a supposed new ally to be so distrusting even when many lives were at stake should have raised concern. Clearly Russia under Putin had a different view of the west than Russia under Yeltsin.
The pressure on the Russian government became unstoppable. Too many relatives knew that the submarine had gone down, and that their own government could not only do nothing to save the crew, but were actively blocking rescue from other sources. In the CCCP, not only would the submariners have been "lost" in the paperwork, so would any complaining relatives. Under Yeltsin, well he didn't have the power - Putin does!
It's entirely possible a pro-Putin individual did this without official sanction. If so, we can condemn it but to be frank unless we can find the culprit or he is handed over, we won't be able to do much at all.
With respect that's more or less the last line of defence the Russians use about Litvinenko. "Oh it was just some angry patriot." It was nonsense then because Polonium does not grow on trees. Analysis showed it to be almost inconceivable that the Polonium came from anywhere else but a Russian plant and had been processed for use as a poison by the Russian state.
Similarly the UK government is more or less hinting that the nerve agent used in the recent attack was not made in someone's bathtub.
Isn't it a little rich Amber Rudd trying to take the moral high ground? Isn't this what spies are supposed to expect?
Perhaps instead of haranguing the Russians she could tell Mi5 that if they must recruit Russians to spy for them at least they could take the trouble to keep them safe
A new low even by your standards
The Labour Party I grew up with stood up for thr democratic West against the totalitarians on right and left. It has been taken over by a far left contingent that is apathetic to democracy and is happy to side with any dictatorship as long as they oppose the UK.
You'd almost think reading some comments that people are relieved the Russians have returned to their traditional role of the "bad guys". I mean, having Russia on our side never felt right did it ?
So we have the perfidious Europeans, the nasty Russians, the duplicitous (fill in the bad guys of the week) but we true British, incorruptible, always end up coming out best. We're always right, never wrong, always principled.
It's like being back in the 80s in so many ways but people knew where they were then and the world was simpler then, wasn't it ?
No point trying to deal with the complicated 21st century when the 20th was so much easier.
So the Russians are killing people on our streets and they're not really the bad guys?
Always the same on here after any kind of attack - terrorist or otherwise. You can't hear anything through the deafening noise of knees jerking all over the place. SeanT will be along in a minute to recommend compulsory deportation of all Russians, Muslims, Remoaner traitors to save little England from going to hell in a handcart. Might it not be a good idea to wait a bit, assess the evidence, respect the legal process and make a considered response in due course?
One problem is that any sanction against the legion of wealthy Russian new aristocracy in London and their dirty money hits our economy, as that is where the dirty money is being spent.
Yep, and post-Brexit London will need their dirty cash more than ever as the financial services sector shrinks.
Stodge is right, too many on here are hankering for a replay of Kenny Everett's "let's bomb Russia" Tory conference speech (not realising he was taking the piss) before even a shred of evidence has come to light.
Sorry, but are you real? Ever heard of Leon Trotsky? Ice pick in the ear?
Trotsky was not an exchanged spy.
What was he?
Presumably thesedays he would be termed a dissident?
So noone of any importance whatsoever?
Why do you quote him?
If you ascribe some importance then tell me what it is.
What are you talking about? You asked what Trotsky was in response to someone saying he was not an exchanged spy, I provided a potential response. I wasn't making any sort of point about it, I was answering a question.
Apologies. I was responding to earlier comments. There's no real excuse, sorry.
I'm somewhat confused as to your point, dear Stodge, which is unusual given your generally characteristic succinct clarity.
Of course things are complicated, and of course all of us treat things more simply than is in fact the case, what does that have to do with anything? I detect very little relief from people should it be the case that Russia are murdering people in our streets. If that is what happened how are people 'not trying to deal with the complicated 21st century', and if it isn't what happened how is a media frenzy which not unreasonably suspects the Russian state given past actions, nature of the attack and the victims, also not trying to deal with the complicated 21st century? At worst it would be jumping to a conclusion, but you appear to be making some kind of societal point a la nostalgic yearning for the cold war, and I am not sure where you are getting that from. And the bit about us never being wrong I also don't get, since even though we clearly are sometimes, that doesn't mean all nations are the same when it comes to moral equivalence.
Slightly tongue in cheek, perhaps my friend but the key point is the media seems to have it in for Johnny Foreigner at present - the EU, the Russians, the Irish though strangely not so much the Saudi Crown Prince who, considering his involvement in the horrendous Yemeni Conflict, seems to be above much criticism apart from the most muted.
I'm left with the disquieting thought that blaming other people for everything is easy. I happen to think the West has completely mishandled its dealings with Russia since 1989 and the result of that stupidity is not only Putin but the uncomfortable truth NATO and Russian troops are eyeballing each other in the Baltic States.
I didn't enjoy the Cold War and don't want to spend my latter years fearing nuclear annihilation as much as I did in my earlier years.
I grew up after the cold war ended, and while Putin in recent years has seen the russians as probable bad guys idea rise, I cannot say I have noticed a particular rise in the media having it in for johnny foreigner, it doesn't seem like the media has ever been a fab. Perhaps that is a case of cumulative change over time so it isn't very noticable, but while there's certainly nothing untoward in suggesting slowing things down when it comes to automatic assumption of russian state guilt, I must confess your referencing of 1980s cold war nostalgia as though that is the main trend happening right now caught me offguard as being totally out of left field.
Sorry, but are you real? Ever heard of Leon Trotsky? Ice pick in the ear?
Trotsky was not an exchanged spy.
What was he?
Presumably thesedays he would be termed a dissident?
So noone of any importance whatsoever?
Why do you quote him?
If you ascribe some importance then tell me what it is.
What are you talking about? You asked what Trotsky was in response to someone saying he was not an exchanged spy, I provided a potential response. I wasn't making any sort of point about it, I was answering a question.
Apologies. I was responding to earlier comments. There's no real excuse, sorry.
Happens to the best of us, dear chap (or chapette)
I'm somewhat confused as to your point, dear Stodge, which is unusual given your generally characteristic succinct clarity.
Of course things are complicated, and of course all of us treat things more simply than is in fact the case, what does that have to do with anything? I detect very little relief from people should it be the case that Russia are murdering people in our streets. If that is what happened how are people 'not trying to deal with the complicated 21st century', and if it isn't what happened how is a media frenzy which not unreasonably suspects the Russian state given past actions, nature of the attack and the victims, also not trying to deal with the complicated 21st century? At worst it would be jumping to a conclusion, but you appear to be making some kind of societal point a la nostalgic yearning for the cold war, and I am not sure where you are getting that from. And the bit about us never being wrong I also don't get, since even though we clearly are sometimes, that doesn't mean all nations are the same when it comes to moral equivalence.
Slightly tongue in cheek, perhaps my friend but the key point is the media seems to have it in for Johnny Foreigner at present - the EU, the Russians, the Irish though strangely not so much the Saudi Crown Prince who, considering his involvement in the horrendous Yemeni Conflict, seems to be above much criticism apart from the most muted.
I'm left with the disquieting thought that blaming other people for everything is easy. I happen to think the West has completely mishandled its dealings with Russia since 1989 and the result of that stupidity is not only Putin but the uncomfortable truth NATO and Russian troops are eyeballing each other in the Baltic States.
I didn't enjoy the Cold War and don't want to spend my latter years fearing nuclear annihilation as much as I did in my earlier years.
The way the Cold War was won and democracy spreading across Europe and the world in the 1990s and early 2000s was by containment of aggressive dictatorial regimes. Not by letting them throw their muscle around without consequence.
So Stodge - if Russia is behind this attack - how would you view their actions and what should we do in response (if anything)
First of all, we don't know with certainty this was a Moscow-sanctioned action. Until and unless we do, throwing around all kinds of accusations isn't helpful.
What should happen is what I suspect IS happening - a thorough investigation based on the compilation of evidence to establish a case against one or more individuals. IF that individual is on British soil and is not protected by diplomatic immunity, an arrest can be made and the subject prosecuted. It's entirely possible any suspect has already left the country.
I accept it would be much more difficult if any suspect were found to be part of the Russian diplomatic staff.
Again, IF it is clearly established that the Russian Government was directly implicated, the measures would involve sanctions and the expulsion of numbers of diplomatic staff but we can't do until and unless we have proof of an officially-sanctioned action.
It's entirely possible a pro-Putin individual did this without official sanction. If so, we can condemn it but to be frank unless we can find the culprit or he is handed over, we won't be able to do much at all.
If any official did this without official sanction, they would be experiencing the same execution, along with their family. Any sanction at this level has to be authorised at the highest level. The political fallout has to be considered and understood at a national level.
Sorry, but are you real? Ever heard of Leon Trotsky? Ice pick in the ear?
Trotsky was not an exchanged spy.
What was he?
Presumably thesedays he would be termed a dissident?
So noone of any importance whatsoever?
Why do you quote him?
If you ascribe some importance then tell me what it is.
What are you talking about? You asked what Trotsky was in response to someone saying he was not an exchanged spy, I provided a potential response. I wasn't making any sort of point about it, I was answering a question.
Apologies. I was responding to earlier comments. There's no real excuse, sorry.
Happens to the best of us, dear chap (or chapette)
You'd almost think reading some comments that people are relieved the Russians have returned to their traditional role of the "bad guys". I mean, having Russia on our side never felt right did it ?
So we have the perfidious Europeans, the nasty Russians, the duplicitous (fill in the bad guys of the week) but we true British, incorruptible, always end up coming out best. We're always right, never wrong, always principled.
It's like being back in the 80s in so many ways but people knew where they were then and the world was simpler then, wasn't it ?
No point trying to deal with the complicated 21st century when the 20th was so much easier.
So the Russians are killing people on our streets and they're not really the bad guys?
Always the same on here after any kind of attack - terrorist or otherwise. You can't hear anything through the deafening noise of knees jerking all over the place. SeanT will be along in a minute to recommend compulsory deportation of all Russians, Muslims, Remoaner traitors to save little England from going to hell in a handcart. Might it not be a good idea to wait a bit, assess the evidence, respect the legal process and make a considered response in due course?
Nor is it unhelpful - because as you imply the actually important stuff happens out of our view during the investigation, and any media or public speculation surely has no bearing on events at all, so why imply people speculating must be cold war enthusiasts?
It's a major news story with suspicious, lurid details, speculation is inevitable, what grounds do you have for thinking this is about people yearning for the certainty of good brits evil soviets of the 1980s? People generally that is, since obviously there are going to be random weirdos like that, as there are for any extreme position, but that is not necessarily indicative.
I found it curious the language of the 1980s (and earlier) has so easily slipped back into the media. I think for some political people and the media demonising Russia (and others) is easy and it has a useful function.
If there is an enemy or a threat people rally to the Government and give it unconditional and uncritical support and anyone criticising the Government gets all sort of vitriol thrown at them.
You'd almost think reading some comments that people are relieved the Russians have returned to their traditional role of the "bad guys". I mean, having Russia on our side never felt right did it ?
So we have the perfidious Europeans, the nasty Russians, the duplicitous (fill in the bad guys of the week) but we true British, incorruptible, always end up coming out best. We're always right, never wrong, always principled.
It's like being back in the 80s in so many ways but people knew where they were then and the world was simpler then, wasn't it ?
No point trying to deal with the complicated 21st century when the 20th was so much easier.
So the Russians are killing people on our streets and they're not really the bad guys?
Always the same on here after any kind of attack - terrorist or otherwise. You can't hear anything through the deafening noise of knees jerking all over the place. SeanT will be along in a minute to recommend compulsory deportation of all Russians, Muslims, Remoaner traitors to save little England from going to hell in a handcart. Might it not be a good idea to wait a bit, assess the evidence, respect the legal process and make a considered response in due course?
One problem is that any sanction against the legion of wealthy Russian new aristocracy in London and their dirty money hits our economy, as that is where the dirty money is being spent.
Yep, and post-Brexit London will need their dirty cash more than ever as the financial services sector shrinks.
Stodge is right, too many on here are hankering for a replay of Kenny Everett's "let's bomb Russia" Tory conference speech (not realising he was taking the piss) before even a shred of evidence has come to light.
Stodge is right, too many on here are hankering for a replay of Kenny Everett's "let's bomb Russia" Tory conference speech (not realising he was taking the piss) before even a shred of evidence has come to light.
Except Stodge by his own admission made that reference 'slightly tongue in cheek' and therefore presumably not entirely literal that people are nostalgic for that era as you appear to have taken it, even if people and the media are being a bit quick when it comes to johnny foreigner.
It's entirely possible a pro-Putin individual did this without official sanction. If so, we can condemn it but to be frank unless we can find the culprit or he is handed over, we won't be able to do much at all.
With respect that's more or less the last line of defence the Russians use about Litvinenko. "Oh it was just some angry patriot." It was nonsense then because Polonium does not grow on trees. Analysis showed it to be almost inconceivable that the Polonium came from anywhere else but a Russian plant and had been processed for use as a poison by the Russian state.
Similarly the UK government is more or less hinting that the nerve agent used in the recent attack was not made in someone's bathtub.
Certainly there are reasonable grounds for speculation given the nature of the attack - certainly a definitive statement of russian culpability would be premature and our government has not done so, but it does not follow that anyone raising the possibility it was them is therefore reacting entirely irrationally as some seem to be suggesting.
It is somewhat irrational, indeed, to expect people discussing an incident on a messageboard to refrain from speculation, right or wrong.
And let us be frank, unless Putin himself suddenly and inexplicably admitted on live television he personally snuck into the UK to administer the agent used in this attack, the official position would always be there is no definitive proof, so the argument over it will never be concluded.
Isn't it a little rich Amber Rudd trying to take the moral high ground? Isn't this what spies are supposed to expect?
Perhaps instead of haranguing the Russians she could tell Mi5 that if they must recruit Russians to spy for them at least they could take the trouble to keep them safe
A new low even by your standards
The Labour Party I grew up with stood up for thr democratic West against the totalitarians on right and left. It has been taken over by a far left contingent that is apathetic to democracy and is happy to side with any dictatorship as long as they oppose the UK.
Yuck! Play with your toys in CCHQ! And stick your dummy where the sun don't shine...
The way the Cold War was won and democracy spreading across Europe and the world in the 1990s and early 2000s was by containment of aggressive dictatorial regimes. Not by letting them throw their muscle around without consequence.
There were many reasons why the Cold War ended the way it did and not the way it might have and Mikhail Gorbachev is a big part of that along with Ronald Reagan.
That said, the response of the West to the fall of Communism has led to this point and indeed has had consequences in many other areas, Brexit being one. Had countries like Poland and Romania not left the Communist bloc and been able to join the EU, the mass migration post 2004 wouldn't have happened and it's likely the EU would be a very different animal today.
Our policy towards Russia has reverted to containment and once again we are eyeballing Russian troops admittedly hundreds of miles further east than before but the consequences of any clash in the Baltic States would be catastrophic.
Isn't it a little rich Amber Rudd trying to take the moral high ground? Isn't this what spies are supposed to expect?
Perhaps instead of haranguing the Russians she could tell Mi5 that if they must recruit Russians to spy for them at least they could take the trouble to keep them safe
No, it is not. Sometimes you simply don't seem to have a moral compass, Roger.
And as for you silly point about MI5, this is a guy who was pardoned by the Russian state, and even in the distorted perspective of that state, not a target. If you think it even vaguely acceptable that a foreign state conduct assassinations in our country, then you are quite simply an idiot.
Under the "Code", if you are exchanged and become inactive, you are ignored. If, on the other hand, you give lessons, talks and courses on KGB/GRU/FSB tradecraft to the "enemy" as did Sergei Skripal to MI5/6, CIA and others, you are regarded as a player...
I'm somewhat confused as to your point, dear Stodge, which is unusual given your generally characteristic succinct clarity.
Of course things are complicated, and of course all of us treat things more simply than is in fact the case, what does that have to do with anything? I detect very little relief from people should it be the case that Russia are murdering people in our streets. If that is what happened how are people 'not trying to deal with the complicated 21st century', and if it isn't what happened how is a media frenzy which not unreasonably suspects the Russian state given past actions, nature of the attack and the victims, also not trying to deal with the complicated 21st century? At worst it would be jumping to a conclusion, but you appear to be making some kind of societal point a la nostalgic yearning for the cold war, and I am not sure where you are getting that from. And the bit about us never being wrong I also don't get, since even though we clearly are sometimes, that doesn't mean all nations are the same when it comes to moral equivalence.
Slightly tongue in cheek, perhaps my friend but the key point is the media seems to have it in for Johnny Foreigner at present - the EU, the Russians, the Irish though strangely not so much the Saudi Crown Prince who, considering his involvement in the horrendous Yemeni Conflict, seems to be above much criticism apart from the most muted.
I'm left with the disquieting thought that blaming other people for everything is easy. I happen to think the West has completely mishandled its dealings with Russia since 1989 and the result of that stupidity is not only Putin but the uncomfortable truth NATO and Russian troops are eyeballing each other in the Baltic States.
I didn't enjoy the Cold War and don't want to spend my latter years fearing nuclear annihilation as much as I did in my earlier years.
Great comment. You'd get my vote for foreign secretary even though you are a Lib Dem and and a Leaver! The west led by the US was determined to rub Russia's proud nose in humiliation in the 1990s rather than helping them meaningfully transition into a prosperous democracy and that led directly to Putinism. There are too many wimpy young fogeys on here with no memory of the cold war and a desperation to sound hard.
Nor is it unhelpful - because as you imply the actually important stuff happens out of our view during the investigation, and any media or public speculation surely has no bearing on events at all, so why imply people speculating must be cold war enthusiasts?
It's a major news story with suspicious, lurid details, speculation is inevitable, what grounds do you have for thinking this is about people yearning for the certainty of good brits evil soviets of the 1980s? People generally that is, since obviously there are going to be random weirdos like that, as there are for any extreme position, but that is not necessarily indicative.
I found it curious the language of the 1980s (and earlier) has so easily slipped back into the media. I think for some political people and the media demonising Russia (and others) is easy and it has a useful function.
If there is an enemy or a threat people rally to the Government and give it unconditional and uncritical support and anyone criticising the Government gets all sort of vitriol thrown at them.
Perhaps, although it isn't the government (at this stage) making open accusations against Russia, and they presumably won't be so direct unless they really can prove it to a reasonable degree. I'll have to take your word about how things were in the 1980s, but again it doesn't feel to me like there has been a marked increase in demonisation as a general thing, be it in relation to Russia or others. Putin is apparently both genuinely popular and autocratic, and our media notes he is autocratic. That seems reasonable, and histrionics reporting is part and parcel of our press, it doesn't fill me with despair as to the state of society.
You'd almost think reading some comments that people are relieved the Russians have returned to their traditional role of the "bad guys". I mean, having Russia on our side never felt right did it ?
So we have the perfidious Europeans, the nasty Russians, the duplicitous (fill in the bad guys of the week) but we true British, incorruptible, always end up coming out best. We're always right, never wrong, always principled.
It's like being back in the 80s in so many ways but people knew where they were then and the world was simpler then, wasn't it ?
No point trying to deal with the complicated 21st century when the 20th was so much easier.
So the Russians are killing people on our streets and they're not really the bad guys?
Always the same on here after any kind of attack - terrorist or otherwise. You can't hear anything through the deafening noise of knees jerking all over the place. SeanT will be along in a minute to recommend compulsory deportation of all Russians, Muslims, Remoaner traitors to save little England from going to hell in a handcart. Might it not be a good idea to wait a bit, assess the evidence, respect the legal process and make a considered response in due course?
Why would a knee jerk make a noise?
In fairness I had a very loud popping sound when I made a knee jerk just the other day. Quite painful actually.
But enough of russians and the downfall of society, good night all.
Amazing in the football - for once the additional goaline official actually does something rather than just stand there...and it's a really harsh overturn to award a penalty.
It's entirely possible a pro-Putin individual did this without official sanction. If so, we can condemn it but to be frank unless we can find the culprit or he is handed over, we won't be able to do much at all.
With respect that's more or less the last line of defence the Russians use about Litvinenko. "Oh it was just some angry patriot." It was nonsense then because Polonium does not grow on trees. Analysis showed it to be almost inconceivable that the Polonium came from anywhere else but a Russian plant and had been processed for use as a poison by the Russian state.
Similarly the UK government is more or less hinting that the nerve agent used in the recent attack was not made in someone's bathtub.
And this "let's all be sensible and wait until due consideration has been given to all the evidence" stuff falls down an epistemic hole because there comes a stage at which either things are as they seem and preliminary conclusions can properly be drawn, or things are so much not as they seem that everything must be in doubt, including the validity of what is later presented to us as "all evidence."
Do you feel any more certain now about what happened to the Lockerbie plane, than you did on 21/12/88? I don't.
You'd almost think reading some comments that people are relieved the Russians have returned to their traditional role of the "bad guys". I mean, having Russia on our side never felt right did it ?
So we have the perfidious Europeans, the nasty Russians, the duplicitous (fill in the bad guys of the week) but we true British, incorruptible, always end up coming out best. We're always right, never wrong, always principled.
It's like being back in the 80s in so many ways but people knew where they were then and the world was simpler then, wasn't it ?
No point trying to deal with the complicated 21st century when the 20th was so much easier.
So the Russians are killing people on our streets and they're not really the bad guys?
Always the same on here after any kind of attack - terrorist or otherwise. You can't hear anything through the deafening noise of knees jerking all over the place. SeanT will be along in a minute to recommend compulsory deportation of all Russians, Muslims, Remoaner traitors to save little England from going to hell in a handcart. Might it not be a good idea to wait a bit, assess the evidence, respect the legal process and make a considered response in due course?
One problem is that any sanction against the legion of wealthy Russian new aristocracy in London and their dirty money hits our economy, as that is where the dirty money is being spent.
Yep, and post-Brexit London will need their dirty cash more than ever as the financial services sector shrinks.
Stodge is right, too many on here are hankering for a replay of Kenny Everett's "let's bomb Russia" Tory conference speech (not realising he was taking the piss) before even a shred of evidence has come to light.
Great stuff. The joke was on the audience I think. Not only were they cheering a gay man destined to die of AIDS, he didn't even really identify as a Tory
You'd almost think reading some comments that people are relieved the Russians have returned to their traditional role of the "bad guys". I mean, having Russia on our side never felt right did it ?
So we have the perfidious Europeans, the nasty Russians, the duplicitous (fill in the bad guys of the week) but we true British, incorruptible, always end up coming out best. We're always right, never wrong, always principled.
It's like being back in the 80s in so many ways but people knew where they were then and the world was simpler then, wasn't it ?
No point trying to deal with the complicated 21st century when the 20th was so much easier.
So the Russians are killing people on our streets and they're not really the bad guys?
Always the same on here after any kind of attack - terrorist or otherwise. You can't hear anything through the deafening noise of knees jerking all over the place. SeanT will be along in a minute to recommend compulsory deportation of all Russians, Muslims, Remoaner traitors to save little England from going to hell in a handcart. Might it not be a good idea to wait a bit, assess the evidence, respect the legal process and make a considered response in due course?
Nor is it unhelpful - because as you imply the actually important stuff happens out of our view during the investigation, and any media or public speculation surely has no bearing on events at all, so why imply people speculating must be cold war enthusiasts?
It's a major news story with suspicious, lurid details, speculation is inevitable, what grounds do you have for thinking this is about people yearning for the certainty of good brits evil soviets of the 1980s? People generally that is, since obviously there are going to be random weirdos like that, as there are for any extreme position, but that is not necessarily indicative.
I found it curious the language of the 1980s (and earlier) has so easily slipped back into the media. I think for some political people and the media demonising Russia (and others) is easy and it has a useful function.
If there is an enemy or a threat people rally to the Government and give it unconditional and uncritical support and anyone criticising the Government gets all sort of vitriol thrown at them.
Perhaps, although it isn't the government (at this stage) making open accusations against Russia, and they presumably won't be so direct unless they really can prove it to a reasonable degree. I'll have to take your word about how things were in the 1980s, but again it doesn't feel to me like there has been a marked increase in demonisation as a general thing, be it in relation to Russia or others. Putin is apparently both genuinely popular and autocratic, and our media notes he is autocratic. That seems reasonable, and histrionics reporting is part and parcel of our press, it doesn't fill me with despair as to the state of society.
The Litvinenko evidence was pretty damming against Russia - so they have form
Perhaps, although it isn't the government (at this stage) making open accusations against Russia, and they presumably won't be so direct unless they really can prove it to a reasonable degree. I'll have to take your word about how things were in the 1980s, but again it doesn't feel to me like there has been a marked increase in demonisation as a general thing, be it in relation to Russia or others. Putin is apparently both genuinely popular and autocratic, and our media notes he is autocratic. That seems reasonable, and histrionics reporting is part and parcel of our press, it doesn't fill me with despair as to the state of society.
It depends the extent to which media reporting and Internet speculation and commentary permeate and inform opinion. The notion of "evil Russians" has existed for a very long time and is reminiscent of stereotypical caricatures of other European nations.
Events like this re-enforce those perceptions regrettably and it's absurdly counter-productive for Moscow to have sanctioned this from a wider perspective. Yet at the moment Moscow seems unwilling to make friends and wants to return its image to that of a global superpower while the reality is it lags far behind Washington and Beijing.
I found Putin's comments about nuclear war deeply worrying but a lot of it is for domestic consumption - he has to talk tough because that's what Russians want to hear.
Theresa May talks tough to the EU in public because that's what a significant portion of the British public wants to hear - I suspect, behind the scenes, the language and tone is very different.
It's entirely possible a pro-Putin individual did this without official sanction. If so, we can condemn it but to be frank unless we can find the culprit or he is handed over, we won't be able to do much at all.
With respect that's more or less the last line of defence the Russians use about Litvinenko. "Oh it was just some angry patriot." It was nonsense then because Polonium does not grow on trees. Analysis showed it to be almost inconceivable that the Polonium came from anywhere else but a Russian plant and had been processed for use as a poison by the Russian state.
Similarly the UK government is more or less hinting that the nerve agent used in the recent attack was not made in someone's bathtub.
And this "let's all be sensible and wait until due consideration has been given to all the evidence" stuff falls down an epistemic hole because there comes a stage at which either things are as they seem and preliminary conclusions can properly be drawn, or things are so much not as they seem that everything must be in doubt, including the validity of what is later presented to us as "all evidence."
Do you feel any more certain now about what happened to the Lockerbie plane, than you did on 21/12/88? I don't.
It's entirely possible a pro-Putin individual did this without official sanction. If so, we can condemn it but to be frank unless we can find the culprit or he is handed over, we won't be able to do much at all.
With respect that's more or less the last line of defence the Russians use about Litvinenko. "Oh it was just some angry patriot." It was nonsense then because Polonium does not grow on trees. Analysis showed it to be almost inconceivable that the Polonium came from anywhere else but a Russian plant and had been processed for use as a poison by the Russian state.
Similarly the UK government is more or less hinting that the nerve agent used in the recent attack was not made in someone's bathtub.
And this "let's all be sensible and wait until due consideration has been given to all the evidence" stuff falls down an epistemic hole because there comes a stage at which either things are as they seem and preliminary conclusions can properly be drawn, or things are so much not as they seem that everything must be in doubt, including the validity of what is later presented to us as "all evidence."
Do you feel any more certain now about what happened to the Lockerbie plane, than you did on 21/12/88? I don't.
I spoke to a policeman who had been involved at and in the Lockerbie investigation, his view of the CIA/FBI people involved was unprintable.
Too many here, have very little understanding of the Cold War. Quite honestly, that is a good thing because they were born or were too young after the collapse of the CCCP, the Berlin Wall and many other symptoms of national paranoia. Unfortunately, they are also not aware of the history. May I humbly suggest some of the following authors and books to get some idea of what it was like (and could I request others of the period, from those who understand):
Perhaps, although it isn't the government (at this stage) making open accusations against Russia, and they presumably won't be so direct unless they really can prove it to a reasonable degree. I'll have to take your word about how things were in the 1980s, but again it doesn't feel to me like there has been a marked increase in demonisation as a general thing, be it in relation to Russia or others. Putin is apparently both genuinely popular and autocratic, and our media notes he is autocratic. That seems reasonable, and histrionics reporting is part and parcel of our press, it doesn't fill me with despair as to the state of society.
It depends the extent to which media reporting and Internet speculation and commentary permeate and inform opinion. The notion of "evil Russians" has existed for a very long time and is reminiscent of stereotypical caricatures of other European nations.
Events like this re-enforce those perceptions regrettably and it's absurdly counter-productive for Moscow to have sanctioned this from a wider perspective. Yet at the moment Moscow seems unwilling to make friends and wants to return its image to that of a global superpower while the reality is it lags far behind Washington and Beijing.
I found Putin's comments about nuclear war deeply worrying but a lot of it is for domestic consumption - he has to talk tough because that's what Russians want to hear.
Theresa May talks tough to the EU in public because that's what a significant portion of the British public wants to hear - I suspect, behind the scenes, the language and tone is very different.
I think the reality is more that Russia is a massive problem for the government, but it struggles to convince the general population of the problem.
To my mind, Britain has pursued a policy of trying to undermine Putin for 15+ years, because Russia was not following our strategic development model (ie free markets, advanced capitalism, freedom, human rights, democracy etc).
The goal was obviously to break Putin, and get some 'modernising' government in, which would helpfully open up Russia to an even greater capitalist rampage than that which occurred after the break up of the soviet union, thus ultimately enriching the City of London.
Unfortunately, the policy obviously hasn't worked, and Putin has simply turned in to our sworn enemy. He won't go away, and we can expect more and more provocations.
Comments
I know you are deluded re the EU but even you must be aware that Labour are not actually the Government of this country.
Thank god
Of course things are complicated, and of course all of us treat things more simply than is in fact the case, what does that have to do with anything? I detect very little relief from people should it be the case that Russia are murdering people in our streets. If that is what happened how are people 'not trying to deal with the complicated 21st century', and if it isn't what happened how is a media frenzy which not unreasonably suspects the Russian state given past actions, nature of the attack and the victims, also not trying to deal with the complicated 21st century? At worst it would be jumping to a conclusion, but you appear to be making some kind of societal point a la nostalgic yearning for the cold war, and I am not sure where you are getting that from. And the bit about us never being wrong I also don't get, since even though we clearly are sometimes, that doesn't mean all nations are the same when it comes to moral equivalence.
Why do you quote him?
If you ascribe some importance then tell me what it is.
What should happen is what I suspect IS happening - a thorough investigation based on the compilation of evidence to establish a case against one or more individuals. IF that individual is on British soil and is not protected by diplomatic immunity, an arrest can be made and the subject prosecuted. It's entirely possible any suspect has already left the country.
I accept it would be much more difficult if any suspect were found to be part of the Russian diplomatic staff.
Again, IF it is clearly established that the Russian Government was directly implicated, the measures would involve sanctions and the expulsion of numbers of diplomatic staff but we can't do until and unless we have proof of an officially-sanctioned action.
It's entirely possible a pro-Putin individual did this without official sanction. If so, we can condemn it but to be frank unless we can find the culprit or he is handed over, we won't be able to do much at all.
Those arguing "wait and see" are just like the NRA after a mass shooting. You actually want no response, but know that is an awful argument, so instead you just want to push things into the long grass until media attention moves on.
I'm left with the disquieting thought that blaming other people for everything is easy. I happen to think the West has completely mishandled its dealings with Russia since 1989 and the result of that stupidity is not only Putin but the uncomfortable truth NATO and Russian troops are eyeballing each other in the Baltic States.
I didn't enjoy the Cold War and don't want to spend my latter years fearing nuclear annihilation as much as I did in my earlier years.
It's a major news story with suspicious, lurid details, speculation is inevitable, what grounds do you have for thinking this is about people yearning for the certainty of good brits evil soviets of the 1980s? People generally that is, since obviously there are going to be random weirdos like that, as there are for any extreme position, but that is not necessarily indicative.
Sometimes you simply don't seem to have a moral compass, Roger.
And as for you silly point about MI5, this is a guy who was pardoned by the Russian state, and even in the distorted perspective of that state, not a target.
If you think it even vaguely acceptable that a foreign state conduct assassinations in our country, then you are quite simply an idiot.
Similarly the UK government is more or less hinting that the nerve agent used in the recent attack was not made in someone's bathtub.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Sunil-bar-chart.jpg
Stodge is right, too many on here are hankering for a replay of Kenny Everett's "let's bomb Russia" Tory conference speech (not realising he was taking the piss) before even a shred of evidence has come to light.
If there is an enemy or a threat people rally to the Government and give it unconditional and uncritical support and anyone criticising the Government gets all sort of vitriol thrown at them.
It is somewhat irrational, indeed, to expect people discussing an incident on a messageboard to refrain from speculation, right or wrong.
And let us be frank, unless Putin himself suddenly and inexplicably admitted on live television he personally snuck into the UK to administer the agent used in this attack, the official position would always be there is no definitive proof, so the argument over it will never be concluded.
That said, the response of the West to the fall of Communism has led to this point and indeed has had consequences in many other areas, Brexit being one. Had countries like Poland and Romania not left the Communist bloc and been able to join the EU, the mass migration post 2004 wouldn't have happened and it's likely the EU would be a very different animal today.
Our policy towards Russia has reverted to containment and once again we are eyeballing Russian troops admittedly hundreds of miles further east than before but the consequences of any clash in the Baltic States would be catastrophic.
But enough of russians and the downfall of society, good night all.
Do you feel any more certain now about what happened to the Lockerbie plane, than you did on 21/12/88? I don't.
Events like this re-enforce those perceptions regrettably and it's absurdly counter-productive for Moscow to have sanctioned this from a wider perspective. Yet at the moment Moscow seems unwilling to make friends and wants to return its image to that of a global superpower while the reality is it lags far behind Washington and Beijing.
I found Putin's comments about nuclear war deeply worrying but a lot of it is for domestic consumption - he has to talk tough because that's what Russians want to hear.
Theresa May talks tough to the EU in public because that's what a significant portion of the British public wants to hear - I suspect, behind the scenes, the language and tone is very different.
While our attention is misdirected Eastwards, the real villain goes to work...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_le_Carré
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Smiley
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Price
To my mind, Britain has pursued a policy of trying to undermine Putin for 15+ years, because Russia was not following our strategic development model (ie free markets, advanced capitalism, freedom, human rights, democracy etc).
The goal was obviously to break Putin, and get some 'modernising' government in, which would helpfully open up Russia to an even greater capitalist rampage than that which occurred after the break up of the soviet union, thus ultimately enriching the City of London.
Unfortunately, the policy obviously hasn't worked, and Putin has simply turned in to our sworn enemy. He won't go away, and we can expect more and more provocations.