UK demands Russia explain nerve attack after two more people struck down

[Morch]

4 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

Quite.

 

Which is precisely why the brit. govt. (and media) rely on this most times they need an excuse....

 

So, in other words, the fact that Russia is bad also serves as a handy alibi for whatever. And doubt that you could substantiate that "most times" bit....but do go on about "excuse".

[Morch]

2 hours ago, BestB said:

It’s not even of Russian grade but of Russian invention .

 

If it was Russian grade, all would have been dead not cured as it’s 100% kill rate.

 

Dosage and potency can be varied.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, BestB said:

You do realize Putin is not a God and is not responsible for anything and everything that happens , right?

 

Russia just like US and UK has its secret service , intelligence agencies and so on.

 

just like US and UK these agencies do not report to Putin on daily basis and do run their own ops.

 

You do know Putin's background, right? And while it is tempting to imagine he is not aware of major operations abroad, it is kinda doubtful that's the case.

[BestB]

1 minute ago, Morch said:

 

You do know Putin's background, right? And while it is tempting to imagine he is not aware of major operations abroad, it is kinda doubtful that's the case.

Of course I am aware of his background but it’s also doubtful he is aware and responsible for every single thing 

[Morch]

55 minutes ago, BestB said:

Actually nothing but a speculation with no proof . And wiki hardly a reliable source when can be edited by anyone 

 

You're welcome and try to edit such entries as the one linked, and see how it works out. You could also go have a look at the discussions pertaining to various edit actions - the level of scrutiny is a "bit" more thorough than you imagine. Wikipedia is a collection of sources, a whole lot of them linked in that page.

[BestB]

6 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Dosage and potency can be varied.

You would think people who made it and decided to use it would know the correct dosage ?

[Morch]

1 minute ago, BestB said:

Of course I am aware of his background but it’s also doubtful he is aware and responsible for every single thing 

 

I don't think trying to kill two foreign nationals outside of Russia's borders falls under "every single thing". All the more so considering their identities and means used.

[Morch]

1 minute ago, BestB said:

You would think people who made it and decided to use it would know the correct dosage ?

 

You would think people make mistakes all the time. And that using new means doesn't always play out as intended.

[BestB]

Just now, Morch said:

 

You're welcome and try to edit such entries as the one linked, and see how it works out. You could also go have a look at the discussions pertaining to various edit actions - the level of scrutiny is a "bit" more thorough than you imagine. Wikipedia is a collection of sources, a whole lot of them linked in that page.

And yet once again nothing but a speculation as even wiki says “ propably” ie a speculation  

[BestB]

1 minute ago, Morch said:

 

I don't think trying to kill two foreign nationals outside of Russia's borders falls under "every single thing". All the more so considering their identities and means used.

Do you have any proof it was Russia who poisoned them ?

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, BestB said:

And yet once again nothing but a speculation as even wiki says “ propably” ie a speculation  

 

And yet, once again, nothing but deflections. The point made was with regard to your misguided criticism of Wikipedia.

[digger70]

Like Russia is going to Listen to the Poms Demand ,,,, Pigs might Fly ,,,,

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, BestB said:

Do you have any proof it was Russia who poisoned them ?

 

Loaded questions for the win.

 

Russia is the most likely suspect. Spin away.

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

9 minutes ago, BestB said:

Of course I am aware of his background but it’s also doubtful he is aware and responsible for every single thing 

 

Right, he probably takes a pass on most important issues of state -- except for killing people. That latter one, I'm sure gets his full attention.

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

1 minute ago, digger70 said:

Like Russia is going to Listen to the Poms Demand ,,,, Pigs might Fly ,,,,

 

Yes, the UK's demand for "info" from Russia that first time, in the wake of the Skripals' poisoning, was such a success that they've now decided to repeat the same request again.

 

Dear Vlad, can you please explain to us why Russian operatives working on behalf of your government used a nerve agent in an attempted assassination of two Russian expats on UK soil??? And why at least your spys didn't manage to clean up their original mess so that other victims would not later be exposed to the same nerve agent?  Sincerely, UK Foreign Ministry

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BestB]

22 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

And yet, once again, nothing but deflections. The point made was with regard to your misguided criticism of Wikipedia.

What an i

 deflecting ? Fact that it’s nothing but speculations

[BestB]

17 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Right, he probably takes a pass on most important issues of state -- except for killing people. That latter one, I'm sure gets his full attention.

 

Well ... they not dead.so there goes the whole argument ??

[maximillian]

2 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Funny comment, considering that historically, leftists and liberals were often called communists and considered by conservatives to be in league with communist nations, whereas it was the conservatives and Republicans who rightly considered the former Soviet Union and the current Russia a threat to western democracies.

 

So now, in your humble opinion, the left that used to be considered in league with the communists is now out to destroy Russia??? My my, we certainly live in a topsy-turvy world.

 

Frankly, I don't care whether anyone then or now considers themselves liberals or conservatives. But they are both right in considering the current Russia under Putin to be a threat to western democracies and to world order and stability.

 

Putin is a dictator who's killed and imprisoned his domestic opponents, retained power thru a fake election in which his main opponent was outlawed, tried to covertly and illegally sway the U.S. presidential election (and succeeded in doing so), has invaded and fomented unrest designed to undermine neighboring regions, has been judged responsible for foreign assassinations, and that's just the lowlights.

 

 

Just wonder where you get all the information about Putin.

 

[BestB]

23 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Loaded questions for the win.

 

Russia is the most likely suspect. Spin away.

 

Why? Because Someome says so ?

 

you would think a country that overthrows regimes, builds rockets to fly to outer space would be able to kill someone without leaving a trail or using an agent which is easily traceable to its source.

 

not much different to Saddam had WMD’s likely , only to find none .

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

11 minutes ago, maximillian said:

 

Just wonder where you get all the information about Putin.

 

 

Yes, the world's news media that report on Russia's various nefarious doings, among other things, are a very inconvenient fact of life.

 

It's kind of hard these days to have those under your command invade your neighbors or shoot down passenger jets or arrest or kill your political opponents and not have anyone notice.

 

Edited July 6, 2018 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[BestB]

6 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Yes, the world's news media that report on Russia's various nefarious doings, among other things, are a very inconvenient fact of life.

 

It's kind of hard these days to invade your neighbors and arrest or kill your political opponents and not have anyone notice.

 

 

But its the very same media that reports on US presidents, one paints him as a hero and another paints him as a moron.

 

Which one is right and which is wrong?

 

Saying that, Putin is no angel, no doubt about that, but you have to give him credit where credit is due.

 

He is one of the smartest and most powerful leaders in the world, he has brought Russia from ruins into a strong country, not only military but economically wise.

 

Media or foreign government love to pin everything on Putin, but realistically and logically he can not possibly be responsible or aware of every single problem that ever arises.

 

Sure he would be briefed on it, but accusing him of sanctioning each and every time is just plain silly

 

http://www.atimes.com/article/putins-fault-still-wins/

[Morch]

32 minutes ago, BestB said:

What an i

 deflecting ? Fact that it’s nothing but speculations

 

Once again, your original comment was about Wikipedia as a "source". It was pointed out to be off-mark.

[BestB]

Just now, Morch said:

 

Once again, your original comment was about Wikipedia as a "source". It was pointed out to be off-mark.

And i already said that even accepting your point, it still remains a speculation as Wiki which you find to be reliable says " he was probably aware" 

 

"Probably" proves the point, a speculation with no evidence

[Morch]

27 minutes ago, BestB said:

Why? Because Someome says so ?

 

you would think a country that overthrows regimes, builds rockets to fly to outer space would be able to kill someone without leaving a trail or using an agent which is easily traceable to its source.

 

not much different to Saddam had WMD’s likely , only to find none .

 

Why? Because it is hard to ignore motives, means and capabilities falling in line with such an assertion. And it isn't "because someone says so". There are plenty of "someones" saying so, many of them more informed than either of us.

 

You would think that nobody (or no country) is infallible. To remind you of an earlier post of yours, Putin is not a god. Intelligence services make mistakes. Russia's aren't exempt.

 

And here we go with yet another off-topic deflection.

[Morch]

1 minute ago, BestB said:

And i already said that even accepting your point, it still remains a speculation as Wiki which you find to be reliable says " he was probably aware" 

 

"Probably" proves the point, a speculation with no evidence

 

The only thing it "proves" is that you are nitpicking.

[BestB]

1 minute ago, Morch said:

 

Why? Because it is hard to ignore motives, means and capabilities falling in line with such an assertion. And it isn't "because someone says so". There are plenty of "someones" saying so, many of them more informed than either of us.

 

You would think that nobody (or no country) is infallible. To remind you of an earlier post of yours, Putin is not a god. Intelligence services make mistakes. Russia's aren't exempt.

 

And here we go with yet another off-topic deflection.

 

So intelligence services make mistake and how does that turn into Putin was aware or sanctioned it?

 

And yes intelligence services make mistakes, so in first case they made nothing but mistakes, so in second case they decided to up the ante and make more mistakes?

[Morch]

13 minutes ago, BestB said:

 

But its the very same media that reports on US presidents, one paints him as a hero and another paints him as a moron.

 

Which one is right and which is wrong?

 

Saying that, Putin is no angel, no doubt about that, but you have to give him credit where credit is due.

 

He is one of the smartest and most powerful leaders in the world, he has brought Russia from ruins into a strong country, not only military but economically wise.

 

Media or foreign government love to pin everything on Putin, but realistically and logically he can not possibly be responsible or aware of every single problem that ever arises.

 

Sure he would be briefed on it, but accusing him of sanctioning each and every time is just plain silly

 

http://www.atimes.com/article/putins-fault-still-wins/

 

Do make up your mind. Either Putin is a god, or he isn't.

There's no explanation as to how asserting his sanctioned such attacks is "silly". Other than you saying so.

[BestB]

2 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

The only thing it "proves" is that you are nitpicking.

You do realize that even Wiki does not consider itself to be a fully reliable source right?

 

Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Wikipedia can be edited by anyone at any time. This means that any information it contains at any particular time could be vandalism. Biographies of living persons are especially vulnerable to this issue. Some edits on Wikipedia that are in error are sometimes fixed, however because Wikipedia cannot monitor contributions made by millions of users, there are many errors that remain unnoticed for days, weeks, months, and even years. Therefore, Wikipedia should not be considered a source for 'fact-checking'.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_reliable_source

[BestB]

2 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Do make up your mind. Either Putin is a god, or he isn't.

There's no explanation as to how asserting his sanctioned such attacks is "silly". Other than you saying so.

No different to your assertions he did

[Morch]

Just now, BestB said:

 

So intelligence services make mistake and how does that turn into Putin was aware or sanctioned it?

 

And yes intelligence services make mistakes, so in first case they made nothing but mistakes, so in second case they decided to up the ante and make more mistakes?

 

Putin rules Russia, and by extension, Russian intelligence services. What they do, he's responsible for. Considering your favorable view of Putin prowess as a leader, why would one assume these qualities are missing when it comes to oversight of intelligence organizations and their operations? Bearing in mind his background, this seems unlikely.

 

I have no idea how the first and the second instances relate to each other. Neither do you. It is possible that one botched up effort had further, unforeseen consequences.