Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Well that is a great assumption that some russian secret service would use nerve agents that almost don't kills and is traceable just to cause random fear?

Because evil KGB is evil, right?

All that you say is basicly terrorism.
And the whole evidence is based on "because russians could do that" and the motive form that act is "because they are russians'.

The more news comes about this theme the more "Burn after reading" feel i get from this whole situation.

And what is that a ridiculous kind of fear I should get when supposed to be assassins is some kind of sloppy thugs using dated and traceable chemicals?

Behold the mighty russian secret service using our best dumb-sloppy thugs that equiped with our best outdated chemicals. And Fear us - or we send even dumber thugs with even more dated chemicals.
Sound like excellent plan - what ever can go wrong with this right?

 Mozzyfuzzy wrote:
You mean like the totally not obvious invasion of Crimea? Nobody said Russia was competent.

But that actually was professionaly executed whatever you call it.

Whoever said the Russian secret service was evil, mighty, or even particularly good?

>

Russian security services are so powerful

"Morally bankrup","connected to the levers of power" , "leftover dregs of the KGB", "rooted in cruising around doing sloppy assassinations", "whisking domestic citizens off", "autocratic third world intelligence service"

If you are trying to proof that they are not evil, but also unprofessional - you're doing it deliberately bad, because all that you said is essentialy what evil is: "Definitions of evil vary, as does the analysis of its motives.[2] However, elements that are commonly associated with evil involve unbalanced behavior involving anger, revenge, fear, hatred, psychological trauma, expediency, selfishness, ignorance, or neglect."

the idea of a hit squad

Do you find the idea of a clown with gun hunting you in the night fear-inducing? And if that said clown will shoot himself in a leg and run away with Yakety Sax song - would that be fear-inducing?
Because that is how I see you trying to portray this incident - sloppy yet somehow fear-inducing.

It's supposed to send a message / If nobody knew about it, it wouldn't be much of a deterrent.

So let's imagine a news "Former russian spy found dead with cut tongue" - what would you think of it? Regular tuesday in Salisbury?
There is no option "If nobody knew about it" - you will know about this just by the fact that victim is former russian agent - not the method of execution.
Although - it could be fear-inducing if it was lethal enough - but the fact that you should spray yourself like a cologne and wait some time - makes it a gakky weapon of mass destruction - you got a better chances to be bombed by islamic radicals or just stabbed - That is what fear-inducing.

And I don't feel any signs of fear in your words - only despise - because that's what the most feels about this whole incident.

Of course there is always can be a misfortune or bad luck during special operation (if it is) so it looks like a professionals act like a sloppy thugs but then you have to actually prove it, because in that case we can balme anyone with the same amount of reasons.

Because Like:
it's so convenient that it happened just a few weeks before joint strike on Syria - because of chemical attack in Douma - so that would sound like a legit plan - Russia involved with chemical buisness so we can safely bomb a soverign state.
it's so convenient that it helps to distract from inner UK problems and helps to unite people before the international act of agression,
it's also convenient that you don't have to participate in upcoming World Cup,
it's also convenient to make that kind of special operations just a two weeks before presidential elections so you can investigate it so fast that only just a week after incident (and few days before elections) you can already blame Russia - if only Brits could solve all the crimes that fast right?

So apart from that - the only explanation is of course russian sloppy thuggs from GRU that try to induce fear.
I like how everything is so simple and convenient in your world.

To which the corresponding answer is 'In the origin of the weapon, the choice of target, the past history of assassinations in Britain involving 'accidents', and the lack of motivation for absolutely any other party in existence.'

That's a gak of a solid proofs.

So novichock is obviously produced only from the glands of Putin and can never be produced or obtained by 3rd parties https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-russia-chemicalweapons-german/wests-knowledge-of-novichok-came-from-sample-secured-in-1990s-report-idUSKCN1IH2HC
Then - double agent - obviously harmless man that could do nothing wrong or be involved in anything illegal in England.
Then - best part - history of assassinations in Britain - is legit as Jew conspiracy against Germany in past century. Thanks god russian are white-colored so no one would suspect you of being racist.
"and the lack of motivation for absolutely any other party in existence" - so that is the level of arguments in British courts now?

With that solid, objective and totally unbiased arguments - I wonder why this crime haven't been solved on the very next day - good work Sherlock!

And cutoff that civilised moral-high ground gak, pretending that your opinion is the only one that should exist.

you're either an idiot, an internet tough guy (aka, liar), or a paid shill (aka, professional liar)

Anyone who would believe it was anyone but Russia by now is (a) mentally unhinged and in need of psychological intervention, (b) a life-long conspiracy nut or (c) a paid Russian disinformation campaigner

As citizen of uncivilized democracy I won't call you a names in return and let you be ignorant as your civilized democracy allows, but for your information - if you have no arguments for actual questions, you don't have to insult opponents. Try it sometime. Just to see what it's like if for no other reason.

 BaronIveagh wrote:


Get in, poison the target, get out, toss the evidence on the way.

Pretty straight forward, actually.

I have no questions about how it was executed - my questions is "How do you know that is a Russian government?" because initially - Novichok is a VERY lethal and deadly nerve agent designed to kill people instantly on a battlefield. In 1993 Russian government shut down the programm and then get rid of it.
Then scientists that worked on this programm migrated to West, and that particular nerve agents was synthesised in various centers outside of Russia for research purposes. Then - there could be left stockpiles of said nerve agents. And considering what a mess was a Russia after USSR dissolvement so I wouldn't be surpised if it's gone to a 3rd parties.

But if we assume it was Russian government - then there is even more questions - Why killing with poison, why this poison is so weak, why Russian government kills former agent that already had served a prison sentence and also has a family in Russia - daughter and mother.
If he is not an intentional target of a crime - then who it is, why it is, and what it had to do with Skripal.
Then there is an executioners - a group of people - who are they, how do you know they are russian, how do you know they are related to a Russian security agencies, and if they do how do you know it was the Agency order to execute that order.

All this brief questions allows you to make a whole picture of what actually happened and who is actually responcible for this.
Finally it all can be fit in a simple "CUI BONO?" - Why it is russian government and why it could be beneficial for them. Or there is someone else who benefits from this situation.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Omega-soul wrote:
And I don't feel any signs of fear in your words - only despise - because that's what the most feels about this whole incident.

I don't need to fear the secret services. I am no traitor. And I am wise enough not to despise them either.

That was adressed to Ketara

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Omega-soul wrote:

Then - best part - history of assassinations in Britain - is legit as Jew conspiracy against Germany in past century. Thanks god russian are white-colored so no one would suspect you of being racist.

Tell that to Litvinenko. Oh wait, that's right, he's dead, so you can't. Or did someone just randomly kill him with a radioactive isotope? Or Markov, who randomly got poisoned by ricin?

Because previous crimes proves new one right?
So maybe it's Britain invaded Crimea? They already done that before.
Brilliant logic.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:


Sorry, could you repeat that? I couldn't hear you over the sound of the goalposts moving.

goalpost stays the same - even if there was a 99 proven poisoning by russians - you have to actually prove even the 100th poisoning, before you found someone guilty, even if it's a usual suspect.
Unlike notorious practice that involved jews, who found guilty just because they are jews.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Premise 1:

 Omega-soul wrote:

Then - best part - history of assassinations in Britain - is legit as Jew conspiracy against Germany in past century. Thanks god russian are white-colored so no one would suspect you of being racist.

Russia's history of assassinations in Britain is compared to Nazi conspiracies against Jews, with a healthy dose of racism accusations thrown in to boot.

I respond by pointing out that both Litvinenko and Markov were assassinated, in Britain, by Russia and the Soviet Union, respectively.

That is my comparison, yes - jews also commited some crimes, but other cases which involved jews treated in a way that you portray - Herschel Grynszpan assassinated Ernst vom Rath - so all the other crimes after deemed as a jew conspirasy, so you don't need to actually prove something.
And now - you pointing that - well Russia assassinated Litvinenko and Markov (He actually was assassinated by Bulgarians which are not even USSR) - so what does it actually points in this case? On suspects? Well, it's quite obvious that primary suspect in Russia.
But does your pointing to Litvinenko proves that Russia also guilty in Skripal case?
The answer is - no it proves nothing, just as the other jew don't have to answer for Grynszpan crime.

Premise 2:

 Omega-soul wrote:


Because previous crimes proves new one right?
So maybe it's Britain invaded Crimea? They already done that before.
Brilliant logic.

You are now questioning what the point of bringing Litvinenko and Markov up is to the discussion. You've gone from calling Russian assassinations in Britain a conspiracy on the same level as Nazi propaganda to accepting that it happened but that it doesn't matter in one post. That's a monumental shifting of goal posts. I wasn't ever arguing one way or another about whether Russia's behind Skripal's poisoning or not, I was calling out your dishonest, miserable excuse of a post for the bullgak that it is.

Come back when you can argue in good faith.

First of all - I didn't call it conspiray - I assumed a possible event to counter-argument Ketara "lack of motivation for absolutely any other party in existence" just as example.

And my questions is pretty straight-forward - I don't belive in argument "Russia poisoned Skripal because it was the same as with Litvinenko".
That is not the answer - that is assumption. Litvinenko is another case - with it's own methods and reasons for conflict.
So that was my answer to you - past crimes is past crimes - they don't prove anything - they can be used as part of evidence, but not a proof.

So that is the problem with whole discussion - it is just assumed "Former russian agent poisoned by Russia - because russians already did that before".
That is the whole motivation I get. But why do Russia want to poison Skripal? - To spread fear and leave a message. But why? That "Leave a message" is also just assumption. Why Russia wants to leave that message? Because russians, obviously. Whay Russia wants to fear someone? it's Russia they can do that.
And there is actually a lot of arguments questioning Russia involvement, that has no answers yet.

But instead, I got insults from Ketara, and assumption that would be inappropriate in similar cases but with another races - and yet you call me - dishonest and miserable esxuses user.

I am arguing with all the respects to ones that don't insult me, just because of having a different opinion.