Politics
7 lurkers |
196 watchers
| 30 Day Post Breakdown | Female | Male | Unspecified |
| Posts (Contributors) | 12 (5) | 629 (34) | () |
Mar 2018
9:08am, 20 Mar 2018
1,938 posts
|
Fellrunning
The first comment was tongue in cheek. The second not so much. It IS an obvious question that no one seems to be asking. That makes me curious. There's a lot of hot air and frenetic activity. I'm not on the inside or anything but having been in the military albeit not in any kind of intelligence role I get the impression that something's happened and people are cr*pping themselves. That said it probably was still the Russians... |
Mar 2018
9:30am, 20 Mar 2018
1,058 posts
|
J2R
I'm appalled to find that Boris Johnson is now saying basically the same as I said above: "The obvious Russian-ness of the weapon was designed to send a signal to anyone pondering dissent amid the intensifying repression of Mr Putin's Russia," he wrote. "The message is clear: we will hunt you down, we will find you and we will kill you - and though we will scornfully deny our guilt, the world will know that Russia did it." So I now think I must be mistaken. |
Mar 2018
10:29am, 20 Mar 2018
12,415 posts
|
Chrisull
""The obvious Russian-ness of the weapon" - lol at Boris's terminology. It's entirely what worries me, it's so obviously Russian that if you want to discredit Russia, be an ideal way to do it. Given, as mentioned before the whole point of Novichoks was that they were to be created from relatively easy to obtain ingredients, so they didn't need stockpiling, and such items were being sold on in the early 90s. Boris's motive ascribed to Putin is straight out of a comic book. As Michael Jackson said "I'm bad, come on you know" The question is why hunt down a spy they swapped, they could have killed 8 years ago. The swap process benefits Russia too, they get back people they want. It doesn't mean there isn't a reason - maybe he was engaging in further espionage, or maybe his daughter was. BUT in that case, you view it through a different lens, Putin has him killed because he's engaging in dodgy activities. So then it becomes less of a Russian state attacking the UK action. Also we are being told in our papers one thing: theguardian.com "Bretton-Gordon, a former commander of the now disbanded UK Chemical, Biological, Radiation and Nuclear regiment and its Nato equivalent, said Shikhany was the sole location for development and production of novichok, dismissing suggestions that the chemical could be found in other places in the former Soviet Union such as Ukraine and Uzbekistan" but in the United States they are being told another: washingtonpost.com "I learned that research on Novichok had begun in 1987, even as the Soviet Union said it would unilaterally halt all its chemical-weapons programs. It had been developed at the institute and tested in a place called Shikhani, in southeastern Russia, and in the Nukus region of Uzbekistan." If it was developed also in Uzbekistan as well, the likelihood that it got out during the Soviet Union collapse is far greater. As I said before, I don't have to provide an alternative scenario or perpetrator, just point out there is reasonable doubt, and any actions we take should be tempered by that. |
|
Mar 2018
11:02am, 20 Mar 2018
1,061 posts
|
J2R
Chrisull, I actually think Corbyn has got this right, that we shouldn't rush to action before all the facts are known. But then, I think that applies across the board. One of the things which worries me these days is the trend towards ever more outrage-driven politics, where a surge of outrage about whatever, whipped up very quickly on social media, leads to rushed decisions at the top because something has to be seen to be done. Those rushed decisions can often be wrong and frequently completely counterproductive. One good example of this is the current drive against the use of plastics by supermarkets. Online petition after online petition demands that supermarket X and supermarket Y stop using plastics in their food packaging. While undoubtedly far too much plastic is used, which does contribute to the terrible problem with plastics in the oceans, in many cases plastics are very beneficial. For one thing, the use of plastic in food packaging substantially reduces food waste, which cannot be anything other than a good thing. And to replace it with something else, some natural product, would often involve dedicating a very large area of land to growing the crop which is currently devoted to growing food. So a more considered, reduced plastic use is undoubtedly a good idea. But that doesn't work for outrage-driven politics, which demands a complete ban. |
Mar 2018
11:18am, 20 Mar 2018
1,302 posts
|
SFL
Good point J2R. Norway has had an incentivised deposit based plastic bottle recycling system since the 70`s and recycle more than 90%of their plastic bottles. Something similar applied here, but also covering plastic packaging for food, toys etc seems like a far more sensible approach than a knee jerk plastic ban.
|
|
Mar 2018
11:18am, 20 Mar 2018
5,074 posts
|
postieboy
The west has let Putin get away with everything since he got into power, and he knows the EU and US are too weak/indifferent/naive to do anything about it. I'm currently reading Winter Is Coming by Garry Kasparov, a vocal critic of Putin. It's an enlightening read about how we've got where we are in our relationship with Russia since the Cold War ended. |
Mar 2018
11:23am, 20 Mar 2018
2,594 posts
|
jdarun
I'm puzzled about the plastic thing, cos I thought biodegradable versions are readily available - cellophane has been around for over a century and surely there are newer/better versions.
|
|
Mar 2018
11:24am, 20 Mar 2018
1,303 posts
|
SFL
On the Russian issue, if Putin is trying to show suspicion, division and confusion it seems to be working. McDonnell agreeing with May rather than Corbyn. Chrisull agreeing with the Daily Mail. J2R singing from the same hymn sheet as Boris Johnson. He's either caused a bit of confusion, or he's hacked your fetch accounts 
|
|
Mar 2018
11:44am, 20 Mar 2018
1,304 posts
|
SFL
sew
|
|
Mar 2018
11:52am, 20 Mar 2018
1,063 posts
|
J2R
SFL, :). Actually, it's even more confused - the Daily Mail article Chrisull referenced rather supports Corbyn's stance on this issue. I never thought I'd see the day.
|
Useful Links
FE accepts no responsibility for external links. Or anything, really.Related Threads
-
EU Referendum - In or Out? Vote here
Aug 2018
-
March to Parliament Against Brexit - Sat 2nd July
Jun 2016
-
EU Referendum
Feb 2016
-
Ads on Fetch - anyone else getting Leave and Remain?!
Feb 2017
-
The Environment Thread :-)
Apr 2024
-
Economics
Aug 2023
-
Dear Scottish Fetchies
Jan 2023
-
Any economists out there - question
Oct 2022
-
Power and exploitation - please check my sanity
Oct 2018
-
The most evil man in Politics..
Feb 2017
