Russian chemical attack on UK

I for one couldn't be more glad that we have such an upstanding man as Mr. Putin to defend Europe against NATO and American imperialism.

Proof that it really was the Russians who were behind the attack does actually not exist, and it is by no means the only plausible explanation (as is claimed by the British prime minister). We just watched a TV-documentation about it.

" It is part of the modern Western mindset to view Russia as the victim now instead of the aggressor, just as Russia always wanted the West to do."

Are you out of your mind? This is how the diplomatic puppets of the US (almost all from Western countries) stupidly and so readily, despite lack of evidence, reacted to the UK's antics.

Read this article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2018/03/27/here-are-all-the-countries-that-just-expelled-russian-diplomats/?utm_term=.87573fea890a

Quoting Affecting at least 151 people, it is the largest expulsion of Russian diplomats since the Cold War  — and virtually unprecedented in scale and scope. 

This very recent incident and the subsequent expulsions demonstrate clearly the West's (at least that of its corrupted diplomats) modern mindset towards Russia.

"They were smart enough"

They are smart enough to not give in to Theresa May's and Nikki Haley's petty finger-pointing

Poor little peace loving Russia, why would anyone have anything against a country with such good intentions towards its neighboring countries.
If you want to know the truth about Putin and the Russian government ask anyone who is from Russia, Poland, Lithuania, Ukraine etc. They do not have any delusions about this dictator.

Blacksword wrote: The Dark Elf wrote: The question one must ask oneself is why would anyone other than the Russians use such a poison to kill an ex-Russian spy? The answer is simply that no other assumption makes any sense. It also not coincidental how many anti-Putin politicians, activists, exiled spies, etc. have ended up murdered. And that specific sort of poison, the danger in handling it, and the expertise required in planting it? It's like Putin put up a billboard festooned with neon lights in Piccadilly. Makes you wonder why another method of attack wasn't used. As you say, handling the substane is precarious and dangerous, and a successful kill was also not guaranteed. Surely if the Kremlin wanted this man dead, he'd be dead. Of course, it may be that Putin actually wanted to be the main suspect, and wanted the world to take notice that he was serious about dealing with 'traitors' and didn't care about the consequences.

Blaqua wrote: "Makes you wonder why another method of attack wasn't used. As you say, handling the substane is precarious and dangerous, and a successful kill was also not guaranteed. Surely if the Kremlin wanted this man dead, he'd be dead. " Spot-on! if the Russians were the perpetrators or involved in this attack in any way, they wouldn't have complicated the operation by using a very lethal, precarious, tell-tale because Russian-made, chemical weapon, which could jeopardize the lives of others including that of his Russian daughter.  Read here https://www.thejournal.ie/novichok-cant-prove-was-made-in-russia-3938011-Apr2018/ “not verified the precise source” of the substance." But so many Russian diplomats have already been expelled. Quoting the washingtonpost.com, Affecting at least 151 people, it is the largest expulsion of Russian diplomats since the Cold War  — and virtually unprecedented in scale and scope.  (!!)   UK government = Factory of Truth & Trust

To be fair, to them it was probably the straw that broke the camels back; Russia has been getting away with obnoxious behavior for a longer time now.

"Makes you wonder why another method of attack wasn't used. As you say, handling the substane is precarious and dangerous, and a successful kill was also not guaranteed. Surely if the Kremlin wanted this man dead, he'd be dead. "

Edited by Blaqua - April 05 2018 at 05:40

The Dark Elf wrote: The question one must ask oneself is why would anyone other than the Russians use such a poison to kill an ex-Russian spy? The answer is simply that no other assumption makes any sense.

Maybe it was used to make the Russians look suspicious as a distraction?

The question one must ask oneself is why would anyone other than the Russians use such a poison to kill an ex-Russian spy? The answer is simply that no other assumption makes any sense. It also not coincidental how many anti-Putin politicians, activists, exiled spies, etc. have ended up murdered. And that specific sort of poison, the danger in handling it, and the expertise required in planting it? It's like Putin put up a billboard festooned with neon lights in Piccadilly.

Easy Money wrote: You don't know who committed that poisoning, you have absolutely no idea anymore than I do, but to say that the KGB or Russian government is absolutely not one of many possible suspects is beyond naive.

It is indeed, John. However, the interview given to the British press by the director of Porton Down yesterday was naive in the extreme. What worries me even more is the fact that it was authorised by the Prime Minister's office. To have more than one arm of government stating definitively that Russia was absolutely responsible (the likeliest scenario) contradicted by the chief chemist of the country stating he can't say definitively where the damned stuff originated from is a tad embarrassing, to say the least.

It has gone down lie a bucket of cold puke in some Western governments who supported us. Indeed, The Times reported today that May is struggling to hold the anti-Russian coalition together.

To repeat, all the evidence is that Putin was responsible, or a state agency, which amounts to the same thing. However, as seems to be constantly the case in government these days, we really do not seem to help ourselves.