Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 104

Thread: Russian ex-spy critically ill after exposure to a "substance"

  1. #31
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    7,227
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    If the Americans didn't ask for ARTICLE 5 over 11 Sept, the Brits won't ask for it over this.
    ok so what happens next

    Not talking about more sanctions here this is something else
    Last edited by Double Edge; 19 Mar 18, at 00:57.

  2. #32
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    957
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    ok so what happens next
    Happens what? A couple of Russian traitors getting whacked? Yes, there is a big stink about this but it's not it has not happened before. We're not going to war over this. Might be a few James Bond thing going on but we never hear about those.

  3. #33
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    4,671
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    If the Americans didn't ask for ARTICLE 5 over 11 Sept, the Brits won't ask for it over this.
    They did; https://www.nato.int/cps/ua/natohq/topics_110496.htm

  4. #34
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    957
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    For a pretend Foreign Service Member, you sure know squat all. The Americans DID NOT INVOKE ARTICLE 5. The NATO allies did ... with no request to do so from the Americans. If you were in the Foreign Service, you SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT. ARTICLE 5 was passed through our Parliments!

  5. #35
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    4,671
    But you were saying Article 5 was not invoked after 9/11 when it was. I agree though I think it highly unlikely that the UK will ask for it to be invoked (as the US did then). See https://www.nato.int/docu/review/200...5/EN/index.htm
    Last edited by snapper; 19 Mar 18, at 02:02.

  6. #36
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    7,227
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Happens what? A couple of Russian traitors getting whacked? Yes, there is a big stink about this but it's not it has not happened before. We're not going to war over this. Might be a few James Bond thing going on but we never hear about those.
    Sorry i misread your previous post. There will be no article 5 asked for by the UK

  7. #37
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    7,227
    Anyway, Russia wants the world to know they did this. They could have bumped him off any number of discrete ways but no. They had to pick a way that would leave no doubt as to who was responsible and this point would be publicised every where.

    They want to send a message. Question is to whom.

    Their personnel ? are they facing defection problems. In which case this guy was probably the easiest and what he did didn't matter but his former connection to Russia does.

    The UK and by extension NATO ? seems pointless
    Last edited by Double Edge; 19 Mar 18, at 15:46.

  8. #38
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    957
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    But you were saying Article 5 was not invoked after 9/11 when it was. I agree though I think it highly unlikely that the UK will ask for it to be invoked (as the US did then). See https://www.nato.int/docu/review/200...5/EN/index.htm
    Read what I wrote

    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    If the Americans didn't ask for ARTICLE 5 over 11 Sept, the Brits won't ask for it over this.
    The NATO allies -MINUS THE AMERICANS- were the ones who invoked ARTICLE 5! Or are you too stupid to actually know what really happened? As a show of solidarity with the Americans on that terrible day, WE WERE THE ONES WHO INVOKED ARTICLE 5 to come to American defence. The Americans NEVER asked NATO to do so. It did not even occurred to them to ask!

    If you were at the Foreign Office (and those shows you really were not there), you would have known the communications traffics with all the NATO capitals to invoke ARTICLE 5. Washington DC was not among them. They were too damned busy.
    Last edited by WABs_OOE; 19 Mar 18, at 02:58.

  9. #39
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,848
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Anyway, Russia wants the world to know they did this. They could have bumped him off any number of discrete ways but no. They have to pick a way that would leave no doubt as to who was responsible and this point would be publicised every where.

    They want to send a message. Question is to whom.

    Their personnel ? are they facing defection problems. In which case this guy was probably the easiest and what he did didn't matter but his former connection to Russia does.

    The UK and by extension NATO ? seems pointless
    Or, Putin just had 300 of his little green men whacked in Syria. He needed to show that he's strong to folks back home ahead of the election. He calculated that this was a sure fire way and even the diplomatic recriminations afterwards would just be like candy to his support base.

    Even Turkey could be perceived to be pushing him around in Afrin.

    Also helps to send message to would be spies: you're never safe, anywhere.
    Last edited by citanon; 19 Mar 18, at 11:45.

  10. #40
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    4,671
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    The NATO allies -MINUS THE AMERICANS- were the ones who invoked ARTICLE 5! Or are you too stupid to actually know what really happened? As a show of solidarity with the Americans on that terrible day, WE WERE THE ONES WHO INVOKED ARTICLE 5 to come to American defence. The Americans NEVER asked NATO to do so. It did not even occurred to them to ask!
    "The US response was quick. I subsequently learned that after consulting with his deputy, Toria Nuland, Burns had passed the text to Secretary of State Colin Powell with his recommendation to support it. Powell quickly authorised Burns to do so and in parallel consulted President George W. Bush. By the time the Council met, President Bush had signalled his support too."

  11. #41
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    7,227
    Quote Originally Posted by citanon View Post
    Or, Putin just had 300 of his little green men whacked in Syria. He needed to show that he's strong to folks back home ahead of the election. He calculated that this was a sure fire way and even the diplomatic recriminations afterwards would just be like candy to his support base.

    Even Turkey could be perceived to be pushing him around in Afrin.

    Also helps to send message to would be spies: you're never safe, anywhere.
    I think you've got it there with the elections. This is about domestic politics and making Russia great again.

    He isn't gloating about it but the people know. He's doing it because he's insecure.

    What if the CCP is in the same boat and for a while now.

    All that nonsense in the SCS for the last ten years. Just a live drama for the home crowd? fighting over rocks makes sense now because militarily they are useless.

    Create this aggressive exterior, rile up the neighbours because internally they're weak and soft.

    This is what makes these countries dangerous

    What if reforms fail (any reforms is empty talk since the lat ten years in Russia's case)

    What if the economy tanks

    What if you get millions of Russians or Chinese demonstrating on the streets

    What does the management do ?
    Last edited by Double Edge; 19 Mar 18, at 15:49.

  12. #42
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    7,227
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    Attachment 45590

    Doesn't seem to add up to me.
    Putin needs a minimum of 65% to be safe.

    If it was in the low fifties that's like an invitation to a civil war

  13. #43
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    957
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    "The US response was quick. I subsequently learned that after consulting with his deputy, Toria Nuland, Burns had passed the text to Secretary of State Colin Powell with his recommendation to support it. Powell quickly authorised Burns to do so and in parallel consulted President George W. Bush. By the time the Council met, President Bush had signalled his support too."
    You can't even read your own sources. Where IN THAT did the US ASKED for ARTICLE 5? The US accepted ARTICLE 5 when the rest of the NATO allies offerred BUT THEY DID NOT ASKED!!!!!!

    You're too dumb to even pretend you know things.

  14. #44
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    4,671
    You asserted that "The NATO allies -MINUS THE AMERICANS- were the ones who invoked ARTICLE 5!". The US was "too busy". That there zero US input - that all the others got together and invoked Article 5 "MINUS THE AMERICANS". You also say it was passed by the Parliament; maybe the Canadian one. Can't find a vote in the UK Parliament on Article 5. There were issues; did Article 5 cover acts of 'terrorism' etc... But very clearly the US was involved in the decision to invoke Article 5. The US Ambassador Nick Burns spoke to Toria Nuland (then his deputy) and passed on a paper about invoking Article 5 to Colin Powell; Powell said go ahead and say this is what we want to do and spoke to Bush who agreed. To describe this as being "The NATO allies -MINUS THE AMERICANS" when the whole US hierarchy from the President down through the Secretary of State is involved in the decision making process seems to me to terminologically inexact.

  15. #45
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    7,227
    Quote Originally Posted by citanon View Post
    Or, Putin just had 300 of his little green men whacked in Syria.
    Hmm, is a month enough to pull this op off if it was because of Syria ?

    He said that interest has only increased since the Russian foreign ministry reported that five Russians died in a US bombing raid on pro-regime troops attacking opposition forces in Syria's Deir Ezzor province on February 7.

    “Now, it’s more about getting revenge than it is about money,” he said.

    But the chief warned that these revenge-seekers don’t know the whole story. According to him, it wasn’t just five Russians killed in the American raid – it was 218. (US officials have said about 100 pro-regime fighters were killed, without specifying whether they were Syrian army, Russian or other forces.)

    However, the paramilitary chief said only 150 bodies have so far been recovered.
    Feb 7 is when those Russians died in Syria

    Skirpal was Sunday Mar 4
    Last edited by Double Edge; 19 Mar 18, at 18:51.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Obama Will "...calibrate..." Russian/U.S. Relationship
    By S2 in forum International Politics
    Replies: 131
    Last Post: 14 Sep 13,, 07:15
  2. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 07 Sep 09,, 17:55
  3. Replies: 18
    Last Post: 02 Sep 08,, 05:20
  4. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 25 Aug 08,, 23:13
  5. Russian tank "Black Eagle" ("object 640")
    By foxhound_nn in forum Ground Warfare
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 27 Dec 07,, 05:53

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •