Russian Intelligence War in the Uk

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by NuclearFart

His point is that you are obviously trying to employ false equivalencies here. Quoting some anachronistic point about Castro is old history, while Russia actively engages in assassination practices right now and then gloats about it on state TV.

Your post seems to be trying to normalize this behavior "because someone else does it too".




No its not just limited to Putin, and any history book will tell you this. Since we like quoting wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...assassinations

I by no means want to justify such behaviour. I fully condemn it. I absolutely do not want tensions between Russia and the west and I would rather live in a world that has managed to leave cold wars behind, much like we left hot wars behind, or at least world wars.

In your list there are 7 assassinations between Stalin and Putin (1953-1999). Putin's murder count is definitely way higher than ones of his preceders

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Comparing the U.S. to Russia is a monstrously false equivalence. If the U.S. really was no different from Putin's regime, we wouldn't be watching Samantha Bee and John Oliver getting in twitter fights with Trump - we'd be watching their corpses being pulled out of the Hudson River.

This is correct. But it is not about foreign policy and treating other nations. Definitely USA is better place to live. It is also way safer place to argue with your president. However, USA pays just as little respect to other nation's sovereignity or non-american lives, as Russia. I agree with Itse that superpower's going to superpower.

[Pointman]

This quote from BBC made me wonder why UK never send such request:


Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Moscow would co-operate if it received a formal request for clarification from the UK under the Chemical Weapons Convention, which sets a 10-day time limit for a response.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43411332

[Hart50]

Originally Posted by Pointman

That's weird comment. WW2 was started by Germany (or Japan if you consider Japan-China war as the beginning).

Russia was invaded by Hitler, suffered casualties that are unparalleled in history of the mankind, and, along with USA and Britain, destroyed Hitler - the biggest evil to walk the earth.

If you think, that WW2 was some sort of expansion war by Russia, you are out to lunch.

With the Nazi/Soviet invasion of Poland in 1939, it certainly started out that way.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Hart50

With the Nazi/Soviet invasion of Poland in 1939, it certainly started out that way.

Not to mention Finland and Bessarabia.

[afc wimbledon]

While I would never want to in any way absolve Uncle Joe of expansionist tendencies he took advantage of the opportunities rather than started WW2, now you want to blame the French for WW1 I'm over that like white on rice.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Not to mention Finland and Bessarabia.

The war was at full swing by then. Those were maneuvers within the WW2, rather than single standalone annexation campaigns that have happened out of the blue.

Molotov-Ribbentrop pact I can give you in that it was condemned as "immoral", but it helped USSR to buy some time nonetheless. And in the end of the day it was Stalin, who relieved polish people from Hitler's occupation and liberated Warsaw.

It is a bit sad, that WW2 now somehow divide us, as it was the last time Russia, UK and USA fought together. Still, it is interesting to see how those events are now viewed in other countries.

[nik-]

"liberated"

One dictator for another.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by nik-

"liberated"

One dictator for another.

Poland was granted independence after WW2, wasn't it? I said Stalin liberated Warsaw from Hitler, and this is certainly true unless you want to challenge that. Warsaw was surely a capital of an independent Poland from 1945 onwards.

Moving from Holocaust to communism is not that bad anyway. Maybe this will put things into a context:

At the end of October 1939, Germany enacted the death penalty for disobedience to the German occupation.[159] Germany began a campaign of "Germanization", which meant to assimilate the occupied territories politically, culturally, socially, and economically into the German Reich.[160][161][162] 50,000–200,000 Polish children were kidnapped to be Germanized.[163][164]


Elimination of Polish elites and intelligentsia was part of Generalplan Ost. The Intelligenzaktion, a plan to eliminate the Polish intelligentsia, Poland's 'leadership class', took place soon after the German invasion of Poland, lasting from fall of 1939 to the spring of 1940. As the result of this operation in 10 regional actions about 60,000 Polish nobles, teachers, social workers, priests, judges and political activists were killed.[165][166] It was continued in May 1940 when Germany launched AB-Aktion,[163] More than 16,000 members of the intelligentsia were murdered in Operation Tannenberg alone.[167]

Germany also planned to incorporate all land into the Third Reich.[161] This effort resulted in the forced resettlement of 2 million Poles. Families were forced to travel in the severe winter of 1939–40, leaving behind almost all of their possessions without recompense.[161] As part of Operation Tannenberg alone, 750,000 Polish peasants were forced to leave and their property was given to Germans.[168] A further 330,000 were murdered.[169] Germany eventually planned to move ethnic Poles to Siberia.[170][171]

Although Germany used forced labourers in most occupied countries, Poles and other Slavs were viewed as inferior by Nazi propaganda, thus, better suited for such duties.[163] Between 1 and 2.5 million Polish citizens[163][172] were transported to the Reich for forced labour, against their will.[173][174] All Polish males were required to perform forced labour.[163] While ethnic Poles were subject to selective persecution, all ethnic Jews were targeted by the Reich.[172] In the winter of 1939–40, about 100,000 Jews were thus deported to Poland.[175] They were initially gathered into massive urban ghettos,[176] such as 380,000 held in the Warsaw Ghetto, where large numbers died of starvation and diseases under the harsh conditions therein, including 43,000 in the Warsaw Ghetto alone.[172][177][178] Poles and ethnic Jews were imprisoned in nearly every camp of the extensive concentration camp system in German-occupied Poland and the Reich. In Auschwitz, which began operating on 14 June 1940, 1.1 million people perished.[179][

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by Pointman

Poland was granted independence after WW2, wasn't it? I said Stalin liberated Warsaw from Hitler, and this is certainly true unless you want to challenge that. Warsaw was surely a capital of an independent Poland from 1945 onwards.

Liberated - yes. Independent - no. Given the number of Soviet military troops stationed in Poland and the political influence alone it would be absurd to say that Poland was an independent state from 1945-89.

Better than Nazi rule undoubtedly and in some ways the spheres of influence mimics that of Western Europe post World War 2 with the United States and the Marshall Plan.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Pointman

And in the end of the day it was Stalin, who relieved polish people from Hitler's occupation and liberated Warsaw.

!!! Only after any possible independent military and political forces in Poland had been liquidated by the Germans. The Warsaw uprising began when Soviets were just 10 km outside the city. But the Soviets stood by for weeks and let the Germans wipe out the Polish Home Army. Not only did Soviet army and air force units not take part in the struggle, they refused to allow allied planes trying to resupply the Poles from the UK refuel in any Soviet airfields in the area, hamstringing desperate Allied efforts to help the Poles. And when the Soviets did finally enter the city after the uprising was crushed, they arrested and executed the remaining Home Army officers.

Then there was the Katyn Forest massacre in the wake of the first Soviet invasion of Poland in 1939, and the purge of Polish leaders, doctors, teachers, etc. that saw 140,000 Polish civilians sent to labour camps and gulags to remove any opposition to Soviet rule.

Yeah, some liberation.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

!!! Only after any possible independent military and political forces in Poland had been liquidated by the Germans. The Warsaw uprising began when Soviets were just 10 km outside the city. But the Soviets stood by for weeks and let the Germans wipe out the Polish Home Army. Not only did Soviet army and air force units not take part in the struggle, they refused to allow allied planes trying to resupply the Poles from the UK refuel in any Soviet airfields in the area, hamstringing desperate Allied efforts to help the Poles. And when the Soviets did finally enter the city after the uprising was crushed, they arrested and executed the remaining Home Army officers.

Then there was the Katyn Forest massacre in the wake of the first Soviet invasion of Poland in 1939, and the purge of Polish leaders, doctors, teachers, etc. that saw 140,000 Polish civilians sent to labour camps and gulags to remove any opposition to Soviet rule.

Yeah, some liberation.

While I knew of Katyn as well, as USSR troops not coming in to help with the uprising, the idea that it was done with the purpose of destroying Polish military forces is somewhat fresh. Both from my old school knowledge and from the current internet sources, Berlin was stormed by Soviet AND POLISH forces fighting together against Hitler.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Berlin


Anyway, I get that poles may not like Russians to what we did in 1939-41, but we still wiped out people who did this to you:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan...tion_of_Warsaw

[FlameOn]

UK will hit back with apparent plans to seize properties from Putin's wealthy Oligarch backers' UK properties.

On Thursday, the U.S., Germany, and France issued a rare joint statement condemning Russia for the attack, and on Friday, NATO and Australia said they stand with Britain, too. Russia responded Friday by threatening to expel British diplomats in retaliation for Britain's decision to kick out 23 Russian embassy employees it says are spies, and to add some number of Americans to its "black list" in reaction to the U.S. sanctioning 19 Russians and five companies for cyber-attacks. Britain also signaled it might hit Russian President Vladimir Putin's loyal allies where it hurts: their luxury "Londongrad" real estate.

Wealthy Russians started moving money into Britain in the mid-1990s, using murky shell companies to invest tens of billions of dollars in multimillion-dollar London mansions and other assets, like soccer teams and newspapers, The New York Times reports.

http://theweek.com/speedreads/761342...spys-poisoning

[CliffFletcher]

It tells you something about how bad Russia is when the most successful people - including those in the highest levels of government - feel they need to keep most of their wealth and property in a foreign country as a safe haven for when Russia collapses from their depredations. These guys are no better than African dictators.

[Fuzz]

If they really want to startle some Russians, they should get Cyprus in on the seizing...

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

It tells you something about how bad Russia is when the most successful people - including those in the highest levels of government - feel they need to keep most of their wealth and property in a foreign country as a safe haven for when Russia collapses from their depredations. These guys are no better than African dictators.

Yup, as Sergei Polonskiy once said, all Russian businessmen are ready to leave the country on a short notice. Government can seize your business at any time, Promsvyazbank is the most recent example.

While I have never lived under African dictator, I would argue that Putin is way more capable of actually running the country.

[NuclearFart]

Originally Posted by Pointman

While I have never lived under African dictator, I would argue that Putin is way more capable of actually running the country.

T'Challa >> Putin

[FlameOn]

A chemist who directly worked with Novichok in the Soviet Union chimes in on the difficulties of deploying and weaponizing the chemical weapon and how it would be next to impossible without direct State support.

Also he states the Skripal chemicals are definitely new stock as the Soviet era weapons would likely have degraded beyond the point of usability.

So Putin would have had to recently authorize the production of these chemical weapons and no other state would have had the expertise to produce the stuff. That's a pretty direct assessment.

Vil Mirzayanov, 83, said the chemical was too dangerous for anyone but a “high-level senior scientist” to handle and that even he – who worked for 30 years inside the secret military installation where novichok was developed and gained extensive personal experience in handling the agent – would not know how to weaponize it.

He said he did not see how a criminal organization or other non-state group could pull off such an attack.

“It’s very, very tough stuff,” Mirzayanov told the Guardian at his home in New Jersey, where he has lived in exile since 1996. “I don’t believe it.

“You need a very high-qualified professional scientist,” he continued. “Because it is dangerous stuff. Extremely dangerous. You can kill yourself. First of all you have to have a very good shield, a very particular container. And after that to weaponize it – weaponize it is impossible without high technical equipment. It’s impossible to imagine.”

Mirzayanov further said that there was probably no current stockpile of novichok to steal, because it has a limited shelf life and the preferred form would be a binary version in which two relatively benign, non-banned substances were mixed to produce novichok.

“The final product, in storage, after one year is already losing 2%, 3%. The next year more, and the next year more. In 10-15 years, it’s no longer effective.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...mist?CMP=fb_gu

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by FlameOn

A chemist who directly worked with Novichok in the Soviet Union chimes in on the difficulties of deploying and weaponizing the chemical weapon and how it would be next to impossible without direct State support.

Also he states the Skripal chemicals are definitely new stock as the Soviet era weapons would likely have degraded beyond the point of usability.

So Putin would have had to recently authorize the production of these chemical weapons and no other state would have had the expertise to produce the stuff. That's a pretty direct assessment.



https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...mist?CMP=fb_gu

While I have never denied that Putin is most likely involved, it sounds perplexing, that no other country allegedly has an expertise to produce a Soviet-era chemical. USA and all has had three decades to figure it out. Is Russia that much ahead in chemical weapons?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Pointman

While I have never denied that Putin is most likely involved, it sounds perplexing, that no other country allegedly has an expertise to produce a Soviet-era chemical. USA and all has had three decades to figure it out. Is Russia that much ahead in chemical weapons?

Considering that the US doesn't really develop chemical weapons. Nixon pretty much shut down chemical weapons development, and then George Bush the elder signed the chemical weapons convention. by 2012 about 90% of the American's stockpile was destroyed, with the rest to be gone by about 2023.

So right now the world leaders in chemical weapons research and production are the USSR, China and North Korea.

Its also why the United States has defined the terms Weapons of mass destruction as an umbrella term.

A bug is a gas is a nuke, they're all the same in terms of the response by the US. Use a chemical warhead against them, and they'll nuke you. Initiate a bio war and its a nuclear response.