Vlad or Kim?

[Workingman]

A few weeks ago Putin tested a new hyperspeed cruise missile which he said was unstoppable by today's and near-future missile defences. It is probably nuclear capable and rumoured to be able to hit anywhere on the globe.

On Friday he (successfully) tested a new ICBM: Satan 2. This is said to have a range of 6,000 miles and capable of carrying 12 nuclear warheads. All of this comes at a time of heightened tension and takes us well into Cold War Mk2... if we did not already know we were there.

Make no mistake, Russia is a World power again. By its actions in Syria it has shown the Americans and Nato that it can do pretty much what it likes and does not need Western permission. It also has massive cyber capabilities with the ability to take out industries and utilities... unless we work very hard to stop it. Even then we would be playing repair and catch up most of the time.

Vlad makes Kim look like a primary school bully by comparison, maybe that is why NK is well on the back burner.

[TheOstrich]

The only way to deal with Putin is to stand up to him. That's what you do with bullies.

We should offer the Skripal daughter political asylum if she wants it.

We should now expel all remaining Russian diplomats and close their embassy. At the same time, we should recall our own embassy staff and close our own embassy.

We should also make it clear that any infringement of UK airspace by Russian military planes will be treated as hostile action.

We're still a nuclear power. Let's ramp up the pressure a bit.

[Workingman]

Ossie, do you want to start a nuclear war?

What am I asking? Of course you don't, but you are going a good way about it.

Standing up to bullies is a noble ideal, but sometimes you have to deal with them differently, this might be one of them.

Vlad has been pretty clear: do not mess with him. He has an armoury and that he is showing it off = do not mess with me. He has shown us in Syria that he can and will do what he wants and we can go sing.

Before the latest events the nuclear Doomsday Clock stood at 23:58 the closest it has been to midnight since 1953. Tomorrow it could go to 23:58:30 or higher, for the first time ever.

Yes, we are a nuclear power, and we could wipe out the planet if we wanted to. With a strike on Russia, or one from them on us, and MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) would visit us all.

Head between legs and kiss your ar5e goodbye, or talk.

Time to talk?

[TheOstrich]

Talk with a thug who sanctions a chemical nerve agent attack on the streets of a city less than 25 miles from where I live?

No way.

[Workingman]

Ossie, I honestly understand how you feel.

I was a shelter Marshall in the RAF and probably know more about these things than most of us, and yes, unleashing them on the streets of a country is well below the belt.

However, we cannot go to full scale nuclear war over this, and that is the danger. Another thing to consider is this; how much of this stuff is already in the UK? Are there repositories in London, Brum, Leeds, Manchester, Glasgow.... Do we have similar in Russia? And if we did would we use them?

Vlad is a bully, no doubt, how we deal with him is the $64,000 question.

Nuclear war? Probably not.

[TheOstrich]

I'm not advocating nuclear war, but I am advocating treating the USSR as a pariah state.

See my post #2. Move towards total sanctions, no trade relations, terminate diplomatic representation. And spell out to them very clearly what will happen if they keep "pushing".

[cromwell]

I am going to have to disagree and come at this from a slightly different angle.

In 2015 Putin kicked out NGO's / Charities funded by George Soros, the open borders advocate. They were expelled from Russia.
Also in 2015 Russia became directly militarily involved in the Syrian civil war, by backing Assad.

Since when, everything in the Western media has been Russia's fault. Trump being elected is Russia's fault, as is Brexit, as is the rise of non-mainstream parties in Europe.

It is a propaganda campaign, nothing less.

The Salisbury attack troubles me, because I'm not a natural conspiracy theorist. But given the amount of anti-Russian propaganda pumped out prior to it (and the lack of effect it had on public opinion), the attack does trouble me because I don't want to believe that it wasn't the Russians, if that makes sense.

But usually when the KGB (or whatever they are called now) wants to kill a Russian in this country - and there have been a lot who have died in mysterious circumstances - they don't make a mistake. The target ends up very dead indeed. But this time they haven't. It is difficult to believe that with such a sitting duck as Skripal that they would make a mistake. They didn't with Litvinenko.

Putin is hostile to mass immigration advocate; he believes in the nation state and he is blocking the West's foreign policy in the middle east. Which is to enforce regime change in countries there, to smash up countries and to leave them broken.

If Putin hadn't backed Assad he would be history by now and the next phase - war against Iran - would have started.

We are talking global geopolitics which can and usually is, very dirty indeed.

Given all that I'm not convinced by the Salisbury attack and I'm worried for the future. Because we don't seem at all interested in any dialogue with Putin which as you point out WM, is a very dangerous thing indeed.

Maybe what the west is after in Russia is regime change?

We certainly seem to think that we have a divine right to do it in the middle east, why not Russia?

[Kaz]

Mick thinks similar to you Crommers If the Russians had wanted them dead, they would be!

[Suff]

I'm very much up for Occams Razor on this one.

Option 1: In the wake of the Indinesian murder of KJUN's brother, with chemical weapons, Russia, headed by Putin, decides to engineer a situation which would play extremely well in the press at the time of an election. At the same time the EU is making an arse of itself by alienating the two largest military members of NATO, one because it wants to leave the EU and the other because it no longer will tolerate rabid market protectionism whilst abusing open markets.

Option2: The UK, via Porton Down, create a chemical weapon, a clone of a Russian weapon which the UK military has never made. For the express purpose of murdering a UK citizen and his Russian Daughter. So that Putin can play it in the press and gain massive political gain from it.

Well now. I know which one I'm leaning for.

Yes Russia has been demonised in the press and for very little good reason. Are they saints? Not a chance. Are they opportunists who would leverage any weakness in their opposition? You betcha.

Now here is the really, really, funny stuff. Russia is now a bit apprehensive, in the wake of world wide condemnation of Russia and actions, by the rest of the world, as if a world power has been abused (god who would have thought that could have happened). Why is Russia becoming apprehensive? Oh, because the UK could deny Russia the ability to raise money in the UK for their home projects which Putin has trumpeted.

Why would that be an issue.

Surprise: The UK is the largest financial market in the WORLD and if Russia can't raise money there then they are going to really struggle with the rest of the world. If the US blocks them, then they are really stuffed because 80% of the world financial markets will be closed to them.

Pity about those EU nobodies who can't make sanctions stick. Because they need Russian gas and Oil and can't say NO.

This whole situation has its roots in Brexit and the Trump administration and the belief that advantage could be taken.

The interesting thing is how very badly it is backfiring.

I wonder if those great "powers" of the EU just realised that they have alienated 75% of their military security assurance? Or that the very hungry economy directly to the East is listening to every word they say?

I'd say Salisbury was a very large "Oops" moment on the world stage. I will continue to watch with great interest. I just won't watch any western press on the issue.

[cromwell]

Every time I see the news I get the feeling that we are being pushed towards another war.

The British Parliament voted against involvement in the Syrian war. Last week a British soldier was killed in Syria.

What was he doing there?

More importantly, why hasn't the TV news or the papers asked that question?