5 ms·

That doesn’t make a lot of sense. The Skirpal incident is very murky, but even if for the sake of argument we assume that the government ordered it, attacks on

That doesn’t make a lot of sense. The Skirpal incident is very murky, but even if for the sake of argument we assume that the government ordered it, attacks on a traitor who fled the country would not be in any way relevant to an attack on an American in China. I can’t imagine how one would even suspect Russia here. Not to mention, they would be unbelievably stupid to do something that risky for no real gain.

wafflebear 8y ago
That's just it, doing something unbelievably stupid for marginal gain is the Russian M.O. right now. There are still people in hazmat suits cleaning up leftover nerve agent in Salisbury.
- rdiddly 8y ago
  There is good reason to doubt the Skripal story -- among other things the apparent lack of hard evidence, the absence of any discernible upside for Russia the purported perpetrators, and the already-existing climate of relentless and politically convenient warmongering against Russia for going on 2-3 years now. If Russia is being set up for military attack, then we're currently seeing a propaganda campaign pretty similar to many others. Fool me once... shame on me etc. How do you know I'm wrong? You heard it from one of those same sources? I'm not saying I would outright believe RT or any of Putin's outlets either, but that's exactly the point: a healthy dose of skepticism is called for.
  - wafflebear 8y ago
    Do you dispute that Russia poisoned Litvinenko as well? Enemies of the Russian state just seem to be poisoned by incredibly rare substances every now and again.
    - rdiddly 8y ago
      I don't know much about that case, but a cursory read on Wikipedia (which could itself be biased and/or misinformed) is a bit more convincing than the Skripal case. Nonetheless we're getting pretty far afield. Select two incidents where any nation has killed its double-agents or whistleblowers (and I doubt there are any nations that lavish fond treatment on their double-agents in particular), and you now have evidence against that country equivalent to that upon which you declared Russia the only possible country brazen enough to carry out these two embassy attacks (assuming they were attacks).
      - dragonwriter 8y ago
        > Select two Skripal, Litvinenko, Gorbuntsov, Perepilichnyy and others. Not two.
        rdiddly 8y ago
        The person I'm conversing with mentioned two, and based on that, concluded Russia is the #1 suspect here, and the only country brazen enough to do it. All you have to do is pick two assassinations by any other country, and that country is now equally brazen. The point is that the statement is weak, not that there have been two assassinations in history. Get it now?
  - favorited 8y ago
    > politically convenient warmongering against Russia for going on 2-3 years now You realize Russia has invaded (and annexed territory from) multiple neighboring sovereign nations over the last 10 years? The idea that the west is simply posturing to set up a war with Russia while Russia is starting actual wars is laughable.
    - lawnchair_larry 8y ago
      They actually haven’t done that. There are other sides to both of those stories that are pretty well supported and make for a far simpler and more straightforward explanation. It’s politically unpopular to discuss that though. Even floating the idea that there might be a rational explanation is enough to invite knee-jerk downvotes and accusations of being a fake Russian troll account. I find it quite bizarre.
      - rdiddly 8y ago
        Doubly so, given that the amount of digging required is so very minimal!
    - rdiddly 8y ago
      Your haughtiness really doesn't improve or bolster your point. Google "Victoria Nuland Viktor Yanukovich regime change" together for some examples of contrary information. Hillary's State Dept. (Nuland et al) destabilized the Ukraine in the first place (2014), to get rid of Yanukovych (duly and democratically elected by a sovereign nation), who maybe coincidentally had previously been leaning toward joining the Russian/Asian trade & cooperation zone instead of NATO. Hmm interesting. Kiev soon turns into a neo-Nazi shitshow. Crimea, made up almost entirely of ethnic and linguistic Russians, holds a referendum and votes to join Russia. "There's a big powerful country with a big military next door, that we used to be a part of anyway, that can protect us from neo-Nazis and US meddling alike? Huzzah, welcome the tanks!" For Russia it's their best shot at a warm-water port, so I agree it is a bit convenient for them. But think about what the US would do if Russia toppled, say, Ontario. Do we let foreign governments create failed states on our borders? We almost started WW3 over Cuba.
    - 8y ago
- exelius 8y ago
  I don’t know it’s so much Russia’s MO as the result of a decentralized Russian intelligence community that overlaps heavily with criminal elements. So some Russian mafia cell may be spying on Americans hoping Putin throws some legitimate business their way if they prove their worth by murdering a defector with some poison they “found”. The downside to this structure is that you have rogue agents you can’t control. The upside is that clandestine operations are very difficult to uncover if nobody in Russia knows about it.
- lawnchair_larry 8y ago
  As a general rule, if you ever think an adversary is is doing something unbelievably stupid for marginal gain, you should be worried, because it’s a good indication that you’re the stupid one and going to make a stupid mistake. They either had nothing to do with it, or they did have something to do with it and it was for good reasons (good for them, not us) that we don’t understand. But them doing it because they are stupid is probably not one of the explanations.
huhtenberg 8y ago
Skripal didn't fled the country. He was caught, trialed, jailed and then exchanged. That whole incident makes absolutely zero sense as explained by the UK government.
- favorited 8y ago
  How does it not make sense? It absolutely makes sense that a spy would be exchanged, then assassinated later.
  - huhtenberg 8y ago
    No, it doesn't in the slightest. This says "you should not do spy exchanges with us". Moreover, let's shoot this poor shmuck with an exotic bullet stamped with "Made in Russia" on its side AND let's also just wound the guy. The bottom line is that this gives Russia nothing. It proves no point, it doesn't serve as a deterrent to anyone (which is what makes it different from the Litvinenko case), but it's just happens to be overflowing with signs that it was done by Russia. If Russians went to such great lengths to make sure it was obvious it was done by them, then it should be even more obvious why they did that. And it's not. So the simplest explanation is that it's a frame-up.
    - favorited 8y ago
      Except nations do it anyway, regardless of the message it sends to potential exchange partners. Mazen Faqha was released by Israel in a prisoner exchange, and was later assassinated. It serves as a deterrent if it sends the message to your own people that treason will never be forgiven, regardless of a pardon and exchange. And that is a philosophy to which Putin subscribes – he once said, "Enemies are right in front of you, you are at war with them, then you make an armistice with them, and all is clear. A traitor must be destroyed, crushed."
- lawnchair_larry 8y ago
  Right, that’s an important correction. It casts even more doubt on his poisoning being state ordered. The smoking gun is that the nerve agent came from a USSR factory decades ago. It’s not hard to imagine that ended up in who-knows-whose hands since then. Plus, it didn’t even do the job. Skirpal was released from the hospital. Seems pretty amateur...

wafflebear 8y ago

That's just it, doing something unbelievably stupid for marginal gain is the Russian M.O. right now. There are still people in hazmat suits cleaning up leftover nerve agent in Salisbury.

rdiddly 8y ago
There is good reason to doubt the Skripal story -- among other things the apparent lack of hard evidence, the absence of any discernible upside for Russia the purported perpetrators, and the already-existing climate of relentless and politically convenient warmongering against Russia for going on 2-3 years now. If Russia is being set up for military attack, then we're currently seeing a propaganda campaign pretty similar to many others. Fool me once... shame on me etc. How do you know I'm wrong? You heard it from one of those same sources? I'm not saying I would outright believe RT or any of Putin's outlets either, but that's exactly the point: a healthy dose of skepticism is called for.
- wafflebear 8y ago
  Do you dispute that Russia poisoned Litvinenko as well? Enemies of the Russian state just seem to be poisoned by incredibly rare substances every now and again.
  - rdiddly 8y ago
    I don't know much about that case, but a cursory read on Wikipedia (which could itself be biased and/or misinformed) is a bit more convincing than the Skripal case. Nonetheless we're getting pretty far afield. Select two incidents where any nation has killed its double-agents or whistleblowers (and I doubt there are any nations that lavish fond treatment on their double-agents in particular), and you now have evidence against that country equivalent to that upon which you declared Russia the only possible country brazen enough to carry out these two embassy attacks (assuming they were attacks).
    - dragonwriter 8y ago
      > Select two Skripal, Litvinenko, Gorbuntsov, Perepilichnyy and others. Not two.
      - rdiddly 8y ago
        The person I'm conversing with mentioned two, and based on that, concluded Russia is the #1 suspect here, and the only country brazen enough to do it. All you have to do is pick two assassinations by any other country, and that country is now equally brazen. The point is that the statement is weak, not that there have been two assassinations in history. Get it now?
- favorited 8y ago
  > politically convenient warmongering against Russia for going on 2-3 years now You realize Russia has invaded (and annexed territory from) multiple neighboring sovereign nations over the last 10 years? The idea that the west is simply posturing to set up a war with Russia while Russia is starting actual wars is laughable.
  - lawnchair_larry 8y ago
    They actually haven’t done that. There are other sides to both of those stories that are pretty well supported and make for a far simpler and more straightforward explanation. It’s politically unpopular to discuss that though. Even floating the idea that there might be a rational explanation is enough to invite knee-jerk downvotes and accusations of being a fake Russian troll account. I find it quite bizarre.
    - rdiddly 8y ago
      Doubly so, given that the amount of digging required is so very minimal!
  - rdiddly 8y ago
    Your haughtiness really doesn't improve or bolster your point. Google "Victoria Nuland Viktor Yanukovich regime change" together for some examples of contrary information. Hillary's State Dept. (Nuland et al) destabilized the Ukraine in the first place (2014), to get rid of Yanukovych (duly and democratically elected by a sovereign nation), who maybe coincidentally had previously been leaning toward joining the Russian/Asian trade & cooperation zone instead of NATO. Hmm interesting. Kiev soon turns into a neo-Nazi shitshow. Crimea, made up almost entirely of ethnic and linguistic Russians, holds a referendum and votes to join Russia. "There's a big powerful country with a big military next door, that we used to be a part of anyway, that can protect us from neo-Nazis and US meddling alike? Huzzah, welcome the tanks!" For Russia it's their best shot at a warm-water port, so I agree it is a bit convenient for them. But think about what the US would do if Russia toppled, say, Ontario. Do we let foreign governments create failed states on our borders? We almost started WW3 over Cuba.
  - 8y ago
exelius 8y ago
I don’t know it’s so much Russia’s MO as the result of a decentralized Russian intelligence community that overlaps heavily with criminal elements. So some Russian mafia cell may be spying on Americans hoping Putin throws some legitimate business their way if they prove their worth by murdering a defector with some poison they “found”. The downside to this structure is that you have rogue agents you can’t control. The upside is that clandestine operations are very difficult to uncover if nobody in Russia knows about it.
lawnchair_larry 8y ago
As a general rule, if you ever think an adversary is is doing something unbelievably stupid for marginal gain, you should be worried, because it’s a good indication that you’re the stupid one and going to make a stupid mistake. They either had nothing to do with it, or they did have something to do with it and it was for good reasons (good for them, not us) that we don’t understand. But them doing it because they are stupid is probably not one of the explanations.

huhtenberg 8y ago

Skripal didn't fled the country. He was caught, trialed, jailed and then exchanged. That whole incident makes absolutely zero sense as explained by the UK government.

favorited 8y ago
How does it not make sense? It absolutely makes sense that a spy would be exchanged, then assassinated later.
- huhtenberg 8y ago
  No, it doesn't in the slightest. This says "you should not do spy exchanges with us". Moreover, let's shoot this poor shmuck with an exotic bullet stamped with "Made in Russia" on its side AND let's also just wound the guy. The bottom line is that this gives Russia nothing. It proves no point, it doesn't serve as a deterrent to anyone (which is what makes it different from the Litvinenko case), but it's just happens to be overflowing with signs that it was done by Russia. If Russians went to such great lengths to make sure it was obvious it was done by them, then it should be even more obvious why they did that. And it's not. So the simplest explanation is that it's a frame-up.
  - favorited 8y ago
    Except nations do it anyway, regardless of the message it sends to potential exchange partners. Mazen Faqha was released by Israel in a prisoner exchange, and was later assassinated. It serves as a deterrent if it sends the message to your own people that treason will never be forgiven, regardless of a pardon and exchange. And that is a philosophy to which Putin subscribes – he once said, "Enemies are right in front of you, you are at war with them, then you make an armistice with them, and all is clear. A traitor must be destroyed, crushed."
lawnchair_larry 8y ago
Right, that’s an important correction. It casts even more doubt on his poisoning being state ordered. The smoking gun is that the nerve agent came from a USSR factory decades ago. It’s not hard to imagine that ended up in who-knows-whose hands since then. Plus, it didn’t even do the job. Skirpal was released from the hospital. Seems pretty amateur...