4 ms·

> using a chemical only the Russians have? This is obviously not true.

by Udik 6y ago

ceejayoz 6y ago
How so? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novichok_agent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novichok_agent It's not the sort of thing you export.
- Udik 6y ago
  From the article you linked: "Novichok has, however, been known to most western secret services since the 1990s,[16] and in 2016 Iranian chemists synthesised five Novichok agents for analysis and produced detailed mass spectral data which was added to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons Central Analytical Database.[17][18] Previously, there had been no detailed descriptions of their spectral properties in open scientific literature.[17][19] A small amount of agent A-230 was also claimed to have been synthesised in the Czech Republic in 2017 for the purpose of obtaining analytical data to help defend against these novel toxic compounds." ---- Rate limited, so I'll reply here to the next comment: > You'd also have to ignore the additional evidence Ok, but if you say "only Russia have them" you're saying something that is not true. They have been synthesized outside of Russia, so it's perfectly possible that others (militaries, secret services) have them. Amounts can also have been exported from Russia in the 50 years since they've been developed. As for the additional evidence: again, damning. However, if someone (a state actor) wanted to damage Russia, it could also have managed to attract two Russian agents in the area to frame Russia. It's a conspiracy theory of course. But we're talking about conspiracies. The bottom line is that if we conclude it was Russia then we need to ask why it would a) put the most obvious signature on the deed; b) use the most brutal and dangerous method available, one that would immediately make a vast number of very rich and powerful countries into enemies. Maybe just to sow division over the implausibility of it? I don't know.
  - ceejayoz 6y ago
    From the actual source referenced: > The syntheses were carried out on a micro-scale in order to minimize exposure. "We synthesized trace amounts so we can detect it if it's used on us" and "we have an active chemical weapons program making useful quantities of the stuff" are vastly different things. You'd also have to ignore the additional evidence, like identified Russian intelligence operatives claiming to have been in town to look at a cathedral, and the motive.
    - sneak 6y ago
      Nothing about that suggests exclusive access; it's entirely circumstantial, however extremely likely that it was used by Russian agents. That said, it's plainly possible to be synthesized by other countries—because it has been. It's sort of like being hacked from a Russian IP address.

> using a chemical only the Russians have? This is obviously not true.

by Udik 6y ago

> using a chemical only the Russians have? This is obviously not true.

How so? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novichok_agent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novichok_agent It's not the sort of thing you export.

Udik 6y ago
From the article you linked: "Novichok has, however, been known to most western secret services since the 1990s,[16] and in 2016 Iranian chemists synthesised five Novichok agents for analysis and produced detailed mass spectral data which was added to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons Central Analytical Database.[17][18] Previously, there had been no detailed descriptions of their spectral properties in open scientific literature.[17][19] A small amount of agent A-230 was also claimed to have been synthesised in the Czech Republic in 2017 for the purpose of obtaining analytical data to help defend against these novel toxic compounds." ---- Rate limited, so I'll reply here to the next comment: > You'd also have to ignore the additional evidence Ok, but if you say "only Russia have them" you're saying something that is not true. They have been synthesized outside of Russia, so it's perfectly possible that others (militaries, secret services) have them. Amounts can also have been exported from Russia in the 50 years since they've been developed. As for the additional evidence: again, damning. However, if someone (a state actor) wanted to damage Russia, it could also have managed to attract two Russian agents in the area to frame Russia. It's a conspiracy theory of course. But we're talking about conspiracies. The bottom line is that if we conclude it was Russia then we need to ask why it would a) put the most obvious signature on the deed; b) use the most brutal and dangerous method available, one that would immediately make a vast number of very rich and powerful countries into enemies. Maybe just to sow division over the implausibility of it? I don't know.
- ceejayoz 6y ago
  From the actual source referenced: > The syntheses were carried out on a micro-scale in order to minimize exposure. "We synthesized trace amounts so we can detect it if it's used on us" and "we have an active chemical weapons program making useful quantities of the stuff" are vastly different things. You'd also have to ignore the additional evidence, like identified Russian intelligence operatives claiming to have been in town to look at a cathedral, and the motive.
  - sneak 6y ago
    Nothing about that suggests exclusive access; it's entirely circumstantial, however extremely likely that it was used by Russian agents. That said, it's plainly possible to be synthesized by other countries—because it has been. It's sort of like being hacked from a Russian IP address.