Russia and its “Special Operation” in Ukraine

[Davkaus]

2 hours ago, Chindie said:

All the rigging probably helped as well.

And the overtly hostile environment for opposition to Putin. Right down to open mockery on TV.

Literally dozens of videos showing the election fraud. They had live streams up on the official government website, showing the ballot rooms, and they just brazenly rigged it on video.

I'm not surprised it was rigged. I am surprised about how they just didn't even bother trying to hide it.

[Chindie]

5 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

Literally dozens of videos showing the election fraud. They had live streams up on the official government website, showing the ballot rooms, and they just brazenly rigged it on video.

I'm not surprised it was rigged. I am surprised about how they just didn't even bother trying to hide it.

No idea what you're talking about. Everything was strictly above board. There are no videos of ballots being stuffed. They were all hidden by women putting balloons in front of cameras because they suddenly felt like it.

The rigging is particularly amusing because he was going to win anyway.

[Awol]

Corbyn calling again for a sample of the nerve agent to be sent to Russia for analysis.

When investigating attempted murder would the police normally ask the chief suspect to assist in interviewing witnesses? 

[tonyh29]

1 minute ago, Awol said:

Corbyn calling again for a sample of the nerve agent to be sent to Russia for analysis.

When investigating attempted murder would the police normally ask the chief suspect to assist in interviewing witnesses? 

 Corbyn also said if he won power, he would challenge Putin on human rights  .

[snowychap]

29 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

 Corbyn also said if he won power, he would challenge Putin on human rights  .

Utterly comical, indeed.

As comical as our current government would challenging any other regime over human rights, too.

Edited March 20, 2018 by snowychap

[Awol]

11 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

 Corbyn also said if he won power, he would challenge Putin on human rights  .

JC: ‘Ah, Mr Putin, you’ve read my file so let’s skip the formalities. We handed over the poison so I must know the truth. Was it the Jews or the Israelis?’ 

Edited March 20, 2018 by Awol

[tonyh29]

24 minutes ago, snowychap said:

Utterly comical, indeed.

As comical as our current government would challenging any other regime over human rights, too.

no , tbf it was raised  when Salman came over in March .....  Now Mr Saudi Prince ,I'm very concerned about your human rights record and feel I should raise it .... and now I've done that here's the  contract for 45 superkiller Jets that can wipe out innocent people from 300 miles away , just promise us you won't use them for that purpose

 

[Chindie]

Isn't the argument that the OPCW rules state that states should co-operate in such matters? There's not much to be lost by giving the Russians more rope. I seem to recall reading that the OPCW themselves wasn't too happy that things seemed to jumping the gun on their own processes.

Corbyn looks stupid as he's an increasingly lone voice, and for his own political ambitions it's a dumb position to take, but he's basically asking for things to be played by the rules it appears.

It's fairly clear this is Russian, given how many of Putin's opposition and other 'traitors' end up with a severe case of the being dead, and given the Putin regime has fine tuned a policy of disinformation for years it's clear they'll say it wasn't them, but I see little harm in giving them the opportunity to further clarify their guilt. Aside from the harm to Corbyn's image, where he insists on being a gift that keeps giving.

[Risso]

Could somebody point out would be gained by giving a sample to the Russians?  A state who you can't even trust to put on a halfway fair election isn't going to play by the rules in a situation like this is it?

[a m ole]

I guess information could be learned by their response, compare their claims on its source to our information. Have proof they're lying.

[HanoiVillan]

Why do police do interviews with criminal suspects if they're really, really sure they did it?

[Chindie]

There's benefits to playing by the rules yourself, even if the opposition will not. It lends credence to your claims - you're confident enough to go through the process correctly. It aids diplomacy - you demonstrate you play things straight. Etc

There's not much to be lost by allowing Russia to see a sample or scrutinise the details. Chances are they say 'not us guv', but giving them chance to say that after you've in good faith involved them in the process as advised, would make it all the more damning if you can prove otherwise. You also shut down one of their lines of defence - 'look they won't even let us take part to defend ourselves, clearly they're lying and this is a set up' doesn't fly when they are given that chance.

[Awol]

Meanwhile on planet EU, President Juncker speaks for us all: 

[Awol]

38 minutes ago, Risso said:

Could somebody point out would be gained by giving a sample to the Russians?  A state who you can't even trust to put on a halfway fair election isn't going to play by the rules in a situation like this is it?

Pig wrestling...

[blandy]

25 minutes ago, Chindie said:

There's benefits to playing by the rules yourself, even if the opposition will not.

What "rules" is Corbyn proposing we follow to give the Russians a sample?

[blandy]

30 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Why do police do interviews with criminal suspects if they're really, really sure they did it?

So the UK is the Police, and Russia is the suspect, in your analogy?

Can you tell me of an example where the Rozzers are interviewing the suspected killer, where they hand the killer the gun and bullets and say "is this lot yours mate?"

They don't do they? They say stuff like "the results are back from the lab and the gun's got your prints all over it", 

Now admittedly I got that from watching too many Cop dramas, but still your analogy question is bobbins, and so there.

[Chindie]

2 minutes ago, blandy said:

What "rules" is Corbyn proposing we follow to give the Russians a sample?

Quote

2. Without prejudice to the right of any State Party to request a challenge inspection, States Parties should, whenever possible, first make every effort to clarify and resolve, through exchange of information and consultations among themselves, any matter which may cause doubt about compliance with this Convention, or which gives rise to concerns about a related matter which may be considered ambiguous. A State Party which receives a request from another State Party for clarification of any matter which the requesting State Party believes causes such a doubt or concern shall provide the requesting State Party as soon as possible, but in any case not later than 10 days after the request, with information sufficient to answer the doubt or concern raised along with an explanation of how the information provided resolves the matter. Nothing in this Convention shall affect the right of any two or more States Parties to arrange by mutual consent for inspections or any other procedures among themselves to clarify and resolve any matter which may cause doubt about compliance or gives rise to a concern about a related matter which may be considered ambiguous. Such arrangements shall not affect the rights and obligations of any State Party under other provisions of this Convention.

OPCW

You can argue the toss whether that means they can request a sample, but I'm yet to hear any reason why giving them one, or access to one, is a no no.

Like I said, its almost certainly Russia, and Corbyn is being stupid in pure realpolitik stakes. But what he's saying away from that isn't the nonsense people want it to be imo.

[HanoiVillan]

13 minutes ago, blandy said:

So the UK is the Police, and Russia is the suspect, in your analogy?

Can you tell me of an example where the Rozzers are interviewing the suspected killer, where they hand the killer the gun and bullets and say "is this lot yours mate?"

They don't do they? They say stuff like "the results are back from the lab and the gun's got your prints all over it", 

Now admittedly I got that from watching too many Cop dramas, but still your analogy question is bobbins, and so there.

I can certainly think of examples from cop dramas where police show some piece of incriminating evidence to a suspect to see their reaction to it, and so there right back at you. 

 

[Awol]

18 minutes ago, Chindie said:

OPCW

You can argue the toss whether that means they can request a sample, but I'm yet to hear any reason why giving them one, or access to one, is a no no.

Like I said, its almost certainly Russia, and Corbyn is being stupid in pure realpolitik stakes. But what he's saying away from that isn't the nonsense people want it to be imo.

Russia is denying it ever manufactured the nerve agent and claims to have destroyed its chemical weapons stocks in 2017; Novichok was never declared to the OPCW by its Russian inventors which is itself a breach of the treaty; Russia is conducting a disinformation campaign that has so far blamed Sweden, Ukraine, the UK (probably others too that I’ve missed) & all while claiming no knowledge of the agent anyway, while retweeting media interviews with its defector inventor...

Russia is trolling the UK on an epic scale & if we gave them a sample then how in any way would that improve the situation? Our allies know the crack, Russia isn’t going to ‘fess up, it just provides another opportunity for them to take the piss & dissemble further.

The OPCW are at Porton Down now doing independent testing so a non-UK assessment will be made available when they are finished. Even John fecking McDonnell says Corbyn has got this wrong and understands that handing even more ammo for Moscow to fire at the UK in satirical style is a dumb idea.

This isn’t some little spat, releasing chemical weapons on UK soil is deadly serious & needs to be treated as such. Indulging Moscow’s attempts to rub the UK’s nose in it is naive beyond description. 

If you still don’t see a good reason not to send them a sample then I don’t know what to tell you, tbh. 

[Chindie]

I understand your position and disagree (no need for the straw man of 'a little spat'. Nobody is saying that and I certainly don't believe it to be so). I've outlined my position and you disagree.

That's cool.

Like I said. Russians almost certainly did it (same language as everyone official). I think Corbyn is being stupid in realpolitik terms. I don't think his position is as dumb, away from his own image, as everyone is keen to show.

But others disagree. Cool.