Has Theresa May Rushed to Judgement?

I ask the question whether this response to the terrible poisoning of the two Russians in Salisbury has been too hasty?

Almost certainly is not 100%.

We have a recent record of hasty actions with the war in Libya and the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Information given at the time seemed conclusive but later proved to be flawed.

It seems highly likely to me that Russia is behind this terrible incident. They do have form. The nerve gas does appear to have been made in one of their factories.

But…….

Who did it? Why are there no suspects? Why are there no CCTV pictures of the suspects? Surely these people will be easy to track and identify?

Is Russia the only source for this nerve gas?

Can other agencies – the CIA perhaps? – have got hold of it?

Who wanted those two dead?

I am not saying that Russia and Putin are not behind it. I am saying that 99% is not a 100% and with something as dangerous and far-reaching as this we need 100% before definitively pointing the finger.

Has this been a knee-jerk reaction? A show of strength? Rather than a considered response?

Perhaps we should have waited a week or two to gather all the facts?

34 thoughts on “Has Theresa May Rushed to Judgement?

  1. Hey Opher, Namaste πŸ™‚

    Death by such means on UK soil is pretty heavy stuff. In answer to your question the best answer is to say who knows? The PM hasn’t disclosed full details and to be honest I doubt if the public will ever be told the truth about these deaths and how exactly they occurred here in the UK. The PM isn’t willing to co-share an investigation with Russia, which breaks some treaty of Chemical Weapons and provide samples to the Russians etc: so either she’s posturing and playing a very dangerous game or she’s adamant.

    What we will know about this whole thing is if there is any further escalation in the breakdown of international relations: and that is about it as far as ‘truth’ is concerned, other than the red-button end game of course, but the rest won’t be disclosed. It’s alarming that nuclear weapons are being spoken about so casually: it won’t be these trigger-happy individuals who suffer, they’ve fall-out shelters ready and waiting, it will be us. Not much of a world left to survive in: what would be the point of global annihilation?

    The world is so utter complex and secrets so carefully hidden trying to even guess at what could be going on here is almost impossible: the incident is a conspiracist’s dream.

    I think the nerve-agent could quite easily have come from anywhere in the world and been brought in by someone visiting privately, diplomatically, or in any other legitimate way…this is what happens when money buys passage/privilege across borders.

    The U.K is at threat of cyber-attack – our strategies and capabilities have not kept pace with technological advancement etc: perhaps this has initiated the PM’s aggressive stance?

    Enjoy your evening.

    Namaste πŸ™‚

    DN

      1. Dig it deep πŸ˜€ ‘Off-grid’ is definitely the way to go…or the way it might well be anyway, time will tell. But far better if you build your bunker/shelter somewhere else, perhaps amongst distant tribes in a very remote region of the world: it is they who will survive by virtue of the fact they know how to.

        But seriously, do you think there’d be point to global annihilation? Or perhaps the end/final agenda of the world’s elite is to just wipe out a high percentage of us and thus allow resources to last longer here on Earth?

        I’d pack an emergency bag with kit enough to keep you alive for a few days and keep it at the foot of the stairs. You never know: better to be prepped than sorry. Oh, and have you taken up archery yet? πŸ˜‰

        Namaste πŸ™‚

        DN

      2. Hopefully it won’t come to that. I can’t see how they can make money out of mutual destruction.
        Greed and selfishness will win through.

  2. I am inclined to agree with you. Russia produced this nerve gas and is supposed to be the only ones to have it, but that is not to say they have not given it to some other Country, and that is the fear about this gas. I don’t know about the Russian who died in Surrey yesterday, that could be natural causes, but the other Russians if not dissidents, then they crossed Putin in deals, their hands were not clean and if you play dirty you must expect to be at risk especially Russian. What annoys me is that its been done on British soil.

    I would not trust our Secret Service or foreign agencies, anything these days is possible. We are never told the truth.

    1. I think it was most probably Putin behind it but in reality there is still a chance that it was someone else. Why do they not have CCTV of the suspects? It is in the city centre. There has to be CCTV. They must know who did it.
      I think there’s more to come out.
      Perhaps they are keeping it quiet? They probably know a lot more than they are letting on. But I still think that it is not a 100% yet. There’s a lot at risk.

  3. How can one ever be more than 99% certain in situations like this… How many decisions for both our countries have been made with a lot less certainty. That’s a scary thought.

  4. It’s a tough situation. I’ll point to another example – after the 2016 presidential election, Barak Obama slapped sanctions on Russia because US Intelligence said that the Russians had meddled in the election via social media. I don’t care for Teresa May, but in this case, I think she’s right. All she’s getting from her allies is lip service. The reason I support her decision is that Putin didn’t bother with a serious response.

    1. John – I have little doubt that Putin is behind this. Russia has been meddling with elections, cyber attacks and assassinations. I just think that in these situations one has to have the full details and everything nailed down. There are a number of things that don’t quite hang together. The people who carried this out will be on CCTV. Why haven’t we heard anything about who they are? I can’t see what the problem is in waiting a few days.

      1. Why should the suspects be on CCTV? It’s feasible that the toxic substances was on some fresh flowers delivered to their home and which they took to a cemetery before then went into the City to eat. Whosoever did it will be out of the UK by now in any event so CCTV won’t be of much use.

      2. Whichever way the nerve gas was delivered, whether through flowers, food, aerosol or whatever, they must know how that was done and there would be a trail. In this day and age there is no end of CCTV. They would only need to check to see who was behind it.
        Yes they are probably long gone. But the key is to identify who they are, what their connections are, where they came from and where they went. That seems crucial to me. That is what happens with all crime these days.

  5. To issue an ultimatum of a few days for response was an incredibly clumsy thing to do. The Russian refusal to lose face is not proof of culpability. The most likely case is that they are involved but now we’re in a potentially and dangerously confusing situation.

    1. It seemed highly provocative to me. Perhaps that is what they wanted? Russia appears to have been meddling in elections here and in the USA as well as Brexit. They appear to be involved with cyber attacks and physical provocation. Maybe this is an excuse for a big facedown?
      Personally I think we should be on complete solid ground with something like this. It being highly probable is not good enough. It should be conclusive. A little more time to prove that would surely not have made much difference.

      1. To me Corbyn, who has received a lot of abuse, has taken exactly the right line. He deplores the attack, thinks that it is most likely Russia behind it, but is questioning the facts. Do we have conclusive evidence? Not that I’m aware of.

  6. What was the information about Libya & Afghanistan which proved to be flawed? What has security information got to do with the nerve gas attack on two foreign nationals living in the UK and the consequent poisoning of a British policeman? It’s straightforward police and forensic work, is it not? What’s that got to do with any war in the Middle East or North Africa?

    1. To attack Libya and Afghanistan without clear reasons or strategic planning was simply stupid. They should have known what they were intending to achieve and how to get out. I do not think they had good information about the nature of the opposition in Libya or the consequences of their actions in either country.
      If the intelligence briefing was so poor in all these situations why should we have confidence in their assessment of who did the poisoning here? It is not straightforward forensics in my opinion. The forensics might establish what agent was used but I’m not so sure that they can conclusively say where it came from or who did it. It could be the CIA stirring up trouble? It could be anybody trying to stir up trouble. 99% sure is not enough for me. There is doubt.

      1. Here we go – more conspiracy theories. Why would anyone target a Russian traitor except the Russian State. I watched Putin on Russian TV, prior to the poisoning incident, state categorically that all Russian traitors would be killed and that there were no safe hiding places for them including Britain. Russians are extremely proud of their country and hate anyone who dares damage it. There was a clear reason aerial assistance was given to the rebels in Libya. Gaddafi had publicly declared that the people of Benghazi were “rats” and he intended to eliminate them with his African mercenaries. His forces were attacked to prevent genocide. Afghanistan was a refuge for al-Queda operatives who were responsible for the twin towers atrocity. Both had justifiable motive contrary to the invasion of Iraq. It is now thought that the toxic nerve gas may have been planted in the daughter’s suitcase whilst she was in Moscow, where she lives and works. She arrived in the UK the day prior to the incident. Whoever planted it would not expect the substance to be spread across the city of Salisbury. Putin must be splitting his sides knowing that people in the UK support Jezza. I would suspect Seumas Milne, the Β£30k per annum public school boy, Oxford graduate and self-described “communist” (that’s a joke in itself) is the author of Jezza’s take on this incident. Neither Jezza nor Milne would survive long under a Putin regime.

      2. Well that all sounds a bit suspect to me Bede. If it was planted in her suitcase how did they know it was going to reach her father? That sounds a bit far-fetched. But it all rather proves my point – and Corbyn’s – at the moment it is speculation. I would suggest that until we have evidence that would stand up in court I would think that we should be a bit careful.
        I do not know if it was Putin or the Russian mafia. I’d condemn it but hold fire a little.
        In terms of Libya – does that justify us bombing and creating havoc? In terms of Afghanistan – I can see the case for bombing the training camps and putting pressure on them but invasion?

  7. Who gives a toss about Putin? He’s spoken of as if he is some terrifying warlord who could sweep across Western Europe like a modern Ghengis Khan. He needs to appear macho to maintain his popularity in Russia. He’s intelligent enough to avoid conflict with NATO where he knows Russia would suffer defeat. There’s no longer a Soviet Bloc. Russia spends about Β£60b per annum on defence. Britain spends almost that whilst the USA spends 10x what Russia spends. Whay do you think Russia never retaliated when one of their planes was downed by NATO member (Turkey) or when Trump blew up their chemical weapons in Syria?

    1. I agree with you that Putin is all bluster and front. He needs to appear macho. But he is also a psychopath who is stirring up the Russian people and causing no end of problems in the West. Why did he interfere with Brexit, the Trump election and why is he carrying out cyber attacks? Why is he testing our air defences and developing a new generation of nuclear weapons?

  8. I don’t agree Putin is all bluster and front. Neither do I consider he is a psychopath. He is an astute political operator and a former KGB agent. He knows how far he can push without risking too much damage. He knows the poisoning incident will never lead to warfare so he can just dismiss it or ignore it. Russians like strong leaders and Putin is that. Did he interfere with Brexit and the US election in any significant degree? I doubt it. Clearly Russia wants to use propaganda for its benefit as do most countries. The Russians are a very proud people, proud of their country and proud of their heritage. Putin is maintaining that national spirit. That and his strength make him very popular in Russia as was Margaret Thatcher for similar reasons. Will Russia create the new generation of nuclear weapons so far mooted in the press? Russia is feeling the effects of the economic sanctions imposed by the West. Last year it spent just $5b more than the UK on defence expenditure. The USA spent more than 10x what Russia spent. Add up the total military capacity of the NATO alliance members and it puts Russia well in the shade. I believe whoever was the instigator of the toxic nerve gas usage did not foresee the consequences of its use and the spread into Salisbury. I don’t believe they intended any harm to British citizens. Have you ever known Russians protest on our streets or commit terrorist acts against our people? No. They simply want to punish traitors and send a warning to any other potential traitors – don’t mess with your country. I like and respect the Russians I have met, known and know but I wouldn’t mess with them or insult their country.

    1. Who knows how much effect they had on Brexit and Trump? They were both very close elections. It doesn’t take much to tip the balance. Russia might well have landed us with both Brexit and Trump. Certainly the disruption is what they’d love.
      I think Putin is like Thatcher – loved and hated.
      Insulting Russia the way Boris, May and the stupid Gavin Williamson has is counterproductive. Insults are not signs of strength.
      I like the way Corbyn has handled it. He is far more measured.

      1. Well for sure you don’t so why speculate that Russia determined the outcome of the Brexit and USA Presidential votes?

  9. I would vouch that Putin would have much more respect for someone who stands up and accuses him that some weasely politician who sits on the fence and fails to take a strong line. Putin doesn’t tolerate or respect weaklings. Corbyn is the naΓ―ve idiot who said we should arrest Mohammed Emwazi (Jihadi John) in Raqqa and bring him to trial. The West didn’t invade Afghanistan. They sent military forces to support the Afghan government in their fight against the Taleban. If Western forces had not intervened with air support in Libya, there would have been genocide committed in Benghazi. The West didn’t invade Libya either. They stopped extreme human rights abuses occurring and left the two sides to fight it out. Qatar gave the most help to the rebels. Other Arab States also helped the rebels. Gaddafi had antagonised several Arab States over a long period including trying to assassinate the ruler of Saudi Arabia. For them it was payback time. That’s the main reason they came out on top not because the West bombed some of Gaddafi’s convoys.

    1. It’s all very well taking a strong stance when you are 100% sure of what is going on. Theresa May merely comes across to me as a pretender. There’s nothing strong about her. And Boris and Gavin were just rude and stupid. They just set out to be rude and disrespectful. Fine if that’s what you want. It may turn out to be folly if more information starts to throw light on what really went on.
      Surely the Taliban were ruling Afghanistan? There was no government other than them. It was an invasion.
      I am much more in favour of putting people on trial and exposing their crimes rather than just shooting them.
      In terms of Libya – was it our place to interfere? Did we know what we were doing? Has the end result been better or worse? Shouldn’t the Arabs police their own countries? They have an Arab league don’t they?

      1. The Northern Alliance were the recognised government in Afghanistan before the Taleban took over most of the country by force and oppressed the population. The country had been peaceful and offered no threat abroad until Russia decided to invade it in an illegal act of aggression. When they were kicked out they left a vacuum which the Taleban, who had fought the Russian invasion, filled. Our interference in Libya prevented mass murder in Benghazi. Gaddafi made the same mistake despots often make ie. he decided to use extreme force against what had been peaceful street protests instead of using the country’s extreme wealth to promote harmony. The Arab League were the main opponents of Gaddafi’s forces in the Libyan revolution by backing the rebels financially and providing air bases and war planes for attacking his convoys and troops. The Arab League also backed the West’s involvement in Libya.

      2. And it was the Americans who armed the Taliban in their fight against the Russians. So why did Russia attack in the first place?

I'd like to hear from you...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.