Originally posted by Jog On
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Reply to: Will there be sanctions against Saudi
Collapse
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
- You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
- You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
- If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "Will there be sanctions against Saudi"
Collapse
-
I don't really GAS anymore TBH. But you keep telling everyone how much of a good second class British citizen you are, it's obviously very important to you. We get it...Originally posted by AtW View PostAre you saying Russian state is incapable of cluster****s like this, that's your best defense against a mountain of evidence?
If those two accused are innocents then Putin could have put them on the first plane to London, or maybe you'll say now they won't have fair trial in the UK?
Leave a comment:
-
Are you saying Russian state is incapable of cluster****s like this, that's your best defense against a mountain of evidence?Originally posted by Jog On View PostYes but which state?! If it really was the Russian state that guy would be brown fookin bread Litvenyenko style. Not saying the Russian's aren't capable or intent on doing something like this we know they are. This whole thing is such a clusterfudge it's got 'the Thick of it' written all over it.
If those two accused are innocents then Putin could have put them on the first plane to London, or maybe you'll say now they won't have fair trial in the UK?
Leave a comment:
-
Yes but which state?! If it really was the Russian state that guy would be brown fookin bread Litvenyenko style. Not saying the Russian's aren't capable or intent on doing something like this we know they are. This whole thing is such a clusterfudge it's got 'the Thick of it' written all over it.Originally posted by vetran View Post
Key things with Salisbury is that is fairly likely that it was state sponsored. by a state we do not count as an ally and was intended to be lethal.
Unless it's Putin 'sending a message' by not killing a former spy and leaving Novichok smeared all over Salisbury for some unfortunate smackheads to stumble on. Unless of course the guy that actually died was the intended target...
Of course I understand the difference between murdering someone with a banned military grade chemical weapon and pushing someone about on the street. I just still don't buy the former as what happened, it makes no sense and the timing with what's happening between said enemies elsewhere in the world...
Anyway - I need to stop caring about this tulip so much. What will be will be - even if that's going into WW3 based on our government lying to us - again.
Leave a comment:
-
Jog On is just a Mor On
Mods should really update this title to reflect it
Leave a comment:
-
its a combination of many factors.Originally posted by Jog On View PostYes it's all about 'friends' vs 'enemies' - doesn't matter what they do, just what side of the fence they are on. Which I believe is what OP was getting at.
Bit like when a friend we support at one time does some pretty awful things but it's fine because he's a friend so he can do whatever he likes and we'll look the other way.
Until that same friend stops being a friend and becomes an enemy, then all those terrible things he did and does are now a major concern - so much so that we'll tell everyone that he can (and will!) drop WMDs on us that can reach us in 45 minutes - all the evidence confirms it, my peers agree with my suspicions. So we better 'liberate' his country immediately.
Key things with Salisbury is that is fairly likely that it was state sponsored. by a state we do not count as an ally and was intended to be lethal.
If it had been Russian football fans beating up some British ones it would have been treated differently.
Leave a comment:
-
No it does not, same thing here - the accident is minor and does not warrant (weak) sanctions applied against Russia who has so far conducted acts of using chemical warfare and radioactive substance in murders of BRITISH CITTIZENS ON BRITISH SOIL.Originally posted by Jog On View PostDepends who's driving/speeding and who's being driven into.
What did Saudi Arabia do again, intimidated some guy? A strong word wih ambassador will more than do
Leave a comment:
-
Depends who's driving/speeding and who's being driven into.Originally posted by AtW View PostIt’s like to say punishment for minor speeding should be the same as for deliberately driving into people with intent to kill (and succeeding)
Can’t you see the difference, or you just don’t want to?
Leave a comment:
-
It’s like to say punishment for minor speeding should be the same as for deliberately driving into people with intent to kill (and succeeding)
Can’t you see the difference, or you just don’t want to?
Leave a comment:
-
No, it’s not ok - it’s a very minor diplomatic accidentOriginally posted by darmstadt View PostSo if they're found to to be agents of the Saudi government attacking people on British soil, it's okay as long as they don't kill anyone?
Killing a British citizen with weapons grade nerv agent is an act of war
Leave a comment:
-
Yes it's all about 'friends' vs 'enemies' - doesn't matter what they do, just what side of the fence they are on. Which I believe is what OP was getting at.Originally posted by vetran View Postwhat hypocrisy?
when an enemy tries to surreptitiously try to kill me or mine and all the evidence confirms it, my peers agree with my suspicions. I would be very upset and would plan to remove the threat.
Someone who doesn't appear to be linked to a friend but claims to be, hits me I won't go and hit my friend. I would investigate.
two completely different situations.
Bit like when a friend we support at one time does some pretty awful things but it's fine because he's a friend so he can do whatever he likes and we'll look the other way.
Until that same friend stops being a friend and becomes an enemy, then all those terrible things he did and does are now a major concern - so much so that we'll tell everyone that he can (and will!) drop WMDs on us that can reach us in 45 minutes - all the evidence confirms it, my peers agree with my suspicions. So we better 'liberate' his country immediately.
Leave a comment:
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Who owns the loans? Inside the mystery of the loan charge recall scandal Today 06:20
- Umbrella company winding-up petitions in 2026: the practical guide for contractors Yesterday 05:29
- Payments on Account deadline: what contractors must do before July 31st — maybe for the final few times Jul 28 08:01
- Andy Burnham's first 100 days: five things contractors need from the new PM Jul 27 00:53
- Starmer vs Burnham on housing: What their rival plans mean for your contractor mortgage Jul 22 00:59
- Burnham's housing vision vs. Starmer's home-buying reforms: what it means for your contractor mortgage Jul 22 00:59
- In Khalil v Innovate Transport, a limited company contractor wasn’t a worker and was on £2.30 — not £230 Jul 21 07:58
- Andy Burnham is PM: 5 new IT policies set to shape UK tech and its contractors Jul 20 06:29
- Taxed on money I haven't earned yet? Bold move, HMRC Jul 17 08:36
- The Fair Work Agency has got zero hours in its sights. Do you? Jul 16 08:44

Leave a comment: