Its not as if this is the first time an ex Russian spy was targeted on British soil. Some of them were even killed in the past but we never saw such a harsh reaction to those incidents. So why is May's govt. reacting so gratingly?

Because it's not before time! Good to see some backbone from a British Government on such issues. it's been a while! 1982? As to how much of May's talk turns into deeds remains to be seen.

I dunno, the polonium in the tea got a lot of coverage and response and so did the umbrella further back, but maybe it's because there's not only one victim?
The daughter...the policeman...18 others treated...possibility of further contamination with hundreds having to wash clothing worn that day, double bag clothing that can't be washed, take precautions with their specs...

Good question. Probably something of a political calculation, as well as concerns about an increasingly meddlesome and provocative Russia. It does seem somewhat blown out of proportion to me, and that's assuming that Russia is indeed culpable.

Core internet days would have restricted the news and speculation. Diplomats would have been able to do diplomatic things with a public ritual of summonses, notes, expulsions. D notices would have limited the news.

Now it's all run by the press and social media, how much input has Russia had into that?

I'd say the main reason for the strong response us that a weapon was used on British soil. Its target may have been the Russian but British people were injured too.

The nerve agent was created by the Russians, so pointing the finger would seem an obvious choice

Frederick Forsyth wrote an interesting novel entitled The Fourth Protocol. The title referred to a clause in a non proliferation agreement forbidding the non-conventional delivery of a nuclear weapon to a target, ie the transfer of fissile material into a target country by covert means during a period of peace.

The Litvinenko murder and more explicitly the recent attack on Skripal and his daughter echo the fears that generated the protocol mentioned above in that such weapons bear a stigma that prohibit use at any time other than in open declared conflict. If, what is being reported is true, then this is reported to have been the first use of a chemical agent in europe since the end of WW2. I think that this, in itself, is sufficient reason for May to have reacted as strongly as she has. It may divert attention from other stories but I suspect that this will be coincidental and given the choice I think she would rather not having had to do it.

No! A foreign country has used Nerve agent on our soil. Throw the lot of them out. We do too much for a few rich foreigners and they have overstepped the mark.

Yeah, you’re right. Obviously just a diversion tactic for something or other. We should just accept a foreign power can attempt to assassinate a British citizen on UK soil with no repercussions.

Obviously, yes. If May can manage to start WWIII, she won't have to deal with Brexit.

Is it true that the loon has been talking about demanding that NATO treat this as a Russian attack on Britain and bomb Moscow?

We may live to experience Armageddon
What do you expect with Boris as Foreign Minister ?


Public fell for the WMD story about Saddam in Iraq.

Now they believe these fairy stories about the Russians ?

This is interesting...

doubts voiced about source of Salisbury novichok

I don't find that at all interesting. I think it's a load of bollocks. An enemy of the Russian state is attacked using a weapon that is stereotypically Russian. That's enough for me. The Russians done it.

Just because American public life has descended into playground discourse, with every social media bleet being accorded the same weight as a Supreme Court judgement, there's no reason for the rest of the world to follow suit. Give yer heads a shake, May hasn't knocked off a citizen as a Trumpian diversion tactic, she's not overreacting, the Russians have caused a problem and she's responded as best she can with the limited resources available.

May is grating though, there's no getting away from that.

Craig Murray is a well-known crank. I wouldn't give his opinion much credence.

What I don't understand is why the Russian state would use an internationally controlled toxin? The potential for serious collateral damage is immense. If the state wanted to assassinate someone, there are far easier and safer methods. It sounds like it may be a rogue Russian or terrorist group that wants to make a name for itself or exert some power.