Verified answer

That would not be a good idea. If the UK starts behaving like that, then what's to stop other countries storming British embassies in future? :-/

Britain has a national law which can if necessary be used if

there is an act of terrorism or terrorists using an embassy

for diplomatic immunity. In this case it is very unlikely that

this law would be used. It probably wouldn't stand up legally.

Assange isn't a terrorist. And William Hague - Foreign Office

minister has ruled it out.

The UK has refused Assange safe passage to Ecuador, which

it has a right to do. As soon as Assange sets foot outside of the

embassy he's liable for arrest. Not only for jumping bail

but also to enforce the European Arrest Warrant issued by

Sweden.

Looks like a repeat of the Roman Polanski incident. Tens of thousands of men in California were living lifestyles like Mr Polanski, and millions around the world were and still are, yet he was the only one dragged into Court and hauled across the front pages of the Press. Thousands of men in Britain face accusations of rape, but the 'Government' has not become involved. So why the hype about Assange? Legal experts have practically all expressed concern that threats to violate the Ecuadorian Embassy sets a seriously bad president.

Invading an embassy is technically an act of war since the land the embassy is on belongs to the government of the occupying nation. Invading an embassy is a big no, there's also multiple treaties agsinst that kind of thing.

Ecuador can stop trading bananas, sugar, and oil to the UK. The UK heavily depends on Ecuador's imports. It's estimated that oil would go up about 2.50 cents american money per gallon within 3 months.

Then the U.K will forever look like a lap dog for the U.S. if they did that.

Assange PUBLISHED the leaks he is not the LEAKER.

Free Assange so that Freedom of speech may prevail.