Malaysia Airlines MH17 Lost Over Ukraine - Shot Down?

[AMLinington]

Absolutely. The problem we have here is that both sides are turning to each other and shouting "photoshopped!" about the photos and videos. So, its difficult to draw any conclusion other than "it was shot down, it looks like it could have been a Russian system in the hands of rebels, but we just don't know, and likely will never know due to the site being messed about with". America released a set of photos yesterday showing that it was highly likely that rocket systems have been fired from Russian territory into Ukrainian territory. Within hours, there were articles from RT and RIA Novosti stating that the evidence was not evidence at all...

 

 

 

I doubt North Korea would be much of an issue - sure they have some rockets but they've got a very poor history of reliability and accuracy, and their standing army are very poorly armed. If North Korea kicked off, I doubt China would do much except try to keep it away from their own land - they prefer an easy life and don't like to interfere with other countries' affairs.

 

The Middle East is a real powder keg that could ignite significantly - especially if ISIS continues as well as they are (although, many are pointing out that ISIS aren't quite as strong as they seem but are very good at PR).

 

Israel would undoutably win any conflict in the Middle East - they're armed to the teeth, and all the surrounding areas have weakened military forces due to recent wars of their own.

 

I think we may actually look back at this entire period as WW3 if anything - its been a continual set of wars, all inter-linked, since 9/11. Its just not happening directly in Europe like the last 2.

 

I recently saw conflicting news articles about how ISIS is forcing all women and girls in their occupied territory to undergo FGM. Cue massive uproar on the internet. I then read a bunch of articles that said it was anti-ISIS propaganda. What I think is more likely is that ISIS are promoting Sharia Law with it's myriad good and bad points and SOME women MAY have been subjected to Sharia-related justice practices and that someone has heard about women being subjected to Sharia law and made the leap to FGM. I can't see, given the situation they are in and the lack of enforceability, that FGM will be particularly high on the ISIS agenda - at least not right now. Maybe in future when they've taken over the whole country and have an iron grip on the populace, but probably not right now. This is a perfect example of not being able to take statements at face value in the media.

 

I'm certainly not sure North Korea has the power to affect large countries like China, Russia and the USA, but if they DID wade into the fray it would be likely their actions would just be disruptive rather than seriously threatening, but even small actions can have ripples of consequence so it is certainly worth keeping them in your peripheral vision (so to speak).

 

I think that regardless of whether it was Russian troops, pro-Russian separatists or anti-Russian fighters that fired the missile, the bottom line is that an innocent passenger jet full of people who had (to the best of my understanding) nothing to do with the Ukraine conflict was shot down as a result of the conflict occurring in the area and it was an appalling tragedy and SOMEONE needs to be held accountable.

[CAM]

Report is out. BBC are being very diplomatic over this story for once!

 

MH17 Ukraine disaster: Dutch report blames missile - BBC News

 

Confirmation that the plane was shot down by a Surface-to-Air missile (SAM). The model in particular was a 9N warhead that could have been fitted to a 9M BUK missile launcher. The weapon used is Russian made and held by both Ukrainian and Russian forces. The manufacturer however claims that the missile is of a decades old design no longer in use by the Russian military. Western governments still claim that the missile was launched from Rebel forces whilst Russia is continuing to blame the Ukrainian military. The plane's cockpit was hit first on the left-hand side, peppering it with shrapnel and tearing the cockpit away from the plane.

 

In addition, the Dutch are expressing concerns that Ukrainian airspace should have been closed before this occurred and that the plane should not have been flying over a warzone.

Edited October 13, 2015 by CAM

[nikaso]

Report is out. BBC are being very diplomatic over this story for once!

 

MH17 Ukraine disaster: Dutch report blames missile - BBC News

 

Confirmation that the plane was shot down by a Surface-to-Air missile (SAM). The model in particular was a 9N warhead that could have been fitted to a 9M BUK missile launcher. The weapon used is Russian made and held by both Ukrainian and Russian forces. The manufacturer however claims that the missile is of a decades old design no longer in use by the Russian military.

 

Having seen some of the stuff the Russians still field the fact it is decades old is no defence whatsoever!

 

Some examples

 

SA-6 'Gainful' entered service in 1970, still operational

T-72 tank - entered service in 1970s

Mi-8 helicopter - entered service in the 1960s!

[CAM]

TBH it is not much of a defence anyway as the Eastern Bloc is littered with ex-Soviet equipment.

[nikaso]

It's not the first time Russia has shot down an airliner either, they shot down Korean Airlines flight 007 in the 80s (under the Soviet flag at the time).

 

The stuff I mentioned isn't ammunition/ordnance no but do you really think there aren't older shells / missiles / ammo in the Russian arsenal? Some of the 'little green men' in Crimea are armed with older weapons and also newer equipment only issued to active Russian units. Russia has made an effort to conceal the presence of regular troops in the Ukraine but no one is surely in any doubt they are present?

[localzuk]

Remember - a lot of the stuff that was "transferred" to the rebels was old Russian equipment, not the latest and greatest. If somehow they had been wandering around with the latest high spec gear, that would have been instant evidence that Russia were involved. Remember, Russia have always tried to say they haven't given equipment to the rebels.

[pcstru]

Having seen some of the stuff the Russians still field the fact it is decades old is no defence whatsoever!

 

Some examples

 

SA-6 'Gainful' entered service in 1970, still operational

T-72 tank - entered service in 1970s

Mi-8 helicopter - entered service in the 1960s!

 

You make it sound unusual! Whereas we have Nimrod (1964), the Tornado from 1974, the lovely Chinook goes back to 1957 and then there is the venerable Landrover. I think some of our Generals go back even further...

[nikaso]

You make it sound unusual! Whereas we have Nimrod (1964), the Tornado from 1974, the lovely Chinook goes back to 1957 and then there is the venerable Landrover. I think some of our Generals go back even further...

 

Oh it's not unusual at all, my comment was in response to the manufacturer claiming the missile was decades old and not in use by Russia. I remember seeing ration packs in army stores that were twenty years old!

[pcstru]

Oh it's not unusual at all, my comment was in response to the manufacturer claiming the missile was decades old and not in use by Russia. I remember seeing ration packs in army stores that were twenty years old!

 

Heh. Consider yourself lucky, I remember eating them!

[localzuk]

Putin has already admitted that the liberation of Crimea involved russian troops, it really couldn't have started .. never mind completed without it.

The alternative is to announce to the world you are taking back Crimea.

 

He only admitted it after the fact. During, he repeatedly and consistently denied it.

 

Also, your use of the term "liberation" is quite telling, and extremely strange. I didn't realise that Crimea was not a free place to be before the invasion and takeover.

[localzuk]

Liberating them from the warzone that has engulfed a good part of the Ukraine. Said after the fact, looking back, is how I think of it.

I don't see it as an invasion as it was reported at the time.

 

The Crimea wasn't a warzone before they entered it (I'd even say it wasn't a warzone during either, as it was fairly violence-free, beyond random disappearances, murders and beatings)... They deployed tens of thousands of their troops, with their insignia removed or hidden across the peninsula, blockaded the Ukrainian port and took over the airports. It is a textbook example of an invasion.

 

Also, Russian law makes it a criminal offence to disagree with what happened, punishable with up to a 5 year prison sentence. So anyone who grumbles about it, which many Tartars have done, ends up being prosecuted for threatening the integrity of the Russian Federation.

[nikaso]

Warzone? What warzone? The only warzone is the one currently there as a direct result of Putin sending large numbers of regular troops and equipment into a foreign country otherwise known as an invasion. It is analogous to us sending troops into Southern Spain on the pretext there are lots of 'ethnic British' there we need to protect.

[localzuk]

Thanks for the history lesson.

 

Crimea was given to Ukraine after the second world war, it was taken back when it was clear the area was going to de-stablize and shift to being anti-russian. What I said above was said knowing all the above.. its my choice of words. Deal with it.

 

It is a very poor choice of words. You can't liberate a country that is already free.

 

Using your logic, Hong Kong has been given back to China. Does Britain retain the right to seize it again? I pay taxes, if I disagree with how they're used, do I retain the right to go and seize them back? In both cases, no.

[localzuk]

is the one currently being fought by pro gov forces against the rebels. Those said Gov forces are firing into civillian areas occupied by the rebels. That foreign nation you mention mainly speak russian and the ones defending it mainly speak russian. Go figure.

 

Does the language that is most commonly spoken in an area matter then? If some neighborhoods in Luton decide to break away without any legitimate vote, would Pakistan come and support the rebels as they speak Urdu and are of Pakistani heritage? What about if predominantly British areas in Spain do the same?

 

It also ignore the history of the region - the part where during the Soviet years, the USSR shipped hundreds of thousands of ethnic Russians to its controlled countries in order to make them more Soviet. Those people didn't leave when the USSR fell apart. Just look at all the ex-Soviety countries, there's a significant percentage of Russian ethnic people in each and every one of them.

[localzuk]

Thats very poor use of logic. We only leased hong kong, hardly any case for a claim I think. I think a better case would be do russia have the right to take back Alaska.

 

Let's go back further shall we? Should Crimea end up back in the hands of the Greeks, as they had some of the earliest colonies there? Or Romans, after they took over?

 

The Crimea was controlled by the Tartars, who were controlled by the Ottoman Empire for a long time, before it was annexed by Russia. So, they took it from the people who already lived there to turn into part of their own empire.

 

Realistically, Russia has about as much right to claim Crimea is there's as Turkey does.

[localzuk]

I think I have answered your question sufficiently.

 

You've not really. Your initial premise - that this was a liberation is demonstrably flawed. Your later premise that Russia gave Crimea away, so taking it back was OK is also demonstrably false, through the history I mentioned.

[localzuk]

Your objection is with my use of the word liberation, not the actual act of taking back some thing that was freely given.

Now your trying to question the logic of the russians taking back Crimea by applying my reasoning to the Tartars, Ottoman Empire or whoever else you can think of.

 

Your extrapolations are false. Im not interested in answering your what if's. The point we are discussing is russias claim to the crimea, and I think its valid. If you want to fight for the case of the tartars then that's your prerogative but im not.

 

OK, I'll break down my objections better. My objection is thus:

 

You say that Russia has a right to take back Crimea because it was given away by them. I am saying that this is irrelevant, as what happens in Crimea is entirely down to the will of its people. The referendum over there was demonstrably unfair. If that referendum had been held without soldiers on the streets, and without widespread intimidation against those who disagreed, with a sensible set of questions, then I wouldn't be complaining in the slightest. It quite simply wasn't a liberation. It was annexation, following invasion.

 

What would be the nearest to a native people of Crimea have the most claim to it - the Tartars. They are now being persecuted and prosecuted if they complain about the current state of affairs. They predate Russia. They have been a single community throughout this in the complete disagreement with being a part of Russia.

 

So, I'm simply saying - you have not provided any real reason Russia have any right to annex Crimea. You have not provided any real reason to call it a liberation. History isn't on your side, nor are the actions of the Russians.

 

You say you wouldn't fight the case of the Tartars, yet you seem to be fighting for the case of the Russians. Why? The Russians are not from Crimea.

[nikaso]

Now .. im firmly against meddling in other countries affairs. This is where I think what has happened in Crimea is for the people of who live there to resolve themselves otherwise all hell breaks loose.

[/url]

 

Unless of course that meddling involves invading and annexing part of a foreign country.

 

To keep in the context of your playground analogy Putin is the playground bully who has seen a chance to test the mettle of the next biggest kid in the playground (NATO/EU/USA) by stealing sweets from a new friend of the next biggest kid. The problem with this analogy is that we aren't in the playground, we are talking about strategic scale international diplomacy. Putin is behaving like a dictator (because he effectively is one) and trying to see how far he can push the West but his little game is potentially affecting millions of people.

 

I must admit I had started to think you were trolling but I actually think you are genuinely convinced by the Russian line on this. You've linked RT, RT is widely viewed as a propaganda outlet for the Russian state. For example its reporters have said they aren't allowed to directly criticize Medvedev or Putin.

[localzuk]

I believe the russian right to take back the Crimea by annexation was Just on the following grounds:

 

They were the ones who gave it away.

They could.

 

Ah, so you appear to support the doctrine commonly used by bullies - might is right.

 

You talk about fair? you think putin would prefer to see the jewel of Baltic turned over in a civil war fair?

 

It is very unlikely a civil war would have a) happened or b) continued for any length of time if Russia hadn't backed the rebels in the first place. Until Russia stepped in in the East, the rebels had been losing, badly.

 

The russian annexation saved the people of Crimea from something far worse then what they have now. You really have not empathized with the russian way of thinking, and how a land they used to called home would be savaged by war ... and it WOULD be savaged.

 

I don't empathise with any violence based empire building thinking.

 

No. No no no. I think putin saved those people from such misery. Borders change all the time. Look at the map of Europe for the last 100 years and you will see that yourself.

 

Yep, lets use examples of past bad behaviour to support current bad behaviour.

 

Your like a child dishing out sweets on the playground deciding who gets what depending on whats fair. Well these sweets are russian comrade... you want them then you must be a big boy and come to the top of the field and fight me for it because thats how the big boys decide things, not like primary where its all about fair.

 

No, I am a third party observer who has significant issues with the way Russia are behaving here. You appear to be support bullies simply because they're big and strong.

 

"... as what happens in Crimea is entirely down to the will of its people.",

Vote counted and confirmed.

 

Not a legitimate vote as mentioned before.

 

"The referendum over there was demonstrably unfair.",

According to ukraines own census, more than 60% of the crimean population is of russian decent. The primary language of Crimea is russian. From that I can see the russians vote could be easily achieved, they could probably just weigh the votes and not bother counting them.

 

Again, see the history of Crimea for reasoning. Also, again, language doesn't dictate anything.

 

"If that referendum had been held without soldiers on the streets, and without widespread intimidation against those who disagreed, with a sensible set of questions, then I wouldn't be complaining in the slightest.", I think monty python can be used to explain many things in life, I think the one when brian is on the cross and and they are debating to stop buggering about actually do something to be so very apt.

 

You do realise that debate is one of the important aspects of democracy don't you? If there isn't consideration and consultation before doing things, poor decisions are made.

 

Just to show you there is no hard feelings ... im prepared to agree they annexed it following some stand off at the school gates ... where the boy who probably had the right and ability to look after it got to take it home.

 

Ability, yes, right, no.

 

What you are arguing about, and what the other boys in the playground are doing comes under my objections to is 'meddling'.

 

Invading and annexing a country is a little more than meddling.

 

Now .. im firmly against meddling in other countries affairs.

 

Pretty obviously not.

 

This is where I think what has happened in Crimea is for the people of who live there to resolve themselves otherwise all hell breaks loose.

 

https://www.rt.com/news/international-observers-crimea-referendum-190/

 

Crimea votes to secede: Ukraine's amputation | The Economist

 

Except, if the powerful parties there have such an influence that they can prevent any form of fair vote - just look at that way that anyone who complains about the current state of affairs gets prosecuted now...

[localzuk]

When Crimea was handed over to ukraine it was said that the people of Crimea would be able to vote on constitutional changes effecting them. They had no say in the EU bailout and are loyal to russia, so russia stepped in.

 

Sure. I have no issue with a vote, as I said. I have issue with 20,000 soldiers on the streets, manning polling stations and intimidating people. I have an issue with the referendum paper having "leave Ukraine and join Russia" or "leave Ukraine" as the only options.

 

The trouble is you don't see their news, you don't see their perspective.

 

I see their perspective just fine. Russia couldn't allow Crimea to be anywhere near the EU as it is the home one of their most important military bases.

 

The analogy you suggest forgets a few key points. The fact is the sweet were given to the kid with conditions.

 

International law doesn't allow for "conditions". It allows for self determination via free and fair votes.

 

Scotland have voted to stay in the UK. Many complained the vote was not fair because people living out of Scotland could not vote blah blah, but the bottom line is they have to accept the vote.. but, they have a clause that if the UK leave the EU all bets are off and they re-vote to stay in the EU and separate from the UK. This is the situation ... this is what is at the heart of Crimea.

 

People who don't live in a place don't really deserve to have a vote there unless they are still subject to the laws of that place or pay taxes there. Its a pretty standard way of performing votes worldwide.

 

I just fundamentally agree what what russia has done. We would have, and have done far worse.

 

Us doing it would've been just as bad. Just because we would behave in a bad way does not mean other countries should too. Everyone should stop behaving this way.

[CAM]

Consider that Russia aiding an armed group in their fight against the Ukrainian government is considered an act of aggression, but no-one has any objections about the US aiding multiple illegal armed groups in their fight against the Syrian Government. Consider that Russia bombing said armed groups in support of the legitimate government is considered an act of evil but no-one has batted an eyelid at US-allied Saudi Arabia blasting civilian markets and weddings off the face of the Earth with airstrikes in Yemen, shortly followed by the US hoping their bombing of a MSF hospital in Afghanistan gets swept under the rug. It certainly doesn't get anywhere near as many column inches.

 

Yes RT is a propaganda mouthpiece but an interesting one at that. And there certainly isn't a shortage of hypocrisy and propaganda in our own politics and news sources in US/EU, RT are just more shameless and blatant when it comes to airing their agendas.

[localzuk]

Consider that Russia aiding an armed group in their fight against the Ukrainian government is considered an act of aggression, but no-one has any objections about the US aiding multiple illegal armed groups in their fight against the Syrian Government.

 

A lot of people do have objections to that. However, the situation is somewhat different as Syria is ruled by a despot and doesn't have free and fair elections.

 

Consider that Russia bombing said armed groups in support of the legitimate government is considered an act of evil but no-one has batted an eyelid at US-allied Saudi Arabia blasting civilian markets and weddings off the face of the Earth with airstrikes in Yemen, shortly followed by the US hoping their bombing of a MSF hospital in Afghanistan gets swept under the rug. It certainly doesn't get anywhere near as many column inches.

 

Again, people have complained about Russia bombing rebels, as have people complained about Saudi behaviour in Yemen. US behaviour is regularly attacked also. The MSF issue has not been swept under any rug. It is being investigated by at least 4 groups, including potentially the UN war crimes commission. Pretty sure its had a great many column inches, considering it has been front page news for multiple days.

 

Yes RT is a propaganda mouthpiece but an interesting one at that. And there certainly isn't a shortage of hypocrisy and propaganda in our own politics and news sources in US/EU, RT are just more shameless and blatant when it comes to airing their agendas.

 

Again, saying one source is propaganda does not mean anyone is saying our media aren't a source of propaganda also!

[CAM]

There is a strong anti-Russian line being towed in our media though. But after the Cold War drew the Red versus Blue political lines across the globe I wouldn't expect anything less. Same goes for anti-US sentiments in Russian and Middle Eastern media sources. Either way, I predict a return to Cold War 2 if the current line of blame after blame between the major powers continues on it's current path.