The World's #1 Russian, Ukrainian & Eastern European Discussion & Information Forum - RUA!

This Is the Premier Discussion Forum on the Net for Information and Discussion about Russia, Ukraine, Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union. Discuss Culture, Politics, Travelling, Language, International Relationships and More. Chat with Travellers, Locals, Residents and Expats. Ask and Answer Questions about Travel, Culture, Relationships, Applying for Visas, Translators, Interpreters, and More. Give Advice, Read Trip Reports, Share Experiences and Make Friends.

Author Topic: MH17 - update ?  (Read 40874 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline BCKev

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 880
  • Country: ca
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Ukraine
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 10-20
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #25 on: September 09, 2014, 04:33:52 PM »
It also confirms that the only traffic in the vicinity of MH17 were three other commercial airliners, the closest of which was 30km away.

Nobody told the locals they were making it up I guess.........
The report did not comment on the presence/absense of military aircraft, so this youtube video can still be accurate.
The report commented on the presence/absence of all aircraft.

The report isn't explicit. By my reading the presence (or not) of any military or private planes in the area is not made clear, and remains a valid question.

From the report:
2.5.3 Other Traffic
According to information received from the NBAAI, recorded ATC surveillance information revealed that three other commercial airliners overflew the same restricted airspace as flight MH17 around the time of the occurence. Two of those aircraft were cruising eastbound and one was cruising westbound. All were under control of Dnipro Radar. At 13.20 hrs the distance between MH17 and the closest of the three aircraft was approximately 30 kilometres. Analysis is ongoing.

http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/uploads/phase-docs/701/b3923acad0ceprem-rapport-mh-17-en-interactief.pdf


I found it interesting that in the conversation between the Dnipro and Rostov air traffic controllers, no mention was made of any other aircraft in the area.

Offline Ste

  • RIP
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5027
  • Country: ie
  • Gender: Male
  • Beware of Muslamic Rayguns
  • Spouses Country: The Planet Zanussi
  • Status: Committed
  • Trips: 5-10
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #26 on: September 09, 2014, 04:43:45 PM »
The theory that MH17 was brought down by gunfire from one or more SU-25s is just ludicrous whichever way you look at it, whether it is air combat tactics, performance capabilities of the SU-25, or just basic physics on the relative motion of two moving objects, all coupled with the evidence highlighted in the report.

They also specified that all of the objects came from "above" the aircraft heading down through the aircraft, no damage from the bottom up.
That would mean the buk system overflew the aircraft and exploded above it, which seems unlikely as most missiles I know will explode the second they have confirmed to be close enough to the target objective.

I refer you to retired Russian army Colonel Mikhail Khodarenok as quoted in the Moscow Times:-
Quote
Khodarenok also pointed to the fact that a Buk missile would have hit the aircraft from above, while evidence suggests that it was hit from below. He explained that the missile system operates in such a way where a missile is shot up to great heights, and is designed to hit its target during its descent.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/speculation-runs-rife-following-release-of-mh17-report/506742.html

He does seem to be a little confused as to what the Preliminary Report actually says about the direction of entry of the high speed objects (Him: from below, Report: from above), or is he contesting the interpretation of the photographic evidence in the report? Whatever, he describes the mode of operation of the missile.

As for the BBC video, my wife listened to the two women speaking about the planes:-

As my wife understood it, the women saw two planes (which they said were Ukrainian military aircraft - wifey couldn't translate the type of aircraft) in the area before the crash (they didn't say how long before) and they then speculated that the aircraft could be to blame for the crash. Wifey reported that the women did not say that they saw the aircraft close to MH17. Maybe someone else could provide a verbatim translation?

I'll ask my better half to do it tomorrow (she broke her ankle and is off work) she's a proper qualified ENG-RU interpreter and translator, though I suspect if I ask she'll bin me off, she has a dim view of all this!

But if they saw these 'planes', they couldn't have been at 33,000 feet, cos that's only a dot surely?
O pointy birds, o pointy pointy, Anoint my head, anointy-nointy.

Offline Lon

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 743
  • Country: 00
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 20+
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #27 on: September 09, 2014, 05:12:04 PM »

most anti-air missile systems do not have to actually hit the target.  they have proximity fuses, that work by calculating the distance to the target.  the missile usually detonates once the proximity fuse determines that the distance is getting larger.
  from wikipedia   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buk_missile_system
"A proximity fuse aboard the missile determines when it will detonate, creating an expanding fragmentation pattern of missile components and warhead to intercept and destroy the target."
that the 'high energy objects" came from above does not preclude an anti-air missile.

They also specified that all of the objects came from "above" the aircraft heading down through the aircraft, no damage from the bottom up.
That would mean the buk system overflew the aircraft and exploded above it, which seems unlikely as most missiles I know will explode the second they have confirmed to be close enough to the target objective.


Offline TomT

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10884
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
  • Trips: 10-20
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #28 on: September 09, 2014, 06:19:54 PM »
"A proximity fuse aboard the missile determines when it will detonate, creating an expanding fragmentation pattern of missile components and warhead to intercept and destroy the target."
that the 'high energy objects" came from above does not preclude an anti-air missile.

Neat, round 30mm holes rule out a missile, however.

Offline Halo

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4692
  • Country: 00
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #29 on: September 09, 2014, 06:31:13 PM »
The pieces weren't all neat and round.  But, there was a good explanation of this in a post by an expert, elsewhere.

I heard an expert from the UK being interviewed on the news today.  He said that the plane was hit by shrapnel, not directly by a missile.  He also said that from the black box, the location of from where that missile was fired could be calculated within a few hundred meters and, that would prove which side fired it.
After the fall of communism, the biggest mistake Boris Yeltsin's regime made was not to disband the KGB altogether. Instead it changed its name to the FSB and, to many observers, morphed into a gangster organisation, eventually headed by master criminal Vladimir Putin. - Gerard Batten

Offline Ste

  • RIP
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5027
  • Country: ie
  • Gender: Male
  • Beware of Muslamic Rayguns
  • Spouses Country: The Planet Zanussi
  • Status: Committed
  • Trips: 5-10
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #30 on: September 09, 2014, 06:52:17 PM »
The pieces weren't all neat and round.  But, there was a good explanation of this in a post by an expert, elsewhere.

I heard an expert from the UK being interviewed on the news today.  He said that the plane was hit by shrapnel, not directly by a missile.  He also said that from the black box, the location of from where that missile was fired could be calculated within a few hundred meters and, that would prove which side fired it.

I'm not an expert, but I'm a WW2 Bomber geek and I know bullet/cannon holes from shrapnel holes and I'd stake my my life on the holes in question being normal shrapnel.

That's all I know for sure.
O pointy birds, o pointy pointy, Anoint my head, anointy-nointy.

Offline Lon

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 743
  • Country: 00
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 20+
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #31 on: September 09, 2014, 07:14:05 PM »

I suppose, all though, most photos of bullet or cannon battle damaged aircraft I have seen are not nice round holes.  would a SU25, or another aircraft using a 30mm cannon, be using explosive shells?

Neat, round 30mm holes rule out a missile, however.

Offline TomT

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10884
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
  • Trips: 10-20
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #32 on: September 09, 2014, 07:22:21 PM »
would a SU25, or another aircraft using a 30mm cannon, be using explosive shells?

Beats me. It isn't obligatory for the shells to be explosive or precisely 30mm, though.

Something that bothers me more than the technical details is if a country that has imposed sanctions on Russia can be trusted to conduct an impartial investigation.

Offline Lon

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 743
  • Country: 00
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 20+
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #33 on: September 09, 2014, 07:32:17 PM »
agreed

if a country that has imposed sanctions on Russia can be trusted to conduct an impartial investigation.


Offline Halo

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4692
  • Country: 00
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #34 on: September 09, 2014, 09:22:56 PM »
The pieces weren't all neat and round.  But, there was a good explanation of this in a post by an expert, elsewhere.

I heard an expert from the UK being interviewed on the news today.  He said that the plane was hit by shrapnel, not directly by a missile.  He also said that from the black box, the location of from where that missile was fired could be calculated within a few hundred meters and, that would prove which side fired it.

I'm not an expert, but I'm a WW2 Bomber geek and I know bullet/cannon holes from shrapnel holes and I'd stake my my life on the holes in question being normal shrapnel.

That's all I know for sure.

In some of the photos, it looked as if on some parts of the plane, rivets just popped out.  That is what was addressed.      Others did look like shrapnel (sharp and uneven).
After the fall of communism, the biggest mistake Boris Yeltsin's regime made was not to disband the KGB altogether. Instead it changed its name to the FSB and, to many observers, morphed into a gangster organisation, eventually headed by master criminal Vladimir Putin. - Gerard Batten

Offline TrevorM

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 618
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #35 on: September 10, 2014, 02:48:20 AM »
Something that bothers me more than the technical details is if a country that has imposed sanctions on Russia can be trusted to conduct an impartial investigation.

Russia is representated in the investigation:-

Quote from: 23 July 2014
With the Dutch Safety Board now heading the investigation, the international investigation
team will have more freedom to go about its tasks unhindered. The Dutch Safety Board is
also responsible for coordinating all participating investigators and investigation teams from
the countries involved (Ukraine, Malaysia, Australia, Germany, the United States, the United
Kingdom and Russia) and the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO). The
international team currently consists of 24 investigators. A total of four Dutch Safety Board
investigators are currently operating in Ukraine.

http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/uploads/fm/2014_07_23_PB_OVV_neemt_leiding_over_ENG_DEF.pdf

Offline MrMann

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 770
  • Country: scotland
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Committed
  • Trips: 5-10
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #36 on: September 10, 2014, 03:47:15 AM »
I was about to post something similar Trevor.

The investigation was carried out according to the strict rules of the International Civil Aviation Organization, part of the UN, and involved experts from the Federal Air Transport Agency of Russia amongst others.

Quote from: Dutch Safety Board
The NBAAI commenced an investigation on the day of the occurrence. The investigation was delegated to the Dutch Safety Board on 23 July 2014. The investigation is ongoing and a final report will be published in due course. The Dutch Safety Board was assisted by experts from Australia (ATSB), France (BEA), Germany (BFU), Indonesia (NTSC), Italy (ANSV), Malaysia (DCA), the Russian Federation (Federal Air Transport Agency), Interstate Air Committee (IAC), Ukraine (NBAAI), the United Kingdom (AAIB), the United States of America (NTSB) and the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). In addition, several other countries offered their support to the Dutch Safety Board investigation team. At the time of their offer, no immediate support was needed, but their offer was much appreciated. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has advised the Dutch Safety Board in procedural matters to ensure full compliance with the standards and recommended practices set forth in Annex 13.

I'm not sure where the theories about MH17 being brought down by cannon fire originated from, other than "experts" seeing holes in the fuselage and concluding that they were caused by cannon fire. Lieutenant-General Kartopolov's media briefing a few days after the plane was brought down refers to an Su-25's ability to carry R-60 air-to-air missiles. But let's look at the facts anyway, as Andrew would say.

The Su-25 carries a Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-30-2 cannon with 250 rounds of 30x165mm ammunition that can be either armour-piercing or high explosive incendiary. From what I can gather this cannon has a maximum effective range of 2.5km for suppressive fire and 1.5km for a point target. According to the Russian Ministry of Defence the Su-25 was 3 to 5km from MH17.

The Russian Ministry of Defence claim that the Su-25 was tracking MH17, i.e. flying on a similar path to it. As you would expect given that they were so close to the Russian border and any Ukrainian military plane would have been travelling from west to east. Given that the majority of the initial damage seems to be to the front of MH17, and that the preliminary report concluded that it was the front which broke off first, it would seem that in order to hit the plane with cannon fire the Su-25 would have had to overtake MH17, turn around and return towards it. This is not indicated on the Russian Ministry of Defence's radar data, and indeed is highly unlikely given the speed at which MH17 was travelling.

In addition to this, the preliminary report is clear that the damage to the plane originated above the level of the cockpit floor and that as well as affecting the side of the plane further damage was seen on the roof of the cockpit. This means that the Su-25 would have to have been above the level of MH17 in order to fire its cannons down the way. Given the effects of gravity on cannon rounds over a 3 to 5km distance this means that the Su-25 would have to also have been considerably higher than MH17 which again is highly unlikely given that MH17 was flying above the maximum ceiling of an Su-25 quoted by Lieutenant-General Kartopolov, which itself is higher than that claimed in most other sources.

Therefore I would go as far as to say it was impossible for MH17 to have been shot down by cannon fire from an Su-25. Has this even been suggested by the Russian Ministry of Defence?

Turning our attention to the air to air missile theory, the R-60 is a lightweight missile designed for binging down fighter jets rather than larger targets. As such it has a pre-launch weight of 44kg (97 lb) with a small warhead weighing 3kg (6.6 lb). Compare that to the Buk Sa-11 which weighs 690kg (1521 lb) before launch carrying a warhead of 70kg (154 lb).

Interestingly an R-60 has been fired at a civilian plane before, so we have something to compare it to. In 1988 a BAe-125 in Angola was hit by an R-60 fired from a MiG-23. The missile knocked off one of the engines and the co-pilot made a successful emergency landing.



The R-60 is an infrared homing missile. If it was fired from below and behind MH17 as the Russian Ministry of Defence's radar data suggests then what is the likelihood that the missile would hit the upper part of the front of the plane?

Also, if the Russian Ministry of Defence is so convinced that MH17 was brought down by an Su-25 why did they also refer to Ukraine having a Buk system in the area during the media briefing? That to me sounds like a classic muddying of the waters tactic.

Offline TrevorM

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 618
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #37 on: September 10, 2014, 04:57:27 AM »
Nicely put MrMann.  :thumbsup:

Offline WestCoast

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9861
  • Country: ca
  • Gender: Male
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #38 on: October 28, 2014, 10:08:15 AM »
The Dutch investigation of the downing of MH17 is advancing. The Russian government has stated in the past that they have evidence that an Ukrainian fighter jet shot down MH17. The Dutch prosecutors are preparing to ask the Russian government to provide the information that led to that conclusion.

Dutch prosecutor Fred Westerbeke has said "Based on the information available, a shooting-down by a ground-to-air missile is the most likely scenario, but we aren't closing our eyes to the possibility that it could have happened differently," Der Spiegel quoted him as saying.

"We are preparing a request to Moscow for information ... including the radar data with which the Russians wanted to prove that a Ukrainian military jet was nearby," he added.

In the days after the crash, the United States said it had evidence proving that the aircraft was brought down by a ground-to-air missile fired by Russian-backed forces occupying the area in eastern Ukraine where its wreckage now lies.

An interim report issued by the Dutch Safety Board, which investigates air crashes, listed several passenger jets in flight MH17's vicinity, but no military aircraft that would have been capable of shooting it down.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/mh17-prosecutor-open-theory-another-plane-shot-down-182620435--finance.html#bi9wIsU
andrewfi says ''Proximity is almost no guarantee of authority" and "in many cases, distance gives a better picture with less emotional and subjective input."

That means I'm a subject matter expert on all things Russia, Ukraine and UK.

Offline Manny

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 19719
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 20+
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #39 on: July 25, 2015, 05:13:16 PM »
It also confirms that the only traffic in the vicinity of MH17 were three other commercial airliners, the closest of which was 30km away.

Nobody told the locals they were making it up I guess.........


Quote
The BBC pulled this broadcast in total panic when they realised the evidence of the eye witnesses did not correspond to the narrative the US & their NATO allies wanted to convey, many witnesses verified there were 2 Ukraine SU25 very close to the downed MH17, their presence was also confirmed by Russian satellite images provided by their air ministry. The US has thus so far refused to disclose their satellite images

Evidently, the BBC deleted it as it did not meet "editorial guidelines". Truth doesn't when it contradicts the official line. The BBC were caught doing the same in Odessa.

BBC deleting facts again and having YouTube vids pulled? Dont tell Moby.  :-X

Now even US veterans are asking why their government wont tell what it knows: http://sputniknews.com/us/20150723/1024944058.html
Read a trip report from North Korea >>here<< - Read a trip report from South Korea, China and Hong Kong >>here<<

Look what the American media makes some people believe:
Putin often threatens to strike US with nuclear weapons.

Offline msmoby

  • BANNED
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 11242
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
  • BANNED
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 20+
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #40 on: July 25, 2015, 10:51:59 PM »

BBC deleting facts again and having YouTube vids pulled? Dont tell Moby.  :-X

Now even US veterans are asking why their government wont tell what it knows: http://sputniknews.com/us/20150723/1024944058.html

As we get near August 10 we will see all sorts of muddying the waters by the Kremlin troll factory



The article was from Wednesday, 30 July 2014 13:18

http://www.truth-out.org/speakout/item/25277-obama-should-release-ukraine-evidence

Since then we've had the Kremlin suggest

1/ it wasn't SU-25s - it was on July 21st

2/ It might have been a BUK system fired the rocket, but the missile was of a type not used by Russian forces - type stated

3/ NOW, it was an Israeli rocket ....

Manny you really  must check your sources' 'sources'to save embarrassment


I have never claimed to be a Blue Beret

Spurious claims about 'seeing action' with the Blue Berets are debunked >here<

Here is my Russophobia/Kremlinphobia topic

Online andrewfi

  • Supporting Member
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 20730
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
    • Articles About Almost Anything!
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #41 on: July 27, 2015, 05:59:50 AM »
Alfy, you are at it again.

Because you have read this stuff, or at least claim to have done, you already know that it was NOT the Kremlin that suggested a BUK missile was used but not one of theirs. The claim has been made that IF a BUK was used it was not a Russian one but the claim was made by the manufacturers of the BUK system.

The claim that an Israeli missile may have been used was, again, not made by the Kremlin but by a group of aviation experts.

The nearest to the 'Kremlin' would be the Russian military who, as you know, made a show and tell of some of their data that demonstrated that 2 planes, presumed to be SU-25s were in the region and that there was increased activity from Ukrainian BUK based radar. To the best of my knowledge that position, held by the military, has not altered.

Why do you continually try to deceive your readers?
Do you assume that you are the brightest bloke in the room and that we all fall over ourselves to believe your purposeful misleading?
Or do you simply understand much less than you think you do of that which you read, hear or see?
...everything ends always well; if it’s still bad, then it’s not the end!

Offline Wiz

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5131
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 20+
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #42 on: July 27, 2015, 09:33:14 AM »
No Wiz, I don't laugh, it isn't very funny.

Sorry Andrew, I find their parroting very funny because exposes the very low standard and knowledge of international affairs and know ASAP what is coming next.

Despite that, I have no intention to get involved in any arguments or debate with persons that throwing personal insults, which for me is a red flag. I simply ignore them and it is to the moderator to keep them in order. My view is, when debating a subject you do not attack the person but you dispute, if you disagree their comments.

Of course I agree with your other comments and May I remind you the case of Flight MH17?

A year passed now and no credible evidence came forward from the US for that crime,  where the Russian side has, at least have offered a lot of evidence.

With so many satellites and other sources at their disposal, you would have thought that the American’s would produce something credible but seems now this subject is gone quiet in their part.

Makes you wonder, if they have something to hide and I hope one day we will find the truth.


Why the sun does not shine on the Ex- British Empire Anymore? Because God never trusted an Englishman in the dark!

Online AvHdB

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 14933
  • Country: nl
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Ukraine, Kiev
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 20+
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #43 on: July 27, 2015, 10:02:07 AM »
Of course I agree with your other comments and May I remind you the case of Flight MH17?

A year passed now and no credible evidence came forward from the US for that crime,  where the Russian side has, at least have offered a lot of evidence.

With so many satellites and other sources at their disposal, you would have thought that the American’s would produce something credible but seems now this subject is gone quiet in their part.

Wizar, You give way to much credit to America and its surveillance. But in fact the evidence coming from the Kremlin has changed on a rather daily basis from the time of the incident. The Dutch and Australians are heading the investigation, with input from Russia and other countries.

What gives me a chuckle is seeing over time Andrew doing the Texan Two Step.

I must say I was raised not to ignore those around you, it is rude. But you remind me a New York taxi driver, the rules of the road apply to everyone except him.

What is amusing in numerous posts Andrew moans about those who copy and post articles. he has a valid point. But I think it is safe to assume you are the new master of this genre.
“If you aren't in over your head, how do you know how tall you are?” T.S. Eliot

Online andrewfi

  • Supporting Member
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 20730
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
    • Articles About Almost Anything!
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #44 on: July 27, 2015, 10:41:37 AM »
AvHdB, sadly you are, as often the case, wrong.

The 'Kremlin' by which I infer you mean the official viewpoint has not changed. I explained that for moby's benefit a few hours ago so I will not trouble you with rewriting that which you can read for yourself.

If you know different I am, as always, ready to learn. Can you share with us any press releases or statements from the Russian government that would reflect a change in the viewpoint from the military show and tell a few days after the incident?
For your recollection, that was that there was one or more military aircraft in the vicinity of mh17 and that Ukrainian BUK tracking radar had shown a peak in activity at the time of the shooting down of the plane.

Can you add to our knowledge here?

...everything ends always well; if it’s still bad, then it’s not the end!

Offline Tom Cat

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5383
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Just Looking
  • Trips: 20+
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #45 on: July 27, 2015, 02:59:26 PM »
MENUSunday 26 july, 2015, 08:021703

Putin OKed lies about MH-17 downing, Russian expert says

Pres Putin hardly gave the order to shoot down the Malaysian Boeing but all the lying by the Russians about the downing were agreed with him, Russian military expert Pavel Felgengauer is quoted by Apostrof as saying July 25.

 “The downing of the plane was apparently a tragic mistake. If the Russians had pleaded guilty it would have looked very bad and would have been qualified as undeliberate murder.However, the attempts to cover up the accident were quite deliberate.It’s like the Watergate. Pres Nixon was fired not because his ‘plumbers’ planted microphones but because he tried to cover it up deliberately.   In Russia, they decided to lie about the true circumstances of the downing to the end,” Pavel Felgengauer said

http://zik.ua/en/news/2015/07/26/putin_oked_lies_about_mh17_downing_russian_expert_says_610505
Don't shoot the messenger, links to articles posted, don't necessarily reflect my personal opinion.

Offline bagalia

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1189
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Ukraine/USA
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 20+
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #46 on: July 27, 2015, 03:06:57 PM »
On the investigation of mh17:

I find it interesting how when the US gets involved it is interference and when they step back to wait on an official investigation they get criticized for not getting involved. If they did offer more proof they would get criticized for trying to influence the investigation probably.

I am partial to the Bellingcat investigation and I know there are web sites that try to debunk their work but it appears to be the best investigation so far. The international investigation will no doubt take what they feel is true and relevant from that along with other information and come up with the bible on the story. It could end up with a coverup or even a blatant lie also.

The news stories posted here along with others want the US to speak up now so all this tension can be put to rest and the truth shine forth but really now... Just suppose that the US holds absolute evidence that Russia was at least responsible for sending in the BUK or even that Russians were responsible for manning it.

What do you suppose will happen then?

My bet is on at least a partial coverup if that were to be the case. Lay the blame on the rebels if that is the case and go no further. Even with good proof it would not be a good thing to shove this in Putins face.

Regardless of anything above, whether russia did not have an old out of date BUK or rebels got it from a Ukraine weapons depot, whether there is proof of it coming or going, regardless of just about anything;

the rebels admitted to and gloated about shooting down the plane and that is all I need to believe they did.
Misery is the river of the world; everybody row, everybody row.

Offline Manny

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 19719
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 20+
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #47 on: July 27, 2015, 03:13:45 PM »
Ambassador Yakovenko's article on MH17 today: http://www.rusemb.org.uk/ambarticles/457
Read a trip report from North Korea >>here<< - Read a trip report from South Korea, China and Hong Kong >>here<<

Look what the American media makes some people believe:
Putin often threatens to strike US with nuclear weapons.

Offline Manny

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 19719
  • Country: gb
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Married
  • Trips: 20+
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #48 on: July 27, 2015, 03:17:29 PM »
Just suppose that the US holds absolute evidence that Russia was at least responsible for sending in the BUK or even that Russians were responsible for manning it.

If the US had any evidence against Russia, they would have been howling it from the rooftops long ago. They do know what happened and wont tell. This is because it will implicate people they don't want to implicate and be counter to the narrative they are pushing.
Read a trip report from North Korea >>here<< - Read a trip report from South Korea, China and Hong Kong >>here<<

Look what the American media makes some people believe:
Putin often threatens to strike US with nuclear weapons.

Offline Tom Cat

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5383
  • Country: us
  • Gender: Male
  • Spouses Country: Russia
  • Status: Just Looking
  • Trips: 20+
Re: MH17 - update ?
« Reply #49 on: July 27, 2015, 03:34:46 PM »
Just suppose that the US holds absolute evidence that Russia was at least responsible for sending in the BUK or even that Russians were responsible for manning it.

If the US had any evidence against Russia, they would have been howling it from the rooftops long ago. They do know what happened and wont tell. This is because it will implicate people they don't want to implicate and be counter to the narrative they are pushing.

Manny, we are not privy to what the United states government and the Kremlin do to make deals.
Russia and the United states are much closer than what is portrayed to the general public.
The United states needed Russia to secure a deal with Iran.
It's very well possible to concede one position to gain another.
Don't shoot the messenger, links to articles posted, don't necessarily reflect my personal opinion.