Malaysian airline MH-17 discussion thread

Grayson

DamagedTrax wrote: »

western journalists dont exactly enjoy freedom of press either. look at the israel/palestine issue. depending on the news channel you could be looking at two seperate wars.

so forgive me if i take any mainstream media reports with a pinch of salt, from either side.

Freedom of the press means that the reporter can report what he wants, where it wants. I understand that fox news may have an agenda, but that's the company deciding. The country itself isn't.
I know there has been some press harassment in the west. The Edward Snowden / Glenn Greenwald fiasco was terrible. Especially when they went after Greenwalds other half. It's still nothing compared to russia where most of the newspapers & television stations are directly controlled by the state.

Grayson

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Saw an article today about a woman who lives near the crash site showing off mascara that she said was given to her by a Pro Russian Separatist who robbed it from the body of one of the victims and relatives ringing the passengers phones and strangers answering them.

What kind of people live in that place, no respect for the dead.

To be fair, if i heard a phone ringing, I might answer it.

( was it a nokia? )

el diablo

What's the purpose of sending unarmed Australian federal police to the crash site?

comongethappy

el diablo wrote: »

What's the purpose of sending unarmed Australian federal police to the crash site?

To stop randomers taking bits & pieses, chunks of fuselage as souvenirs, passengers possessions etc.

Securing the already contaminated crime scene.

Perhaps the rebels will feel guilted into allowing them take over the site.

jimeryan22

Grayson wrote: »

That wasn't your point. here's what you posted. just because you have a very short term memory and an inability to scroll up the page.



The maximum they ever has was 20% mechanised. They had over 600k horses.

lets try that again. They had, and relied upon, horses.

In french..... ils avaient des chevaux

get my very belaboured point?

They had horses. Just like Napoleon. Horses are something that the EU and nato wouldn't be using.

lets quote wiki again

Seeing as you want to quote wiki so much..

] the largest invasion in the history of warfare. In addition to troops, Barbarossa initially used 600,000 motor vehicles and 625,000 horses.

Causes of the failure of Operation BarbarossaEdit

The gravity of the beleaguered German army's situation towards the end of 1941 was due to the Red Army's increasing strength and factors that in the short run severely restricted the German forces' effectiveness. Chief among these were their overstretched deployment, a serious transport crisis and the eroded strength of most divisions. The infantry deficit that appeared by 1 September 1941, was never made good. For the rest of the war in the Soviet Union, the Wehrmacht would be short of infantry and support services.

Underestimation of the capacity of Soviet mobilization

The German High Command grossly underestimated the mobilization potential of the Red Army. From the onset of the campaign till the end of 1941, the Soviet Union raised 825 division-equivalents,[1] tapping into its mobilization pool of over 10 million men.[145] Between the onset of the war and the end of June alone 800,000 men were mobilized, and another 600,000 in July. The plan for Barbarossa assumed that the Wehrmacht would emerge victorious if it could destroy the bulk of the Red Army west of the Dvina and Dnieper rivers. By 3 July, Army Group Center had, in the Battle of Białystok–Minsk, destroyed three encircled Soviet Armies (3rd, 4th and 10th) in the vicinity of Minsk. As Army Group Center arrived at the river banks on 7 July, however, they discovered another five Soviet Armies (16th, 19th, 20th, 21st, and 22nd). By 10 July, it became clear that the assumptions regarding the result of destroying the Red Army forces west of the two rivers proved incorrect. Nonetheless, three of these Soviet Armies (16th, 19th, and 20th) were quickly encircled and eventually decimated in the vicinity of Smolensk, while the other two were severely weakened.[54] In just the first six weeks of the invasion, which was between late June and early August, the Red Army had lost as many as 1.5 million soldiers (killed, wounded or captured).[146] By 6 August another row of five Soviet Armies (24th, 28th, 29th, 30th, and Group Iartsevo) were facing Army Group Center, however, and unknown to German intelligence, still another row of Soviet Armies were forming to the rear (31st, 33rd, and 43rd).[147] In comparison, according to Franz Halder the chief of the OKH General Staff, by 2 August Army Group Center had lost 74,500 men (killed, wounded, or missing) and had received only 23,000 replacements.[117] By the end of August the Red Army losses rose to nearly three million (killed, wounded or captured), but that did not hinder it from raising more men for the defense of Moscow.[146] The Soviets also quickly relocated their factories. According to one account by a German soldier, when German troops arrived at the Dnieper River they saw many intact industrial plants; by the time they crossed the river, however, the Russians had emptied every building and taken their contents east.[125]:141 By September it became clear that the mobilization capacity of the Red Army had been severely underestimated.

Franz Halder wrote in his diary in 1941:[148]

The whole situation makes it increasingly plain that we have underestimated the Russian colossus...[Soviet] divisions are not armed and equipped according to our standards, and their tactical leadership is often poor. But there they are, and as we smash a dozen of them the Russians simply put up another dozen. The time factor favours them, as they are near their own resources, while we are moving farther and farther away from ours. And so our troops, sprawled over the immense front line, without depth, are subject to the incessant attacks of the enemy.[148]

The Red Army proved it could replace huge losses quickly, and was not destroyed as a coherent force. When divisions of conscripts trained before the war were destroyed, new formations replaced them. On average, about half a million men were drafted each month for the duration of the war. The Soviets also proved very skilled in raising and training many new armies from the different ethnic populations of the far flung republics. The ability to mobilize vast (if often poorly trained and equipped) forces rapidly and continually allowed the Soviet Union to survive the critical first six months of the war.[citation needed]

Faults of logistical planning

Winter in Russia, 1941
At the start of the war in the dry summer, the Germans took the Soviets by surprise and destroyed a large part of the Red Army in the first weeks. When good weather gave way to the harsh autumn and winter and the Red Army recovered, the German offensive began to falter. The German army could not be supplied sufficiently for prolonged combat; indeed, there was not enough fuel for the whole army to reach its objectives.

This was well understood by the German supply units even before the operation, but their warnings were ignored.[149] The entire German plan assumed that within six to eight weeks they would have attained full strategic freedom due to a complete collapse of the Red Army.[125]:97–98 Only then could they have diverted necessary logistic support to fuelling the few mobile units needed to occupy the defeated state.

German infantry and tanks stormed 300 mi (480 km) ahead in the first week, but their supply lines struggled to keep up. Soviet railroads could at first not be fully used due to a difference in track gauges (Germany used standard gauges while Russia used five-foot Russian gauge), and dismantled railroad facilities in border areas.[150] In addition, road systems that looked impressive on the map, were in reality under-developed.[151] Lack of supplies significantly slowed down the formerly highly effective German tactic of blitzkrieg.

Weather
A paper published by the U.S. Army's Combat Studies Institute in 1981 concluded that Hitler's plans miscarried before the onset of severe winter weather. He was confident of a quick victory, so he did not prepare properly for a winter war in the Soviet Union. Moreover, his eastern army suffered more than 734,000 casualties (about 23 percent of its average strength of 3,200,000 soldiers) in the first five months of the invasion, and on 27 November 1941, General Eduard Wagner, Quartermaster General of the German Army, reported "We are at the end of our resources in both personnel and material. We are about to be confronted with the dangers of deep winter."[152]

The German forces were unready to deal with harsh weather and the poor road network of the USSR. In September, terrain slowed the Wehrmacht's progress. Few roads were paved. The ground in the USSR was very loose sand in summer, sticky muck in autumn, and heavy snow in winter. German tanks had narrow tracks with little traction and poor flotation in mud. In contrast, the new generation of Soviet tanks such as the T-34 and KV had wide tracks and were far more mobile in these conditions. The 600,000 large western European horses the Germans used for supply and artillery movement did not cope well with this weather. The smaller horses the Red Army used were much better adapted to the climate and could even scrape the icy ground with their hooves to dig up the weeds beneath.

German troops were mostly unprepared for the harsh weather changes in the rainy autumn and early winter of 1941. Equipment had been prepared for such winter conditions, but the severely overstrained transport network could not move it to the front. Consequently, the troops lacked adequate cold-weather gear, and some soldiers had to pack newspapers into their jackets as temperatures dropped to below −40 °C . While at least some cold weather uniforms were available, they rarely reached the Eastern Front because Hitler ordered that supply lines give more priority to shipments of ammunition and fuel. To operate furnaces and heaters, the Germans also burned precious fuel that was in short supply. Soviet soldiers, in contrast, often had warm, quilted uniforms, felt-lined boots, and fur hats.

German weapons malfunctioned in the cold. Lubricating oils were unsuitable for these temperatures, leading to engine malfunction and misfires. To load shells into a tank's main gun, frozen grease had to be chipped off with a knife. Soviet units faced less severe problems due to their experience with cold weather. Aircraft had insulating blankets to keep their engines warm while parked. Lighter-weight oil was used. German tanks and armored vehicles could not move due to a lack of antifreeze, causing fuel to solidify. The cold was so intense that fires had to be lit under vehicles' engines before they could be started.

Because few Russian roads were paved, most of the main roads turned to mud when the rains and snow came in late October and early November. These quagmires combined with longer supply lines to cause the German advance to stall within sight of the spires of Moscow. The Soviet counteroffensive of December 1941 was led primarily by Siberian troops, who had trained for harsh winter combat. They arrived from the east with numerous T-34 tanks, which had been held in reserve. These Siberian troops advanced up to 100 mi (160 km) in some sectors, proving that mobile warfare was still possible during the Russian winter.

When the severe winter began, Hitler feared a repetition of Napoleon's disastrous retreat from Moscow. He ordered the German forces to hold their ground defiantly in the face of Soviet counterattacks. This became known as the "stand or die" order. Some historians have argued that this order prevented the Germans from being routed; others contend that this order restricted Germany's ability to conduct mobile defensive warfare and led to heavy casualties due to battle and the cold. Whatever the case, the Germans were driven back a short distance but ultimately, their defensive positions stabilized; this served to convince Hitler further that he could ignore the advice of his generals, something that proved disastrous for the Wehrmacht.

So as you can see my point.. At nowhere is it mentioned that the lack of mechanised vehicles and reliance of use of horses to being the reason of why hitler lost on Russia.. But as I said before..

They underestimated Russia's forces
Thought they'd be done before the cold weather..

So in turn, and this coupled with Germany having its supply routes cut off everywhere and bombed in submission
Is why they didn't beat Russia
Not like as you made out... That their supply chains were so totally reliant on horses...

comongethappy

Christ Jim..... Set up a blog or something!

This adds nothing.

Grayson

jimeryan22 wrote: »

. The 600,000 large western European horses the Germans used for supply and artillery movement did not cope well with this weather. The smaller horses the Red Army used were much better adapted to the climate and could even scrape the icy ground with their hooves to dig up the weeds beneath.

jimeryan22 wrote: »

So as you can see my point.. At nowhere is it mentioned that the lack of mechanised vehicles and reliance of use of horses to being the reason of why hitler lost on Russia..

You didn't read that wall of text you posted, did you.

Your original point was...

The nazis realied on horses for supply's did they..? News to me.

This is going well off topic now.

If you want I'll agree that they used flying space monkeys, if it'll stop the discussion.

jimeryan22

After this I'm also done on this..
Your original post that I was replying to..?

" Both Napoleon and Hitler had armies that relied on supply chains run by horses. That's why they failed in winter. "

That is why I said relied on horses did they, to which most would have got.. Sarcasm.. Because this was not the case..

loughside

`n `ell, this threads on a downward spiral,

we`re banging on about horses, bicycles and puncture repair kits now

Grayson

loughside wrote: »

`n `ell, this threads on a downward spiral,

we`re banging on about horses, bicycles and puncture repair kits now

thank you.

To bring it back on topic, i wonder when the preliminary findings from the black boxes will be released. And correct me if I'm wrong, but i was under the impression that there's more than two, but only two have been handed over. Am i right?

Ash.J.Williams

Grayson wrote: »

thank you.

To bring it back on topic, i wonder when the preliminary findings from the black boxes will be released. And correct me if I'm wrong, but i was under the impression that there's more than two, but only two have been handed over. Am i right?

Two I think...one just recording the voices in the cockpit and one for data

signostic

comongethappy wrote: »

To stop randomers taking bits & pieses, chunks of fuselage as souvenirs, passengers possessions etc.

Securing the already contaminated crime scene.

Perhaps the rebels will feel guilted into allowing them take over the site.

From a Ukrainian news source....(google translation)

Much of the personal effects and luggage of passengers killed already appeared on the local flea markets and Tores Snow and credit card people, the ill-fated flight flying already tried to withdraw money from ATMs.

Even the wreckage of the plane, representing great value for the investigation of a terrorist act, are not protected from the local population. If Russian armed terrorists threatened shooting do not miss the place of tragedy of international experts, the protection of the local Aboriginal people there is virtually no, and they are starting to gradually take away the wreckage to pass them into scrap. It is possible that when the blast site will get to investigators, investigate them will be nothing - because duralumin, which is made of aircraft, very much appreciated the owners receiving points nonferrous metal.

http://nikvesti.com/news/public/56631

Egginacup

Grayson wrote: »

I don't think anyone's saying that the EU/NATO is about to invade Russia.

But if, for the sake of argument, they were to, and assuming no nuclear weapons were used,

Their forces greatly outnumber Russia's.
The technology that the EU/NATO possesses is far, far better. Both Napoleon and Hitler had armies that relied on supply chains run by horses. That's why they failed in winter. Whereas NATO forces have equipment which was designed over 40 years with Russia as the prime target. their armies wouldn't be ground down by the winter like the previous invaders were.

I'm not going to nitpick about conditions and that's the most irrelevant part of this discussion...you are talking about weather in hindsight like suddenly there's an army who could withstand the conditions that slowly creep. Cold weather...Germany invaded Russia in one of the warmest summers in history. Their frozen skulls are are in the hundreds of thousands from Leningrad to Volgograd.
This discussion isn't about predicting military prowess as if you or I could know. A nuclear armed, tank laden, airforce heavy, well paid, well fed, army with helicopters, satellites, bombers, listening devices.....ad infinitum attacked a country in 2010...a country with not even a tank....yet they got their asses handed to them by more clever men. Sad but TRUE.

So forget this talk about who would win this that or the other. History displays otherwise.


Back to the proof that Vladimir Putin was responsible for this crime.

I can also say that a lot of my friends in Utrecht, Leiden, Diemen are sickened by the little railroading of Putina.

mandrake04

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Saw an article today about a woman who lives near the crash site showing off mascara that she said was given to her by a Pro Russian Separatist who robbed it from the body of one of the victims and relatives ringing the passengers phones and strangers answering them.

What kind of people live in that place, no respect for the dead.

Animals, absolutely sickening.

jimeryan22

mandrake04 wrote: »

Animals, absolutely sickening.

Funny these animals have allowed parents of a girl that died in this plane crash to wander around the sight in a place that the media has said they've found access hard...

mandrake04

jimeryan22 wrote: »

Funny these animals have allowed parents of a girl that died in this plane crash to wander around the sight in a place that the media has said they've found access hard...

I don't don't find it funny at all, passenger possessions already being sold at local flea markets and bodies with hands and fingers chopped off because they are too bloated to have the rings removed.

You may find it funny but most decent human beings only find it sickening.

Egginacup

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Odd that no other country is saying this ? where is this information coming from ? Any links ?

It's immaterial whether all countries or none on the planet "say" this.
The US has civilian, military and satellite data covering the entirety of western, central and eastern Europe. A junior ATC trainee will tell you that.

US Satellite data alleged to have spotted convoys crossing the border or that massive buildup in some Russian base yet they have nothing to release that would lay this entire MH17 case to rest?

Egginacup

But all that aside.....

is any proof that the Russians or Novorussian separatists are responsible for the killing of these 298 as has been claimed for over a week now?

Is there a shred, a smidgen, a scrap of proof to prove, nay to implicate Putin, separatists, Russia in this killing?

I'll ask this question again in another week and most likely there will be no proof then either.

The screaming that it "has to have been Putin's "gang"" has softened somewhat of late.

One can only resist calls for proof for so long.

Even the barking from John Kerry has turned to the odd snap, yap and sniffle.

Perhaps now the questions will be asked and answered.

Egginacup

Grayson wrote: »

Freedom of the press means that the reporter can report what he wants, where it wants. I understand that fox news may have an agenda, but that's the company deciding. The country itself isn't.
I know there has been some press harassment in the west. The Edward Snowden / Glenn Greenwald fiasco was terrible. Especially when they went after Greenwalds other half. It's still nothing compared to russia where most of the newspapers & television stations are directly controlled by the state.

DT don't get into it.

Egginacup

Markcheese wrote: »

Except that , nuclear armed France
and britain would fire their nukes at
Russia if they saw a load of icbms
coming in (no waiting to check the war
head)

Turning off the gas .. Probably right ... And I think the Russians would put up with a lot more hardship when the regime is broke, than us Europeans would when the gas goes off ...

This is the most infantile talk I've ever allowed myself to be roped into.

Guesswork from nobody.

Egginacup

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Saw an article today about a woman who lives near the crash site showing off mascara that she said was given to her by a Pro Russian Separatist who robbed it from the body of one of the victims and relatives ringing the passengers phones and strangers answering them.

What kind of people live in that place, no respect for the dead.

Do you know if the story is TRUE?
If so what's the big deal? Makeup from a bag....well whoopie.
Not like she went sound with a pliers

deco nate

Stealing from the dead is sick.
Dont know how anyone can condone it.

Egginacup

mandrake04 wrote: »

I don't don't find it funny at all, passenger possessions already being sold at local flea markets and bodies with hands and fingers chopped off because they are too bloated to have the rings removed.

You may find it funny but most decent human beings only find it sickening.

Do we have any evidence of this?
It seems to me that an awful lot more money went into allegedly hunting down "corpse" robbers at flea markets than looking for clues as to how this act came to happen.

Would anyone here chop off the finger of a corpse to sell a ring? No. Why do you think an eastern Ukrainian would?

Egginacup

Grayson wrote: »

I don't think anyone's saying that the EU/NATO is about to invade Russia.

But if, for the sake of argument, they were to, and assuming no nuclear weapons were used,

Their forces greatly outnumber Russia's.
The technology that the EU/NATO possesses is far, far better. Both Napoleon and Hitler had armies that relied on supply chains run by horses. That's why they failed in winter. Whereas NATO forces have equipment which was designed over 40 years with Russia as the prime target. their armies wouldn't be ground down by the winter like the previous invaders were.

The Wehrmacht relied on horses?

Heaven forbid how were any lands attacked and conquered especially prior to the advent of the internal combustion engine?

Egginacup

Markcheese wrote: »

Except that , nuclear armed France
and britain would fire their nukes at
Russia if they saw a load of icbms
coming in (no waiting to check the war
head)

Turning off the gas .. Probably right ... And I think the Russians would put up with a lot more hardship when the regime is broke, than us Europeans would when the gas goes off ...

So it's NOT a conventional war then? Read back a little please.

Egginacup

Grayson wrote: »

That wasn't your point. here's what you posted. just because you have a very short term memory and an inability to scroll up the page.



The maximum they ever has was 20% mechanised. They had over 600k horses.

lets try that again. They had, and relied upon, horses.

In french..... ils avaient des chevaux

get my very belaboured point?

They had horses. Just like Napoleon. Horses are something that the EU and nato wouldn't be using.

lets quote wiki again

One shouldn't use Wikipedia for any historical information. It does not go through a clearing house so can't be relied upon.

mandrake04

Egginacup wrote: »

Would anyone here chop off the finger of a corpse to sell a ring? No. Why do you think an eastern Ukrainian would?

To answer the question if this wreckage was in Ireland I doubt they would, also I doubt victims credit cards would be used in ATMs, belongings openly being sold at local flea markets or wreckage been sold as scrap. People just wouldn't stand for it.

It would be treated with respect much like a grave, not like some bonanza for a bunch of animals.

The way things are going there will be nothing left of the wreckage of MH17, stomach churning.

Autonomous Cowherd

mandrake04 wrote: »

To answer the question if this wreckage was in Ireland I doubt they would, also I doubt victims credit cards would be used in ATMs, belongings openly being sold at local flea markets or wreckage been sold as scrap. People just wouldn't stand for it.

It would be treated with respect much like a grave, not like some bonanza for a bunch of animals.

The way things are going there will be nothing left of the wreckage of MH17, stomach churning.

It is appalling. It is likely to be happening, unfortunately. How extensive it is I have no clue; personally i would imagine it is a very small bad element, but all it takes is one gross act to taint a whole community. I did see a picture of a very elderly Ukrainian lady holding a bunch of flowers and weeping by the scene, and I am sure the vast majority of Ukrainians living in that area are noble and compassionate and humane. they are as horrified as we are at this mass murder. As would ordinary Russians be too. We cannot demonise whole populations...it is the thinking of a narrow mind. Unfortunately the bad stories always trump the good. Just as I am sure the image of Ireland and the Irish was tarnished by stories of tiny skeletons in a septic tank and decades of child rape in Industrial schools.
Anyways..sigh

OldRio

Egginacup wrote: »

One shouldn't use Wikipedia for any historical information. It does not go through a clearing house so can't be relied upon.

Still at it. Fair play to you all.

And I do mean all. More than one egg methinks.

'Clearing house' How does that work? I'm sure you have experience of such things, do tell.

Autonomous Cowherd

OldRio wrote: »

Still at it. Fair play to you all.

And I do mean all. More than one egg methinks.

'Clearing house' How does that work? I'm sure you have experience of such things, do tell.

It's fairly obvious. Wikipedia is not peer reviewed. You yourself could go and contribute an article to Wikipedia now if you wanted to, and it would get quoted and re-quoted as Gospel. An article on Oology perhaps? Since you're an expert.