Ukrainians mark the 73rd anniversary of the formation of their SS division.

gandalf

Putinbot says No

BoJack Horseman

HensVassal wrote: »

Why are you asking me that?

Seeking your opinion friend.

It's a 50-50 answer.... it isn't hard & I'm sure your as familiar with the tragedy as anyone else.

What does your gut say?
SAM or AAM?

HensVassal wrote: »

The onus is upon those providing me with their original story to convince me beyond doubt. Then I won't be skeptical anymore.

Yeah... we already heard that evasion from Garlic.

I'm just wondering which means you think brought down the plane.
You obviously have an opinion.

HensVassal

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Seeking your opinion friend.

It's a 50-50 answer.... it isn't hard & I'm sure your as familiar with the tragedy as anyone else.

What does your gut say?
SAM or AAM?


Yeah... we already heard that evasion from Garlic.

I'm just wondering which means you think brought down the plane.
You obviously have an opinion.

I don't know. Can you not accept that?
The Dutch say that it was destroyed by a missile from the ground. Fine, if that's what they say. You seem to know not only what destroyed the plane but who actually fired the missile which is actually more than any official report has stated.

So you're asking me who I personally think was responsible and I'm telling you that I don't know. But you are adamant that YOU know.

I am not sure who was responsible and you are demanding who I think was responsible. And the answer is I DON'T KNOW. But I'm not convinced by your explanation either. I don't have to provide you with an alternative just because I'm doubtful of your explanation,

BoJack Horseman

HensVassal wrote: »

I don't know.

You have an opinion though.
Otherwise, you would not be posting here.

I am not sure who was responsible

Didn't ask you for responsibility Henser...
I asked you whether you thought it was a SAM or an AAM?
And don't tell me that a thought has never passed through your head.... I'm sure it has, everybody has thoughts from time to time

If you were a gambling man, where would your money lie
SAM or AAM?

Jimmy Garlic

These guys have their minds made up Hens, apparently they don't need a solid body of evidence to prove beyond doubt who the culprit is. You are dealing with people who think Russia is run by a Bond villain. They think anyone who doesn't have the same blinkered view as themselves as themselves on this topic must be an agent who takes their orders from the Kremlin. Highly biased paranoiacs maipulated by media to focus irrational contempt on Russia. Four years ago they wouldn't have been able to name 5 cities in Ukraine off the top of their heads.

Dohnjoe

HensVassal wrote: »

Why are you asking me that?
It's irrelevant.

The same way as if I was skeptical about anything, the onus isn't upon me to provide an alternative explanation. The onus is upon those providing me with their original story to convince me beyond doubt. Then I won't be skeptical anymore.

Actually this isn't really skepticism

If we line up all the theories on how MH17 went down, there is one that is by far the strongest and has the overwhelming amount of evidence

The others are quite weak and lack evidence in comparison

It's straightforward logic.

There is no onus to prove it to one person in particular, because that person can subjectively chose to refuse to accept any of the proof.

Likewise the recent Kremlin fixation with fascism in Ukraine. It's largely propaganda and part of the information war that Putin is waging on Kiev. The Ukrainians are likewise engaged in their own information war, some of the stories in the Kyivpost are as bad as their counterparts in Russia.

A large part of this debate is that typically people with an emotional belief or world view that the "US is evil" will feel they have to defend Putin. Both can be criticized in regards to the Ukraine situation.

BoJack Horseman

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

These guys have their minds made up Hens.

I absolutely do.... based on the overwhelming evidence available.

So again James... don't go silent on me again

Do you think MH17 was brought down by a SAM or an AAM?
Again, what does your gut say.

HensVassal

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Actually this isn't really skepticism

If we line up all the theories on how MH17 went down, there is one that is by far the strongest and has the overwhelming amount of evidence

The others are quite weak and lack evidence in comparison

It's straightforward logic.

There is no onus to prove it to one person in particular, because that person can subjectively chose to refuse to accept any of the proof.

Likewise the recent Kremlin fixation with fascism in Ukraine. It's largely propaganda and part of the information war that Putin is waging on Kiev. The Ukrainians are likewise engaged in their own information war, some of the stories in the Kyivpost are as bad as their counterparts in Russia.

A large part of this debate is that typically people with an emotional belief or world view that the "US is evil" will feel they have to defend Putin. Both can be criticized in regards to the Ukraine situation.

You seem to be itching to have me proffer my own thesis of what or who brought the plane down but it's not for me to say because I don't know and I'm not going to be drawn into that game. All I know is that a Dutch investigation came to the conclusion that it was shot down by a missile from the ground. That doesn't explain who did the firing. So far nobody has been implicated so who do I believe is responsible? I don't know. Nobody has convinced me.

Gatling

HensVassal wrote: »

You seem to be itching to have me proffer my own thesis of what or who brought the plane down but it's not for me to say because I don't know and I'm not going to be drawn into that game. All I know is that a Dutch investigation came to the conclusion that it was shot down by a missile from the ground. That doesn't explain who did the firing. So far nobody has been implicated so who do I believe is responsible? I don't know. Nobody has convinced me.

We know Ukrainian jets didn't shoot it down ,
We know the Ukrainian army didn't mobilse anti air defences as they were fighting a ground battle ,
We know in the same week 13 Ukrainian aircraft were shot down from within rebel terrority .
We know that the rebels were pretty much beaten until russian forces and equipment flooded into Ukraine to fight Ukrainians.
Armour, heavy artillery, anti air battery's .
We know russia claimed Ukraine shot down MH17 after mistaken it for vladi Putin's personal aircraft which had apparently just took off near Moscow .
We know russia publicly stated that they had radar videos showing 2 Ukrainian su24s jets tracking mh17 and shooting it down they even claimed they had eye witnesses that saw this air battle.
We know rebels /Russian forces claimed to have seen 12-16 Ukrainian paratroopers jump out of the plane after they hit it ,
We know russia claimed it had interviewed the Ukrainian pilot who claimed to have shot down MH17.
Russian sources claimed the bodies where likely murdered preflight to set up the Russian government.
We know the Russian buk launcher was tracked entering Ukraine and leaving minus a missles straight after the downing of MH17.
We know the CIA didn't do it .
We know it wasn't shot down by Ukrainian su24s.

Have I missed anything other than the other Malaysian aircraft that went missing and it's wreckage turning up in Ukraine.

Now russia made a lot of public claims about MH17 and yet have not produced any evidence that would exonerate them .


Why

BoJack Horseman

Actually Gatling... what makes the Krelmin's falsified claim even more preposterous is that they claimed the plane was downed by a Ukranian SU-25....

Had they pretended it was a, say, an SU-24 it actually would have lent some sliver of credibility.
However their choice of plane to forge would have found it impossible to shoot down MH17.

It was a terrible attempt at forgery all round that failed on the most basic technical level.
One wonders why they went to the effort?

Vabal

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

One wonders why they went to the effort?

This is how Russian propaganda works. They put a lot of rubbish, not even bothering if it makes sense and mix it with small amount of truth. And they do that in massive volumes. There is a saying - tell lies a lot of times and one will believe it. This worked well in soviet times (the best example - Chernobyl disaster), works even better in nowadays Russia. Since not long ago, Putin brought it to a new level - propaganda is no longer targeting internal auditorium - with RT, Sputnik and other so called news agencies they export this BS internationally.
They have some crazy slogan, which makes me laugh - "Telling untold". Of course - "untold", as no reputable agency would not come up with crazy sick ideas as "crucified boys in Ukraine", SU-24 being able to climb B777 altitudes and so on.
There were several RT footages where it was noted the same people being presented as "eyewitnesses" were in fact Kremlin paid actors.

HensVassal

Gatling wrote: »

We know Ukrainian jets didn't shoot it down ,
We know the Ukrainian army didn't mobilse anti air defences as they were fighting a ground battle ,
We know in the same week 13 Ukrainian aircraft were shot down from within rebel terrority .
We know that the rebels were pretty much beaten until russian forces and equipment flooded into Ukraine to fight Ukrainians.
Armour, heavy artillery, anti air battery's .
We know russia claimed Ukraine shot down MH17 after mistaken it for vladi Putin's personal aircraft which had apparently just took off near Moscow .
We know russia publicly stated that they had radar videos showing 2 Ukrainian su24s jets tracking mh17 and shooting it down they even claimed they had eye witnesses that saw this air battle.
We know rebels /Russian forces claimed to have seen 12-16 Ukrainian paratroopers jump out of the plane after they hit it ,
We know russia claimed it had interviewed the Ukrainian pilot who claimed to have shot down MH17.
Russian sources claimed the bodies where likely murdered preflight to set up the Russian government.
We know the Russian buk launcher was tracked entering Ukraine and leaving minus a missles straight after the downing of MH17.
We know the CIA didn't do it .
We know it wasn't shot down by Ukrainian su24s.

Have I missed anything other than the other Malaysian aircraft that went missing and it's wreckage turning up in Ukraine.

Now russia made a lot of public claims about MH17 and yet have not produced any evidence that would exonerate them .


Why

Sorry but a lot of that is just saying you know stuff for the sake of saying it. I'm not convinced by anything so far that irrefutably explains who was responsible. I'm really not.

BoJack Horseman

HensVassal wrote: »

I'm not convinced by anything so far that.

Indeed Henser.... but that is your choice to disregard the obvious.

As I said previously, there is no proof on this earth that would convince you & Jimmy-G anyway.

HensVassal

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Indeed Henser.... but that is your choice to disregard the obvious.

As I said previously, there is no proof on this earth that would convince you & Jimmy-G anyway.

I'm sure there is proof that would convince me who was responsible. I just haven't seen it yet.

Gatling

HensVassal wrote: »

Sorry but a lot of that is just saying you know stuff for the sake of saying it. I'm not convinced by anything so far that irrefutably explains who was responsible. I'm really not.

These are the Facts thought ,
This was all put out there by russia not Ukraine or America or the EU all of the above came from russia .

HensVassal

And nobody has weighed in regarding my post about it being a mistake or an accident. People who are convinced it was rebels who shot down the airliner say they must have mistook the plane for a Ukrainian transporter. If that's the case then why all the rage? Civilian targets get bombed all the time by accident.
But then some will say that the rebels deliberately murdered the people on MH17. They either shot it down by mistake or they shot it down on purpose but it can't be both, so which is it?

HensVassal

Gatling wrote: »

These are the Facts thought ,
This was all put out there by russia not Ukraine or America or the EU all of the above came from russia .

They may be facts but they still don't implicate anybody. If fact some of those facts are downright irelevant. They're facts just like water is wet but they don't convince me of anybody's culpability.

Vabal

HensVassal wrote: »

And nobody has weighed in regarding my post about it being a mistake or an accident. People who are convinced it was rebels who shot down the airliner say they must have mistook the plane for a Ukrainian transporter. If that's the case then why all the rage? Civilian targets get bombed all the time by accident.
But then some will say that the rebels deliberately murdered the people on MH17. They either shot it down by mistake or they shot it down on purpose but it can't be both, so which is it?

Hens, there is a tricky thing.
It wasn't deliberate attack on MH17, because it does not help any side of conflict. Of course it was an accident. So why all the rage? Because nobody takes responsibility. Russia will never admit it, because it will go against their false narrative, that Russia has no military involvement in so called civil war in eastern Ukraine.

BoJack Horseman

HensVassal wrote: »

They may be facts but they still don't implicate anybody

Of course (as you remember), implication came directoy from the DPR themselves.

As DPR defence minister Igor Strelkov posted on social media on the day of the crash:
To paraphrase.... "we shot down an AN-26... landed in a heap near Totez (ie: the MH17 crash site)... We told them not to enter our air space"

Then, when the reality dawned, the post was deleted & account closed!

(Our friend the defence minister resigned 4 weeks later, subsequently admitting that it was under preassure from Moscow.... why?)

HensVassal

vaidasb wrote: »

Hens, there is a tricky thing.
It wasn't deliberate attack on MH17, because it does not help any side of conflict. Of course it was an accident. So why all the rage? Because nobody takes responsibility. Russia will never admit it, because it will go against their false narrative, that Russia has no military involvement in so called civil war in eastern Ukraine.

But if you can prove who did it then why do they need to take responsibility? You just show the irrefutable evidence and they are exposed as guilty. After that you can take legal proceedings or whatever.

To me the only reason someone would not admit to shooting down an airliner was if it was done deliberately. They'd be admitting to a war crime. So which is it?

Probably off topic from the SS commemoration rallies but someone did come on and claim that pro-Russian rebels shot down a passanger jet because they hate Ukrainians (or some equally weird statement).

HensVassal

vaidasb wrote: »

Hens, there is a tricky thing.
It wasn't deliberate attack on MH17, because it does not help any side of conflict. Of course it was an accident. So why all the rage? Because nobody takes responsibility. Russia will never admit it, because it will go against their false narrative, that Russia has no military involvement in so called civil war in eastern Ukraine.

It seems the blame is shifting all over the place. Why would you want Russia to admit "it" if you are convinced rebels in Ukraine shot the plane down

BoJack Horseman

HensVassal wrote: »

After that you can take legal proceedings or whatever.

Fraid not.

Malaysia tried last July to table a UNSC motion to open up a tribunal of investigation into the responsibility for downing MH17...

For some reason Russia vetoed the motion.... (what are the odds eh?)

Former DPR defence ministor Igor Strelkov (mentioned above) is currently residing in Moscow & cannot be extradited anyway.
Good choice Igor!

Vabal

HensVassal wrote: »

But if you can prove who did it then why do they need to take responsibility? You just show the irrefutable evidence and they are exposed as guilty. After that you can take legal proceedings or whatever.
To me the only reason someone would not admit to shooting down an airliner was if it was done deliberately. They'd be admitting to a war crime. So which is it?.

It was not done deliberately. It was a stupid mistake, which actually ruined Putin's plans in Ukraine. Putin denied (and keeps denying) any military involvement in Ukraine (as he did in Crimean case). So admitting shooting down the plane would not help denying his military involvement, right?

HensVassal

vaidasb wrote: »

It was not done deliberately. It was a stupid mistake, which actually ruined Putin's plans in Ukraine. Putin denied (and keeps denying) any military involvement in Ukraine (as he did in Crimean case). So admitting shooting down the plane would not help denying his military involvement, right?

Are you saying it was Russian personnel in Ukraine under orders of the Russian army who shot down a Ukrainian military plane only to find out later they had shot down a passenger airliner?

Vabal

HensVassal wrote: »

It seems the blame is shifting all over the place. Why would you want Russia to admit "it" if you are convinced rebels in Ukraine shot the plane down

Firstly let's agree what we are talking about when we say "rebels". Many of those so called rebels are Russian army soldiers "having holidays" in eastern Ukraine (how sweet?) or accidentally getting "lost" across the border (poor guys, aren't they?).
So when we say - rebels shot the plane, we have to keep in mind, that it was direct Russian involvement. Russian army deployed hardware and when the mistake happened, it was removed back to Russia urgently.

Vabal

HensVassal wrote: »

Are you saying it was Russian personnel in Ukraine under orders of the Russian army who shot down a Ukrainian military plane only to find out later they had shot down a passenger airliner?

Exactly.

HensVassal

vaidasb wrote: »

Exactly.

Well if that's the case then this is clearly an act of war. Why haven't Ukraine started attacking Russian targets inside Russia? Surely they would retaliate if a foreign army under orders from a foreign leader is shooting down their aircraft.

Mesrine65

What has the 73rd anniversary of the formation of Ukraine's first SS division got to do with a Malaysian plane being shot down FFS? :rolleyes:

Gatling

HensVassal wrote: »

Well if that's the case then this is clearly an act of war. Why haven't Ukraine started attacking Russian targets inside Russia? Surely they would retaliate if a foreign army under orders from a foreign leader is shooting down their aircraft.

Simple russia has 200,000 men and equipment very close to the Ukrainian border ,along with 30,000 men and 500 pieces of heavy artillery and several hundred armoured vehicles a large airforce and Putin is itching to take the whole country back under russian control .

Why would they attack russia I wonder that but then again
Schadenfreudia

Vabal

HensVassal wrote: »

Well if that's the case then this is clearly an act of war. Why haven't Ukraine started attacking Russian targets inside Russia? Surely they would retaliate if a foreign army under orders from a foreign leader is shooting down their aircraft.

Because it is more complicated than you think. Putin is playing a dirty game there.
It supplies guns, personnel, etc to the region to keep the fire going, at the same time denying involvement. Why Putin is doing that? He thinks he has right to defend national interests, and having Ukraine cutting economic ties and influence from Russia and slipping towards association with EU he sees it as a national threat. He knows that it is not 15th century and this is not a sufficient motive to start conventional war against Ukraine. So his goal is to destroy Ukraine's economy by triggering and supporting civil unrest (the same scenario was or is being played in Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan).

At the same time Ukraine understands, that military action against Russia will end up tragically. It is not much Ukraine can do without western support, but western countries seem to be more interested in trade with Russia. Also Ukraine's hands are tied by Minsk agreements, so it has not much power even in it's own territory.

Dohnjoe

Mesrine65 wrote: »

What has the 73rd anniversary of the formation of Ukraine's first SS division got to do with a Malaysian plane being shot down FFS? :rolleyes:

Apparently fascist Ukrainian pilots shot down the airliner full of dead bodies in their jet in a false flag ordered by the fascist junta in Kiev

If it's good enough for the Russian evening news, it's good enough for me

HensVassal

Gatling wrote: »

Simple russia has 200,000 men and equipment very close to the Ukrainian border ,along with 30,000 men and 500 pieces of heavy artillery and several hundred armoured vehicles a large airforce and Putin is itching to take the whole country back under russian control .

Why would they attack russia I wonder that but then again
Schadenfreudia

Seems very oversimplified. If Putin really wanted to gobble up Ukraine then why hasn't he? What's he waiting for if he has the means and the desire?

Skylinehead

Mesrine65 wrote: »

What has the 73rd anniversary of the formation of Ukraine's first SS division got to do with a Malaysian plane being shot down FFS? :rolleyes:

Mod: This. There's an MH17 thread, use that for the plane stuff please.

Vabal

HensVassal wrote: »

Seems very oversimplified. If Putin really wanted to gobble up Ukraine then why hasn't he? What's he waiting for if he has the means and the desire?

Because then he would turn himself to another Hitler in the world eyes. And he knows that the western world will have all reasons to end him. He is trying to play dirty games at the same time trying to look a good guy.

But the worst is that the world still dealing with hims as with a "good guy". Economic sanctions is not sufficient response to Putin's actions.

the_syco

HensVassal wrote: »

Seems very oversimplified. If Putin really wanted to gobble up Ukraine then why hasn't he? What's he waiting for if he has the means and the desire?

He wants it to be shown that the people of Ukraine welcome the Russians, to ensure the Americans don't intervene. And as the Americans are assisting Poland in war games, the Russians don't want to give America a reason to attack them; it wouldn't be good for their oil business.

HensVassal

vaidasb wrote: »

Because then he would turn himself to another Hitler in the world eyes. And he knows that the western world will have all reasons to end him. He is trying to play dirty games at the same time trying to look a good guy.

But the worst is that the world still dealing with hims as with a "good guy". Economic sanctions is not sufficient response to Putin's actions.

Sorry vaidasb but your whole story sounds very far-fetched.

Jimmy Garlic

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Do you think MH17 was brought down by a SAM or an AAM?
Again, what does your gut say.

Don't know for sure. And I am not going to pigeon hole myself by speculating. I am waiting for a proper investigation conducted by those who really are independent. Japan would be a good choice as they have the relevant experience in that area.

Jimmy Garlic

Mesrine65 wrote: »

What has the 73rd anniversary of the formation of Ukraine's first SS division got to do with a Malaysian plane being shot down FFS? :rolleyes:

Some people came on here and insisted on talking about MH17. As it is such a murky subject they can run around in circles with it to stifle discussion about other aspects of the Ukrainian situation.

Gatling

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

Some people came on here and insisted on talking about MH17. As it is such a murky subject they can run around in circles with it to stifle discussion about other aspects of the Ukrainian situation.

Wrong but but not for the first time .


Unfortunately unlike russia we live in a democratic society where we are free to discuss all aspects of the Ukrainian conflict.
Unlike others who came with an agenda

HensVassal

Gatling wrote: »

Wrong but but not for the first time .


Unfortunately unlike russia we live in a democratic society where we are free to discuss all aspects of the Ukrainian conflict.
Unlike others who came with an agenda

What's with the childish digs?
Can you not same something without a sneer at <insert your hated country here? ??

Jimmy Garlic

HensVassal wrote: »

What's with the childish digs?
Can you not same something without a sneer at <insert your hated country here? ??

It is like Red Scare stuff from the 1950s. They imagine sinister Russians with bad intentions lurking everywhere. Then they wax lyrical about democracy as if we live in a functioning one. Typical stuff. Broken records.

Gatling

HensVassal wrote: »

What's with the childish digs?
Can you not same something without a sneer at <insert your hated country here? ??

Sch is that you

Gatling

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

It is like Red Scare stuff from the 1950s. They imagine sinister Russians with bad intentions lurking everywhere. Then they wax lyrical about democracy as if we live in a functioning one. Typical stuff. Broken records.

Lolz