CayceGComparisons of this conflict with the Syrian Civil War–especially ISIS–aren’t exactly the best. So I can’t speak to them.
This is essentially a proxy war Russia is waging on Ukraine’s political establishment. The Syrian Civil War isn’t a proxy war run by the west. If it were, the west would be giving the rebels enough to actually defend against Assad. Plus, as others have said, the rebels and ISIS are two different entities. Plus, western support hasn’t been given directly to ISIS. They’ve done well enough to plunder and capture what they have.
But as an overall point, caretaker states absolutely can be blamed for things that happen through proxies. Just like the US can be implicated in Stinger missile attacks on Soviet jets in Afghanistan. Same here. The Buk provided to the Rebels presumably by Russia used to shoot down MH17 can be traced back to Russia.
It therefore makes Russia culpable–an accessory. Not necessarily responsible.
But when you look at the conflict as a whole, Russia sowed the unrest and deployed GRU operators to Eastern Ukraine (Babay, Bes, Strelkov, Vostok Battalion, etc), thus fueling the sentiments in Eastern Ukraine for Russia’s own political gain. For that they are responsible.
CayceGIt is typical for people without arguments to resort to vain efforts of ridicule to support their unfounded claims.
Yes, I do believe NASA went to the moon. Because it is verifiable by outside work sources.
Yes, I do believe 9/11 was the work of terrorists, it is verifiable by outside work and sources.
No, I don’t believe (yet) the evidence presented because it is NOT real evidence, just unfounded claims and nothing more.WMD were equally presented before the second Iraq war. See how Iraq is doing now and how stronger extremist Islamists are.
Rather than believing blindly what they tell you, open your eyes and exercise your reason a little bit.
I believe evidence and facts. Circumstantial or not, the missiles were there, the rebels had them, and the rebels talked about them. Russia supporting the rebels is not at all circumstantial. It is proven through satellite photos, video, and even interviews.
When a video analyst that isn’t paid by the Kremlin reviews the video for authenticity, then I’ll call it into question.
Until then, the most likely scenario for what happened was that the rebels shot down MH17, thinking it was a Ukrainian transport. It isn’t 100%, but the likelihood is much higher than if the Ukrainians did it or if another plane shot it down BECAUSE of the summation of the evidence presented.
And I hope you’ll forgive me for not believing press out of Russia when they call for the “full story.” Seeing as this was the same press that said it was Ukraine shooting down what they believed to be Putin’s plane, a Ukrainian Su-25 shot it down, it was escorted by Su-27s, or some mythical air traffic controller named Carlos said it was diverted on purpose.
CayceGRebel admission of the possession of Buks
We know the rebels have in possession systems, which exactly and in what condition we don’t really know
Geolocation of photos and dating showing that a Buk was in Rebel territory on the days before and the day of the shootdown
Doesn’t stand up in court, any court. Circumstantial evidence, just because you are around a murder scene does not mean you are the murderer
Rebel phone calls intercepted that discussed seeing a target on radar, then the aftermath of the shootdown where they discovered it was an airliner
There is no proof that the voice recordings are genuine, at this stage they could be made up or not, we don’t know
Rebel discussions about the Buks being sent back to Russia
see aboveThese “evidence” you claim don’t hold up in any civil court. Much less in such serious matters. Only the US has shown in the past to accept such circumstantial evidence when it comes to taking action against …other countries for obvious reasons.
Whatever you say. That’s the evidence presented. If you want to disbelieve it, that’s fine. Hopefully you still believe that we went to the moon and that 9/11 was the work of terrorists.
CayceGI think it should not be too hard to sum it up. In the end, what evidence do we have that supports / proves that the shot indeed did come from the rebels and that Russia was directly involved? A short list will suffice. Thank you.
Rebel admission of the possession of Buks
Geolocation of photos and dating showing that a Buk was in Rebel territory on the days before and the day of the shootdown
Rebel phone calls intercepted that discussed seeing a target on radar, then the aftermath of the shootdown where they discovered it was an airliner
Rebel discussions about the Buks being sent back to Russia
Russian support in every other aspect of the rebel fight including arming them and training them and even providing rebels
Nowhere do I say Russia pulled the trigger. But without Russia’s support, they wouldn’t have had a functioning Buk. The rest of the evidence stacks up to show with very high certainty that the Rebels fired on a target they couldn’t interrogate and wound up shooting down an airliner. Nowhere do I say the Rebels wanted to shoot down an airliner. But it happened because of the rebellion and because of Russian support.
CayceGNo, I am sorry, there was NO evidence of a smoking gun presented at all. Again logic dictates that the 777 was shot down by the separatists by accident.
However what logic dictates is NOT and should NEVER be presented as a smoking gun evidence. To this day there have been NO (conclusive or otherwise) evidence that a separatist missile hit the plane.
Actually in terms of quality of evidence (and not veracity or accuracy) the Russians have been more effective. The US pretty much said “the russians did it, trust us, we know what we are saying!!”
Not likely to happen amongst educated patient people with a trace of memory of recent events.
Posts like this are why the thread should be done away with.
CayceG/video
You still haven’t addressed my last post to you. Your assertion that the rebels’ conversation uploaded to Youtube was pre-recorded based on the encoding date on Youtube is baseless. Because the link I posted shows that all Youtube videos do that.
CayceGI guess it’s probably my own feelings, but when almost 300 people die the jokes just are not funny.
I can sympathize, but at the same time, I consider ridiculous conspiracies like Su-25s shooting the plane down and overtly doubting the evidence in front of everyone as jokes as well.
CayceGWe’re missing the most obvious conspiracy theory.
Looking at the damage on MH17, the height it was flying, and the location where it was shot down, the only POSSIBLE solution is that it was destroyed by an R-37 fired head on from a MiG-31 on the Russian side of the boarder.
Obviously.
CayceGare u dumb? the video with the recordings was encoded on youtube a day before everything happened, what rebels pre record their voices lol wao, i stated from the very begining that it is ukrains fault – now that the evidence is in just look at US media and british media how quiet they have become lol
Sorry. All Youtube videos do that:
CayceGI completely fail to see the link between this and 9/11.
Let’s make it simple:Posters on this forums are basically working with two theories. Theory #1 is that the ones responsible for the MH17 shotdown were pro-Russian separatists who have misidentified the target. Theory #2 is that the ones responsible were from Ukrainian Air Defense brigade who have triggered the missile by a mistake. No BS about CIA on one side or Putin’s finger on the trigger on the other side.
Unless proven otherwise, both theories are still plausible as we speak. Putting any “conspiracy” adjectives to either one of them is pointless.
That’s it.
And even then, there are recorded phone calls between rebel leadership saying that they shot down something with a Buk. Then another call confirmed to the rebel leadership that it was a civilian airliner.
So the only plausible explanation is that the rebels shot down the plane, thinking it was military. Ukrainian SAM units don’t even enter into the discussion based on this.
CayceGSatellite images showing Russian rocket artillery and howitzer positions inside Russia that have fired on Ukrainian troop positions inside Ukraine.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]230637[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]230638[/ATTACH]
MLRS scorch marks in ground on Russian side are visible, as are the craters around the Ukrainian troop position. Russian self propelled artillery can be seen in the June 23 image.
I count the satellite that took this as aviation for the tangential relation to this forum, if only to inject some objective facts to this otherwise ridiculous argument.
CayceGI find the latest post very disturbing and unrespectfull. The amount of nonsens posted here will fall back on its own rights.. this thread will most likely get closed. It should get closed!
Agreed!
I love this forum and have been watching this thread lately for factual information. But the likes of Paralay and others that refuse facts and post nonsense in this thread take the quality of this forum down significantly.
I like Paralay’s works outside of this–conceptual imaginings of Russian aircraft–but his posts in this thread are nonsense.
This thread doesn’t contribute any meaningful discussion or information to the forum and should be closed.
CayceGWith the shrinking electronics I’m surprised nobody has figured out how to create a pod full of guided rockets. I can’t imagine you would need to carry so many tubes in the pod if your computer is successfully acquiring and prosecuting targets on the first pass. Your rockets could fill niches like laser designated, anti-armor using MMW, anti-personnel airbursting warheads using timed fuses, etc.
They have it for the S-5, S-8, and S-13 rockets:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugroza
Not certain at all how widespread it is. Plus, it needs a laser designator, so it would require either designator pods (which are in marginal use, if at all) or someone on the ground to laze the targets.
CayceGAny news on reasons for 52 needing 51’s tail fin?
CayceGMiG-29KUB for either India or the Russian Navy.
I’m not sure if Russian Navy production has begun yet, so I’d put more money on it being an Indian KUB…
If it’s a KUB at all. The angle isn’t good enough to see wing articulations or a tail hook.
Sign In
