6 ms·

Why so quick to blame the Russians? Would you not put it past the Ukraine backed neo-nazis, which even the state-funded BBC now admit exist, trying to widen th

Why so quick to blame the Russians? Would you not put it past the Ukraine backed neo-nazis, which even the state-funded BBC now admit exist, trying to widen the conflict and drag third parties into the fight? http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28329329 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28329329

pdabbadabba 12y ago
Anything's possible, I suppose. But the rebels and/or Russians are the only ones to have shot down any aircraft in this episode so far (so far as I know). And if the goal is to broaden the conflict, a Malaysian Airlines flight is a pretty odd choice when there were numerous other flights operated by big western airlines (British Airways, Lufthansa, etc.) also flying in the area. There's also the fact that Ukranian officials have specifically said that Russian-backed rebels shot the plane down. We shouldn't accept those statements uncritically, but they're out there and they are worthy of some consideration. Meanwhile, I'm not aware of anyone credible, who is in a position to know, asserting that Ukraine is behind this.
- darthgoogle 12y ago
  We simply don't know what happened and we should heed the warnings from missing flight MH370 where all kinds of media reports and intelligence turned out to be worthless. Sadly too many parties have an incentive to shape the narrative and they will use anonymous "tips" to push the frenzied media in different directions. Unless there is independent, corroborated and conclusive evidence, we may never know what happened to this flight.
kordless 12y ago
You are making an ad hominem argument. Just because there exists a mention of neo-nazis by a relevant news organizations does not LOGICALLY imply that group, or those people associated with that group, shot down the airline. On the other hand, knowing a Buk was deployed in the region where the plane was shot down (and the fact it was shot down in separatist territory to boot) is a much more compelling line of reasoning than what you've put down here. I get that you may be angry about this, but that doesn't justify making up a rationalization about it. FWIW, I don't like neo-nazis or people who shoot down innocent civilians who weren't even involved in the area (other than being over it) to begin with. Whoever did this will be determined. Are you OK with accepting the outcome when it is?
- darthgoogle 12y ago
  An independent investigation needs to look at this tragedy and figure out what happened. I think everyone would agree on that. I just think it's ridiculous that minutes after the event, some Ukranian officials start finger-pointing and people want to believe them because they have been conditioned to associate Russia with bad things. Up until yesterday, 99% of the people reading this thread had probably never even heard of a Buk, yet suddenly everybody's an expert. Might as well accept neo-nazis could have done it, after all, look what Brevik did to those kids in Norway and his reasoning. Yes, this tragedy may be due to the separatists but it could also easily have been a mistake by the Ukrainians. In fact, a British major was just on TV saying that they could have accidentally shot down the plane because their air defence is "slack". At the end of the day, look at this thread and see how quickly people are to blame Russia. It must be a Pavlovian response of some sort.
  - krschultz 12y ago
    I don't think Pavlovian response is the right word. More like deja vu, considering the Russians did this once before (Korean Air 007).
    - hga 12y ago
      And Korean Air 902 in 1978 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_902 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_902). You might also count a 1955 shoot down by the People's Republic of Bulgaria (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Al_Flight_402 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Al_Flight_402), and one shot down in 1940 during a period of nominal peace between Finland and the Soviet Union, but probably related to the latter's occupation of Estonia two days later (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaleva_(airplane) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaleva_(airplane) ).
    - vl 12y ago
      Many countries did it before, including Ukraine: "However, Ukrainian officials later admitted that it was indeed their military that shot down the airliner." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberia_Airlines_Flight_1812 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberia_Airlines_Flight_1812
tinco 12y ago
That's very interesting and unsettling of course. But how would those guys get access to 10km high aircraft destroying weapons? Are they so well backed that they'd have access? Are they active in the same area? (btw, it's a valid point, no need to downvote. Yes it may seem obvious that it was Russian allies, but it's important to keep an open mind in times of war, as both sides usually play dirty)
cafard 12y ago
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n12/peter-pomerantsev/diary http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n12/peter-pomerantsev/diary
skwirl 12y ago
The plane was shot down deep in territory controlled by the rebels. Here's where it was shot down: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Torez,+Donetsk+Oblast,+Ukraine/@47.7952782,38.5858196,9z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x40e0510df0e54653:0x95eb26e70828bdff https://www.google.com/maps/place/Torez,+Donetsk+Oblast,+Ukr... Here's the territory controlled by the rebels: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/02/27/world/europe/ukraine-divisions-crimea.html http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/02/27/world/europe/u... We know Russia has been supplying the rebels with heavy weapons. It's unlikely that Ukrainian pro-Kiev "neo nazis" marched a heavy SAM launcher through rebel controlled territory. Also, in any case, it doesn't follow that because someone is a "neo nazi" they will shoot down aircraft.
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  > We know Russia has been supplying the rebels with heavy weapons. More than that, we know the rebels themselves claim to have captured exactly the sort of weapon that would be able to do this (Buk missiles) from a raid on a Ukrainian military base.
  - darthgoogle 12y ago
    Or not? http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/malaysia-airlines.. http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/malaysia-airlines.... >“The plane was shot down by the Ukrainian side,” said Serhiy Kavtaradze, a member of the rebels’ security council, according to the Russia’s Interfax news agency. “We simply do not have such air defense systems.” He said rebels’ shoulder-launched antiaircraft missiles “have a firing range of only 3,000 to 4,000 meters” and that passenger jets fly at much higher altitudes. ... He denied that the rebels possess the SA-17 Buk air-defense as Kiev alleges."
    - dragonwriter 12y ago
      The stories in which the Donetsk People's Republic -- the initial claim that they had the missiles didn't come from Kiev, though the claim that they had used them to shoot down this plane did -- claimed to have captured the Buk missiles [0] were before this incident (and they've apparently shot down Ukrainian military aircraft recently beyond any altitude that MANPAD missiles would reach), so the furious backpedal and claiming they don't have the technology now is somewhat dubious. It could, though, be an honest retreat from a propaganda misrepresentation that has since become more of a burden than a benefit. (Incidentally, I upvoted the parent because even though the claim may be dubious, noting the fact that the claim has been made is a valuable addition to the conversation, IMO.) [0] referenced in my earlier post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8048607 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8048607

pdabbadabba 12y ago

Anything's possible, I suppose. But the rebels and/or Russians are the only ones to have shot down any aircraft in this episode so far (so far as I know). And if the goal is to broaden the conflict, a Malaysian Airlines flight is a pretty odd choice when there were numerous other flights operated by big western airlines (British Airways, Lufthansa, etc.) also flying in the area. There's also the fact that Ukranian officials have specifically said that Russian-backed rebels shot the plane down. We shouldn't accept those statements uncritically, but they're out there and they are worthy of some consideration. Meanwhile, I'm not aware of anyone credible, who is in a position to know, asserting that Ukraine is behind this.

darthgoogle 12y ago
We simply don't know what happened and we should heed the warnings from missing flight MH370 where all kinds of media reports and intelligence turned out to be worthless. Sadly too many parties have an incentive to shape the narrative and they will use anonymous "tips" to push the frenzied media in different directions. Unless there is independent, corroborated and conclusive evidence, we may never know what happened to this flight.

kordless 12y ago

You are making an ad hominem argument. Just because there exists a mention of neo-nazis by a relevant news organizations does not LOGICALLY imply that group, or those people associated with that group, shot down the airline. On the other hand, knowing a Buk was deployed in the region where the plane was shot down (and the fact it was shot down in separatist territory to boot) is a much more compelling line of reasoning than what you've put down here. I get that you may be angry about this, but that doesn't justify making up a rationalization about it. FWIW, I don't like neo-nazis or people who shoot down innocent civilians who weren't even involved in the area (other than being over it) to begin with. Whoever did this will be determined. Are you OK with accepting the outcome when it is?

darthgoogle 12y ago
An independent investigation needs to look at this tragedy and figure out what happened. I think everyone would agree on that. I just think it's ridiculous that minutes after the event, some Ukranian officials start finger-pointing and people want to believe them because they have been conditioned to associate Russia with bad things. Up until yesterday, 99% of the people reading this thread had probably never even heard of a Buk, yet suddenly everybody's an expert. Might as well accept neo-nazis could have done it, after all, look what Brevik did to those kids in Norway and his reasoning. Yes, this tragedy may be due to the separatists but it could also easily have been a mistake by the Ukrainians. In fact, a British major was just on TV saying that they could have accidentally shot down the plane because their air defence is "slack". At the end of the day, look at this thread and see how quickly people are to blame Russia. It must be a Pavlovian response of some sort.
- krschultz 12y ago
  I don't think Pavlovian response is the right word. More like deja vu, considering the Russians did this once before (Korean Air 007).
  - hga 12y ago
    And Korean Air 902 in 1978 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_902 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_902). You might also count a 1955 shoot down by the People's Republic of Bulgaria (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Al_Flight_402 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Al_Flight_402), and one shot down in 1940 during a period of nominal peace between Finland and the Soviet Union, but probably related to the latter's occupation of Estonia two days later (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaleva_(airplane) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaleva_(airplane) ).
  - vl 12y ago
    Many countries did it before, including Ukraine: "However, Ukrainian officials later admitted that it was indeed their military that shot down the airliner." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberia_Airlines_Flight_1812 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberia_Airlines_Flight_1812

tinco 12y ago

That's very interesting and unsettling of course. But how would those guys get access to 10km high aircraft destroying weapons? Are they so well backed that they'd have access? Are they active in the same area? (btw, it's a valid point, no need to downvote. Yes it may seem obvious that it was Russian allies, but it's important to keep an open mind in times of war, as both sides usually play dirty)

cafard 12y ago

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n12/peter-pomerantsev/diary http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n12/peter-pomerantsev/diary

skwirl 12y ago

The plane was shot down deep in territory controlled by the rebels. Here's where it was shot down: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Torez,+Donetsk+Oblast,+Ukraine/@47.7952782,38.5858196,9z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x40e0510df0e54653:0x95eb26e70828bdff https://www.google.com/maps/place/Torez,+Donetsk+Oblast,+Ukr... Here's the territory controlled by the rebels: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/02/27/world/europe/ukraine-divisions-crimea.html http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/02/27/world/europe/u... We know Russia has been supplying the rebels with heavy weapons. It's unlikely that Ukrainian pro-Kiev "neo nazis" marched a heavy SAM launcher through rebel controlled territory. Also, in any case, it doesn't follow that because someone is a "neo nazi" they will shoot down aircraft.

dragonwriter 12y ago
> We know Russia has been supplying the rebels with heavy weapons. More than that, we know the rebels themselves claim to have captured exactly the sort of weapon that would be able to do this (Buk missiles) from a raid on a Ukrainian military base.
- darthgoogle 12y ago
  Or not? http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/malaysia-airlines.. http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/malaysia-airlines.... >“The plane was shot down by the Ukrainian side,” said Serhiy Kavtaradze, a member of the rebels’ security council, according to the Russia’s Interfax news agency. “We simply do not have such air defense systems.” He said rebels’ shoulder-launched antiaircraft missiles “have a firing range of only 3,000 to 4,000 meters” and that passenger jets fly at much higher altitudes. ... He denied that the rebels possess the SA-17 Buk air-defense as Kiev alleges."
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    The stories in which the Donetsk People's Republic -- the initial claim that they had the missiles didn't come from Kiev, though the claim that they had used them to shoot down this plane did -- claimed to have captured the Buk missiles [0] were before this incident (and they've apparently shot down Ukrainian military aircraft recently beyond any altitude that MANPAD missiles would reach), so the furious backpedal and claiming they don't have the technology now is somewhat dubious. It could, though, be an honest retreat from a propaganda misrepresentation that has since become more of a burden than a benefit. (Incidentally, I upvoted the parent because even though the claim may be dubious, noting the fact that the claim has been made is a valuable addition to the conversation, IMO.) [0] referenced in my earlier post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8048607 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8048607