EPTOn July 18 2014 18:37 zeo wrote:
If you have both sides reporting on the same thing in the same way thats just more conformation that the news is true. No?
Elaborate why 'of course they would say that'? Why would Kiev deliberately lie? In your own opinion.
Show nested quote +
On July 18 2014 18:29 WiggyB wrote:
I believe you are in violation sir!.
Of course they are going to say that
On July 18 2014 18:24 zeo wrote:
Well here is a statement (from today) from the Prosecutor General of Ukraine that rebel forces had not captured any BUK systems. Though its a Russian source citing the Prosecutor General of Ukraine it should be easy to find a Ukrainian (or any other) source for the same thing.
http://news.mail.ru/politics/18918028/?frommail=1
+ Show Spoiler +
edit: Here we go: https://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/ukrainian-prosecutor-general-says-militants-did-not-seize-ukrainian-air-defense-launchers-356619.html
On July 18 2014 17:51 Mithhaike wrote:
I would like to enquire as to your source that the missiles captured were incomplete. From my understanding, the separatists claimed the missiles were working, while Kiev said it's not.
So you believe what Kiev says now? From your history you were highly skeptical of anything from Kiev, convenient timing to switch sides.
Like you said, look at the facts. Your postings has indicated that you have chosen a side, and your cherry picking of convenient "facts" are indicative too. Sorry you lack credibility IMO.
On July 18 2014 17:43 zeo wrote:
The BUK's captured were incomplete at best. Though I doubt people watched the video posted earlier about surface-to-air missile overhaul procedure, if someone had seen it they would know the high amount of calibration needed when anything is changed or removed etc. from the system. They would need special facilities and equipment as well as a few test fires to calibrate the thing.
People need to stop jumping the gun and blaming whatever side for whatever reason. Just look at the facts.
On July 18 2014 17:27 WiggyB wrote:
I'm assuming that the Russian military had the same kind of standards when it comes to weaponry.
These systems are heavily tested at great expense. I've heard of cases of missiles exploding on the launcher, or exploding in mid air. But never heard of a case where a missile had hit a target other than the one specified.
There have been mistakes, but always human error as far as I am aware.
And after a quick Google on the BUK. It's been in service since 79. Thats over 35 years. If it was unreliable they wouldn't still be using it.
If you are interested in missile tests. YouTube "Sea Dart misfire HMS Gloucester". I would provide the link, but I'm on work Internet at the moment.
Don't worry no one was hurt, and everyone laughs about it now
On July 18 2014 17:04 LegalLord wrote:
What about the launchers themselves, at least the ones you are familiar with? Are those as reliable as the missiles, or do they get buggy?
What about the launchers themselves, at least the ones you are familiar with? Are those as reliable as the missiles, or do they get buggy?
I'm assuming that the Russian military had the same kind of standards when it comes to weaponry.
These systems are heavily tested at great expense. I've heard of cases of missiles exploding on the launcher, or exploding in mid air. But never heard of a case where a missile had hit a target other than the one specified.
There have been mistakes, but always human error as far as I am aware.
And after a quick Google on the BUK. It's been in service since 79. Thats over 35 years. If it was unreliable they wouldn't still be using it.
If you are interested in missile tests. YouTube "Sea Dart misfire HMS Gloucester". I would provide the link, but I'm on work Internet at the moment.
Don't worry no one was hurt, and everyone laughs about it now
The BUK's captured were incomplete at best. Though I doubt people watched the video posted earlier about surface-to-air missile overhaul procedure, if someone had seen it they would know the high amount of calibration needed when anything is changed or removed etc. from the system. They would need special facilities and equipment as well as a few test fires to calibrate the thing.
People need to stop jumping the gun and blaming whatever side for whatever reason. Just look at the facts.
I would like to enquire as to your source that the missiles captured were incomplete. From my understanding, the separatists claimed the missiles were working, while Kiev said it's not.
So you believe what Kiev says now? From your history you were highly skeptical of anything from Kiev, convenient timing to switch sides.
Like you said, look at the facts. Your postings has indicated that you have chosen a side, and your cherry picking of convenient "facts" are indicative too. Sorry you lack credibility IMO.
Well here is a statement (from today) from the Prosecutor General of Ukraine that rebel forces had not captured any BUK systems. Though its a Russian source citing the Prosecutor General of Ukraine it should be easy to find a Ukrainian (or any other) source for the same thing.
http://news.mail.ru/politics/18918028/?frommail=1
+ Show Spoiler +
После того, как был сбит пассажирский самолет, военные доложили президенту, что у террористов нет наших ракетных комплексов “Бук” и С-300, — сообщил генпрокурор. — Захвата этого вооружения не было
"After having been hit by a passenger plane, the military reported to the President that the terrorists have our missile systems" Buk "and C-300 - said the prosecutor general. - There was no capture of these weapons. "
edit: Here we go: https://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/ukrainian-prosecutor-general-says-militants-did-not-seize-ukrainian-air-defense-launchers-356619.html
Ukrainian prosecutor general says militants did not seize Ukrainian air defense launchers
In order to maintain some kind of respectable thread quality and to show some respect for those who lost friends in this tragedy, we're forced to enact a hard line policy for this thread. Any posts holding an opinion on who is responsible or making an accusation that is not held by neutral media will be banned. Policy is in effect from page 27 onwards.
Specifically, citing a Ukrainian or Russian source for your claims is going to get you banned. Opinions/facts/accusations arising from neutral media sources (i.e. media whose country of origin is not Ukraine, Russia or one of its puppet states) will be permitted. This policy extends to all forms of media; if a youtube video or picture has not come through a neutral media source then don't post it or you'll be banned. If you wish to discuss this policy please use this website feedback thread.
Specifically, citing a Ukrainian or Russian source for your claims is going to get you banned. Opinions/facts/accusations arising from neutral media sources (i.e. media whose country of origin is not Ukraine, Russia or one of its puppet states) will be permitted. This policy extends to all forms of media; if a youtube video or picture has not come through a neutral media source then don't post it or you'll be banned. If you wish to discuss this policy please use this website feedback thread.
I believe you are in violation sir!.
Of course they are going to say that
If you have both sides reporting on the same thing in the same way thats just more conformation that the news is true. No?
Elaborate why 'of course they would say that'? Why would Kiev deliberately lie? In your own opinion.
Oh, the irony, zeo arguing that Ukrainian military wouldn't lie. There are high-ranked generals jobs at stakes, and other officers as well. People would go at lengths not to admit losing high-tech equipment that might be used to shoot down Ukrainian airforces at any latitudes. And if they were forced to acknowledge it, they would be very likely to report it was not operational anyway.
there is no super mega voice database where everyones voice is stored ,this is real life not CSI miami 
