|
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. Updated policy on aggressive posting and insults. |
On July 19 2014 04:28 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2014 04:22 JinDesu wrote: Ghanburighan, can you spoiler those huge sections of texts? Or at least, part of them? Which part, those are overview articles, they are just very dense news articles which discuss a lot of information.
Sorta like what StealthBlue did above.nevermind, he edited that out. I would suggest having the first or first two paragraphs of each article unspoilered, but the rest would be better served spoilered. It's making this page very long, and if you are doing it everytime you have an article to post, it makes for some serious scrolling.
|
As I said yesterday, I predicted the Donetsk leader taking off. After that big of a blunder and fucking up that much shit you better get the hell out of there, or you're done for.
|
So has anyone seen the AP reporter story who said he/she was an eyewitness to the shooting? Just heard that on CNN.
|
On July 19 2014 04:31 JinDesu wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2014 04:28 Ghanburighan wrote:On July 19 2014 04:22 JinDesu wrote: Ghanburighan, can you spoiler those huge sections of texts? Or at least, part of them? Which part, those are overview articles, they are just very dense news articles which discuss a lot of information. Sorta like what StealthBlue did above.nevermind, he edited that out. I would suggest having the first or first two paragraphs of each article unspoilered, but the rest would be better served spoilered. It's making this page very long, and if you are doing it everytime you have an article to post, it makes for some serious scrolling.
Someone added spoilers. I also added a brief summary before them so people know what they're clicking on...
***
What AP story, can you describe it a bit more in detail?
|
On July 19 2014 04:41 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2014 04:31 JinDesu wrote:On July 19 2014 04:28 Ghanburighan wrote:On July 19 2014 04:22 JinDesu wrote: Ghanburighan, can you spoiler those huge sections of texts? Or at least, part of them? Which part, those are overview articles, they are just very dense news articles which discuss a lot of information. Sorta like what StealthBlue did above.nevermind, he edited that out. I would suggest having the first or first two paragraphs of each article unspoilered, but the rest would be better served spoilered. It's making this page very long, and if you are doing it everytime you have an article to post, it makes for some serious scrolling. Someone added spoilers. I also added a brief summary before them so people know what they're clicking on... *** What AP story, can you describe it a bit more in detail?
CNN said a few minutes ago that there was an AP reporter who said they witnessed the plane being shot down.
|
(CNN) -- A spokesman for 21 international monitors who on Friday visited the Malaysia Airlines crash site in eastern Ukraine said the team wasn't "given the access that we expected."
Michael Bociurkiw, spokesman for the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe team, told CNN's Christiane Amanpour the group was "only allowed access to about a 200-meter strip" for about 75 minutes at the site, which he said was guarded by armed men in uniform. "One of our top priorities was to find out what happened to the black boxes. No one was there to answer those questions," he said.
Source
|
Hm:
An airliner being shot down in a territory where two forces are fighting each other...those things happen. Second one to blame are the people who declared that route as safe. US meddling as usual, sending FBI because one guy, who is also a US national, got killed (good pretense to become a lot more active I guess; it's a good enough reason after all...)
Whoever wrote that, just...sigh:
At least in public, the leaders of Germany, France and Britain expressed outrage over the downing of the airliner but were careful not to rush to judgment or publicly accuse Russia.
In my opinion, the best:
“We’re assuming that the Russian president of course has an influence on Russian separatists,” Merkel told reporters in Berlin. “But still one has to differentiate between the separatists and the Russian government.”
Some countries are really intent on letting things escalate. Whoever has nothing to do with it, just needs to stay out. Also, the US pressing their interests is annoying(in general, not completely linked to this case).
And again, an airliner being shot down there is not surprising. I mean, what do you think they are doing there? Shouting at each other? This incident hasn't changed the situation itself at all. It's just a good reason for certain countries to say or do something which they couldn't before.
|
The NTSB/FBI has some of the best forensic specialists in the world. Merkel is just being Merkel in hoping someone else takes the lead so she doesn't have to like the earlier crisis when she publicly said both sides need to talk and not place blame but then behind closed doors she quickly denounced Putin.
|
Russia had better look out for Obama's stern sanctions and displeased glares.
Good lord, if this was bush, half the US army would be in Ukraine by now.
|
Some countries are really intent on letting things escalate. Whoever has nothing to do with it, just needs to stay out. Also, the US pressing their interests is annoying(in general, not completely linked to this case).
Germany has very much to do with that, as much as the netherlands and whatever nationality was on that plane. To say "it's a good reason to say something" might be the dumbest thing said so far in this thread, what exactly do you expect? The governments to stay silent after citizens died?
edit: not to mention that the statement you quoted from Merkel is very much true. And she never said or pretended otherwise.
|
|
On July 19 2014 05:11 Lucumo wrote:Hm: An airliner being shot down in a territory where two forces are fighting each other...those things happen. Second one to blame are the people who declared that route as safe. US meddling as usual, sending FBI because one guy, who is also a US national, got killed (good pretense to become a lot more active I guess; it's a good enough reason after all...) Whoever wrote that, just...sigh: Show nested quote +At least in public, the leaders of Germany, France and Britain expressed outrage over the downing of the airliner but were careful not to rush to judgment or publicly accuse Russia. In my opinion, the best: Show nested quote +“We’re assuming that the Russian president of course has an influence on Russian separatists,” Merkel told reporters in Berlin. “But still one has to differentiate between the separatists and the Russian government.” Some countries are really intent on letting things escalate. Whoever has nothing to do with it, just needs to stay out. Also, the US pressing their interests is annoying(in general, not completely linked to this case). And again, an airliner being shot down there is not surprising. I mean, what do you think they are doing there? Shouting at each other? This incident hasn't changed the situation itself at all. It's just a good reason for certain countries to say or do something which they couldn't before.
I think that any country should have grounds to get involved just based off of the fact that any of their citizens could have very well been on that plane as well.
|
Friend of my mother took the later flight. It's a bit strange to feel relief though, seems inappropriate.
|
On July 19 2014 05:29 Grumbels wrote: Friend of my mother took the later flight. It's a bit strange to feel relief though, seems inappropriate.
I understand where you're coming from (sorta), but you shouldn't feel bad because of that. I wouldn't, at least. Doesn't change the fact that you still feel bad for the casualties of this crash, does it.
|
On July 19 2014 05:20 Enzymatic wrote: Russia had better look out for Obama's stern sanctions and displeased glares.
Good lord, if this was bush, half the US army would be in Ukraine by now. And you think that would help?
|
It seems baffling to me that these airliners were permitted to fly in a warzone.
|
On July 19 2014 05:36 Moka wrote: It seems baffling to me that these airliners were permitted to fly in a warzone.
I hate all of these posts, because you people speak as if they're just casually hovering slowly at a couple thousand feet in the air taking a helicopter to their destination.
33k feet up is a lot different.
|
Straight outta Johto18973 Posts
On July 19 2014 05:36 Moka wrote: It seems baffling to me that these airliners were permitted to fly in a warzone. I've made a post on this issue before but just for further reading here is a BBC article that tries to explain this a bit more. As it states, this route was not considered risky.
It's really emphasised in the article when a pilot said that even during the Iraq war planes were still flying over the country. So long as the right precautions are taken, it's generally just not considered normal for military grade weapons to be turned onto commercial planes. Commercial planes will squawk their position constantly to identify as a civilian plane so military operators should know exactly what's going on.
|
On July 19 2014 05:42 Enzymatic wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2014 05:36 Moka wrote: It seems baffling to me that these airliners were permitted to fly in a warzone. I hate all of these posts, because you people speak as if they're just casually hovering slowly at a couple thousand feet in the air taking a helicopter to their destination. 33k feet up is a lot different.
Well I never said they were <<casually>> hovering a couple thousand feet in the air, you implied it. I just don't understand why are they permitted to fly close in a warzone and 33k feet up in the air doesn't make a difference if they shooted it down.
|
On July 19 2014 05:44 MoonBear wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2014 05:36 Moka wrote: It seems baffling to me that these airliners were permitted to fly in a warzone. I've made a post on this issue before but just for further reading here is a BBC article that tries to explain this a bit more. As it states, this route was not considered risky. It's really emphasised in the article when a pilot said that even during the Iraq war planes were still flying over the country. So long as the right precautions are taken, it's generally just not considered normal for military grade weapons to be turned onto commercial planes. Commercial planes will squawk their position constantly to identify as a civilian plane so military operators should know exactly what's going on.
Yeah I just read it, thanks, should haave read the whole OP
|
|
|
|