|
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. |
Al Jazeera is reporting confusion with the corpses:
|
On July 20 2014 01:33 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2014 01:28 Derez wrote:
I dont give a shit about the clothing, but imagine the kind of tone you'd be hearing from a french/english/german PM, and how they would take initiative within the EU and NATO and try to get some form of pressure going. Rutte reduces himself to be a small politician of a small country who just stands by on the sidelines and waits for Merkel/Cameron to say something. They wouldn't. Remember, there was germans and whatnot on that plane too. While i agree that the dutch were hit harder in terms of "magnitude of the tradegy", there's still dead people that aren't dutch. I may agree about saberrattling if it was a deliberate attack on the plane, but so far every single piece of "evidence" (well no such thing, don't know the english word for "Indizien") points to an accident. Who do you threaten for an accident? That happened above basically a fighting zone? If anything, it's malaysian airlines, or better the european councilthing that deemed the space safe (apparently they ordered the plane to fly even lower) to fly. That's where anger should go. Show nested quote +
Not demanding military action, although I wouldn't consider sending troops to secure the crash site out of line or anything, but some form of outrage, some sort of statement would be worthwhile. Instead of a decent prime minister we end up with a supermarket supervisor who just wants to keep selling as much as possible to the people that sent their mercenaries to cause havoc in another state.
It is out of line, wtf. If you send military personal to occupy space for however long into a foreign country, it's quite a big deal. Now the UN on the other hand, i mentioned it earlier, should have a unified "emergency-medevac-thingy" for stuff like this. Since i'm not sure because it didn't interest me too much, there wasn't a statement of the dutch PM to this?
There's a difference between accident and accidental shootdown. In one case there is no guilty party, in the other case firing a missile at a passenger plane makes you a guilty party even if you didn't intend to do it. Also, as has been pointed out earlier in this thread, 50+ planes on EU - SEA routes pass over this specific zone every day up to yesterday and no ukrainian military planes fly at this altitude. They might have thought it was a UKR plane, which would still be abominable, but the reality is that they could have known otherwise.
Next to that, I don't advocate invasion or anything but I'm pretty sure that if we were to ask the sovereign authority in the country (Ukraine) to allow us access with some sort of 'protective detail' for the inspectors, they would be fine with that.
|
On July 20 2014 01:33 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2014 01:28 Derez wrote:
I dont give a shit about the clothing, but imagine the kind of tone you'd be hearing from a french/english/german PM, and how they would take initiative within the EU and NATO and try to get some form of pressure going. Rutte reduces himself to be a small politician of a small country who just stands by on the sidelines and waits for Merkel/Cameron to say something. They wouldn't. Remember, there was germans and whatnot on that plane too. While i agree that the dutch were hit harder in terms of "magnitude of the tradegy", there's still dead people that aren't dutch. I may agree about saberrattling if it was a deliberate attack on the plane, but so far every single piece of "evidence" (well no such thing, don't know the english word for "Indizien") points to an accident. Who do you threaten for an accident? That happened above basically a fighting zone?
You can't shoot a plane down from 10.000 meters by accident. It might not be the target they hoped for but it's no accident it's a deliberate strike that requires quite some actions to make it happen.
And even if it were an accident, than they should provide full cooperation for search and rescue. Instead they are just fucking things up, not allowing anyone near, moving corpses and materials, looting posessions.
|
On July 20 2014 01:48 Derez wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2014 01:33 m4ini wrote:On July 20 2014 01:28 Derez wrote:
I dont give a shit about the clothing, but imagine the kind of tone you'd be hearing from a french/english/german PM, and how they would take initiative within the EU and NATO and try to get some form of pressure going. Rutte reduces himself to be a small politician of a small country who just stands by on the sidelines and waits for Merkel/Cameron to say something. They wouldn't. Remember, there was germans and whatnot on that plane too. While i agree that the dutch were hit harder in terms of "magnitude of the tradegy", there's still dead people that aren't dutch. I may agree about saberrattling if it was a deliberate attack on the plane, but so far every single piece of "evidence" (well no such thing, don't know the english word for "Indizien") points to an accident. Who do you threaten for an accident? That happened above basically a fighting zone? If anything, it's malaysian airlines, or better the european councilthing that deemed the space safe (apparently they ordered the plane to fly even lower) to fly. That's where anger should go.
Not demanding military action, although I wouldn't consider sending troops to secure the crash site out of line or anything, but some form of outrage, some sort of statement would be worthwhile. Instead of a decent prime minister we end up with a supermarket supervisor who just wants to keep selling as much as possible to the people that sent their mercenaries to cause havoc in another state.
It is out of line, wtf. If you send military personal to occupy space for however long into a foreign country, it's quite a big deal. Now the UN on the other hand, i mentioned it earlier, should have a unified "emergency-medevac-thingy" for stuff like this. Since i'm not sure because it didn't interest me too much, there wasn't a statement of the dutch PM to this? There's a difference between accident and accidental shootdown. In one case there is no guilty party, in the other case firing a missile at a passenger plane makes you a guilty party even if you didn't intend to do it. Also, as has been pointed out earlier in this thread, 50+ planes on EU - SEA routes pass over this specific zone every day up to yesterday and no ukrainian military planes fly at this altitude. They might have thought it was a UKR plane, which would still be abominable, but the reality is that they could have known otherwise. Next to that, I don't advocate invasion or anything but I'm pretty sure that if we were to ask the sovereign authority in the country (Ukraine) to allow us access with some sort of 'protective detail' for the inspectors, they would be fine with that.
While Ukraine might be fine with that, the area is where separatists are fighting Ukrainian forces and those forces are specifically the ones that are opposing anyone getting closer... Russia needs to give the firm word for those separatists to stand aside...
|
On July 20 2014 01:48 Derez wrote:
no ukrainian military planes fly at this altitude
Is there a source for this? 10km is not an unusual altitude for military planes. In fact, right after having a plane shot down at 6.5km Ukraine advised not flying below 10km in the area, so one would assume that they would heed their own warning and only fly above that treshold afterwards as well.
|
On July 20 2014 02:01 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2014 01:48 Derez wrote:
no ukrainian military planes fly at this altitude Is there a source for this? 10km is not an unusual altitude for military planes. In fact, right after having a plane shot down at 6.5km Ukraine advised not flying below 10km in the area, so one would assume that they would heed their own warning and only fly above that treshold afterwards as well.
I think there is if you read back a few pages in the thread.
|
On July 20 2014 02:01 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2014 01:48 Derez wrote:
no ukrainian military planes fly at this altitude Is there a source for this? 10km is not an unusual altitude for military planes. In fact, right after having a plane shot down at 6.5km Ukraine advised not flying below 10km in the area, so one would assume that they would heed their own warning and only fly above that treshold afterwards as well.
If you know the enemy has SAMs in the area then you fly low to try and keep off radar. If you fly high then you get shot out of the sky...
|
So I still haven't seen anyone repost the response to that SBU video from the actual response of those involved, I'll use the video itself to say what they were trying to say. The video has been reposted 20 times over in this thread - feel free to look through to find it. Also, the only thing that differentiates this video from the usual BS the SBU throws out is the amount of attention this one gained.
So, start by watching the video, but ignore the "context" provided by the SBU - that is, ignore anything but the actual translation of what the people involved are actually saying. Ignore what times they are said to be at, context as to what they mean, etc.
Five conversations total:
Conversation 1: Igor Bezler reporting that a plane was shot down by "Miner's Group" that fell near Yenakievo, and he can see the smoke.
Conversation 2: "Major" reporting a plane shot down at a Chernukhino checkpoint by Cossacks.
Conversation 3: "Major" reporting that a plane broke up in air near Petropavlovsk mine (no idea where this is).
Conversation 4: "Major" reporting that a plane was a civilian plane.
Conversation 5: Report of Boeing shot down, outrage similar to the "wtf was that plane doing in a war zone" posts here. TV reports already talking about the downing of the plane.
Distances between cities mentioned:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/BhtDEU1.png)
(give or take 5 km in either direction for where they actually were)
So Enakievo and Torez, the actual crash site, are pretty far apart (Grabovo, the village where it fell, is right next to Torez). Conversation 1 says it fell in Enakievo, so these two conversations are referring to different planes. I believe the plane in question was a Su.
Conversation 2, 3, and 4 are the ones that relate most closely to the actual incident. Conversation 2: a plane shot down from a Chernukhino checkpoint. Conversation 3: Plane broke apart in the air near Petropavlovsk mine. I don't know where that mine would be, so I can't say whether or not it's the same plane. Conversation 4 almost certainly refers to the actual plane, but mentions no locations and never says that they shot down the plane. Also, these videos are about the quality you'd expect to be able to fake a voice. I suspect that either these recordings are fake or taken out of context in US politics style obfuscation.
One other note on this one: The alleged Buk was said to be photographed in Torez.The Chernukhino checkpoint is probably further away from Torez than city limits as it would be closer to military-controlled territory. No mention of heavy weaponry at the checkpoint, and the way they described it it sounds like guerillas. Inconsistent at the very least.
Conversation 5 probably happened after that LifeNews report of an AN-26 crash, given that there were TV reports. Sounds like a mistaken report, and genuine outrage at an upcoming shitstorm that dead civilians will be.
In short: standard SBU lies.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On July 20 2014 01:48 Derez wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2014 01:33 m4ini wrote:On July 20 2014 01:28 Derez wrote:
I dont give a shit about the clothing, but imagine the kind of tone you'd be hearing from a french/english/german PM, and how they would take initiative within the EU and NATO and try to get some form of pressure going. Rutte reduces himself to be a small politician of a small country who just stands by on the sidelines and waits for Merkel/Cameron to say something. They wouldn't. Remember, there was germans and whatnot on that plane too. While i agree that the dutch were hit harder in terms of "magnitude of the tradegy", there's still dead people that aren't dutch. I may agree about saberrattling if it was a deliberate attack on the plane, but so far every single piece of "evidence" (well no such thing, don't know the english word for "Indizien") points to an accident. Who do you threaten for an accident? That happened above basically a fighting zone? If anything, it's malaysian airlines, or better the european councilthing that deemed the space safe (apparently they ordered the plane to fly even lower) to fly. That's where anger should go.
Not demanding military action, although I wouldn't consider sending troops to secure the crash site out of line or anything, but some form of outrage, some sort of statement would be worthwhile. Instead of a decent prime minister we end up with a supermarket supervisor who just wants to keep selling as much as possible to the people that sent their mercenaries to cause havoc in another state.
It is out of line, wtf. If you send military personal to occupy space for however long into a foreign country, it's quite a big deal. Now the UN on the other hand, i mentioned it earlier, should have a unified "emergency-medevac-thingy" for stuff like this. Since i'm not sure because it didn't interest me too much, there wasn't a statement of the dutch PM to this? There's a difference between accident and accidental shootdown. In one case there is no guilty party, in the other case firing a missile at a passenger plane makes you a guilty party even if you didn't intend to do it. Also, as has been pointed out earlier in this thread, 50+ planes on EU - SEA routes pass over this specific zone every day up to yesterday and no ukrainian military planes fly at this altitude. They might have thought it was a UKR plane, which would still be abominable, but the reality is that they could have known otherwise. Next to that, I don't advocate invasion or anything but I'm pretty sure that if we were to ask the sovereign authority in the country (Ukraine) to allow us access with some sort of 'protective detail' for the inspectors, they would be fine with that.
There is a difference, but it's not what you make it out to be. First, the plane shouldn't be flying there in the first place. Doesn't matter if other companies don't give enough shits either, that's a fact (in fact, quite a few airlines actually reroute their flights). Second, if it was shot down because somebody thought it was something else - it's still accidental. There was no intent to kill dutch people, that's the big thing. Now i'm not a SAM operator (a lousy one too, considering they're all just irregulars), so i can't tell how much indication the operator had when he launched the missile.
It wasn't established that ukrainian/miltary planes don't fly at that altitude. Whatever you read, i was the person having that "discussion". It was established that on maxload, some transporters can't reach that height. That doesn't mean they can't when they're empty, or at half cargo, whatnot. To take this as an indication for a passenger plane to be deliberately targeted is just mental gymnastic now.
You can ask the ukrainians whatever you want, do you actually think they can guarantee safety for your men if they can't guarantee the same thing for their own soldiers? What do you think happens if the ukrainian military (which can't even reach the crashsite) tries to force their way there?
Come on. Your thought of a protective detail is pretty much a suicide mission, not to mention that the detail would need to come from the DPR people, since it's (for now) their territory there.
As i said, i understand everyone who's angry and disappointed, but so far, there's nothing more anybody could do.
In short: standard SBU lies.
They didn't lie when they aired a phonecall about "alexander", who turned up just a week later. But that's irrelevant anyway since the SBU is also ruled out as a source. No point in discussing it.
|
On July 20 2014 02:07 LegalLord wrote:So I still haven't seen anyone repost the response to that SBU video from the actual response of those involved, I'll use the video itself to say what they were trying to say. The video has been reposted 20 times over in this thread - feel free to look through to find it. Also, the only thing that differentiates this video from the usual BS the SBU throws out is the amount of attention this one gained. So, start by watching the video, but ignore the "context" provided by the SBU - that is, ignore anything but the actual translation of what the people involved are actually saying. Ignore what times they are said to be at, context as to what they mean, etc. Five conversations total: Conversation 1: Igor Bezler reporting that a plane was shot down by "Miner's Group" that fell near Yenakievo, and he can see the smoke. Conversation 2: "Major" reporting a plane shot down at a Chernukhino checkpoint by Cossacks. Conversation 3: "Major" reporting that a plane broke up in air near Petropavlovsk mine (no idea where this is). Conversation 4: "Major" reporting that a plane was a civilian plane. Conversation 5: Report of Boeing shot down, outrage similar to the "wtf was that plane doing in a war zone" posts here. TV reports already talking about the downing of the plane. Distances between cities mentioned: (give or take 5 km in either direction for where they actually were) So Enakievo and Torez, the actual crash site, are pretty far apart (Grabovo, the village where it fell, is right next to Torez). Conversation 1 says it fell in Enakievo, so these two conversations are referring to different planes. I believe the plane in question was a Su. Conversation 2, 3, and 4 are the ones that relate most closely to the actual incident. Conversation 2: a plane shot down from a Chernukhino checkpoint. Conversation 3: Plane broke apart in the air near Petropavlovsk mine. I don't know where that mine would be, so I can't say whether or not it's the same plane. Conversation 4 almost certainly refers to the actual plane, but mentions no locations and never says that they shot down the plane. Also, these videos are about the quality you'd expect to be able to fake a voice. I suspect that either these recordings are fake or taken out of context in US politics style obfuscation. One other note on this one: The alleged Buk was said to be photographed in Torez.The Chernukhino checkpoint is probably further away from Torez than city limits as it would be closer to military-controlled territory. No mention of heavy weaponry at the checkpoint, and the way they described it it sounds like guerillas. Inconsistent at the very least. Conversation 5 probably happened after that LifeNews report of an AN-26 crash, given that there were TV reports. Sounds like a mistaken report, and genuine outrage at an upcoming shitstorm that dead civilians will be. In short: standard SBU lies.
Is this going to be like zeo 'solving' the sniper cases in Maidain as being the fault of the protesters through his vast CSI experience and photo evidence? You should at least make up your mind, are the videos with fake voices or are they referring to another plane that no one has bothered to show videos off -- because right now you sound like a separatist "well it was shot down by ukrainian jets AND it was a conspiracy to make us look bad AND there are dead bodies"
|
On July 20 2014 02:09 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2014 01:48 Derez wrote:On July 20 2014 01:33 m4ini wrote:On July 20 2014 01:28 Derez wrote:
I dont give a shit about the clothing, but imagine the kind of tone you'd be hearing from a french/english/german PM, and how they would take initiative within the EU and NATO and try to get some form of pressure going. Rutte reduces himself to be a small politician of a small country who just stands by on the sidelines and waits for Merkel/Cameron to say something. They wouldn't. Remember, there was germans and whatnot on that plane too. While i agree that the dutch were hit harder in terms of "magnitude of the tradegy", there's still dead people that aren't dutch. I may agree about saberrattling if it was a deliberate attack on the plane, but so far every single piece of "evidence" (well no such thing, don't know the english word for "Indizien") points to an accident. Who do you threaten for an accident? That happened above basically a fighting zone? If anything, it's malaysian airlines, or better the european councilthing that deemed the space safe (apparently they ordered the plane to fly even lower) to fly. That's where anger should go.
Not demanding military action, although I wouldn't consider sending troops to secure the crash site out of line or anything, but some form of outrage, some sort of statement would be worthwhile. Instead of a decent prime minister we end up with a supermarket supervisor who just wants to keep selling as much as possible to the people that sent their mercenaries to cause havoc in another state.
It is out of line, wtf. If you send military personal to occupy space for however long into a foreign country, it's quite a big deal. Now the UN on the other hand, i mentioned it earlier, should have a unified "emergency-medevac-thingy" for stuff like this. Since i'm not sure because it didn't interest me too much, there wasn't a statement of the dutch PM to this? There's a difference between accident and accidental shootdown. In one case there is no guilty party, in the other case firing a missile at a passenger plane makes you a guilty party even if you didn't intend to do it. Also, as has been pointed out earlier in this thread, 50+ planes on EU - SEA routes pass over this specific zone every day up to yesterday and no ukrainian military planes fly at this altitude. They might have thought it was a UKR plane, which would still be abominable, but the reality is that they could have known otherwise. Next to that, I don't advocate invasion or anything but I'm pretty sure that if we were to ask the sovereign authority in the country (Ukraine) to allow us access with some sort of 'protective detail' for the inspectors, they would be fine with that. There is a difference, but it's not what you make it out to be. First, the plane shouldn't be flying there in the first place. Doesn't matter if other companies don't give enough shits either, that's a fact (in fact, quite a few airlines actually reroute their flights). Second, if it was shot down because somebody thought it was something else - it's still accidental. There was no intent to kill dutch people, that's the big thing. Now i'm not a SAM operator (a lousy one too, considering they're all just irregulars), so i can't tell how much indication the operator had when he launched the missile.
They didn´t kill them with intent, they still killed them. They are still responsible for their deaths. It´s not an accident.
|
On July 20 2014 02:12 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2014 02:07 LegalLord wrote:So I still haven't seen anyone repost the response to that SBU video from the actual response of those involved, I'll use the video itself to say what they were trying to say. The video has been reposted 20 times over in this thread - feel free to look through to find it. Also, the only thing that differentiates this video from the usual BS the SBU throws out is the amount of attention this one gained. So, start by watching the video, but ignore the "context" provided by the SBU - that is, ignore anything but the actual translation of what the people involved are actually saying. Ignore what times they are said to be at, context as to what they mean, etc. Five conversations total: Conversation 1: Igor Bezler reporting that a plane was shot down by "Miner's Group" that fell near Yenakievo, and he can see the smoke. Conversation 2: "Major" reporting a plane shot down at a Chernukhino checkpoint by Cossacks. Conversation 3: "Major" reporting that a plane broke up in air near Petropavlovsk mine (no idea where this is). Conversation 4: "Major" reporting that a plane was a civilian plane. Conversation 5: Report of Boeing shot down, outrage similar to the "wtf was that plane doing in a war zone" posts here. TV reports already talking about the downing of the plane. Distances between cities mentioned: (give or take 5 km in either direction for where they actually were) So Enakievo and Torez, the actual crash site, are pretty far apart (Grabovo, the village where it fell, is right next to Torez). Conversation 1 says it fell in Enakievo, so these two conversations are referring to different planes. I believe the plane in question was a Su. Conversation 2, 3, and 4 are the ones that relate most closely to the actual incident. Conversation 2: a plane shot down from a Chernukhino checkpoint. Conversation 3: Plane broke apart in the air near Petropavlovsk mine. I don't know where that mine would be, so I can't say whether or not it's the same plane. Conversation 4 almost certainly refers to the actual plane, but mentions no locations and never says that they shot down the plane. Also, these videos are about the quality you'd expect to be able to fake a voice. I suspect that either these recordings are fake or taken out of context in US politics style obfuscation. One other note on this one: The alleged Buk was said to be photographed in Torez.The Chernukhino checkpoint is probably further away from Torez than city limits as it would be closer to military-controlled territory. No mention of heavy weaponry at the checkpoint, and the way they described it it sounds like guerillas. Inconsistent at the very least. Conversation 5 probably happened after that LifeNews report of an AN-26 crash, given that there were TV reports. Sounds like a mistaken report, and genuine outrage at an upcoming shitstorm that dead civilians will be. In short: standard SBU lies. Is this going to be like zeo 'solving' the sniper cases in Maidain as being the fault of the protesters through his vast CSI experience and photo evidence? You should at least make up your mind, are the videos with fake voices or are they referring to another plane that no one has bothered to show videos off -- because right now you sound like a separatist "well it was shot down by ukrainian jets AND it was a conspiracy to make us look bad AND there are dead bodies"
I'm just going to say that I simply don't know the answer to that one. Conversation 1 is referring to a different plane according to Bezler himself. Conversation 5 is obviously referring to the Boeing but probably happened a while later. The other three, I simply don't know and I'd rather not jump to conclusions. The SBU narrative is inconsistent though, that is all I want to show.
|
On July 20 2014 02:18 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2014 02:12 Sub40APM wrote:On July 20 2014 02:07 LegalLord wrote:So I still haven't seen anyone repost the response to that SBU video from the actual response of those involved, I'll use the video itself to say what they were trying to say. The video has been reposted 20 times over in this thread - feel free to look through to find it. Also, the only thing that differentiates this video from the usual BS the SBU throws out is the amount of attention this one gained. So, start by watching the video, but ignore the "context" provided by the SBU - that is, ignore anything but the actual translation of what the people involved are actually saying. Ignore what times they are said to be at, context as to what they mean, etc. Five conversations total: Conversation 1: Igor Bezler reporting that a plane was shot down by "Miner's Group" that fell near Yenakievo, and he can see the smoke. Conversation 2: "Major" reporting a plane shot down at a Chernukhino checkpoint by Cossacks. Conversation 3: "Major" reporting that a plane broke up in air near Petropavlovsk mine (no idea where this is). Conversation 4: "Major" reporting that a plane was a civilian plane. Conversation 5: Report of Boeing shot down, outrage similar to the "wtf was that plane doing in a war zone" posts here. TV reports already talking about the downing of the plane. Distances between cities mentioned: (give or take 5 km in either direction for where they actually were) So Enakievo and Torez, the actual crash site, are pretty far apart (Grabovo, the village where it fell, is right next to Torez). Conversation 1 says it fell in Enakievo, so these two conversations are referring to different planes. I believe the plane in question was a Su. Conversation 2, 3, and 4 are the ones that relate most closely to the actual incident. Conversation 2: a plane shot down from a Chernukhino checkpoint. Conversation 3: Plane broke apart in the air near Petropavlovsk mine. I don't know where that mine would be, so I can't say whether or not it's the same plane. Conversation 4 almost certainly refers to the actual plane, but mentions no locations and never says that they shot down the plane. Also, these videos are about the quality you'd expect to be able to fake a voice. I suspect that either these recordings are fake or taken out of context in US politics style obfuscation. One other note on this one: The alleged Buk was said to be photographed in Torez.The Chernukhino checkpoint is probably further away from Torez than city limits as it would be closer to military-controlled territory. No mention of heavy weaponry at the checkpoint, and the way they described it it sounds like guerillas. Inconsistent at the very least. Conversation 5 probably happened after that LifeNews report of an AN-26 crash, given that there were TV reports. Sounds like a mistaken report, and genuine outrage at an upcoming shitstorm that dead civilians will be. In short: standard SBU lies. Is this going to be like zeo 'solving' the sniper cases in Maidain as being the fault of the protesters through his vast CSI experience and photo evidence? You should at least make up your mind, are the videos with fake voices or are they referring to another plane that no one has bothered to show videos off -- because right now you sound like a separatist "well it was shot down by ukrainian jets AND it was a conspiracy to make us look bad AND there are dead bodies" I'm just going to say that I simply don't know the answer to that one. Conversation 1 is referring to a different plane according to Bezler himself. Conversation 5 is obviously referring to the Boeing but probably happened a while later. The other three, I simply don't know and I'd rather not jump to conclusions.
You already jumped to conclusions, you are trusting Bezler and calling the entire tape exchanged as 'Typical SBU lies', surely you can see how both of those are qualitative judgments.
|
On July 20 2014 02:20 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2014 02:18 LegalLord wrote:On July 20 2014 02:12 Sub40APM wrote:On July 20 2014 02:07 LegalLord wrote:So I still haven't seen anyone repost the response to that SBU video from the actual response of those involved, I'll use the video itself to say what they were trying to say. The video has been reposted 20 times over in this thread - feel free to look through to find it. Also, the only thing that differentiates this video from the usual BS the SBU throws out is the amount of attention this one gained. So, start by watching the video, but ignore the "context" provided by the SBU - that is, ignore anything but the actual translation of what the people involved are actually saying. Ignore what times they are said to be at, context as to what they mean, etc. Five conversations total: Conversation 1: Igor Bezler reporting that a plane was shot down by "Miner's Group" that fell near Yenakievo, and he can see the smoke. Conversation 2: "Major" reporting a plane shot down at a Chernukhino checkpoint by Cossacks. Conversation 3: "Major" reporting that a plane broke up in air near Petropavlovsk mine (no idea where this is). Conversation 4: "Major" reporting that a plane was a civilian plane. Conversation 5: Report of Boeing shot down, outrage similar to the "wtf was that plane doing in a war zone" posts here. TV reports already talking about the downing of the plane. Distances between cities mentioned: (give or take 5 km in either direction for where they actually were) So Enakievo and Torez, the actual crash site, are pretty far apart (Grabovo, the village where it fell, is right next to Torez). Conversation 1 says it fell in Enakievo, so these two conversations are referring to different planes. I believe the plane in question was a Su. Conversation 2, 3, and 4 are the ones that relate most closely to the actual incident. Conversation 2: a plane shot down from a Chernukhino checkpoint. Conversation 3: Plane broke apart in the air near Petropavlovsk mine. I don't know where that mine would be, so I can't say whether or not it's the same plane. Conversation 4 almost certainly refers to the actual plane, but mentions no locations and never says that they shot down the plane. Also, these videos are about the quality you'd expect to be able to fake a voice. I suspect that either these recordings are fake or taken out of context in US politics style obfuscation. One other note on this one: The alleged Buk was said to be photographed in Torez.The Chernukhino checkpoint is probably further away from Torez than city limits as it would be closer to military-controlled territory. No mention of heavy weaponry at the checkpoint, and the way they described it it sounds like guerillas. Inconsistent at the very least. Conversation 5 probably happened after that LifeNews report of an AN-26 crash, given that there were TV reports. Sounds like a mistaken report, and genuine outrage at an upcoming shitstorm that dead civilians will be. In short: standard SBU lies. Is this going to be like zeo 'solving' the sniper cases in Maidain as being the fault of the protesters through his vast CSI experience and photo evidence? You should at least make up your mind, are the videos with fake voices or are they referring to another plane that no one has bothered to show videos off -- because right now you sound like a separatist "well it was shot down by ukrainian jets AND it was a conspiracy to make us look bad AND there are dead bodies" I'm just going to say that I simply don't know the answer to that one. Conversation 1 is referring to a different plane according to Bezler himself. Conversation 5 is obviously referring to the Boeing but probably happened a while later. The other three, I simply don't know and I'd rather not jump to conclusions. You already jumped to conclusions, you are trusting Bezler and calling the entire tape exchanged as 'Typical SBU lies', surely you can see how both of those are qualitative judgments.
One of the two narratives is consistent with everything that can be confirmed, the other is not.
In perfect weather, you can see smoke from a large fire from 30km away. Yenakievo and Grabovo are 35km apart. Safe to say that it's not the same plane.
|
On July 20 2014 02:17 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2014 02:09 m4ini wrote:On July 20 2014 01:48 Derez wrote:On July 20 2014 01:33 m4ini wrote:On July 20 2014 01:28 Derez wrote:
I dont give a shit about the clothing, but imagine the kind of tone you'd be hearing from a french/english/german PM, and how they would take initiative within the EU and NATO and try to get some form of pressure going. Rutte reduces himself to be a small politician of a small country who just stands by on the sidelines and waits for Merkel/Cameron to say something. They wouldn't. Remember, there was germans and whatnot on that plane too. While i agree that the dutch were hit harder in terms of "magnitude of the tradegy", there's still dead people that aren't dutch. I may agree about saberrattling if it was a deliberate attack on the plane, but so far every single piece of "evidence" (well no such thing, don't know the english word for "Indizien") points to an accident. Who do you threaten for an accident? That happened above basically a fighting zone? If anything, it's malaysian airlines, or better the european councilthing that deemed the space safe (apparently they ordered the plane to fly even lower) to fly. That's where anger should go.
Not demanding military action, although I wouldn't consider sending troops to secure the crash site out of line or anything, but some form of outrage, some sort of statement would be worthwhile. Instead of a decent prime minister we end up with a supermarket supervisor who just wants to keep selling as much as possible to the people that sent their mercenaries to cause havoc in another state.
It is out of line, wtf. If you send military personal to occupy space for however long into a foreign country, it's quite a big deal. Now the UN on the other hand, i mentioned it earlier, should have a unified "emergency-medevac-thingy" for stuff like this. Since i'm not sure because it didn't interest me too much, there wasn't a statement of the dutch PM to this? There's a difference between accident and accidental shootdown. In one case there is no guilty party, in the other case firing a missile at a passenger plane makes you a guilty party even if you didn't intend to do it. Also, as has been pointed out earlier in this thread, 50+ planes on EU - SEA routes pass over this specific zone every day up to yesterday and no ukrainian military planes fly at this altitude. They might have thought it was a UKR plane, which would still be abominable, but the reality is that they could have known otherwise. Next to that, I don't advocate invasion or anything but I'm pretty sure that if we were to ask the sovereign authority in the country (Ukraine) to allow us access with some sort of 'protective detail' for the inspectors, they would be fine with that. There is a difference, but it's not what you make it out to be. First, the plane shouldn't be flying there in the first place. Doesn't matter if other companies don't give enough shits either, that's a fact (in fact, quite a few airlines actually reroute their flights). Second, if it was shot down because somebody thought it was something else - it's still accidental. There was no intent to kill dutch people, that's the big thing. Now i'm not a SAM operator (a lousy one too, considering they're all just irregulars), so i can't tell how much indication the operator had when he launched the missile. They didn´t kill them with intent, they still killed them. They are still responsible for their deaths. It´s not an accident.
It doesn't mean that it's not an accident just because somebody is responsible. If they didn't kill them by intention, they were killed by accident. There's no "in the middle". Germans accidentally attacked a civilian tanker in afghanistan. We are responsible for that. It still was an accident even though we deliberately targeted that tanker (which wasn't supposed to be civilian by the intel we were given). That's quite a possibility if a civilian is in what is considered a civil warzone (or in the german case, a clusterfuck).
Doesn't help the families, i know that. But that's how it is.
|
On July 20 2014 02:25 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2014 02:20 Sub40APM wrote:On July 20 2014 02:18 LegalLord wrote:On July 20 2014 02:12 Sub40APM wrote:On July 20 2014 02:07 LegalLord wrote:So I still haven't seen anyone repost the response to that SBU video from the actual response of those involved, I'll use the video itself to say what they were trying to say. The video has been reposted 20 times over in this thread - feel free to look through to find it. Also, the only thing that differentiates this video from the usual BS the SBU throws out is the amount of attention this one gained. So, start by watching the video, but ignore the "context" provided by the SBU - that is, ignore anything but the actual translation of what the people involved are actually saying. Ignore what times they are said to be at, context as to what they mean, etc. Five conversations total: Conversation 1: Igor Bezler reporting that a plane was shot down by "Miner's Group" that fell near Yenakievo, and he can see the smoke. Conversation 2: "Major" reporting a plane shot down at a Chernukhino checkpoint by Cossacks. Conversation 3: "Major" reporting that a plane broke up in air near Petropavlovsk mine (no idea where this is). Conversation 4: "Major" reporting that a plane was a civilian plane. Conversation 5: Report of Boeing shot down, outrage similar to the "wtf was that plane doing in a war zone" posts here. TV reports already talking about the downing of the plane. Distances between cities mentioned: (give or take 5 km in either direction for where they actually were) So Enakievo and Torez, the actual crash site, are pretty far apart (Grabovo, the village where it fell, is right next to Torez). Conversation 1 says it fell in Enakievo, so these two conversations are referring to different planes. I believe the plane in question was a Su. Conversation 2, 3, and 4 are the ones that relate most closely to the actual incident. Conversation 2: a plane shot down from a Chernukhino checkpoint. Conversation 3: Plane broke apart in the air near Petropavlovsk mine. I don't know where that mine would be, so I can't say whether or not it's the same plane. Conversation 4 almost certainly refers to the actual plane, but mentions no locations and never says that they shot down the plane. Also, these videos are about the quality you'd expect to be able to fake a voice. I suspect that either these recordings are fake or taken out of context in US politics style obfuscation. One other note on this one: The alleged Buk was said to be photographed in Torez.The Chernukhino checkpoint is probably further away from Torez than city limits as it would be closer to military-controlled territory. No mention of heavy weaponry at the checkpoint, and the way they described it it sounds like guerillas. Inconsistent at the very least. Conversation 5 probably happened after that LifeNews report of an AN-26 crash, given that there were TV reports. Sounds like a mistaken report, and genuine outrage at an upcoming shitstorm that dead civilians will be. In short: standard SBU lies. Is this going to be like zeo 'solving' the sniper cases in Maidain as being the fault of the protesters through his vast CSI experience and photo evidence? You should at least make up your mind, are the videos with fake voices or are they referring to another plane that no one has bothered to show videos off -- because right now you sound like a separatist "well it was shot down by ukrainian jets AND it was a conspiracy to make us look bad AND there are dead bodies" I'm just going to say that I simply don't know the answer to that one. Conversation 1 is referring to a different plane according to Bezler himself. Conversation 5 is obviously referring to the Boeing but probably happened a while later. The other three, I simply don't know and I'd rather not jump to conclusions. You already jumped to conclusions, you are trusting Bezler and calling the entire tape exchanged as 'Typical SBU lies', surely you can see how both of those are qualitative judgments. One of the two narratives is consistent with everything that can be confirmed, the other is not. In perfect weather, you can see smoke from a large fire from 30km away. Yenakievo and Grabovo are 35km apart. Safe to say that it's not the same plane.
So beyond phone conversation analyst you are also a smoke-at-a-distance analyst? You know what would be safer to say? If the rebels who controlled the area would just show that other plane, otherwise it doesnt exist. But instead of doing that the rebels are deleting their social media, obstructing access to site and releasing numerous explanations that happened to the plane -- which are all picked up by the main news channel in Russia and reported without any counter point as the truth.
|
On July 20 2014 02:17 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2014 02:09 m4ini wrote:On July 20 2014 01:48 Derez wrote:On July 20 2014 01:33 m4ini wrote:On July 20 2014 01:28 Derez wrote:
I dont give a shit about the clothing, but imagine the kind of tone you'd be hearing from a french/english/german PM, and how they would take initiative within the EU and NATO and try to get some form of pressure going. Rutte reduces himself to be a small politician of a small country who just stands by on the sidelines and waits for Merkel/Cameron to say something. They wouldn't. Remember, there was germans and whatnot on that plane too. While i agree that the dutch were hit harder in terms of "magnitude of the tradegy", there's still dead people that aren't dutch. I may agree about saberrattling if it was a deliberate attack on the plane, but so far every single piece of "evidence" (well no such thing, don't know the english word for "Indizien") points to an accident. Who do you threaten for an accident? That happened above basically a fighting zone? If anything, it's malaysian airlines, or better the european councilthing that deemed the space safe (apparently they ordered the plane to fly even lower) to fly. That's where anger should go.
Not demanding military action, although I wouldn't consider sending troops to secure the crash site out of line or anything, but some form of outrage, some sort of statement would be worthwhile. Instead of a decent prime minister we end up with a supermarket supervisor who just wants to keep selling as much as possible to the people that sent their mercenaries to cause havoc in another state.
It is out of line, wtf. If you send military personal to occupy space for however long into a foreign country, it's quite a big deal. Now the UN on the other hand, i mentioned it earlier, should have a unified "emergency-medevac-thingy" for stuff like this. Since i'm not sure because it didn't interest me too much, there wasn't a statement of the dutch PM to this? There's a difference between accident and accidental shootdown. In one case there is no guilty party, in the other case firing a missile at a passenger plane makes you a guilty party even if you didn't intend to do it. Also, as has been pointed out earlier in this thread, 50+ planes on EU - SEA routes pass over this specific zone every day up to yesterday and no ukrainian military planes fly at this altitude. They might have thought it was a UKR plane, which would still be abominable, but the reality is that they could have known otherwise. Next to that, I don't advocate invasion or anything but I'm pretty sure that if we were to ask the sovereign authority in the country (Ukraine) to allow us access with some sort of 'protective detail' for the inspectors, they would be fine with that. There is a difference, but it's not what you make it out to be. First, the plane shouldn't be flying there in the first place. Doesn't matter if other companies don't give enough shits either, that's a fact (in fact, quite a few airlines actually reroute their flights). Second, if it was shot down because somebody thought it was something else - it's still accidental. There was no intent to kill dutch people, that's the big thing. Now i'm not a SAM operator (a lousy one too, considering they're all just irregulars), so i can't tell how much indication the operator had when he launched the missile. They didn´t kill them with intent, they still killed them. They are still responsible for their deaths. It´s not an accident.
Yeah unintentional and accidental are two different things. An accident presumes that reasonable people couldn't have avoided the outcome/action. Unless the intention was to start WW3 I am pretty confident it wasn't intentional, however anytime you are shooting at crafts you are not positive about, it is no longer an accident when you shoot down the wrong plane.
This does seem eerily similar to when German U-boats sank the Lusitania, at least that turned out well though....
|
On July 20 2014 02:25 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2014 02:20 Sub40APM wrote:On July 20 2014 02:18 LegalLord wrote:On July 20 2014 02:12 Sub40APM wrote:On July 20 2014 02:07 LegalLord wrote:So I still haven't seen anyone repost the response to that SBU video from the actual response of those involved, I'll use the video itself to say what they were trying to say. The video has been reposted 20 times over in this thread - feel free to look through to find it. Also, the only thing that differentiates this video from the usual BS the SBU throws out is the amount of attention this one gained. So, start by watching the video, but ignore the "context" provided by the SBU - that is, ignore anything but the actual translation of what the people involved are actually saying. Ignore what times they are said to be at, context as to what they mean, etc. Five conversations total: Conversation 1: Igor Bezler reporting that a plane was shot down by "Miner's Group" that fell near Yenakievo, and he can see the smoke. Conversation 2: "Major" reporting a plane shot down at a Chernukhino checkpoint by Cossacks. Conversation 3: "Major" reporting that a plane broke up in air near Petropavlovsk mine (no idea where this is). Conversation 4: "Major" reporting that a plane was a civilian plane. Conversation 5: Report of Boeing shot down, outrage similar to the "wtf was that plane doing in a war zone" posts here. TV reports already talking about the downing of the plane. Distances between cities mentioned: (give or take 5 km in either direction for where they actually were) So Enakievo and Torez, the actual crash site, are pretty far apart (Grabovo, the village where it fell, is right next to Torez). Conversation 1 says it fell in Enakievo, so these two conversations are referring to different planes. I believe the plane in question was a Su. Conversation 2, 3, and 4 are the ones that relate most closely to the actual incident. Conversation 2: a plane shot down from a Chernukhino checkpoint. Conversation 3: Plane broke apart in the air near Petropavlovsk mine. I don't know where that mine would be, so I can't say whether or not it's the same plane. Conversation 4 almost certainly refers to the actual plane, but mentions no locations and never says that they shot down the plane. Also, these videos are about the quality you'd expect to be able to fake a voice. I suspect that either these recordings are fake or taken out of context in US politics style obfuscation. One other note on this one: The alleged Buk was said to be photographed in Torez.The Chernukhino checkpoint is probably further away from Torez than city limits as it would be closer to military-controlled territory. No mention of heavy weaponry at the checkpoint, and the way they described it it sounds like guerillas. Inconsistent at the very least. Conversation 5 probably happened after that LifeNews report of an AN-26 crash, given that there were TV reports. Sounds like a mistaken report, and genuine outrage at an upcoming shitstorm that dead civilians will be. In short: standard SBU lies. Is this going to be like zeo 'solving' the sniper cases in Maidain as being the fault of the protesters through his vast CSI experience and photo evidence? You should at least make up your mind, are the videos with fake voices or are they referring to another plane that no one has bothered to show videos off -- because right now you sound like a separatist "well it was shot down by ukrainian jets AND it was a conspiracy to make us look bad AND there are dead bodies" I'm just going to say that I simply don't know the answer to that one. Conversation 1 is referring to a different plane according to Bezler himself. Conversation 5 is obviously referring to the Boeing but probably happened a while later. The other three, I simply don't know and I'd rather not jump to conclusions. You already jumped to conclusions, you are trusting Bezler and calling the entire tape exchanged as 'Typical SBU lies', surely you can see how both of those are qualitative judgments. One of the two narratives is consistent with everything that can be confirmed, the other is not. In perfect weather, you can see smoke from a large fire from 30km away. Yenakievo and Grabovo are 35km apart. Safe to say that it's not the same plane.
Incorrect, you are making two assumptions with no evidence:
1. That the people watching the plane fall were accurate about where it fell to within a few km
2. That there were multiple planes
There is not evidence to support either of these.
|
On July 20 2014 02:35 Jormundr wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2014 02:25 LegalLord wrote:On July 20 2014 02:20 Sub40APM wrote:On July 20 2014 02:18 LegalLord wrote:On July 20 2014 02:12 Sub40APM wrote:On July 20 2014 02:07 LegalLord wrote:So I still haven't seen anyone repost the response to that SBU video from the actual response of those involved, I'll use the video itself to say what they were trying to say. The video has been reposted 20 times over in this thread - feel free to look through to find it. Also, the only thing that differentiates this video from the usual BS the SBU throws out is the amount of attention this one gained. So, start by watching the video, but ignore the "context" provided by the SBU - that is, ignore anything but the actual translation of what the people involved are actually saying. Ignore what times they are said to be at, context as to what they mean, etc. Five conversations total: Conversation 1: Igor Bezler reporting that a plane was shot down by "Miner's Group" that fell near Yenakievo, and he can see the smoke. Conversation 2: "Major" reporting a plane shot down at a Chernukhino checkpoint by Cossacks. Conversation 3: "Major" reporting that a plane broke up in air near Petropavlovsk mine (no idea where this is). Conversation 4: "Major" reporting that a plane was a civilian plane. Conversation 5: Report of Boeing shot down, outrage similar to the "wtf was that plane doing in a war zone" posts here. TV reports already talking about the downing of the plane. Distances between cities mentioned: (give or take 5 km in either direction for where they actually were) So Enakievo and Torez, the actual crash site, are pretty far apart (Grabovo, the village where it fell, is right next to Torez). Conversation 1 says it fell in Enakievo, so these two conversations are referring to different planes. I believe the plane in question was a Su. Conversation 2, 3, and 4 are the ones that relate most closely to the actual incident. Conversation 2: a plane shot down from a Chernukhino checkpoint. Conversation 3: Plane broke apart in the air near Petropavlovsk mine. I don't know where that mine would be, so I can't say whether or not it's the same plane. Conversation 4 almost certainly refers to the actual plane, but mentions no locations and never says that they shot down the plane. Also, these videos are about the quality you'd expect to be able to fake a voice. I suspect that either these recordings are fake or taken out of context in US politics style obfuscation. One other note on this one: The alleged Buk was said to be photographed in Torez.The Chernukhino checkpoint is probably further away from Torez than city limits as it would be closer to military-controlled territory. No mention of heavy weaponry at the checkpoint, and the way they described it it sounds like guerillas. Inconsistent at the very least. Conversation 5 probably happened after that LifeNews report of an AN-26 crash, given that there were TV reports. Sounds like a mistaken report, and genuine outrage at an upcoming shitstorm that dead civilians will be. In short: standard SBU lies. Is this going to be like zeo 'solving' the sniper cases in Maidain as being the fault of the protesters through his vast CSI experience and photo evidence? You should at least make up your mind, are the videos with fake voices or are they referring to another plane that no one has bothered to show videos off -- because right now you sound like a separatist "well it was shot down by ukrainian jets AND it was a conspiracy to make us look bad AND there are dead bodies" I'm just going to say that I simply don't know the answer to that one. Conversation 1 is referring to a different plane according to Bezler himself. Conversation 5 is obviously referring to the Boeing but probably happened a while later. The other three, I simply don't know and I'd rather not jump to conclusions. You already jumped to conclusions, you are trusting Bezler and calling the entire tape exchanged as 'Typical SBU lies', surely you can see how both of those are qualitative judgments. One of the two narratives is consistent with everything that can be confirmed, the other is not. In perfect weather, you can see smoke from a large fire from 30km away. Yenakievo and Grabovo are 35km apart. Safe to say that it's not the same plane. Incorrect, you are making two assumptions with no evidence: 1. That the people watching the plane fall were accurate about where it fell to within a few km 2. That there were multiple planes There is not evidence to support either of these.
1. Accurate to within a city. That, I can assume because that is a rough estimate.
2. Why would a Su make headlines? It's really not that important when a military plane gets shot down in a military operation. I didn't even see any mention of the Lugansk offensive that happened during this MH17 incident.
Watching it again, I'm going to go with "out of context" rather than "fake" for these conversations.
|
On July 20 2014 02:02 3Form wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2014 02:01 Dan HH wrote:On July 20 2014 01:48 Derez wrote:
no ukrainian military planes fly at this altitude Is there a source for this? 10km is not an unusual altitude for military planes. In fact, right after having a plane shot down at 6.5km Ukraine advised not flying below 10km in the area, so one would assume that they would heed their own warning and only fly above that treshold afterwards as well. If you know the enemy has SAMs in the area then you fly low to try and keep off radar. If you fly high then you get shot out of the sky...
Yeah. This is pretty accurate.
An efficient and very low-tech way to force airplanes to higher altitudes where they can be hit by these weapons is by simply having AAA weapons on the ground. Small caliber machine guns will do just fine, the key is having a group of gunners here and there over a big area to pose a large enough threat. The separatist forces should have been able to acquire a large number of 0.308 and 0.50 caliber machine guns, the latter kind is more than capable of shooting down low flying planes and helicopters, especially if explosive and incendiary ammunition is used.
I want to point out that there are different tiers of surface-to-air weapons. The weapon used to down the AN-26 last week was probably a smaller hand held SAM which can not be used to shoot down airplanes at 30k+ feet.
A plausible chain of events is that the Ukranian military planes have been flying on higher altitudes, out of reach of hand operated SAMs, ever since their AN-26 was shot down. To counter this, rebels have gotten access to advanced "BUK" weapons with substantially better capabilities, with our without Russian aid ( I believe that they were assisted by Russians, but of course I don't have any hard evidence).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
