Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yeah, and we don't notice that in Russia it has long been removed from voorujeniya, and don't notice what the Ukrainian beeches were deployed and were active that day. In General, everything is exactly the same as last time, when Ukrainians shot down the plane over the Black sea. Also to the last unlocked.
There is a reason why the EU sanctions happened after this shootdown. The EU was presented with evidence implicating Russia.
Ukraine would have no reason to deploy anti aircraft against a non-existent threat from the air. The risk of being caught purposefully shooting down a civilian airliner from a nation which it wants to ally itself would outweigh the benefit. So motive is not there to implicate Ukraine. You have to come up with evidence to overcome the rebuttable presumption that this was a Russian operated "beech". We traced it down to the unit.
Why you guys bringing that up again? It was already revealed this was Buk #332 from Russia's 53rd anti aircraft brigade based in Kursk. It was an accident, they thought it was another Ukrainian plane. We get why Russia covers it up, they don't want to admit they were in Ukraine shooting down Ukrainian jets (still makes me shake my head that Ukraine and Russia are engaged in conflict against each other).
As easy as it is to photoshop and the graphics technology today such things can be faked. I know the launcher was in the hands of the Donbas militias and it was moving through the region and shot down the airliner. I KNOW THIS BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. Where it came from I don't know, where it went to? The Russians probably took it from the rebels.
The only 4 things I can hypothesize is the Russians did in fact give the BUK to the rebels. Some officer/soldiers sympathetic to the cause saw a need and took the BUK without permission to the Donbas. Not hard to do if you're a general if you think about it. Some other sympathetic foreign power gave it to them such as the Chechens. Last but not least the Rebels jacked it from an abandoned arsenal.
I lean heavily towards the last. Where did the Rebels get the Strela mobile launcher they had? From Russia too? Just as likely cannibalized from a depot
Even if you want to say it was a non-state actor like the Chechens, nobody sneaks a BUK across Russia without the consent of the Russian government.
The sympathetic foreign power was Russia. It had to deny Ukraine air superiority once it became evident Ukraine was willing to use its air force against the Donbas "militia". This is actually very reasonable considering the disaster awaiting Russia if its proxies were defeated militarily on Russia's border. Many Ukrainian aircraft were shot down before the Buk incident.
You could argue there were enough anti-aircraft equipment in battle ready shape in Donetsk to achieve this, but its unlikely there were enough determined professionals in the area who knew how to use it as well as it was used in the early months. Ukraine's army was not mobilized or maintained at all during the period and that would include any who took up arms against the state in Donbas. There were surely some pro Russian army personnel but from what I've heard, few of them wanted to fight against their fellow countrymen, especially over a situation which many saw as just political.
The vast majority of Ukraine's army depots existed in the west since Soviet Times. The tanks which the rebels have include a few dozen captured T-64s but the majority are T-72's which Ukraine had zero in service in 2014 (most sitting in storage in Kharkov). So unless they infiltrated Kharkov with a train and stole and repaired T-72's they certainly got them from the neighboring state.
Even if you want to say it was a non-state actor like the Chechens, nobody sneaks a BUK across Russia without the consent of the Russian government.
I disagree. It's not unusual at all to see military equipment being schlepped around anywhere in Russia at anytime. I've seen all types of armored and wheeled vehicles on the streets of Smolensk. Not to mention other places. I'm willing to bet it would go largely unquestioned and unnoticed for a BUK launcher to move across Russia on the back of a Volvo. If some colonel or general were to have a mind to do it he could easily get it done. No one would question it. The Russian government may well never have a clue.
Quote:
The sympathetic foreign power was Russia. It had to deny Ukraine air superiority once it became evident Ukraine was willing to use its air force against the Donbas "militia". This is actually very reasonable considering the disaster awaiting Russia if its proxies were defeated militarily on Russia's border. Many Ukrainian aircraft were shot down before the Buk incident.
Agree. It's highly likely that there was a lot of people looking the other way on a lot of things. It's called "plausible deniability" and it has many forms. Certainly Russia was sympathetic. There was not only strategic reasons such as in the case of Crimea but moral reasons too. This war did not have to happen. The reptiles the west put in place in Kiev committed a crime by attacking the people of the Donbas. Any morally upstanding power/people would take action against such sadism. No one will ever tell me different. All you have to do is look at the recent Catalan crisis to see the proper way to handle it.
Quote:
You could argue there were enough anti-aircraft equipment in battle ready shape in Donetsk to achieve this, but its unlikely there were enough determined professionals in the area who knew how to use it as well as it was used in the early months. Ukraine's army was not mobilized or maintained at all during the period and that would include any who took up arms against the state in Donbas. There were surely some pro Russian army personnel but from what I've heard, few of them wanted to fight against their fellow countrymen, especially over a situation which many saw as just political.
They did have enough knowledeable people to get things moving and later many more came to help. I suspect oligarchs in Russia provided a lot of funding. The khazahks emptied dozens of old Soviet warehouses of ammunition stocks and made money doing it. Same no doubt all over the region.
Quote:
The vast majority of Ukraine's army depots existed in the west since Soviet Times. The tanks which the rebels have include a few dozen captured T-64s but the majority are T-72's which Ukraine had zero in service in 2014 (most sitting in storage in Kharkov). So unless they infiltrated Kharkov with a train and stole and repaired T-72's they certainly got them from the neighboring state.
There is more than enough evidence the rebels captured Ukrainian T-72s that were brought out of storage. I've seen videos of trains filled with all kinds of stuff being mobolized by the Ukraine. Even WWII era SU-100s. The rebels got some T-64s from Crimea, that is a certainty. A minimum of 4 to my best knowledge.
One is that the east was under attack and the Donbas fighters were responding to violence imposed. ON the contrary, Ukraine did not begin any type of military operation until long after the Russian backed forces took over most of the cities they now control, extending all the way to Sloviansk. It doesn't even make sense that Ukraine would attack its own cities before the Russian fighters had taken them over. Once again, rebuttable presumption (motive and logic) not overcome. There is no record of Ukraine's army losing any battles until Russia intervened in August at Sloviansk.
Kazakhstan has no motive whatsover to foment a pro Russian rebellion in Ukraine. Quite the opposite of what they want to see happen in their own country near Russia.
Ukraine did not bring any T-72 out of storage until 2015, well after the front lines solidified. Yes the rebels were supplied tanks from Crimea, but that's the same as from Russia.
One is that the east was under attack and the Donbas fighters were responding to violence imposed. ON the contrary, Ukraine did not begin any type of military operation until long after the Russian backed forces took over most of the cities they now control, extending all the way to Sloviansk. It doesn't even make sense that Ukraine would attack its own cities before the Russian fighters had taken them over. Once again, rebuttable presumption (motive and logic) not overcome. There is no record of Ukraine's army losing any battles until Russia intervened in August at Sloviansk.
Kazakhstan has no motive whatsover to foment a pro Russian rebellion in Ukraine. Quite the opposite of what they want to see happen in their own country near Russia.
Ukraine did not bring any T-72 out of storage until 2015, well after the front lines solidified. Yes the rebels were supplied tanks from Crimea, but that's the same as from Russia.
All lies about Russia, the equipment (tanks) of the Ukrainian on the second or third day after the Maidan drove to the East. Even before the first shots.
All lies about Russia, the equipment (tanks) of the Ukrainian on the second or third day after the Maidan drove to the East. Even before the first shots.
This was in June after Luhansk was taken over. Do try to read my posts before telling me what I said was wrong. That particular airstrike was the day during the assault on the local national guard base.
No evidence of Ukraine using its army at all before the events of April 12th in which armed units had taken Sloviansk.
There was no genuine uprising at all. This was a Russian provocation supported by a propaganda campaign.
One is that the east was under attack and the Donbas fighters were responding to violence imposed. ON the contrary, Ukraine did not begin any type of military operation until long after the Russian backed forces took over most of the cities they now control, extending all the way to Sloviansk.
Disagree. That human turd Turchynov had groups of thugs headed there shortly after he became interim president and maybe even sooner they were called outreach squads or something. They went there to take control of the government institutions and on several occasions kill people. Some of them were almost killed by citizens of Kharkov one night.
Small scale conflict started in February all over the area. These were little more than gang fights at first. The Ukrainian army intervention happened later. It still didn't have to happen.
None of it had to happen. The US state department and CIA started this whole mess. All blame starts at the source, in DC and the EU. I don't give a **** what anyone says. Russia has done the moral and right thing in defending the basic human rights of people and possibly preventing more slaughter.
Quote:
Kazakhstan has no motive whatsover to foment a pro Russian rebellion in Ukraine. Quite the opposite of what they want to see happen in their own country near Russia.
The Kazakh government does not but the mafia/oligarchs have an interest in money.
Quote:
Ukraine did not bring any T-72 out of storage until 2015, well after the front lines solidified. Yes the rebels were supplied tanks from Crimea, but that's the same as from Russia.
Need to check that one. Many Russian volunteers came to fight also, many natives chose to fight. Considering the attitude of the nutters in Kiev what would you have done? I would have fought. Passing a law outlawing their native language one of the first acts? That's barbarity.
Speculation. No Ukrainian government or Western Ukrainian anybody went to Donetsk or anywhere in eastern Ukraine to fight anyone until AFTER the local government offices were taken over. I know a lot of people in Eastern Ukraine and not one ever saw anybody come to commit any violence or intimidation from west of the Dneiper. Some locals did try some things and some fights occured, more or less around some Lenin statues but they were between locals only and small scale. I guess we will disagree on what happened and when but a lot of things are on Youtube and none support your idea that there was a threat to anybody in Donbas. There certainly was violence against locals who were pro Ukraine, that's easy to find on youtube. Funny how government controlled areas in eastern Ukraine seem to be just fine, other than the threat of attacks from the east.
Very aware that locals and Russian volunteers took up arms in the conflict. That is the case on both sides actually.
It was a bad situation with some nutters in Kiev who took power and yes that law change was ridiculous, yes there were some bad guys like Tyanybok who were there for a time but that all went away with the elections a couple months after. Elections that Russia's proxies did not allow to take place in areas under their control. Russia wasn't about to watch an election solve the problem they helped create, lest people in Russia get crazy ideas that democracy can change governments they don't like.
Speculation. No Ukrainian government or Western Ukrainian anybody went to Donetsk or anywhere in eastern Ukraine to fight anyone until AFTER the local government offices were taken over. I know a lot of people in Eastern Ukraine and not one ever saw anybody come to commit any violence or intimidation from west of the Dneiper. Some locals did try some things and some fights occured, more or less around some Lenin statues but they were between locals only and small scale. I guess we will disagree on what happened and when but a lot of things are on Youtube and none support your idea that there was a threat to anybody in Donbas. There certainly was violence against locals who were pro Ukraine, that's easy to find on youtube. Funny how government controlled areas in eastern Ukraine seem to be just fine, other than the threat of attacks from the east.
Very aware that locals and Russian volunteers took up arms in the conflict. That is the case on both sides actually.
It was a bad situation with some nutters in Kiev who took power and yes that law change was ridiculous, yes there were some bad guys like Tyanybok who were there for a time but that all went away with the elections a couple months after. Elections that Russia's proxies did not allow to take place in areas under their control. Russia wasn't about to watch an election solve the problem they helped create, lest people in Russia get crazy ideas that democracy can change governments they don't like.
Funny how now Russian-controlled Crimea is doing just fine as well, (other than "international outrage.") However when you are trying to present how "peaceful" the intentions of the new government were ( brought on the backs of the Nationalists, who STILL rule the streets of Ukraine by the way,) you keep on forgetting one important event in Korsun', the warning bell so to speak, of what was to come to anyone not agreeing with the "new government" and its policies.
So let me remind you what THAT was all about, then your narrative ( about how there was nothing threatening to Donetsk) might change;
I think this is the actual footage of it, filmed ( at least partially) by the innocent bystanders - it looks like it.
These people from Crimea ( with no weapons - pay attention) went to Kiev just to protest the events, and look what treatment they've got from your "peaceful" Ukrainian nationalists.
So obviously Donetsk had each and every reason to organize and to fight back, keeping in mind that "pro-Ukrainian rally" gathered there only about 700-800 people.)
P.S. Not to mention that it was a warning sign to the Russians in Crimea as well.
Last edited by erasure; 11-10-2017 at 12:52 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
