|Quoting alfa164 (Reply 80):|
If it is your contention that he was talking about a different plane... please tell us where to find that wreckage. Until you can, it is painfully abvious[sic] that these Russian-backed thugs, thinking they were firing at a Ukrainian jet, are responsible for the loss of more than 300 innocent lives......So you say "the separatist commander did not talk about 'seeing' or 'hearing' a Buk." You are right - and I never said he talked about that. He was more direct; he bragged about the plane they had shot down, without describing the weapon that had been used.
No that is not my contention at all. As I already said, it is easy to imagine how in the circumstances, the separatists thought they were the only people who might shoot down an A/C in that area, and would therefore automatically
claim responsibility for anything shot down. Their claim proves only one thing, they had no plans or intention to shoot down a civilian airliner.
If the posts are genuine then no doubt the Ukranians had seen the separatists posting before, and so could have expected that. The separatists might have fallen into that trap. The fact that the Ukranian and US media spin after the event was so slick point towards the Ukrainians rather than the separatists.
It could turn out that separatists unintentionally shot down MH17, but there is evidence that points the other way as well. I say let the investigators investigate. According to you, no need for that since you have already reached your conclusions?
You need to read this to see that things are not as clear cut as you make out. The US has been stirring up this trouble in the Ukraine for a while.
One point to clear up is that it was the responsibility of the Ukraine to decide on what airspace is safe, ICAO and IATA are not responsible for these decisions. Clearly the Ukranians and the US were aware of the risks of a shoot down before it happened. The US because of the issuance of the "strong warning" to its own airlines, and Ukraine due to the modifications to the restricted area.
|Quoting Mark787 (Reply 69):|
2. in order to stage the shoot down where a specific party is to be "set up" as the guilty party, would be astonishingly difficult to execute....While it is possible to control the outcome of some situations, shooting an airliner down from the sky cannot be controlled.
The Iraq war was the result of a large scale conspiracy. The conspiracy achieved its aim of starting a war based on a false information. It only came out after the invasion that the entire reason for that war was a based on a lie. Similarly, the Gulf of Tonkin fiction involved a conspiracy, that was used to justify the Vietnam war. In between, there have been hundreds more, so conspiracies do happen, even elaborate ones, and they often work (at least in the short term).
In everday life it is rare that an outcome can be explained by an elaborate conspiracy, events are more likely the result of a stuff up, ignorance, mismanagement and so on. However, in war it is different, plans and "conspiracy" theories (if you like) are the meat of that work.
Given the evidence that the Ukraine and the US were aware of the shoot down risk. Any competent military commander or advisor in Ukraine would very quickly see the possibilities for taking advantage of the circumstances where 100's of airline were flying over the war zone. Once the options are on the table, the risks and returns and variations could be assessed. In the end, a Ukrainian plan to bring about a shoot down of a civilian airliner that could be blamed on separatists is comparatively simple and need not involve many people.
1.The Ukranians could shadow civilian A/C, expecting that an unintentional shoot down of an airliner would occur at some point and that they could turn that to their advantage. There is the question here then whether the US and Ukraine conspired to develop this plan together, or was it just the Ukranian's idea. It is possible that the US independently figured out what the Ukranians were going to do and issued the "strong warning" to their own airlines not to fly over the war zone.
2. If the separatists did not get around to shooting an airliner down, then the Ukranians might have to do it themselves. That might involve a single airborne fighter or a small missile crew on the ground. We don't know whether the US placed some constraints on this plan by for example advising Ukraine to make sure that any airliner that got shot down did not have US citizens on it. It could well have been this constraint that forced the Ukrainians to change from the first plan (where a random airliner might be shot down) to a plan where the Ukraine would choose a specific airliner and aircraft with the help of the US (i.e. by passing the pax manifests to the Ukranians).
The plan to exploit this situation is not complex, and arises naturally out of the circumstances. Yes there are risks, and they may yet prove to have been underestimated.
|Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 102):|
If we imagine that the Ukrainian Air Force was "hiding", wouldn't they do it behind an Aeroflot plane, or behind one of the many planes from other Russian airline companies?
If an Aeroflot or Russian A/C was shot down, that would put Russia in the victim role and give them "just cause". There would have been no sanctions on Russia in that case.
As many others have commented, the slick media and propaganda campaign from Ukraine and the US that started just hours after the shooting down of MH17 looked like it had been prepared in advance, like they were primed and ready to spin the story. Conclusions were reached with no information. Exactly like the lead up to the Iraq war.
It is also appears strange that it is likely that there were no pax travelling under a US passport on MH17. How many of the 800 A/C that used this airway in the last few days before the incident had zero documented US pax? This is a question that could be answered by the people with access to that information. It could turn out to be quite common, but it requires someone with access to the data to look into it.[Edited 2014-08-07 21:12:47]
[Edited 2014-08-07 21:20:14]