Quoting Scorpio (Reply 67): Not sure what others think, but at first glance I can already see two big problems with the picture: 1) Plane looks like a 763, not a 772; 2) 'Malaysia' titles are in the wrong place, they should be more to the back.

The biggest problem: that missile would miss. At the speeds they're going, the fighter (and missile) would be behind the airliner (which does look an awful lot like a 767) in a second or less - far too close to be shooting missiles at someone. And the angle is all wrong - the fighter has placed itself in the position where the relative motion of the target is highest, which makes it most difficult to shoot accurately.

It's completely bogus.

-Mir

Quoting Mir (Reply 104):

Not only that, in the image given, the two planes are 50KM from each other and the missile would have to make a right turn to hit the plane right under the window.


But notice, none of the pro-Russian posters are providing any evidence and aren't discussing the information I presented, the debunked theory.

Quoting Mir (Reply 100): two big problems with the picture:

A third problem is the smoke trail from the missile, That Photoshop would have been OK for a missile fired from a stationary helicopter, but a SU-29 or whatever would have passed the beginning of the smoke trail by the time the missile had gotten that far.

I think all of us can agree--Russia has ZERO credibility. I don't know why people believe them....oh wait, it's only Russian apologists that do.

 

Quoting Scorpio (Reply 67): Not sure what others think, but at first glance I can already see two big problems with the picture:

That's some mad photoshop skillz

After this tragic event all the attention was attracted to the search of weapon and the person who launched the missile. I have not seen yet if anybody asked the question what criteria did the Ukrainian Government followed in their assesment of the situation and why they declared a limited but stil safe operation over the battle field. Why Malaysian Airlines did not follow those airlines whic chose to avoid this place for the sake of safety of passangers? In my opinion, that fact that other airlines detoured the war zone makes the Ukrainian Government and Malaysian Airlines ultimately responsible in thistragic loss.

Quoting torontofly (Reply 104): Why Malaysian Airlines did not follow those airlines whic chose to avoid this place for the sake of safety of passangers? In my opinion, that fact that other airlines detoured the war zone makes the Ukrainian Government and Malaysian Airlines ultimately responsible in thistragic loss.

Judgement call. If MH17 hadn't happened, MH would perhaps criticise other airlines for being over-cautious. You only know after the fact.

I'm sure the Flight Ops guys have checklists ready which they follow in case routes go over conflict areas. Then they assess the situation with insurers, and with intelligence and risk assessment firms.


David

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 105):

Another example for been overcaucious is an arcraft preventive maintenance program. You need it for safe aircraft operation.

Quoting torontofly (Reply 104): I have not seen yet if anybody asked the question what criteria did the Ukrainian Government followed in their assesment of the situation and why they declared a limited but stil safe operation over the battle field.

According to the WSJ article the Unkanian officials knew all about the BUK, but dailed to act on it.

Quote:
Three Buk-M1 medium-range antiaircraft systems, also known as the SA-11 Gadfly under the North Atlantic Treaty Organization designation, were known to be in rebel hands as early as July 14, said Vitaly Nayda, the head of the counterintelligence division of Ukraine's security service. (Follow the latest updates on the Malaysia Airlines crash in Ukraine.)
and

Quote: Ukrainian rebels boasted on social media on June 29 that they gained control of a Buk-M1 system when they overran a Ukrainian armed forces base in the conflict zone in eastern Ukraine, Russian news agency Itar-Tass reported.

Quoting torontofly (Reply 106): Another example for been overcaucious is an arcraft preventive maintenance program. You need it for safe aircraft operation.

Being overcautious is, like too little caution, a sign of incompetency. Imagine a weather forecast that predicts a tornado warning each and every day... they'll have superb record with predicting 100% of all damages, injuries and deaths. Safety is very often achieved by following rules and procedures laid out by experts - and the rest are the freak incidents like MH17. If you suppose that Buk missiles are manned by competent people then you won't have to fear these weapons when flying commercial.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 107): Ukrainian rebels boasted on social media on June 29 that they gained control of a Buk-M1 system when they overran a Ukrainian armed forces base in the conflict zone in eastern Ukraine, Russian news agency Itar-Tass reported.

But wasn't the Buk launcher supplied from the Russian army? Did the Ukrainian army ever report losing one or several of these launchers?


David

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 108): But wasn't the Buk launcher supplied from the Russian army? Did the Ukrainian army ever report losing one or several of these launchers?

Reports have conflicted - just like most everything about this disaster - but the consensus now seems to be that it was supplied by Russia. Some propagandists are extremely anxious to blame anyone - and everyone - else.

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 108): But wasn't the Buk launcher supplied from the Russian army? Did the Ukrainian army ever report losing one or several of these launchers?

So what if it was.

Quoting alfa164 (Reply 109):

This consensus reminds me a witch hunt where name of the witch is provided.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 107): Russian news agency Itar-Tass reported.

ITAR-TASS? The Russian news agency? Try again.

Quoting irshava (Thread starter): the missile that brought down MH17 was supplied by Russia and launched from a BUK missile launcher, a system that the Ukrainian army does not possess.

The Ukrainian Armed Forces have 60 operational BUK systems, by their own admission. All of them are accounted for. None of them fell into rebel hands.

Quoting irshava (Reply 6): I refuse to even discuss this with someone who has been presented "the facts" that he desires and arrogantly denies them.

I understand your feelings, and I'm with you and your compatriots, but let's please stick to the facts. Only by sticking to the facts will Ukraine win the propaganda war with Russia.

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 22): It's quite obvious irshava, given the flag next to his name, is heavily biased and unable to have a discussion with anyone who disagrees with him.

Can you blame him? His country and people are under blatant attack by Russia. People are dying as a result of Putin's brain malfunctions ...

Quoting pvjin (Reply 28): It's also obvious that only rebels could have shot it down by an accident, thinking it was an Ukrainian military bird.

No Ukrainian BUK could conceivably have been in a position to hit MH17 where it was shot down.

The location of the launcher is clear -- south of Snizhne. Right near the frontline, in an area where Ukrainian aircraft had been very active bombing rebel positions and dropping supplies to the Ukrainian forces who were surrounded in the border areas.

A very logical position to place the BUK from the perspective of the Russians / rebels.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 59): This is my only problem with the entire separatists shot it down theory, these missiles make a shit load of noise when they launch, it was launched (if the article is correct) from a fairly well populated location, in this day and age every man and his dog has cellphone which can take video. So how come nobody did? How come nobody is coming forward and stating they saw the missile exhaust?

The missile was launched from near the frontline (i.e., in an area where people were sheltering and there was plenty of background noise). In addition, the smoke trail of the missile was photographed. If you push me to go through the effort, I will find the picture for you (once again).

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 62): Metors are quicker, many people filmed that.

Completely different. Here is a BUK launch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2Ea97DTwA8

The missile is out of sight and sound within seconds. No time really to grab a cellphone to take a picture of the launch. By the time the sound of the launch travels 1 km, the rocket is already several kilometers up in the air.

Imagine a cloudy sky combined with this footage...

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 68): t wouldn't have happened if the Ukrainian govt had completely closed the airspace over the area. They knew the rebels had a BUK, they know what a BUK can do, it was their responsibility to make sure the airspace over the area was closed because of this threat.

We know from your previous posts that you have an irrational hatred toward all things Ukrainian. We can only guess what is behind this. Perhaps you were dumped by a Ukrainian girlfriend sometime...?

Whatever the reasons, based on your track record, you have zero credibility commenting on anything concerning Ukraine.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 76): Yes they did the AN-26 shot down on the 14th July was shot down by a BUK.

The An-26 was shot down at 6,000 meters. Nobody knows by what. The Ukrainian authorities claimed it was shot down by some sort of missile fired from accross the border with Russia.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 107): According to the WSJ article the Unkanian officials knew all about the BUK, but dailed to act on it.

No airplane was shot down by a rebel-operated BUK before MH17.

The fact of the matter is that MH17 was most likely shot down by a Russian BUK operated by a Russian (regular army) crew. They just messed up, at their first try...

The efforts Russia and its useful idiots go through to invent alternative theories just add weight to this explanation of events, which is entirely consistent with the available evidence.

[Edited 2014-11-16 15:35:44]

[Edited 2014-11-16 15:57:53]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK76aZ4vku0&

Not sure if mentioned before, there's a new video out from the crash site, apparently filmed just after the crash when the area was still burning.

I find this comment particularly interesting, maybe some Russian speakers can watch the video and confirm it?:

"I speak Russian...
At around 1:11 someone with a heavy Ukrainian accent asks if there were two planes? Several people answer that there was only one plane and the debris got scattered. They then explain that there was a rocket that "tore up" (disintegrated) the plane as hit it. Russians still claim that in was an attack by a Ukrainian military plane. Well, this video can act as an evidence to the contrary."

Quoting Scipio (Reply 113):

You are delusional, and once again, not a single link to back up anything you said, just plain words.

The evidence is there, the evidence is explained. Russian rebels have shot down numerous Ukrainian planes in that area and it is not in any way under Ukrainian control.

Wake up lol.

Have a nice day.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 62): If this went off within listening distance of me I'd whip out the cellphone and start pointing toward the sky, why didn't anyone on the ground near this do that?

And by the time the cellphone had left your pocket, the missile is already at ~10,000ft. Only a smoke trail to see then and even so, any wind will dissipate that quickly.

Quoting Scorpio (Reply 67): Not sure what others think, but at first glance I can already see two big problems with the picture: 1) Plane looks like a 763, not a 772;

I'd have said 767-200. Can anyone guess the airline?


If I had to guess, I'd maybe say Air Italy? Though the plane in the satellite image doesn't seem to have the stripe over the rear fuselage between the vertical stab and horizontal stab....hmmm. Hilariously bad propaganda on Russia's part. It would seem that they're desperate.

Quoting irshava (Reply 70): Russia's image is from a 2012 Google Earth file.

LOL.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 73): I bet if say a USN guided missile cruiser shot down an airliner taking off from an airport in the Gulf they would also claim it was a threat and a legitimate target in a potential combat zone.

Indeed.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 73): The captain would probably get a medal.

This was disgusting and unimaginably stupid of the US Military to do.

Quoting alfa164 (Reply 81): A lot of infrastructure has been wiped-out.

Including power, which was cut to the area at the beginning of the month. Most people's cell phone's had probably run out of battery by then, which makes videoing the Buk a bit difficult.
http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2014_0...hting-in-the-east-of-Ukraine-1730/

Quoting alfa164 (Reply 81): "Noise" isn't unusual; I suspect many residents simply try to hide under these circumstances.

I would.

Quoting alfa164 (Reply 109): but the consensus now seems to be that it was supplied by Russia.

  

Quoting irshava (Reply 115): You are delusional

You do realise that he is on your side? Scipio's post was actually a very good one.

[Edited 2014-11-16 18:28:29]

Quoting pvjin (Reply 114): "I speak Russian... At around 1:11 someone with a heavy Ukrainian accent asks if there were two planes? Several people answer that there was only one plane and the debris got scattered. They then explain that there was a rocket that "tore up" (disintegrated) the plane as hit it. Russians still claim that in was an attack by a Ukrainian military plane. Well, this video can act as an evidence to the contrary."

Thank you for the translation! Despite the disinformation campaign from Russia. the Russian-backed "rebels", and a couple of cronies here on A.net, the evidence continues to point to one conclusion: the Russian-backed, Russian-supplied rag-tag army of mercenaries, drunks, and malcontents fired whenever they heard the sounds of an aircraft overhead, and brought down MH17.

Quoting torontofly (Reply 111): This consensus reminds me a witch hunt where name of the witch is provided.

Actually, the witch herself/himself/itself took credit for being the perpetrator. Perhaps you missed that part.

Quoting Scorpio (Reply 67): Not sure what others think, but at first glance I can already see two big problems with the picture: 1) Plane looks like a 763, not a 772 2) 'Malaysia' titles are in the wrong place, they should be more to the back.

It's definitely not a 772.

All 777s have straight inboard flaps trailing edge perpendicular to the fuselage. The plane on the Russian picture has swept back trailing edge similar to 767.

The 777 tailplane has less taper.

And you are right, the title "malaysia" is on their 772s written over the wing with only one letter (m or a depending on left/right side) in front of the leading edge at the root. On the Russian picture the whole title is in front of the leading edge.

I agree, most likely a 763, but definitely not a 772.

But it doesn't matter. No Russian journalist dares to copy what we write here. And the picture is for internal Russian use. For the uneducated TV watcher it makes no difference.

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 118): But it doesn't matter. No Russian journalist dares to copy what we write here. And the picture is for internal Russian use. For the uneducated TV watcher it makes no difference.

...and there are those posters here who say they "won't trust Western media"...   

What about the oxygen mask? Did this guy just make it up?

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/09/world/...laysia-airlines-crash-oxygen-mask/

Quoting zkojq (Reply 116): You do realise that he is on your side? Scipio's post was actually a very good one.

You are right and I am sorry Scipio.
I read that as "Ukraine bombing rebels" and for some reason I thought you were pointing to the fact that this territory was being raided by Ukrainian bombers, etc (which is not true, as of yet, I haven't heard of the Air Force dropping loads on rebels).

Again, I apologize for the misunderstanding which was completely my fault. I thought a troll was once again attempting to change the subject. I am sorry Scipio.

I was also in a hurry while reading it and replying as I was traveling.

Quoting zkojq (Reply 116): I'd have said 767-200. Can anyone guess the airline?

If you type in on Google images, in Russian, "Boeing view from the top", this is one of the first images to come up. It is an image of a test flight for the 767-200.

Type in " боинг вид сверху " and it is the first image to show up. The titles say Boeing 767, but the Russians photoshopped the 767 out.

[Edited 2014-11-16 20:40:05]

Quoting dvautier (Reply 120):

I don't understand the meaning of your post? You mean what does him having an oxygen mask on mean?

I can only suspect that they dropped as soon as there was a decompression of the cabin and that the plane was torn apart after a significant amount of stress was placed on it. I would assume some people had several seconds to put on a mask, but it is strange that only one person was able to do so. Also, you never know if the rebels tampered with the evidence. Keep in mind, Ukrainians had no access to the wreckage. Only OSCE and the rebels... and if you've been following the news, you'd know the scandal the OSCE is involved in now... but that is besides the point.

It is very strange that 1 person had a mask on, if it is true. But to say that plane broke apart straight away is not correct. The missile is believed to have hit the plane under captain's window. This immediately did not break up the aircraft, but it would depressurize it and lead masks to fall down. Again, maybe there was enough time to grab it.

Quoting Scipio (Reply 113): In addition, the smoke trail of the missile was photographed. If you push me to go through the effort, I will find the picture for you (once again).

I'd like to see that.

Quoting Scipio (Reply 113): The missile is out of sight and sound within seconds. No time really to grab a cellphone to take a picture of the launch. By the time the sound of the launch travels 1 km, the rocket is already several kilometers up in the air.

Yet you just mentioned above that sopmeone got a phot of the smoke trail.

Quoting Scipio (Reply 113): No airplane was shot down by a rebel-operated BUK before MH17.

The AN-26 was.

Quoting irshava (Reply 115): You are delusional, and once again, not a single link to back up anything you said, just plain words.

Wow comprehension isn't your strong point, Scipio is on your side an buys into your argument.

Quoting zkojq (Reply 116): And by the time the cellphone had left your pocket, the missile is already at ~10,000ft. Only a smoke trail to see then and even so, any wind will dissipate that quickly.

Apparently someone got a photo, we're just waiting for it to be produced.

Still my main point is Ukraine allowed civilian passanger aircraft to cross into a war zone when they knew the enemy had high altitude ground to air missiles, that's incompetence on behalf of the Ukraine, it's their fault the plane was where it should never have been, it's their fault all those people died, cause and effect people. It's dead simple.

I'm going with the WSJ over this, they state Ukranian intelligence knew about the BUK, they are far more believable than media outlets.

BTW irshava why are you posting on airliners.net when you should be on the front lines fighting for you country?

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 107): According to the WSJ article the Unkanian officials knew all about the BUK, but dailed to act on it.

Actually, the airspace was closed up to 30,000 ft. The Ukranians may have assumed that no sentient human being would fail to check the IFF before firing. The AN-26 was not brought down by a BUK (as far as we know) and, even if it was, the IFF would have provided a green light to fire.

Below is just one of the quotes about the downing of the AN-26.

Quoting Scipio (Reply 113): The An-26 was shot down at 6,000 meters. Nobody knows by what. The Ukrainian authorities claimed it was shot down by some sort of missile fired from accross the border with Russia.

Quoting dvautier (Reply 120): What about the oxygen mask? Did this guy just make it up?

From the article:

Quote: ["The mask was attached around the victim's neck with an elastic strap. The Netherlands Forensic Institute examined the mask for fingerprints, saliva and DNA, but the results were inconclusive," the prosecutor's office said in a statement Thursday."It is not known how and at what point the mask came to be around the victim's neck. The passenger's relatives were informed at the time. None of the other victims recovered were found to be wearing oxygen masks."

Weird.

Quoting irshava (Reply 121): If you type in on Google images, in Russian, "Boeing view from the top", this is one of the first images to come up. It is an image of a test flight for the 767-200. Type in " боинг вид сверху " and it is the first image to show up. The titles say Boeing 767, but the Russians photoshopped the 767 out.

Wow, nice find!

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 123): Yet you just mentioned above that sopmeone got a phot of the smoke trail.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 123): Apparently someone got a photo, we're just waiting for it to be produced.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...rt-mid-air-killing-298-people.html
As much as I detest the Daily Mail....

I felt then, as I feel now, that the
politicians who took us to war should
have been given the guns and told to
settle their differences themselves,
instead of organising nothing better
than legalised mass murder.
These wise words have been attributed to Harry Patch, the last surviving soldier of World War 1.

Sadly, it didn't get better; on the contrary, in the 21st century it has become worse than ever before.
The loss of flight MH-17 is a tragic example for this.

What is happening is that the powers controlling the governments of the western world, and much of the rest of the world, would have liked to instigate a WW-III but, luckily, that didn't happen (yet).
In the absence of that, they want at least a New Cold War; war is good for profits.
And whether Russia, i.e. Putin, likes it or not, it is going to be the new target.
Or is already, one can probably safely say.

What is equally sad to see is that far too many of the contributors to this particular thread are only too willing to perpetuate that Cold War mentality.

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 126): What is happening is that the powers controlling the governments of the western world, and much of the rest of the world, would have liked to instigate a WW-III but, luckily, that didn't happen (yet).

It's mainly Putin who is war mongering at the moment, not western world. Of course that might change if Americans elect a Republican as their new president after Obama.

Quoting pvjin (Reply 127): It's mainly Putin who is war mongering at the moment, not western world. Of course that might change if Americans elect a Republican as their new president after Obama.

We probably would have peace on our Earth, very quickly -
.... if only the Americans would just go home!

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 123): I'd like to see that.

Here you go:

http://ukraineatwar.blogspot.com/201...-location-detected-of-missile.html
http://twitter.com/WowihaY/status/489807649509478400/photo/1

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 128): We probably would have peace on our Earth, very quickly - .... if only the Americans would just go home!

I don't think the Ukrainians would believe this.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 123): BTW irshava why are you posting on airliners.net when you should be on the front lines fighting for you country?

Combating Putin's trolls is one of the possible ways to defend his country.

Quoting LovesCoffee (Reply 124): Actually, the airspace was closed up to 30,000 ft. The Ukranians may have assumed that no sentient human being would fail to check the IFF before firing. The AN-26 was not brought down by a BUK (as far as we know) and, even if it was, the IFF would have provided a green light to fire. Below is just one of the quotes about the downing of the AN-26.

So now Scipio is an authority on this matter? The airspace should have been closed completely, there is no excuse for not doing so. The AN-26 was shot down at 6500m, too high for a MANPAD, Ukrainian intelligence according to WSJ knew of the BUK on the 15th July.

Quoting zkojq (Reply 125): As much as I detest the Daily Mail....

Would you look at that, a clear blue sky, when loads of people posting above have been saying it was a cloudy overcast day, so what was it clear blue sky's like the photo or overcast like people above say it was?

Quoting pvjin (Reply 127): It's mainly Putin who is war mongering at the moment, not western world.

I know you don't believe that because it's going against hundreds of posts you've made in the non av section criticising the US.

Quoting L410Turbolet (Reply 131): Combating Putin's trolls is one of the possible ways to defend his country.

He'd be much more use to his country out in the field in combat.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 123): BTW irshava why are you posting on airliners.net when you should be on the front lines fighting for you country?

Haha, you literally have no details to back up any claims to what you've said in this forum, so you resort to a personal attack? The Ukrainian army is doing fine without me, I'd rather coordinate supplies and aid packages to Donbas, and I'm a university student.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 132): He'd be much more use to his country out in the field in combat.

About as useful as spellcheck on your computer/phone.

But let's talk about the evidence..... oops. You have none.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 124): Unkanian officials

....

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 123): sopmeone got a phot

....

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 123): an buys into your argument

....

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 123): you country?

....

[Edited 2014-11-17 05:32:21]

Quoting YoungMans (Reply 126): Sadly, it didn't get better; on the contrary, in the 21st century it has become worse than ever before. The loss of flight MH-17 is a tragic example for this.

You're over exaggerating. This didn't occur because of a World War or because of Cold War tensions, this is a proxy war, just like in Georgia, because Russia is dissatisfied that the Ukrainian people overthrew their government and selected to have a westward orientation, one of European style. Someone in the Kremlin didn't like this, hired a bunch of Chechens and some of his own military to go stage the siege of cities, some of which were voted the most patriotic in Ukraine, only 2 years ago. You're trying to tell me that these people want to live in Russia?

This didn't start over U.S.-Russia tensions, it started when drunk rebels knocked down a passenger aircraft thinking it was an Antonov cargo plane. The tensions came when the west implemented sanctions, and this isn't enough.

How about they give back the world's third largest nuclear arsenal that Ukraine gave away after independence in exchange for its territorial integrity.

Quoting LovesCoffee (Reply 124): The Ukrainians may have assumed that no sentient human being would fail to check the IFF before firing.

Well that's their mistake then. How can you assume something like this, especially when hundreds of lives depend on this assumption. It is an ok assumption to make if flying over a controlled area with the actual armies and representatives of states that follow strict protocols on engaging in battle. Trained military personnel would have checked the IFF, they would wait for an order and so on. These rebels do not follow such protocols. They are unpredictable in what they do. They are not accountable to their state in the sense that would prevent them for engaging in improper conduct.

Firms exist to make a profit and governments require revenue. Ukraine had the option of closing that airspace. In doing so they would lose a lot of potential revenue (overflying charge) and trust from airlines as well as inadvertently be helping neighbouring states that would gain from the revenue from redirected flights. Of course Ukraine didn't expect any airliner to be shot down, otherwise I have no doubt they would have closed that airspace. However they had this option available to them. I agree it would have been an overreaction if they knew the rebels had no capability to shoot down an airline at cruise, had constant and up to date information on the rebels activities and generally no uncertainty on their artillery. However if they did indeed know about the rebels obtaining the Buk and realised that it was possible for them to shoot down an aircraft at cruise altitude, or were unsure of the capabilities of the rebels, then they should have taken appropriate action. If money wasn’t at all a factor, they would have probably taken this route. Of course, they didn't have the benefit of hindsight, so closing the airspace may seem extreme, but in that case they should have informed relevant authorities that the rebels had obtained weaponry capable of shooting down an airliner at cruise. We know that some airlines had already stopped flying over this area, which means that they must have believed sufficient risk existed even prior to the reports of the Buk. MH thus had an option to stop overflying this region which would have resulted in higher costs (fuel etc.). I do not believe that MH or any other airline flying over that region was knowingly putting lives in danger, however, if money was again not a factor, MH and other airlines would have most likely redirected flights. There was a lot of uncertainty in this period which is why flights were still being carried ahead, however if Ukraine and MH as well as the other airlines overflying that region knew about the capabilities of the rebels weaponry, the blame lies mostly with them.

Quoting irshava (Reply 133): Haha, you literally have no details to back up any claims to what you've said in this forum, so you resort to a personal attack?

You say this and then dedicate an entire post on a users spelling mistakes? As well as that, being in a rush is not an excuse for not reading someones post and then calling them delusional based on what you thought you read. If you do not have the time to read the post, do not reply to it based on what you expected it to say, especially if your reply is as useless as calling someone delusional.

Quoting alfa164 (Reply 117): drunks

Quoting irshava (Reply 135): drunk

Please provide the results of the blood tests conducted on the rebels after the shoot down.

Quoting irshava (Reply 135): This didn't occur because of a World War or because of Cold War tensions, this is a proxy war, just like in Georgia, because Russia is dissatisfied that the Ukrainian people overthrew their government and selected to have a westward orientation, one of European style. Someone in the Kremlin didn't like this, hired a bunch of Chechens and some of his own military to go stage the siege of cities, some of which were voted the most patriotic in Ukraine, only 2 years ago. You're trying to tell me that these people want to live in Russia? This didn't start over U.S.-Russia tensions, it started when drunk rebels knocked down a passenger aircraft thinking it was an Antonov cargo plane. The tensions came when the west implemented sanctions, and this isn't enough. How about they give back the world's third largest nuclear arsenal that Ukraine gave away after independence in exchange for its territorial integrity.

         As an answer to all the pro-Russian attempts at misdirecting the arguments here, your statement is a succinct and honest evaluation of the issue.

Quoting AIRWALK (Reply 136): Please provide the results of the blood tests conducted on the rebels after the shoot down.

If you'd bother to look at the videos of news services on the scene of the shoot-down, at the times investigators were trying to get to the wreckage for their investigations, you wouldn't need blood tests - you could see it for yourself. Of course, that would destroy another of your attempts to distract us from the facts...

Quoting AIRWALK (Reply 136): However if they did indeed know about the rebels obtaining the Buk and realized that it was possible for them to shoot down an aircraft at cruise altitude, or were unsure of the capabilities of the rebels, then they should have taken appropriate action. If money wasn’t at all a factor,

You are assuming that "the rebels" are the ones who operated the buk which brought down MH-17; this isn't known fact and in my opinion is a very remote possibility, if that. The buk launcher that brought down MH-17 is currently in Russian territory, there can be no doubt about that. If it was of Ukrainian origin it seems obvious that by now the Russians would have brought the press in to see this "Ukrainian" launcher (and remaining missiles) to settle this issue; or at least make a purposeful claim that the launcher in question was from Ukraine inventory and not from Russian inventory. The Russian lack of action here is a message in itself.

Quoting AIRWALK (Reply 136): Trained military personnel would have checked the IFF

"Trained" military personnel wouldn't have needed to check "the IFF." A "trained" air defense commander would have been able to discern that a target flying a straight and level course at 33,000 feet on a busy airway (at the junction of three civilian airways) was 99.9% certain to be a civilian airliner.

This also again raises the issue of how IFF is used by air defense units. IFF is not an inclusive piece of information - that a target is broadcasting a "friendly" code is not reason to declare a target non-hostile (otherwise the enemy would merely set their IFF to broadcast the same code as an airliner and fly anywhere with impunity.) IFF is used only to exclude a target from being considered hostile. The "friendly" codes are a top secret piece of information, the only people who know them are the air defense and the friendly air force. This has been covered here before.

There is yet another reason to exclude IFF from the subject if one wishes to pursue the "rogue launcher" theory. A buk TELAR has no IFF capability, that function exists in the command vehicle with the search radar. So if a buk TELAR were operating individually they would be blind to IFF information.

This all brings up a subject that I've covered here before; I believe it extremely likely that the TELAR was operating in conjunction with its command module. Therefore I consider it extremely likely that an airliner was the intended target of that launch. The site chosen to place that launcher is almost directly under the intersection of three airways, I don't think this happened by chance. I also think it extremely unlikely that some rogue infantrymen would have had the skills to operate the TELAR.

I believe that there is a Russian air defense battalion commander, or possibly even a notch or two higher up who wanted to pour gasoline on a smouldering fire and force Putin to take more decisive action than he had been doing in the "rebel" region.

Quoting AIRWALK (Reply 136): Trained military personnel would have checked the IFF, they would wait for an order and so on.

Iran Air 655 was transmitting the correct transponder "squawk" code typical of a civilian aircraft and maintained English-speaking radio contact with appropriate air traffic control facilities.

If the USN can't get it right how can a group of untrained rebels get it right? 655 wasn't flying over a warzone unlike MH17.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 140): If the USN can't get it right how can a group of untrained rebels get it right?

At ;least we finally get an admission from you: you agree the rebels shot down the airliner.

I find the Russian evidence highly interesting. That makes so much more sense.

Quoting alfa164 (Reply 141): At ;least we finally get an admission from you: you agree the rebels shot down the airliner.

This is unproven. Both sides have the BuK system.

Quoting seahawk (Reply 143): I find the Russian evidence highly interesting. That makes so much more sense.

I would like to see the missile that has ball's larger than 50.Cal bullet...  

Quoting alfa164 (Reply 141): At ;least we finally get an admission from you: you agree the rebels shot down the airliner.

I wouldn't call that an admission, my stance on the matter is I really don't care who shot it down, that's irrelevant when the airliner should not have been in the area, it's the Ukrainian govts fault first and foremost, they ignored the issue didn't close the airspace and MH17 was downed.

Quoting AIRWALK (Reply 136): Please provide the results of the blood tests conducted on the rebels after the shoot down.

Your request would be absolutely appropriate if the discussion was about a traffic accident in Sydney.

Unfortunately, in the case of this bunch of idots called separatists, there is no need to to blood tests. If you knew anybody living in the area you would know that.

Quoting seahawk (Reply 143): I find the Russian evidence highly interesting.

Which evidence?

Quoting alfa164 (Reply 137): If you'd bother to look at the videos of news services on the scene of the shoot-down, at the times investigators were trying to get to the wreckage for their investigations, you wouldn't need blood tests - you could see it for yourself.

Bother? Do you know for a fact that you have seen every single news article and video from the scene? I thought no one knew who fired the missile, but if you have evidence that whoever did was drunk please share it with me.

Quoting alfa164 (Reply 137): Of course, that would destroy another of your attempts to distract us from the facts...

Please tell me exactly what facts I am distracting people from. I am only discussing my opinion on where the blame lies.

Quoting tailskid (Reply 138): You are assuming that "the rebels" are the ones who operated the buk which brought down MH-17; this isn't known fact and in my opinion is a very remote possibility, if that.

I was basing my assumption on them having fired it due to incompetence and ignorance. I was advancing that theory. What's your opinion on who fired it?

Quoting tailskid (Reply 138): "Trained" military personnel wouldn't have needed to check "the IFF

Agreed, I was just using it as an example of one of the things that could be done because someone brought it up.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 140): If the USN can't get it right how can a group of untrained rebels get it right? 655 wasn't flying over a warzone unlike MH17.

I agree, that's the whole point I am trying to make. That's why I think the blame lies primarily with Ukraine.

Quoting Unflug (Reply 147): Unfortunately, in the case of this bunch of idots called separatists, there is no need to to blood tests. If you knew anybody living in the area you would know that.

I know and understand what you mean. However to make a case that whoever fired the missile was drunk at the time without having any evidence at all on who even fired the missile is incorrect. That in itself is a form of propaganda.

Quoting AIRWALK (Reply 145): What's your opinion on who fired it?

Members of the Russian Army's 53rd air defense Brigade.

Quoting tailskid (Reply 138): I believe it extremely likely that the TELAR was operating in conjunction with its command module. Therefore I consider it extremely likely that an airliner was the intended target of that launch. The site chosen to place that launcher is almost directly under the intersection of three airways, I don't think this happened by chance. I also think it extremely unlikely that some rogue infantrymen would have had the skills to operate the TELAR. I believe that there is a Russian air defense battalion commander, or possibly even a notch or two higher up who wanted to pour gasoline on a smouldering fire and force Putin to take more decisive action than he had been doing in the "rebel" region.

Quoting tailskid (Reply 146): Members of the Russian Army's 53rd air defense Brigade.

Then why was it transported on a stolen semi truck and trailor, why only the launch vehicle and not all the other equipment that goes with a BUK, if it was operated buy Russian troops I'd be certain they would take all the necessary equipment and would transport it using military transport equipment, they probably wouldn't shoot down an airliner, they're not the USN you know  

tailskid, with all due respect you have no slightest idea what is what you called "the Russian Army."
It is completely out of question. It simply cannot happen here.
The system of command chain is well-structured and extremely rigorous.
You simply have no idea what you are talking about.
Oh...

Quoting irshava (Reply 135): This didn't start over U.S.-Russia tensions, it started when drunk rebels knocked down a passenger aircraft thinking it was an Antonov cargo plane. The tensions came when the west implemented sanctions, and this isn't enough.

Actually it started months before when some rebels decided to overthrow a legitimately elected government. When they should have waited and voted them out, instead they took the violent route which lead to where we are now. Not the actions of a country which wants to be part of Europe IMO.