This one may have been shot down by a surface to air missile.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
By (probably) Ukrainian separatists, if not Ukraine itself.
Posted by Szymon (Member # 7103) on :
Some trigger-happy idiot who was given a gun just ruined lives of 300 families. My bet is separatists, they even posted it on their website. They thought it was a Ukrainian Antonov, a military plane. This is just so outrageous. I flew many times over Ukraine when I went to China, it just makes me so angry that one stupid little person has so much power. It was easier, when there were just bows and spears. Difficult to kill 300 people by accident.
Posted by Szymon (Member # 7103) on :
My comment about me flying over Ukraine was somehow unfinished. I just meant it could've been me, anyone. Which is stating the obvious. But I hope you get what I was trying to convey.
There were 23 US citizens on board.
Posted by Wingracer (Member # 12293) on :
I'm actually surprised this sort of thing doesn't happen even more. Just the other day I read a great article from a highly decorated retired USAF pilot. He told a story about flying over Afghanistan when an AWACS sent him after an unknown bogey. There wasn't supposed to be anything friendly in the sky at the time and it was heading right for the AWACS so they cleared him to shoot without visual confirmation. Fortunately, he felt funny about the whole thing so he violated his orders and flew in for a visual. Turned out to be an unlisted civilian 737 full of U.N. advisers.
Posted by GaalDornick (Member # 8880) on :
What do Ukrainian seperatists stand to gain by shooting down a Malaysian airplane?
Posted by Wingracer (Member # 12293) on :
quote:Originally posted by GaalDornick: What do Ukrainian seperatists stand to gain by shooting down a Malaysian airplane?
Nothing unless they can blame Ukraine for it. Supposedly there are tweets from separatists stating they shot down a Ukrainian military transport at about the same time and radio intercepts saying they made a mistake and shot down a civilian plane. So if they did shoot it down, it was a mistake, not intentional.
Posted by Wingracer (Member # 12293) on :
quote:Originally posted by Szymon: It was easier, when there were just bows and spears. Difficult to kill 300 people by accident.
No they just raped, stole, burned, and murdered their way through the undefended or defeated towns of their enemies.
Posted by Szymon (Member # 7103) on :
quote:Originally posted by Wingracer:
quote:Originally posted by Szymon: It was easier, when there were just bows and spears. Difficult to kill 300 people by accident.
No they just raped, stole, burned, and murdered their way through the undefended or defeated towns of their enemies.
I guess.
And the separatists did confirm they shot it, thinking it was an Antonov. Ukrainian intelligence released a recording of two officials talking- one a separatist "terrorist" and one a Russian colonel. They realised they shot down a civilian plane only after they arrived at the crash site and saw hundreds of bodies.
I imagine the person responsible is wanted dead or alive by separatists. They can lose Russia's support after something like that.
Case probably closed.
[ July 18, 2014, 04:18 AM: Message edited by: Szymon ]
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
Yeap it was the separatists, russians had a hand in it (what a surprise?).
There were 108 top HIV/AIDS researchers and delegates on that plane.
Why do some people want to be separate?
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
you mean in ukraine?
Posted by Szymon (Member # 7103) on :
quote:Originally posted by RivalOfTheRose: Why do some people want to be separate?
If your question is for real: eastern and southeastern Ukraine is populated mostly by Russians. Until recently it wasn't a big problem, because Ukraine was tightly related to Russia anyway. Now they wanted to do what Crimea did- leave Ukraine and join Russia. But failed: Putin is under a lot of pressure from all around the world and decided to just secretly fund them and give them weapons. Amongst them "Buk", SAM systems.
To sum up: they want to be separate in order to be annexed by Russia.
Posted by RivalOfTheRose (Member # 11535) on :
Why doesn't the rest of Ukraine just let them leave?
Posted by Szymon (Member # 7103) on :
Trollin', right?
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
They don't want to lose out on control over the territory, including Sevstopol, Russia's only warm-water port.
They also don't want to accede to elements of gross popular dissatisfaction over the fact that they are such a comically inept and corrupt government that they make russia seem great by comparison. Like, seriously, ukraine is a majorly screwed up country.
Posted by Szymon (Member # 7103) on :
Well, maybe it is screwed up, but not more so than many other. Ukrainians wanted to join the EU, and when Yanukovich blocked the process, they started major protests, then removed him from office. Russia realised that Ukraine might slip away from it's sphere of influence. So it annexed Crimea, not to lose Sevastopol, which was a Russian port on Ukrainian soil under an agreement from the 1990's, when USSR agreed to Ukrainian independence.
Ukraine is unimaginably corrupt, but most of all it is in a state of a god damn war. Things go down during war. Including planes (which, by the way, shouldn't be flying over warzone).
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:[russian tv channels use] retransmitted video images with voice overs that does not represent what the speaker says.
The Dutch prime minister is really really pissed at Putin and he told Putin that he was pissed. Russian TV translated that they had an energetic communication and now working together. They then showed the footage where the observers were saying that they got resistance from the pro-Russians, but the voice over says that the observers have full cooperation with the pro-Russians and work closely together.
Posted by Elison R. Salazar (Member # 8565) on :
quote:Originally posted by Szymon: Well, maybe it is screwed up, but not more so than many other. Ukrainians wanted to join the EU, and when Yanukovich blocked the process, they started major protests, then removed him from office. Russia realised that Ukraine might slip away from it's sphere of influence. So it annexed Crimea, not to lose Sevastopol, which was a Russian port on Ukrainian soil under an agreement from the 1990's, when USSR agreed to Ukrainian independence.
Ukraine is unimaginably corrupt, but most of all it is in a state of a god damn war. Things go down during war. Including planes (which, by the way, shouldn't be flying over warzone).
It goes a little further back, Crimea was originally a part of the Russian Federated Soviet Socialist Republic prior to the 1950's until Khrushchev transferred it for fairly romantic and wishful thinking purposes and was basically approved in 15 minutes without much discussion or debate. There's also the matter that more Russians died per square kilometer defending Hero City Sevastopol than virtually any other part of the Soviet Union in the longest and most spirited defence of any siege of a Russian city in Russian history since the Crimean War of the 1850's. In the Russian public consciousness its a damn important city and to hell with the consequences.
The problems with Ukraine's relationship with the EU is a little more complex; its something that's an interest for Ukrainians in the West who are generally more nationalistic (particularly Lvov) while opposed by the Eastern Ukrainians that generally are more culturally tied to Russia.
The problems leading up to Yanukuvik's ouster is that Ukraine has deep financial problems from living in a country with extremely high heating costs because of geography and a lack of resources and poor economic liberalization post the collapse of the SU. He either had to accept IMF imposed austerity measures and another round of 'Shock Therapy' or a cash loan from Russia in exchange for terminating the EU agreement (which would keep the lights on but wouldn't solve the economic problems either, its giving crack to a crack fiend).
The former was political suicide and would have resulting in heavy handed political and economic pressures from Russia that might have collapsed the economy anyways for no gain so he choose to accept financial aid from Russia.
Then came Maidan, Russia now has Sevastopol and now EU and NATO accession is dead on arrival; NATO won't accept anyone with territorial disputes and Ukraine is an economic basket case that will just dilute the EU economically even further.
Posted by Szymon (Member # 7103) on :
Of course it's more complex and it goes futher back. What it goes down to, there was never such a country as Ukraine up until 20 years ago. It was a part of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth up until 1750's, then Russian for another 250 years. Western Ukraine, including Lwów, was Polish for around 1000 years, but there's virtually no one in Poland who would want to annex part of Ukraine, as is the case with Donieck and basically whole of Eastern Ukraine.
Ukrainians, also called Ruthenians before, are a young nation. Every young nation has to struggle to survive, especially with such a powerful neighbor, whose language is quite similar. Similar goes with Belarus, Latvia and Estonia, who have really large Russian minority (up to 30% percent) and also came to existance together with Ukraine. Lithuania is an exception- it is a country with over 800 years of history.
Of course one could say this or that part of Ukraine is very Russian, many Russians died here during war and stuff. But the fact is: USSR let Ukraine live. In exchange for nuclear weapons that were still on Ukrainian soil in 1994, they guaranteed it's independence. Now they broke it, so they can go to hell. Russia is responsible for this plane being shot down, because it's providing separatists with SAM systems, tanks, small arms and other supplies. And it is happening in Ukraine which independence they guaranteed.
I saw Putin on a press conference yesterday. He was almost crying. I felt anger so passionate in me, I felt like punching him in the face. I believe he is really an evil individual.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote: In the Russian public consciousness its a damn important city and to hell with the consequences.
No. Most Russians don't like the separatists at all, don't give a crap about sevastopol's 'glorious' history under the USSR, and want out of the mess in Ukraine. Putin is having an increasingly difficult time pushing a message via party loyalists because of growing antipathy for the Ukrainian separatists, and discontent for transparent russian meddling in the region.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
And I'm just now finding out that now there's a huge new anti-russian sentiment exploding in Malaysia, a large part of it being inflamed by how separatists looted and desecrated the bodies and also prevented aid workers for retrieving them for islamic burial procedure
i guess this could get more awful but there you go
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Elison R. Salazar:
quote:Originally posted by Szymon: Well, maybe it is screwed up, but not more so than many other. Ukrainians wanted to join the EU, and when Yanukovich blocked the process, they started major protests, then removed him from office. Russia realised that Ukraine might slip away from it's sphere of influence. So it annexed Crimea, not to lose Sevastopol, which was a Russian port on Ukrainian soil under an agreement from the 1990's, when USSR agreed to Ukrainian independence.
Ukraine is unimaginably corrupt, but most of all it is in a state of a god damn war. Things go down during war. Including planes (which, by the way, shouldn't be flying over warzone).
It goes a little further back, Crimea was originally a part of the Russian Federated Soviet Socialist Republic prior to the 1950's until Khrushchev transferred it for fairly romantic and wishful thinking purposes and was basically approved in 15 minutes without much discussion or debate. There's also the matter that more Russians died per square kilometer defending Hero City Sevastopol than virtually any other part of the Soviet Union in the longest and most spirited defence of any siege of a Russian city in Russian history since the Crimean War of the 1850's. In the Russian public consciousness its a damn important city and to hell with the consequences.
Somehow I doubt the Crimean Tartars feel the same way.
What the Russians did to them was no better than what Saddam did to the Kurds in Kirkuk.
Posted by Elison R. Salazar (Member # 8565) on :
That's not relevant to what Russians think of the city, the Crimean Tartars probably fought in the war like every other Soviet ethnicity but over 50% of the country was demographically Russian and that's likely a large portion of the Red Army and thus most of who died defending that city, which is mostly Russian regardless.
quote: Ukrainians, also called Ruthenians before, are a young nation. Every young nation has to struggle to survive, especially with such a powerful neighbor, whose language is quite similar. Similar goes with Belarus, Latvia and Estonia, who have really large Russian minority (up to 30% percent) and also came to existence together with Ukraine. Lithuania is an exception- it is a country with over 800 years of history.
Just a reminder, the Kievan Rus is generally considered the birthplace of Russian culture and civilization aka Ukraine/Kiev. So that ties into it as well.
Posted by Szymon (Member # 7103) on :
Of course. I mean it didn't exist as a "national state".
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Elison R. Salazar: [QB] That's not relevant to what Russians think of the city, the Crimean Tartars probably fought in the war like every other Soviet ethnicity but over 50% of the country was demographically Russian and that's likely a large portion of the Red Army and thus most of who died defending that city, which is mostly Russian regardless.
You completely missed my point.
Crimea is the homeland of the tartars. And the Russians brutally repressed and cleansed them from the Crimea.
Once mans heroic defense of a city is another mans ethnic cleansing.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
To say nothing of I don't care what happened in a war seventy years ago, it's not supposed to give you license to tyrannies and repress people now.
Or at least not do so and claim justification and expect to he taken seriously. Especially since and I still marvel at this when I encounter it, the Soviet Union entered that war for conquest; and were explicit and implicit partners with the Nazis. I'll happily honor the sacrifice and bravery of the soldiers themselves, but their government and its successor can go straight to hell as far as claiming anything like virtue or honor with respect to WWII for itself.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: To say nothing of I don't care what happened in a war seventy years ago, it's not supposed to give you license to tyrannies and repress people now.
Or at least not do so and claim justification and expect to he taken seriously. Especially since and I still marvel at this when I encounter it, the Soviet Union entered that war for conquest; and were explicit and implicit partners with the Nazis. I'll happily honor the sacrifice and bravery of the soldiers themselves, but their government and its successor can go straight to hell as far as claiming anything like virtue or honor with respect to WWII for itself.
To say nothing of the millions who died when Russia forced starvation on eastern Ukraine so they could move in Russian speaking peasants.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
'Historically Russian', remember. It helps if you kind of skip around some places to avoid the sticky ethical questions.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Also, goodness, killing the locals to move your own people in...that reminds me of the behavior of another major power in that war and in that region.
Ah! The Netherlands, right.
Posted by Szymon (Member # 7103) on :
Huh? I don't get the Netherlands part. That it was uninvolved in the conflict and Dutch people still died? Please expound.