reorg (2,270 posts) http://upload.democraticunderground.com/10025273762
So, where is the proof that "rebels"/Russians shot down the plane?
Ugh...
I have read this post a dozen times and I still have no idea what the DUmpmonkie is talking about.
But the sneaky Russians had already transported Buk missile launchers in the middle of March, just to make sure the "rebels" could later shoot down planes at high altitudes?
--- updated for more clarity ---
It isn't any more clear than it was before!
The Security Service of Ukraine says the "rebels" didn't have any missile launchers, so the Russians shipped them in at some point and spirited them away immediately after the accident.
So... who did what again?
reorg (2,270 posts)
2. you think that's on purpose?
The launcher with this number has apparently been identified as Ukrainian:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm48vi4TghY[/youtube]
It's a vehicle number signifying the battery and platoon. A lot of vehicles would have the same number. They don't number every vehicle sequentially.
Don't know what to make of that. Uploaded on March 9
Google translation of video description:
Gorlovki resident, met a whole convoy of military equipment. Experts estimate that anti-missile systems "Buk". That such complexes in Georgia in 2008 successfully shot down several Russian aircraft.
geek tragedy (39,883 posts)
3. Russian government has already admitted there were Buks in rebel-controlled territory near the scene of the wreckage at the time a missile shot the plane down.
The question that has to be answered is why the missile system appeared in the area controlled by the local militia forces shortly before the catastrophe, he stated.
http://rt.com/news/174412-malaysia-plane-russia-ukraine/
So, you're kind of wasting your time by trying to deflect blame from the murderers here.
The rebels did it, and everyone who isn't highly motivated to play dumb knows it.
reorg (2,270 posts)
4. in case you are referring to the Defense Ministry briefing- you should watch it through the end, where they pose a number of questions about the OTHER photo in the slide mentioned above.
reorg (2,270 posts)
6. so, you think that the pictures provided at the press conference were accidently confused?
How is it nitpicking when the official statement by the Ukrainian government illustrates its claims (Buk launcher observed in the night of July 18) with an image that was taken in March, and probably shows a Ukrainian launcher instead of a Russian one?
Both the Ukrainians and the Russians admit there were BUK MLs in the area where the plane was shot down.
reorg (2,270 posts)
10. says the Russians? Since when are you such an RT lover that nothing else matters to you than what Russia reports?
I'll give you that, at least they presented the pictures, and pictures that cannot be shown to be crap within days.
You know- the odds are the press used stock footage of BUK ML to illustrate the story, right?
reorg (2,270 posts)
13. The Russian defense ministry collects radar data and presented what they have, I suppose. I have no clue whatsoever if a missile registers on these radars, do you?
And why would the Russians keep such data under wraps, didn't they provide you with all you need for your conspiracy theory?
The planes shot down in the days prior to 7/17 were hit by shoulder-fired missiles at a much lower range. That the Ukrainians and the DPR militants agree upon, BTW. The Russian data suggest that the missile launcher came from a Ukrainian base. I don't know how well the militants can secure "their" territory - didn't seem to work all that well in the first days at the crash site, did it? Even though it was just a few square miles where the debris was spread. So, who knows who, accidently or even on purpose, who knows, shot down that plane. I hear there are several private armies by oligarchs such as Mr Kolomoyskyi roaming the region.
The whole point of radar it to track flying objects, like missiles, as they fly through the air. Are you suggesting there are 'stealth' missiles the Ukrainians used to shoot down a passenger jet over their airspace because.... why again?
However the site has been under the control of the rebels who have had plenty of time to mess the evidence up including removing the black boxes.
reorg (2,270 posts)
22. do you believe they removed the shrapnel holes and everything that may have remained of a missile? I think you are overestimating what you elsewhere dismissed as a ragtag bunch of miserable drunks?
Puzzledtraveller (4,560 posts)
17. What kind of missile would have had to be used?
Considering the altitude and speed of the aircraft. I was wondering if smaller, more portable rocket systems can bring down a jet flying at 30k feet or so
reorg (2,270 posts)
18. According to everything that was said, not shoulder-fired missiles
at least not the Russian ones listed here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man-portable_air-defense_systems#Missile_models
with a maximum reach of up to 23,000 ft (7,000 m). That's why the altitude above 32000 ft was still considered safe.
Kind of like a BUK ML. Which was reported in the hands of the rebels in the area where the plane was shot down... but it is easier to muddy the waters by making all sorts of claims.
