Just Thinking about Recent Events in the Ukraine

[ryan]

Try again.

Operation Northwoods involved suggestions to hijack and making disappear a commercial airliner and then for some reason months later somehow managing to replace a commercial flight from the same airline with the airplane you hijacked and disappeared months earlier, and somehow managing to conspire to hide the hundreds of bodies and airplane that came from whichever flight you aren't using the bodies and aircraft from?

How in the name of everything that is sensible and good does any of this make sense? Hijacking and disappearing a commercial plane months ago because you want to blow up a different plane months later in an entirely different place in order to implicate the Russians in it? What exactly could have been achieved by hijacking and disappearing MH370 that would have made a false flag operation against MH17 make any sense? Either you've got to hide/murder hundreds of crew and passengers (and bodies) from one flight, replace an airplane with another in a major airline for some reason (why?) without the airline staff know or whistleblow, hide the extra plane, use MH370 for some reason as the false flag attack plane instead of MH17 plane (again, for reasons that I fail to grasp), etc. etc.

Why not just blow up the plane you want to blame the Russians for instead of this bizarre convulted scenario involving extra complexity, an extra commercial airline, extra hundreds of people you have to murder and hide bodies (or hide and not reveal the location of hundreds of people who survived one of the flights (or indeed have all 500+ bodies on one plane and hope the investigators don't notice hundreds of extra dead bodies or are they on the payroll of the guilty part?).

Are you serious or what?

Try harder.

Try hard enough, and you can make the facts fit any crazy idea you like. If you have to try that hard, it is a good indication that your idea is indeed crazy.

Yes, but I would expect a good deception to be hard to figure out, especially when you realize what's at stake, and I would expect the general public to say exactly what Archimedes says. The whole thing stinks of deception.

There is a reason why the plane was aloud to fly over that area - because this stuff just doesn't happen.

 

[Archimedes]

Try harder.

yes, very cute.

How about answering the actual questions put forth?

How and why does it makes sense to hijack and disappear Mh370 in order todo something nefarious with MH17 months later?

Your attempts to be clever ("try harder") betray a lack of ability to actually answer direct questions about the subject.

 

[ryan]

Try harder.

yes, very cute.

How about answering the actual questions put forth?

How and why does it makes sense to hijack and disappear Mh370 in order todo something nefarious with MH17 months later?

Your attempts to be clever ("try harder") betray a lack of ability to actually answer direct questions about the subject.

I said that because you are taking the obvious position and not accepting any other possibility - that is ridiculous. Neither of us have any more information than the other assuming that we are both caught up. So any argument for or against me will become very thin very fast.

 

[bilby]

Try again.

Operation Northwoods involved suggestions to hijack and making disappear a commercial airliner and then for some reason months later somehow managing to replace a commercial flight from the same airline with the airplane you hijacked and disappeared months earlier, and somehow managing to conspire to hide the hundreds of bodies and airplane that came from whichever flight you aren't using the bodies and aircraft from?

How in the name of everything that is sensible and good does any of this make sense? Hijacking and disappearing a commercial plane months ago because you want to blow up a different plane months later in an entirely different place in order to implicate the Russians in it? What exactly could have been achieved by hijacking and disappearing MH370 that would have made a false flag operation against MH17 make any sense? Either you've got to hide/murder hundreds of crew and passengers (and bodies) from one flight, replace an airplane with another in a major airline for some reason (why?) without the airline staff know or whistleblow, hide the extra plane, use MH370 for some reason as the false flag attack plane instead of MH17 plane (again, for reasons that I fail to grasp), etc. etc.

Why not just blow up the plane you want to blame the Russians for instead of this bizarre convulted scenario involving extra complexity, an extra commercial airline, extra hundreds of people you have to murder and hide bodies (or hide and not reveal the location of hundreds of people who survived one of the flights (or indeed have all 500+ bodies on one plane and hope the investigators don't notice hundreds of extra dead bodies or are they on the payroll of the guilty part?).

Are you serious or what?

Try harder.

Try hard enough, and you can make the facts fit any crazy idea you like. If you have to try that hard, it is a good indication that your idea is indeed crazy.

Yes, but I would expect a good deception to be hard to figure out, especially when you realize what's at stake, and I would expect the general public to say exactly what Archimedes says. The whole thing stinks of deception.

There is a reason why the plane was aloud to fly over that area - because this stuff just doesn't happen.

Then you are doomed to never know anything. Everything you believe could be lies. Including the conspiracy theories you currently subscribe to. Because that's just what they want you to think; otherwise, why would you think it?

 

[barbos]

Yes, it was detected by US, same way they detected russian forces near border on .... on old satellites photos.
And same way WMD were detected in Iraq. These are all facts too.

Launch plumes are far more precise than photo recon.

It's not about plumes, It is about US lying. US lied about WMD in Iraq, they lied about russian forces being concentrated near border. They lied about spying on american people, and they lied about spying on their own allies.
And chances are good, they are lying about having plume evidence now.

 

[ryan]

Then you are doomed to never know anything. Everything you believe could be lies. Including the conspiracy theories you currently subscribe to. Because that's just what they want you to think; otherwise, why would you think it?

We both "know" what we have been told had happened. But only one of us is making an absolute judgement. I reserve my judgement based on historical events with commonalities. The U.S. has made false claims, whether they were in on it or not I am not sure, in the past to get what they want. One such event was the invasion of Iraq from bad information given by one questionable person.

Having said that, if I had to make a judgement, I would unconfidently have to go with what I have been told.

 

[bilby]

Then you are doomed to never know anything. Everything you believe could be lies. Including the conspiracy theories you currently subscribe to. Because that's just what they want you to think; otherwise, why would you think it?

We both "know" what we have been told had happened. But only one of us is making an absolute judgement.

Why are you doing that?

I reserve my judgement based on historical events with commonalities. The U.S. has made false claims, whether they were in on it or not I am not sure, in the past to get what they want. One such event was the invasion of Iraq from bad information given by one questionable person.

Having said that, if I had to make a judgement, I would unconfidently have to go with what I have been told.

Why? What is wrong with simply saying "I don't know"?

 

[ryan]

We both "know" what we have been told had happened. But only one of us is making an absolute judgement.

Why are you doing that?

What does this question have to do with what I said?

I reserve my judgement based on historical events with commonalities. The U.S. has made false claims, whether they were in on it or not I am not sure, in the past to get what they want. One such event was the invasion of Iraq from bad information given by one questionable person.

Having said that, if I had to make a judgement, I would unconfidently have to go with what I have been told.

Why? What is wrong with simply saying "I don't know"?

if I had to make a choice

 

[tupac chopra]

delete

 

[bilby]

Why are you doing that?

What does this question have to do with what I said?

You said one of us was making an absolute judgement. I know it isn't me; so I was wondering why you would do such a thing.

 

[ryan]

What does this question have to do with what I said?

You said one of us was making an absolute judgement. I know it isn't me; so I was wondering why you would do such a thing.

It is you who seems positive, "then you are doomed to never know anything". You want me to take this as knowledge, and without any investigation yet!

 

[Archimedes]

yes, very cute.

How about answering the actual questions put forth?

How and why does it makes sense to hijack and disappear Mh370 in order todo something nefarious with MH17 months later?

Your attempts to be clever ("try harder") betray a lack of ability to actually answer direct questions about the subject.

I said that because you are taking the obvious position and not accepting any other possibility - that is ridiculous. Neither of us have any more information than the other assuming that we are both caught up. So any argument for or against me will become very thin very fast.

Uh huh. Where did I say I accepted no other possibilities? I'm asking about the stupidity of the possibility you're suggesting.

You're avoiding the obvious question. What is the link between MH370 and MH17 and why does it make sense on any level whatsoever for someone to hijack MH370 in order to swap it out for MH17 months later and arrange for the ludicrously complicated conspiracy of covering up such a bizarre scenario, before blowing it up in a false flag operation? What is the advantage for doing that as opposed to simply blowing up the plane (MH17) you want to accuse the Russians of being responsible for blowing up?

 

[Keith&Co.]

And chances are good, they are lying about having plume evidence now.

How do you calculate those chances?
Is there actual math involved? Or is it just 'And i would like to believe they are lying about...'??

 

[ryan]

I said that because you are taking the obvious position and not accepting any other possibility - that is ridiculous. Neither of us have any more information than the other assuming that we are both caught up. So any argument for or against me will become very thin very fast.

Uh huh. Where did I say I accepted no other possibilities?

my bad

I'm asking about the stupidity of the possibility you're suggesting.

You're avoiding the obvious question. What is the link between MH370 and MH17 and why does it make sense on any level whatsoever for someone to hijack MH370 in order to swap it out for MH17 months later and arrange for the ludicrously complicated conspiracy of covering up such a bizarre scenario, before blowing it up in a false flag operation? What is the advantage for doing that as opposed to simply blowing up the plane (MH17) you want to accuse the Russians of being responsible for blowing up?

You seem to be concerned that you are missing out on something here; why else would you be so interested in "stupidity"?

But your concern is valid because there are many answers to you questions.