• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Russia: Don't look for who did the MH17 shootdown

Nice job of being pathetic.
They have been using transparent boxes and unfolded ballots forever.
They wanted to leave Ukraine and voted to leave Ukraine and that's all.

All you're showing is they weren't very democratic before.

The mistake Ukraine made was to allow high pro-Russian population in Crimea and Sevastopol in the first place. Russian annexation thereof is a hint to every other country, that they should ethnically cleanse such areas in the future. Good job protecting Russians abroad, Putin!
 
The analysis, when it pertains to the explosion and the fragments, seems legit. I am not qualified to doubt that. But I also don't buy the assumption that the final position and orientation of the missile that has its own propulsion and guidance system can be used to deduce the point where it was fired from. From the analysis, it seems that the details pertaining to how the targeting and manouvering of the missile works is strangely absent.
There is much to learn for you about anti-aircraft missiles. If target moves with constant speed and direction then missile trajectory will be perfect straight line, missile would not maneuver if target does not. What it does it calculates trajectory of the target and tries to intercept it.
 
All you're showing is they weren't very democratic before.

The mistake Ukraine made was to allow high pro-Russian population in Crimea and Sevastopol in the first place.
What do you suggest they should have done? Killing them? imprisoning? bribing? forced deportation? foced ukrainiazation?
Russian annexation thereof is a hint to every other country, that they should ethnically cleanse such areas in the future. Good job protecting Russians abroad, Putin!
Oh, I see, you suggest killing them, OK.
Sorry, dude, but Crimea is a historically russian land which got annexed to Ukraine peacefully but illegally during Soviet Union. It was simple technical redistricting within one country.

What Ukrainian Junta should have done was done by Russia for them - conduct a referendum.
 
Nice job of being pathetic.
They have been using transparent boxes and unfolded ballots forever.
They wanted to leave Ukraine and voted to leave Ukraine and that's all.

All you're showing is they weren't very democratic before.
and still aren't apparently:
http://www.gettyimages.in/detail/ne...enko-speaks-to-the-media-news-photo/457890088
See, these two serious men? They are there to make sure Poroshenko votes for his party :)
 
Last edited:
The mistake Ukraine made was to allow high pro-Russian population in Crimea and Sevastopol in the first place.
What do you suggest they should have done? Killing them? imprisoning? bribing? forced deportation? foced ukrainiazation?
Russian annexation thereof is a hint to every other country, that they should ethnically cleanse such areas in the future. Good job protecting Russians abroad, Putin!
Oh, I see, you suggest killing them, OK.
Sorry, dude, but Crimea is a historically russian land which got annexed to Ukraine peacefully but illegally during Soviet Union. It was simple technical redistricting within one country.

What Ukrainian Junta should have done was done by Russia for them - conduct a referendum.
You misunderstand me. I wasn't making a moral statement what Ukraine should have done for the people of Crimea, but what Ukraine should have done if it wanted to keep Crimea: change the demographics. It doesn't have to be done by killing of course. Incentivizing Ukrainian migration to Crimea and Sevastopol would have worked just as well.

For other means, look at how Russia is dealing with the Tatar minority in Crimea.
 
What Ukrainian Junta should have done was done by Russia for them - conduct a referendum.


Well you've done a fine job here for your masters at the Kremlin!


Distract away from the fact that your guys shot down an airliner full of innocent civilians by any means necessary.


Does that come with bonus pay? And if so, how much are rubles worth in the decadent west?
 
What do you suggest they should have done? Killing them? imprisoning? bribing? forced deportation? foced ukrainiazation?
Russian annexation thereof is a hint to every other country, that they should ethnically cleanse such areas in the future. Good job protecting Russians abroad, Putin!
Oh, I see, you suggest killing them, OK.
Sorry, dude, but Crimea is a historically russian land which got annexed to Ukraine peacefully but illegally during Soviet Union. It was simple technical redistricting within one country.

What Ukrainian Junta should have done was done by Russia for them - conduct a referendum.
You misunderstand me. I wasn't making a moral statement what Ukraine should have done for the people of Crimea, but what Ukraine should have done if it wanted to keep Crimea: change the demographics. It doesn't have to be done by killing of course. Incentivizing Ukrainian migration to Crimea and Sevastopol would have worked just as well.
I see you were quick enough to change it to something less prone to my "misunderstand" :)
You are a shrewd politician, almost like a Stalin when he did exactly what you suggested with Abkhazia. Did not work in the end but it was a good try.
For other means, look at how Russia is dealing with the Tatar minority in Crimea.
And how do you think they are dealing with them?
 
What do you suggest they should have done? Killing them? imprisoning? bribing? forced deportation? foced ukrainiazation?
Russian annexation thereof is a hint to every other country, that they should ethnically cleanse such areas in the future. Good job protecting Russians abroad, Putin!
Oh, I see, you suggest killing them, OK.
Sorry, dude, but Crimea is a historically russian land which got annexed to Ukraine peacefully but illegally during Soviet Union. It was simple technical redistricting within one country.

What Ukrainian Junta should have done was done by Russia for them - conduct a referendum.
You misunderstand me. I wasn't making a moral statement what Ukraine should have done for the people of Crimea, but what Ukraine should have done if it wanted to keep Crimea: change the demographics. It doesn't have to be done by killing of course. Incentivizing Ukrainian migration to Crimea and Sevastopol would have worked just as well.
I see you were quick enough to change it to something less prone to my "misunderstand" :)
You are a shrewd politician, almost like a Stalin when he did exactly what you suggested with Abkhazia. Did not work in the end but it was a good try.
For other means, look at how Russia is dealing with the Tatar minority in Crimea.
And how do you think they are dealing with them?
Shutting down their own television station for one, harrassing their leaders, banning them from publicly gathering or organizing themselves, and thus "encouraging" them to move out. It's slower than outright deportation, but Russia has time, and it's not like they are a serious threat at only about 10% of the population.

Historically Russian land means nothing, without the people to demand it. Or do you think Russia will give back the historically German city of Konigsberg to Germany? Or Karelia back to Finland? In both cases, ethnic cleansing worked out just fine for purposes of permanent annexation.
 
What Ukrainian Junta should have done was done by Russia for them - conduct a referendum.


Well you've done a fine job here for your masters at the Kremlin!


Distract away from the fact that your guys shot down an airliner full of innocent civilians by any means necessary.


Does that come with bonus pay? And if so, how much are rubles worth in the decadent west?

1 Rouble is currently worth 1.6 US cents.
 
What do you suggest they should have done? Killing them? imprisoning? bribing? forced deportation? foced ukrainiazation?
Russian annexation thereof is a hint to every other country, that they should ethnically cleanse such areas in the future. Good job protecting Russians abroad, Putin!
Oh, I see, you suggest killing them, OK.
Sorry, dude, but Crimea is a historically russian land which got annexed to Ukraine peacefully but illegally during Soviet Union. It was simple technical redistricting within one country.

What Ukrainian Junta should have done was done by Russia for them - conduct a referendum.
You misunderstand me. I wasn't making a moral statement what Ukraine should have done for the people of Crimea, but what Ukraine should have done if it wanted to keep Crimea: change the demographics. It doesn't have to be done by killing of course. Incentivizing Ukrainian migration to Crimea and Sevastopol would have worked just as well.
I see you were quick enough to change it to something less prone to my "misunderstand" :)
You are a shrewd politician, almost like a Stalin when he did exactly what you suggested with Abkhazia. Did not work in the end but it was a good try.
For other means, look at how Russia is dealing with the Tatar minority in Crimea.
And how do you think they are dealing with them?
Shutting down their own television station for one, harrassing their leaders, banning them from publicly gathering or organizing themselves, and thus "encouraging" them to move out. It's slower than outright deportation, but Russia has time, and it's not like they are a serious threat at only about 10% of the population.
Thank you.
Historically Russian land means nothing, without the people to demand it.
Yes, too bad ukrainians did not deport all ethnic russians out of Ukraine in 1991 or better in 1954 :)
Or do you think Russia will give back the historically German city of Konigsberg to Germany? Or Karelia back to Finland? In both cases, ethnic cleansing worked out just fine for purposes of permanent annexation.
So you suggest ukrainians do exactly what you think russians currently do?
but somehow when russians do that (in your mind) it's bad, but when ukrainians it's good.
As for you fins, get back to Ural you dirty finno-ugric bastards!
 
What do you suggest they should have done? Killing them? imprisoning? bribing? forced deportation? foced ukrainiazation?
Russian annexation thereof is a hint to every other country, that they should ethnically cleanse such areas in the future. Good job protecting Russians abroad, Putin!
Oh, I see, you suggest killing them, OK.
Sorry, dude, but Crimea is a historically russian land which got annexed to Ukraine peacefully but illegally during Soviet Union. It was simple technical redistricting within one country.

What Ukrainian Junta should have done was done by Russia for them - conduct a referendum.
You misunderstand me. I wasn't making a moral statement what Ukraine should have done for the people of Crimea, but what Ukraine should have done if it wanted to keep Crimea: change the demographics. It doesn't have to be done by killing of course. Incentivizing Ukrainian migration to Crimea and Sevastopol would have worked just as well.
I see you were quick enough to change it to something less prone to my "misunderstand" :)
You are a shrewd politician, almost like a Stalin when he did exactly what you suggested with Abkhazia. Did not work in the end but it was a good try.
For other means, look at how Russia is dealing with the Tatar minority in Crimea.
And how do you think they are dealing with them?
Shutting down their own television station for one, harrassing their leaders, banning them from publicly gathering or organizing themselves, and thus "encouraging" them to move out. It's slower than outright deportation, but Russia has time, and it's not like they are a serious threat at only about 10% of the population.
Thank you.
Historically Russian land means nothing, without the people to demand it.
Yes, too bad ukrainians did not deport all ethnic russians out of Ukraine in 1991 or better in 1954 :)
Or do you think Russia will give back the historically German city of Konigsberg to Germany? Or Karelia back to Finland? In both cases, ethnic cleansing worked out just fine for purposes of permanent annexation.
So you suggest ukrainians do exactly what you think russians currently do?
but somehow when russians do that (in your mind) it's bad, but when ukrainians it's good.
Again, I wasn't making a moral statement. Just if-else scenario. Russia with its actions is making it clear that a sizeable Russian minorities in other countries present a threat to those countries' territorial sovereignty, Ukrinian nationalism and backlash against ethnic Russians isn't good, but it's easy to see why such distrust exists.

As for you fins, get back to Ural you dirty finno-ugric bastards!
There is another country currently blocking our path.
 
Source? The DigitalGlobe images show that the truck carrying the BUK is not at the vehicle yard, which is consistent with it having been photographed by Paris Match elsewhere.
The last DigitalGlobe images obtained are from the morning of the 17th and show the road the "Paris Match" photo was apparently taken on. But the buk is not on the road. The DigitalGlobe imagery is very close to the same time and covers a big area. The buk should be there if the photo really was from the morning of the 17th July 2014,
Repeating the claim is not a source. Show me the satellite image.
Bellingcat refused to publish the images (not surprising as it destroys their case) but openly admitted the buk was not to be seen and that it should have been.
Right, and the article points out why it would not have been there: obscured by clouds or trees, or the timing was slightly off. The truck was spotted in Zuhres at 11:40am, and the satellite image was taken at 11:08am. Zuhres is only 25 kilometers away from the edge of the satellite image, which is less than a 30 minute drive even for a truck.
I gotta clarify this comment. The time 11:40am came from a Tweet claiming the location of the truck in Zuhres, but it has not been verified in any other way. There was another sighting in Shaktarsk at 12:41pm, which suggests that the truck is moving rather slowly, it stopped for some reason, or the times from either of the tweets are inaccurate. There is really no reason why the truck should have been in Donetsk at 11:08am... it could have been, but it's hardly surprising if not.
 
What do you suggest they should have done? Killing them? imprisoning? bribing? forced deportation? foced ukrainiazation?
Russian annexation thereof is a hint to every other country, that they should ethnically cleanse such areas in the future. Good job protecting Russians abroad, Putin!
Oh, I see, you suggest killing them, OK.
Sorry, dude, but Crimea is a historically russian land which got annexed to Ukraine peacefully but illegally during Soviet Union. It was simple technical redistricting within one country.

What Ukrainian Junta should have done was done by Russia for them - conduct a referendum.
You misunderstand me. I wasn't making a moral statement what Ukraine should have done for the people of Crimea, but what Ukraine should have done if it wanted to keep Crimea: change the demographics. It doesn't have to be done by killing of course. Incentivizing Ukrainian migration to Crimea and Sevastopol would have worked just as well.
I see you were quick enough to change it to something less prone to my "misunderstand" :)
You are a shrewd politician, almost like a Stalin when he did exactly what you suggested with Abkhazia. Did not work in the end but it was a good try.
For other means, look at how Russia is dealing with the Tatar minority in Crimea.
And how do you think they are dealing with them?
Shutting down their own television station for one, harrassing their leaders, banning them from publicly gathering or organizing themselves, and thus "encouraging" them to move out. It's slower than outright deportation, but Russia has time, and it's not like they are a serious threat at only about 10% of the population.
Thank you.
Historically Russian land means nothing, without the people to demand it.
Yes, too bad ukrainians did not deport all ethnic russians out of Ukraine in 1991 or better in 1954 :)
Or do you think Russia will give back the historically German city of Konigsberg to Germany? Or Karelia back to Finland? In both cases, ethnic cleansing worked out just fine for purposes of permanent annexation.
So you suggest ukrainians do exactly what you think russians currently do?
but somehow when russians do that (in your mind) it's bad, but when ukrainians it's good.
Again, I wasn't making a moral statement.
Just if-else scenario. Russia with its actions is making it clear that a sizeable Russian minorities in other countries present a threat to those countries' territorial sovereignty,
Besides Ukraine there are hardly any other country which has got a chunk of Russian territory along with its population.
Ukrinian nationalism and backlash against ethnic Russians isn't good, but it's easy to see why such distrust exists.
And why do you think it exists?
 
The Ukrainians told us they captured one and the anti coup rebels told us the same. I already linked to a video of the Ukrainians saying that. There is evidence you haven't seen that's all. It was captured on June 29 and tweeted about and mentioned by both sides.
The Ukrainians told us in another place it was damaged.
I must have missed where you linked to Ukraine admitting the capture of a BUK. Couldn't find it easily, so care to re-link? The only admission from Ukraine I've seen is that the rebels may have captured decommissioned or disabled vehicles, which is in line with what rebels are now saying as well.
Yes you are right I didn't link to one. Sorry I thought I had, and the video doesn't say that. But as you mention there are admissions about a disabled buk, at least. A disabled buk would be one that has had it's electronics tampered with. So the buk on the truck could be a disabled one

Basically, what we have is multiple videos and photos that show the same truck and the same BUK on its way from Donetsk to Luhansk.
No we don't. We have some photos of a buk on a truck when each was taken is disputed. Torez seems to be from another day with clear blue skies and there is evidence it is from the day before.
The video in Luhansk, if made on 17th, fits with the rest of it.
As there is no confirmation of the dates of the others and reason to think the SBU lied there is nothing to fit with.

Right, and the article points out why it would not have been there: obscured by clouds or trees, or the timing was slightly off. The truck was spotted in Zuhres at 11:40am, and the satellite image was taken at 11:08am. Zuhres is only 25 kilometers away from the edge of the satellite image, which is less than a 30 minute drive even for a truck.
So there is no confirmation it is from the 17th. and no original and we don't even have the name of the photographer.

It does pose a problem for your argument though. Do you think you are more qualified than the experts that RTL Nieuws used to confirm that the originals showed absolutely no signs of tampering?
We need to hear their response to the specific problems Dr Neal Krawetz pointed out on his twitter feed. Curiously we have silence about the specific problems

and everytime you pro-Russian trolls bring it up, .
Are you capable of discussing without name calling?
 
But you continue to provide no reason to do so based on evidence Do you have a reason based on evidence to discount their analysis?

It's an important question because it's very likely that soon the Dutch investigation will report that there were buk missile fragments in the body of the pilot.
Almaz Anteys analysis shows that a missile could not have been fired from Snizhne, and leave the pattern of damage found on the plane, which will them prompt the question of who was it that fired the missile.
No, it says no such thing. The missile in question has guiding system and it changes its course in the air - after all it si designed to hit fighter planes that move a lot faster than Boeing 777. Analysis of its position at the time of its explosion says absolutely nothing where it was fired from simply because it doesn't move in a straight line. Plus, there is no corroborating evidence (witnesses, photos, BUK sightings, etc.) that would place the launch site where Almaz-Antey says it is.
If it came from Snizhne it came from almost directly head on. It would definitely have come in a straight line.
 
There are photos of it... in a military convoy in Russia on June 23rd.
I'm not disputing it was in Russia, I'm disputing the same one was in Donetsk. What is the evidence? You'll find it evaporates once you try to firm it up
 
Back
Top Bottom