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

[Jayjay]

No, I question the premise that "they would not have done it by accident". Military accidents happen all the time. All it takes is for the operators to not be particularly sensitive to the fact that there may be civilian planes in the air. They were expecting for a Ukrainian military plane, and when they saw a blip on the radar they thought that might be it.

They were shooting down plenty of planes with manpads.

Can you produce one, just one, just one photo or video of this "mystery buk" that can be dated or verified. All I'm asking is for ONE that can be verified and dated. Just one

There are many, but let's take the Paris Match photo for example:

Paris Match (who has no reason to lie about it) says it was taken around 11am on July 17th, and the analysis of shadows shows that the time is beween 10am - 10:15am. It's further verified by other sightings in social media. But actually, asking for single image is misleading. The most convincing evidence is that all the photos and videos corraborate each other. You are trying to point out some pedantic doubts about single dating of individual images, and indeed some images or videos may be fake, but the scope of the conspiracy required to forge all of them is so astounding that it's ridiculous.

We have photos and videos of the convoy which supposedly had the buk in it that can be dated, but this "mystery buk" isn't in any of them.

Actually, there is a high probability that it was:

The Buk seen in Russia was dubbed “3×2” due to an obscured number on the side of the vehicle (as is the case with the ID numbers of many of the vehicles transported from Russia to Ukraine). The remaining parts of the numbers of the Buk photographed by Paris Match as well as the loading markings and white paint on the rubber side skirt below those numbers were in exactly the same position.

A burn mark above the exhaust visible in one of the Paris Match photographs was also in exactly the same position as the one seen on Buk 3×2 in Russia. While all of these pieces of evidence seemed to indicate that the Buk in Ukraine and Buk 3×2 were one and the same, an additional piece of evidence made the case particularly compelling. During Bellingcat’s research[40] into the many Buk sightings, it became clear that the rubber side skirt above the tracks of Buk missile launchers can become damaged over time and that this damage creates a unique “fingerprint” allowing different Buk photographs to be matched. In the case of Buk 3×2 and the Buk photograph by Paris Match in Donetsk, the side skirts were nearly identical.

It's not completely conclusive, but similarities are close enough to call it.

 

[Jayjay]

No, I question the premise that "they would not have done it by accident". Military accidents happen all the time. All it takes is for the operators to not be particularly sensitive to the fact that there may be civilian planes in the air. They were expecting for a Ukrainian military plane, and when they saw a blip on the radar they thought that might be it.

It would not have been a blip, it would have been bunch of blips from multiple civilian planes flying above 10,000 meters

There were exactly three civilian planes in Eastern Ukrainian airspace at that time.

But the BUK radar has limited range, and the other two planes were nowhere near it. My understanding is that even MH17 was even at the edge of the radar range... which would make sense, if it was fired as soon as it was spotted.

This incident was based on intelligence of a specific plane and there was a short time window to get in place, take the shot and get out. I doubt the BUK was just parked in a forest waiting for any random plane to come by, because that could take days and the longer it stays in one point the more people would see it and that would be bad for Russia who was claiming that they don't have troops or equipment in eastern Ukraine.

 

[Jayjay]

It would not have been a blip, it would have been bunch of blips from multiple civilian planes flying above 10,000 meters

Those evil Russians. They sent a team of buk specialists in with 5 years training each, at least, and tell them to shoot at planes flying above 10,000 metres even though there are many passenger planes flying at that height.
They apparently smuggled it in without anyone being able to take a verifiable photo or video of it, then smuggled it out before anyone could take a verifiable photo or video too. It was able to pass under a bridge that seems too low, and was magically invisible in a satellite photo taken of the area on the 17th July at a time it should have been seen. It seemed to be travelling at remarkable speeds too, and strangely take unnecessarily long detours, detours that unnecessarily took it right past or through areas controlled by the Ukrainian army

Let's review.

1) There was a bridge on the way that the truck with the BUK does not fit under.
2) The truck took detours for some reason.

How on earth are we going to reconcile these two facts? The mind boggles!

The satellite photos were inconclusive. At that time, depending on the route, it could have already passed the edge of the picture, and there were several parts of the road along the way that were obscured.

 

[Jayjay]

There is no need for rogue element in the ukrainian army, just dumb element and I can assure you that there is plenty of dumb elements in the ukrainian army. Ukrainian army shot down Russian passenger plane during training exercises and they dropped Surface-to-Surface rocket on the apartment building too

There is less evidence that Ukrainians shot down the Tupolev plane during training exercise, than there is evidence that Russians shot down MH17. Keep in mind that it was fired from a Russian military base, and Ukraine is still denying it.

 

[Jayjay]

Jayjay, stop repeating the same nonsense over and over.

Is it my fault, that you pro-Russian stooges keep bringing up the same PRATTs over and over again? Sure at some point I'll probably get tired, and then you "win".

 

[barbos]

It would not have been a blip, it would have been bunch of blips from multiple civilian planes flying above 10,000 meters

There were exactly three civilian planes in Eastern Ukrainian airspace at that time.

But the BUK radar has limited range, and the other two planes were nowhere near it. My understanding is that even MH17 was even at the edge of the radar range... which would make sense, if it was fired as soon as it was spotted.

This incident was based on intelligence of a specific plane and there was a short time window to get in place, take the shot and get out. I doubt the BUK was just parked in a forest waiting for any random plane to come by, because that could take days and the longer it stays in one point the more people would see it and that would be bad for Russia who was claiming that they don't have troops or equipment in eastern Ukraine.

3 IS a bunch.
What you suggest is essentially this:
Trained russian specialists bring BUK into the Ukraine, turn it ON and immediately see 2-3 planes and then push the button. This is insane! If they were in fact trained they would had known that on any given day at any moment you could see few passenger planes on the radar.

 

[barbos]

Jayjay, stop repeating the same nonsense over and over.

Is it my fault, that you pro-Russian stooges keep bringing up the same PRATTs over and over again? Sure at some point I'll probably get tired, and then you "win".

One more time. I can read english well enough to confirm that Almaz Antey has a legitimate question.

 

[Horatio Parker]

There were exactly three civilian planes in Eastern Ukrainian airspace at that time.

But the BUK radar has limited range, and the other two planes were nowhere near it. My understanding is that even MH17 was even at the edge of the radar range... which would make sense, if it was fired as soon as it was spotted.

This incident was based on intelligence of a specific plane and there was a short time window to get in place, take the shot and get out. I doubt the BUK was just parked in a forest waiting for any random plane to come by, because that could take days and the longer it stays in one point the more people would see it and that would be bad for Russia who was claiming that they don't have troops or equipment in eastern Ukraine.

3 IS a bunch.
What you suggest is essentially this:
Trained russian specialists bring BUK into the Ukraine, turn it ON and immediately see 2-3 planes and then push the button. This is insane! If they were in fact trained they would had known that on any given day at any moment you could see few passenger planes on the radar.

It happens.

 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

 

[barbos]

There is no need for rogue element in the ukrainian army, just dumb element and I can assure you that there is plenty of dumb elements in the ukrainian army. Ukrainian army shot down Russian passenger plane during training exercises and they dropped Surface-to-Surface rocket on the apartment building too

There is less evidence that Ukrainians shot down the Tupolev plane during training exercise, than there is evidence that Russians shot down MH17. Keep in mind that it was fired from a Russian military base, and Ukraine is still denying it.

OK, that's official, someone hacked Jayjay's account.

 

[Jayjay]

There were exactly three civilian planes in Eastern Ukrainian airspace at that time.

But the BUK radar has limited range, and the other two planes were nowhere near it. My understanding is that even MH17 was even at the edge of the radar range... which would make sense, if it was fired as soon as it was spotted.

This incident was based on intelligence of a specific plane and there was a short time window to get in place, take the shot and get out. I doubt the BUK was just parked in a forest waiting for any random plane to come by, because that could take days and the longer it stays in one point the more people would see it and that would be bad for Russia who was claiming that they don't have troops or equipment in eastern Ukraine.

3 IS a bunch.
What you suggest is essentially this:
Trained russian specialists bring BUK into the Ukraine, turn it ON and immediately see 2-3 planes and then push the button. This is insane! If they were in fact trained they would had known that on any given day at any moment you could see few passenger planes on the radar.

What I'm suggesting is that the other two planes were not in radar range. The BUK unit radar is up to 30km. If you were to draw a circle with a radius of 30km on top of that picture, centering near Snizhne, SQ351 is out of range, and AI113 is only barely in range, but it's approaching from opposite direction so it would have been farther away at the time when the missile was fired. That only leaves MH17: a single blip on the radar.

They were expecting to see a plane, and they saw a plane, so they fired. This is the first time BUK was used in Ukraine war and I would imagine that in training exercises even in Russia, civilian planes would be kept out for safety reasons, so even a trained crew might not have considered the alternative that it could have been a civilian plane. Furthermore, in training exercises there is a probably a separate radar unit with longer range that first identifies the target, and the job of the firing crew is simply to pull the trigger.

- - - Updated - - -

Is it my fault, that you pro-Russian stooges keep bringing up the same PRATTs over and over again? Sure at some point I'll probably get tired, and then you "win".

One more time. I can read english well enough to confirm that Almaz Antey has a legitimate question.

And what question is that? If they brought it up during the review process, then it's included in the "Consultations" part of the report, and has been answered.

 

[Jayjay]

There is less evidence that Ukrainians shot down the Tupolev plane during training exercise, than there is evidence that Russians shot down MH17. Keep in mind that it was fired from a Russian military base, and Ukraine is still denying it.

OK, that's official, someone hacked Jayjay's account.

I'm not saying Russia shot down Siberia Airlines flight 1812. I'm saying that the level of evidence by which we know it was most likely Ukraine, is less conclusive than the evidence we have for Russian BUK downing MH17. If you think that it's proven beyond reasonable doubt that Ukraine shot down SA1812, by that standard of evidence it's been proven beyond reasonable doubt that Russia shot down MH17. All we are doing is haggling how much beyond reasonable doubt that is.

 

[Jayjay]

3 IS a bunch.
What you suggest is essentially this:
Trained russian specialists bring BUK into the Ukraine, turn it ON and immediately see 2-3 planes and then push the button. This is insane! If they were in fact trained they would had known that on any given day at any moment you could see few passenger planes on the radar.

It happens.

 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

Exactly.

 

[barbos]

3 IS a bunch.
What you suggest is essentially this:
Trained russian specialists bring BUK into the Ukraine, turn it ON and immediately see 2-3 planes and then push the button. This is insane! If they were in fact trained they would had known that on any given day at any moment you could see few passenger planes on the radar.

It happens.

 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

Anything could happen if you wait long enough. But there was no wait in case of MH17. According to the theory proposed here they fucked it up immediately in the first try. In case of iranian plane they were aware of civilian planes present and simply followed fucked up manual which resulted in the disaster. We don't know how many times they followed these fucked up manuals before they met iranian plane.

- - - Updated - - -

OK, that's official, someone hacked Jayjay's account.

I'm not saying Russia shot down Siberia Airlines flight 1812. I'm saying that the level of evidence by which we know it was most likely Ukraine, is less conclusive than the evidence we have for Russian BUK downing MH17. If you think that it's proven beyond reasonable doubt that Ukraine shot down SA1812, by that standard of evidence it's been proven beyond reasonable doubt that Russia shot down MH17. All we are doing is haggling how much beyond reasonable doubt that is.

Whoever you are, stop using Jayjay account.

 

[barbos]

Theories need to be plausible. You can't just throw random stuff.
Russian BUK is much less plausible than ukrainian one. The only reason why you are insisting on it is because of your bias against Russia.
If you try to avoid your bias you will realize that there were shitload of ukrainian BUKs in the area with half of that shitload being operated by drunk soldiers.

 

[dystopian]

You know, seeing all this talk of Dutch this and Dutch that; and seeing as how this thread is long past the point of no return; let me just say that despite knowing the hardships it's no doubt creating for many ordinary Russians... part of me is profoundly amused by the fact that following their abominable behavior the past couple of years, Russia's economy is now smaller than that of Spain and well on its way to becoming smaller than that of the Netherlands. Perhaps karma is real after all.

 

[Horatio Parker]

Theories need to be plausible. You can't just throw random stuff.
Russian BUK is much less plausible than ukrainian one. The only reason why you are insisting on it is because of your bias against Russia.
If you try to avoid your bias you will realize that there were shitload of ukrainian BUKs in the area with half of that shitload being operated by drunk soldiers.

Project much?

 

[barbos]

Theories need to be plausible. You can't just throw random stuff.
Russian BUK is much less plausible than ukrainian one. The only reason why you are insisting on it is because of your bias against Russia.
If you try to avoid your bias you will realize that there were shitload of ukrainian BUKs in the area with half of that shitload being operated by drunk soldiers.

Project much?

No, I don't project at all.

 

[Horatio Parker]

Theories need to be plausible. You can't just throw random stuff.
Russian BUK is much less plausible than ukrainian one. The only reason why you are insisting on it is because of your bias against Russia.
If you try to avoid your bias you will realize that there were shitload of ukrainian BUKs in the area with half of that shitload being operated by drunk soldiers.

Sure you can.

First it was an air to air missile fired from Ukrainian jet, then BUK stolen by Ukrainians. Easy. Whatever sticks. Culpability is avoided(the Vincennes incident cost the US $63 billion). Aggression is covered up. Maybe you can even get sanctions lifted.

None of that is possible if Russian involvement is accepted by all hands.

The Ukrainians obviously needed all that AA capacity to deal with the rebel air force.

 

[barbos]

Theories need to be plausible. You can't just throw random stuff.
Russian BUK is much less plausible than ukrainian one. The only reason why you are insisting on it is because of your bias against Russia.
If you try to avoid your bias you will realize that there were shitload of ukrainian BUKs in the area with half of that shitload being operated by drunk soldiers.

Sure you can.

First it was an air to air missile fired from Ukrainian jet,

Yes, it was, there was a jet in the area, hence this theory

then BUK stolen by Ukrainians.

I have never heard that one, please elaborate.

Easy. Whatever sticks. Culpability is avoided(the Vincennes incident cost the US $63 billion). Aggression is covered up. Maybe you can even get sanctions lifted.

None of that is possible if Russian involvement is accepted by all hands.

The Ukrainians obviously needed all that AA capacity to deal with the rebel air force.

You show your bias.
And yes ukrainian had all that AA capacity, nobody denies that, not even ukrainians.

 

[Derec]

So, a Russian jet just crashed in Egypt. So, mechanical failure, ISIS terrorism or perhaps an angry Malay with a score to settle over MH17? Or is it those dastardly Ukrainians again?