Malaysian Passenger Plane Crashes in Ukraine Near Russian Border

[Pooky 3,791]

And now the Russian-backed rebels are doing their best to destroy evidence at the crash site. Likelihood that there will never be a proof beyond doubt about how the airliner was brought down. Russia may continue their denials and distractions, but the confidence level regarding what happened is high.

There is a good deal of confidence that it was an SA-11 "Buk" missile that brought it down. Ukrainian authorities deny that the rebels captured one of theirs, so the possibility it was recently supplied by Russia is fairly high.

Higher still is the likelihood of the involvement of Russian personnel in the attack itself, it is widely acknowledged that the Russians have been training the rebels in the use of these SAM systems. But it is also likely that Russian personnel had involvement in, or control of, the order to fire.

Whoever gave the order, the flight path and altitude of the Malaysian Airlines plane left little doubt that it was a civilian flight. This shoot down was no accident.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

And now the Russian-backed rebels are doing their best to destroy evidence at the crash site. Likelihood that there will never be a proof beyond doubt about how the airliner was brought down. Russia may continue their denials and distractions, but the confidence level regarding what happened is high.

There is a good deal of confidence that it was an SA-11 "Buk" missile that brought it down. Ukrainian authorities deny that the rebels captured one of theirs, so the possibility it was recently supplied by Russia is fairly high.

Higher still is the likelihood of the involvement of Russian personnel in the attack itself, it is widely acknowledged that the Russians have been training the rebels in the use of these SAM systems. But it is also likely that Russian personnel had involvement in, or control of, the order to fire.

Whoever gave the order, the flight path and altitude of the Malaysian Airlines plane left little doubt that it was a civilian flight. This shoot down was no accident.

It was no accident for sure, but I don't think it was deliberate either if that makes sense. I don't think someone or some people knowingly made the decision to blow a civilian jet liner out of the sky. I think it was problly a perfect storm of poor command and control, Mission lock, having shot down a couple of planes recently and got trigger happy, poor training. A highly trained crew on board a US naval missle cruiser shot down an Iranian airliner in Iranian airspace in 1988. It killed 290 on board. I think it was much like that incident.

[lostinblue 1,989]

It was no accident for sure, but I don't think it was deliberate either if that makes sense. I don't think someone or some people knowingly made the decision to blow a civilian jet liner out of the sky. I think it was problly a perfect storm of poor command and control, Mission lock, having shot down a couple of planes recently and got trigger happy, poor training. A highly trained crew on board a US naval missle cruiser shot down an Iranian airliner in Iranian airspace in 1988. It killed 290 on board. I think it was much like that incident.

That sounds like what happened

[JIJourney 96]

Prayers to all those involved and to their family and friends.

And the root of the cause will be found..

[mendeleev 68]

It was no accident for sure, but I don't think it was deliberate either if that makes sense. I don't think someone or some people knowingly made the decision to blow a civilian jet liner out of the sky. I think it was problly a perfect storm of poor command and control, Mission lock, having shot down a couple of planes recently and got trigger happy, poor training. A highly trained crew on board a US naval missle cruiser shot down an Iranian airliner in Iranian airspace in 1988. It killed 290 on board. I think it was much like that incident.

And let's keep in mind that the USS Vincennes was also illegally operating in Iranian territorial waters when they shot down an airplane in Iranian airspace.

The USA never really accepted responsibility and never apologized.

It is interesting to see us, once again, holding those we define as our opponents in the world to a standard very different than one to which we hold ourselves.

[_Simpson_ 250]

It is interesting to see us, once again, holding those we define as our opponents in the world to a standard very different than one to which we hold ourselves.

This was 1988, we should of done much more. But considering the above line...come on. So we should sit on sidelines and do nothing?

[Pooky 3,791]

And let's keep in mind that the USS Vincennes was also illegally operating in Iranian territorial waters when they shot down an airplane in Iranian airspace.

The USA never really accepted responsibility and never apologized.

It is interesting to see us, once again, holding those we define as our opponents in the world to a standard very different than one to which we hold ourselves.

The USS Vincennes incident was rather different, as the ship was engaged with hostile forces at the time and, although mistakes were made, the crew and captain perceived the Iran Air flight as a plausible threat.

http://www.iranchamber.com/history/articles/shootingdown_iranair_flight655.php

The circumstances were very different and the threats to US assets in the Persian Gulf were very real, as shown by previous action against them.

[mendeleev 68]

If Ukrainian rebels shot down this airplane, it was likely an error committed by poorly trained individuals. Presumably the warriors on the USS Vincennes were not poorly trained when they shot down Iran Air 655.

Those Ukrainian separatists are indeed in a situation different than our naval vessel that was operating illegally in another's countries territorial waters when they shot down that country's civilian airplane in that country's own airspace. Ukrainian rebels seek to protect themselves against a government attacking their their cities with heavy artillery, armor, and attack aircraft. It is regrettable that a revolutionary government, confronted with citizens of their own country using tactics of their own revolution, react in the violent militarist way that defines Kiev's current actions.

We condemn the Assad government for using similar weapons against Syrian citizens. It is interesting to hear no condemnation against Kiev.

TEN QUESTIONS FOR THE UKRAINIAN AUTHORITIES

1. Immediately after the tragedy, the Ukrainian authorities, naturally, blamed it on the self-defense forces. What are these accusations based on?

2. Can Kiev explain in detail how it uses Buk missile launchers in the conflict zone? And why were these systems deployed there in the first place, seeing as the self-defense forces don't have any planes?

3. Why are the Ukrainian authorities not doing anything to set up an international commission? When will such a commission begin its work?

4. Would the Ukrainian Armed Forces be willing to let international investigators see the inventory of their air-to-air and surface-to-air missiles, including those used in SAM launchers?

5. Will the international commission have access to tracking data from reliable sources regarding the movements of Ukrainian warplanes on the day of the tragedy?

6. Why did Ukrainian air traffic controllers allow the plane to deviate from the regular route to the north, towards "the anti-terrorist operation zone"?

7. Why was airspace over the warzone not closed for civilian flights, especially since the area was not entirely covered by radar navigation systems?

8. How can official Kiev comment on reports in the social media, allegedly by a Spanish air traffic controller who works in Ukraine, that there were two Ukrainian military planes flying alongside the Boeing 777 over Ukrainian territory?

9. Why did Ukraine's Security Service start working with the recordings of communications between Ukrainian air traffic controllers and the Boeing crew and with the data storage systems from Ukrainian radars without waiting for international investigators?

10. What lessons has Ukraine learned from a similar incident in 2001, when a Russian Tu-154 crashed into the Black Sea? Back then, the Ukrainian authorities denied any involvement on the part of Ukraine's Armed Forces until irrefutable evidence proved official Kiev to be guilty.

[_Simpson_ 250]

OK...

[Pooky 3,791]

If Ukrainian rebels shot down this airplane, it was likely an error committed by poorly trained individuals. Presumably the warriors on the USS Vincennes were not poorly trained when they shot down Iran Air 655.

Those Ukrainian separatists are indeed in a situation different than our naval vessel that was operating illegally in another's countries territorial waters when they shot down that country's civilian airplane in that country's own airspace. Ukrainian rebels seek to protect themselves against a government attacking their their cities with heavy artillery, armor, and attack aircraft. It is regrettable that a revolutionary government, confronted with citizens of their own country using tactics of their own revolution, react in the violent militarist way that defines Kiev's current actions.

We condemn the Assad government for using similar weapons against Syrian citizens. It is interesting to hear no condemnation against Kiev.

TEN QUESTIONS FOR THE UKRAINIAN AUTHORITIES

1. Immediately after the tragedy, the Ukrainian authorities, naturally, blamed it on the self-defense forces. What are these accusations based on?

2. Can Kiev explain in detail how it uses Buk missile launchers in the conflict zone? And why were these systems deployed there in the first place, seeing as the self-defense forces don't have any planes?

3. Why are the Ukrainian authorities not doing anything to set up an international commission? When will such a commission begin its work?

4. Would the Ukrainian Armed Forces be willing to let international investigators see the inventory of their air-to-air and surface-to-air missiles, including those used in SAM launchers?

5. Will the international commission have access to tracking data from reliable sources regarding the movements of Ukrainian warplanes on the day of the tragedy?

6. Why did Ukrainian air traffic controllers allow the plane to deviate from the regular route to the north, towards "the anti-terrorist operation zone"?

7. Why was airspace over the warzone not closed for civilian flights, especially since the area was not entirely covered by radar navigation systems?

8. How can official Kiev comment on reports in the social media, allegedly by a Spanish air traffic controller who works in Ukraine, that there were two Ukrainian military planes flying alongside the Boeing 777 over Ukrainian territory?

9. Why did Ukraine's Security Service start working with the recordings of communications between Ukrainian air traffic controllers and the Boeing crew and with the data storage systems from Ukrainian radars without waiting for international investigators?

10. What lessons has Ukraine learned from a similar incident in 2001, when a Russian Tu-154 crashed into the Black Sea? Back then, the Ukrainian authorities denied any involvement on the part of Ukraine's Armed Forces until irrefutable evidence proved official Kiev to be guilty.

Ask the same question of Russia, see what response you get.

You obviously didn't the article I linked to, or you wouldn't have made the opening statement of your post. The USS Vincennes was in active pursuit of hostile Iranian craft at the time of the incident. And, with a recent air attack on US Navy assets resulting in 35 fatalies fresh in his mind, the captain of the Vincennes made a judgement call. The world now knows it was wrong, but, in his circumstances, with the information he was given, would you have done anything different?

And ask yourself this. Who, in the Ukraine conflict, has already used SAMs, very successfully? Poorly trained? Only if their Russian instructors haven't done their job.

In addition, why would the Ukrainian government forces need to use a SAM? The rebels don't have any air assets to shoot down.

[mendeleev 68]

@Pooky: I read your link. It did not deserve response.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

The Vincennes was in "hot pursuit" in Iranian waters of Iranian craft shooting at invading American assets that were in Iranian waters. The Vincennes was in the wrong in more ways than one can count. But no acceptance of responsibility from the USA and no apology to the families of the bereaved.

Is the proverb "Rules are for servants" applicable here?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

There's no moral relativism to be found here. Shooting down a civilian passenger plane is reprehensible. Maybe it's just me who believes that.

Edited July 21, 2014 by Hail Ming!

[Asia 2,498]

You're not the only one.

[JohnR! 5,495]

There's no moral relativism to be found here. Shooting down a civilian passenger plane is reprehensible. Maybe it's just me who believes that.

Amen. However having said that I have no doubt that whoever pulled the trigger had no idea what he was doing. In regards to Putin acknowledging anything or Russia taking responsibility for any part of this episode, it just won't happen. The guy is a former KGB turned dictator. He has his people under control.

[Darnell 8,478]

Wait - didn't the flight originate in a NATO country? Where's the NATO armed response or air-strike?