Why must it be Putin?

On that subject - I'm not exactly in the Ron Paul fan club, but you know, I have to mostly agree with his commentary here:

http://www.fitsnews.com/2014/07/20/r...irline-attack/
Spot on about the media coverage and political exploitation of this still-very-unclear situation, IMO.

Because to some people it seems he is the saviour and bringer of good news in a crysis.

Detached from reality i'd say. Or read the news from crappy sources and miss-interpret what is reported.

Who ordered ceasefire?

Seems the Rebels (pro-russian, yes) did, considering they hold the ground where the Jet went down.
They also handed over the black boxes.

Oh Putin our great saviour, where art thou?

2+2=4.

SOURCE

Mind you, it took 2 days for the permission to be granted for investigators to gain access to crash site.

SU-25 only has a service ceiling of about 7000m, while the Boeing was travelling faster at 10000m. So those statements smell of something.

The question is open hence my punctuation. Putin may have had no influence or he may have told the rebels what to do.


I certainly don't see him as a saviour. Just someone with significant influence over the actions of the separatist movement. They want to be part of Russia and so will pamper to his desires.

Political, economic and financial options would be presented if access hadn't been gained.

Russia's influence on the rebels is undeniable.



Yet
Although from a diplomatic point of view, direct responsibility to order the Rebels to comply and give access to the crash site would be Putin being looked upon 'favourably' by the world.


Obama: "What are they trying to hide"?

I don't see why anyone is uncertain or mystified over the cause and authors of this tragedy? Hey, even Russian people know what's up.

At least when the US shot down that Iranian airliner, they owned up to it.

Based on what evidence? The problem is that it's putting the cart before the horse - there hasn't been a proper investigation and that takes time. The Iran Air situation isn't the same thing - that missile was launched from a USN ship, and even there the investigation and admission that there was no reason to shoot at the airliner took a long time.

As for "knowing what's up", that is taking the language there severely out of context and is frankly propagandistic. The apologies in this case are a collective sense that humanity has failed there, and you should also keep in mind that for many, Russians and (at least eastern) Ukrainians are a collective identity. I would've used the same language - I've got a lot of friends and family in the Ukraine, with far from everyone agreeing on politics and what to do about the east, but to me this war is still one which is fought by "us" against "us". "We" do share a common identity, culture, and social connections and "we" feel for the human tragedy. This has no political implications and no implication of state responsibility.

The bottom line is that until there is an investigation, I don't think any of this is fair to say. And as I said elsewhere, more pointedly, if this disaster shows anything it's that the separatists are NOT under Moscow's operational control in any sense at all - the shootdown would not have happened if they were. Putin has nothing to gain from this. Russia has a lot to lose from this. I would be the last person on earth to defend Putin, but describing the situation in terms like "Russia/Putin shot it down" is as facetious as saying that Reagan and his crew launched airliners into the Twin Towers or that America gassed the Kurds. I mean hey, it was that government that helped arm the Taliban and their buddy Bin Laden to fight the Soviets, and Saddam to fight Iran. The identification of "Russia"/"Russians" as shooting down the airliner - even assuming that the missile was provided from Russia and launched by someone under operational control of the separatists - is bothersome, disturbing and propagandistic. To suggest that it was launched under Russia's operational control makes zero sense and I am yet to see any evidence to suggest this other than stuff like this, which amounts to mistranslations of condolences, twisted to suit a political cause. That cause, by the way, is creating a new bogeyman for Captain America to flex muscles at, because someone finally realized they've already lost the war on terror, a decade too late. And I may have no reason to sympathise with Putin, but I have even less sympathy for anyone trying to use a tragedy to provoke a Cold War II.

7000? You read it after the edit i assume. Well, as per Russian MOD>>>> It was operating well above its ceiling of
23,000 feet. Even more interesting the Wiki page of the Su-25 was edited (by a Russian IP address) to update its specifications…

One more thing to note:

the graphic used by the Russian MoD has another major flaw: it depicts (on the left) the Boeing 777 as a Boeing 707, and the Su-25 (on the right) with the shape of an EF-111 Raven, a famous, retired, U.S. electronic warfare plane!

http://theaviationist.com/wp-content...25-graphic.png



Edited specs:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BtGK8ojIQAA7L5U.png:large


Good job, keep the propaganda rolling.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...-warplanes-mh1

Russia's MOD is also showing satellite imagery of what they say are Ukrainian SA-11 launchers that were within firing range of MH17 on July 14th, and were moved away by July 17th.

They've also positioned a set of 10 questions to Ukraine about the crash which, IMO, are mostly valid to ask (although some are obviously loaded) and Ukraine has yet to properly address:

Hopefully an independant investigation on the whole sorry affair can come up with some definitive answers.

You'd think they would at least be able to tell their own creations apart from their coldwar antagonist's. I pity them now.

The victims remains have been moved to Kherkiv outside rebel held territory.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28416973

Sadly not all the remains... :nope:

I do have to chuckle a little bit though, I get the impression that Putin is regarded as something of a James Bond villain in America, a sort of new Bin Laden for the 21st century perhaps. :haha:

This was not deliberately engineered by Putin, that much is certain, he gains nothing from it, and while he might not be Blofeld, he is not a stupid person.
In my mind, this is how events played out.
The pro-Russians got a Buk launcher, either stolen from the Ukrainian army or delivered across the border from Russia, both scenarios are just as likely, and current intel leans it towards the latter.
Russia intends these launchers to be used by the pro-Russians to degrade the aerial advantage that the Ukrainian military has, however despite the Ukraine denying it has SAM launchers that far east, it will have SAM units in the east in order to defend against a potential Russian incursion, so I don't believe that particular line from Kiev for one minute.
Anyway, a Ukrainian Su-25 was operating near the area of MH-17 on a routine mission, nothing unusual about Frogfoots operating in Eastern Ukraine. The pro-Russian forces targeted the Frogfoot with the Buk launcher, but due to their poor training or just a fluke accident (not particularly likely with todays IFF technology) they launched a Surface to Air Missile at MH-17.
At first their jubilation indicates that they thought the Frogfoot had been downed, then it turns to horror as they realise they've just shot down a passenger airliner. A frantic cover-up begins, the Buk is kicked back across the border to Russia, the wreckage is scoured for evidence of missile damage and Russia finds itself in a very tough spot...which is why it is playing a bit of a dance, trying to pin the blame on Kiev when it knows that it's just as likely to be Donetsk.
Putin is in a spot of bother, really, in fact he finds himself a little bit like the PRC finds itself when North Korea is being an idiot. He has vouched for the pro-Russian forces, he has aided the pro-Russian forces and they have screwed up, big time, but he has cemented his position so that he cannot come out on international media and condemn the pro-Russian forces, instead he has to play the quiet game, making concessions here and there (such as in the recent vote in the UNSC which Russia backed) while trying to do damage control.
Now Skybird does have a point when he states that most of Putins comments are for internal use only, directed more at the Russian people than the people of the world. If there is one thing that Putin has been doing, it's focusing on domestic matters...he's not really had a choice with the whole unrest there has been in places. The last thing he really wants though is a new Cold War, Russia has had good trade with the west, he's made a lot of rubles off it, and whilst he can and will transfer this trade to China, there is going to be a bit of a hit while the process takes place.
Will Europe end up the worse for this new Cold War? Perhaps...I certainly expect to see a greater emphasis on internal trade and consolidation of the EU power in the future if Russia is going to become the de jure European nemesis of the 21st century. Quite honestly Europe has three choices, shackle itself to America (which I don't think either America or Europe wants), shackle itself to Russia (I think Eastern Europe would rather be a nuclear wasteland than that) or consolidate its power and finally realise that alone the GDP and military power of Germany is nothing compared to Russia, but with all the other states of the EU put together, it's more than a match for Moscow.

The tricky part is getting a bunch of European nations to actually agree on something...I can't really recall a single time in history that this has happened... :oops:

Let me add something Oberon.

How the rebels handled the situation showed they have a very de-centralised command. The first few days they looked like headless chickens running around, not knowing should they allow people in, what to do with bodies, what to do with black boxes...

Slowly as days went, they allowed investigators in, handed over the black boxes, sent the train with bodies towards Holland. As if less decisions were done by field commanders and more by some senior staff.

Maybe Putin wasn't behind the recent progress, but only the rebels banged their heads together and started making coherent reasonable decisions.

My theory is that Putin eventually came to the realisation that the world was eventually starting to turn against him so he pulled a few strings of those in the rebel camp who do as he bids.

To add something to that though, remember that a lot of the same also applies to the other side - the official Ukraine and their military are also right now pretty decentralized and poorly coordinated, and you see that in their reaction here as well. Keep in mind, the country is in a very poor state, and a lot of the new leadership are people who were just anti-government activists a few months earlier and not all of them are highly qualified for leadership. The Ukrainian army is in a bad state - units are so chronically understrength that conscription is being re-introduced, and defection, desertion and just general lack of motivation is rife, especially for soldiers who are themselves from the East. A lot of the fighting is being done by the so-called National Guard, volunteer units who are way more motivated but also themselves operate like nationalist militias that are equipped by the government. They've shown lack of coordination throughout this conflict - there's many situations where some National Guard battallions observed government-ordered ceasefires while others advanced; there's a huge variation in tactics and approaches among them. Many have their own air support. I really don't have a lot of confidence in calling them a coordinated modern military. A lot of the leadership of these units are nationalists, many with experience fighting in Chechnya against Russians, and what they would've learned there is basically a many-warlords approach to fighting a civil war (in fact, there's a bit of a rematch going on right now in eastern Ukraine, between Ukrainian nationalists who fought with separatist warlords against Russian forces in Chechnya and pro-Moscow warlords who run Chechnya now and have sent volunteers and mercenaries, along with weapons, to the Donetsk and Lugansk militias). Those are, in a sense, their best-qualified people. Meanwhile, a lot of the old, highly-trained, centralized military leadership in the Ukraine is gone - during the "Orange" years, there was a virtual purge of the "Old Guard", experienced officers who started out in the USSR's Red Army. It's not surprising that Yuschenko's government would've been suspicious of having their military run by generals who originally swore an oath to the Soviet government and Moscow, and they were largely removed - without qualified replacements. That did a lot of damage to the Ukrainian military's ability to manage itself. And lastly, all the economic troubles in the Ukraine really have not done good things to the quality of their military and to morale.

Bottom line is that both sides of the conflict there are pretty decentralized and reacting poorly right now. I would not trust either side with complex weapons systems or difficult investigations, to be honest. And that's what makes this disaster and the investigation so messy.

Oberon, Although I think you theory is in general correct, there is a little hole in it. Atleast all media sources I have encountered so far initial (and removed) separatist claim was that they had shot down Ukraininan transport aircraft. I'm not sure if An-26 was specifically mentioned or not (one was shot down earlier).

Also Yle.fi (Finland's national broadcaster) reports that separatist soldier has given Corriere della Sera and interview where he admitted that they shot MH17 down. I check if I find article in English.

EDIT: Link to Corriere della Sera's english article below.

http://www.corriere.it/english/14_lu...a03d21e8.shtml

Meanwhile, Ukrainian news reporting two Su-25s shot down in the past day, both reportedly just north of the MH17 site. The rebels have reported that they were downed by shoulder-launched missiles, Kiev authorities suspect other possibilities.

Worth noting that the shootdown is reported in reference to a village just 25km from the MH 17 site, despite both sides declaring a 40km radius around it a ceasefire zone.

Meanwhile, more pictures and reports are emerging of an SA-11 vehicle in the town of Torez, 12km south of the crash site, on the day of the shootdown. Torez is under rebel control.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...-launcher-mh17

Another picture:
http://i.imgur.com/ffWaEnl.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/yJhFtXm.jpg

And here is a site tracking/mapping pictures of the possible Buk spotted in Torez and Snizhne, both near the shootdown zone: http://politota.d3.ru/comments/578166/

And here in English, a user has made an attempt to put together pictures to track the actual site of the launch, including an alleged picture of a smoke column left by the SAM launch: http://ukraineatwar.blogspot.ca/2014...f-missile.html

http://i.imgur.com/FOZrIFh.jpg

...all of which puts the alleged launch site right here: https://goo.gl/maps/hnkX3

Certainly a plausible version.

Don't know if this has been posted yet but here's basically Russia's questions and version of events. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrhE...ature=youtu.be It's in both English and Russia.