Russia to build new super army! Ukraine, Human Rights and WW3

[csgohan4]

Some of the posters although sad, are quite right, nothing will be done and that is just deplorable, but understandable since we are living in a nucleur age.

[OilSheikh]

The world refused to stand up to Nazi Germany until it was too late.

Wasn't it just the British empire ?

[neonplanet40]

Wasn't it just the British empire ?

Millions of French, Russian, American etc etc etc would disagree. But for a time, yes it was just the English and French.

[chuckskull]

Aside from those, do we have any other evidence as to what shot down the plane? How high was the plane actually flying when it was hit? Can the alleged BUK system shoot down a plane at 33,000 feet travelling at 550mph?

Who operated the BUK system? These things are incredibly complex to operate, requires a whole team of trained individuals, requires several different vehicles, i doubt the rebels could have operated this BUK system unless the Russians trained them. Maybe the russians operated the BUK system, maybe former Ukrainian army? Which makes me believe this was no error if it was actually shot down by the BUK system as they would be highly trained individuals, it's not a simple point and shoot rocket.

The rebels have BUK they captured a Buk TELAR vehicle, from a Ukrainian base in Donetsk on June 29(see my earlier post). It can hit even higher than the airliner was flying.

Just after the shoot down they claimed to have hit a Ukrainian AN-26 transport in the same area using what they called "Dome" a common reporting name for the Buk TELAR, no AN-26 hit the ground the Boeing did, with videos of the Boeing crash site being posted as proof of shooting down the AN-26. Quickly removed them when they realised their mistake.

The system does not require multiple vehicles the TELAR is all you need to engage, the vehicle contains a fire control radar and 4 missiles. The other vehicles expand it's capabilities but aren't required. The TELAR is the critical node, the other vehicles require it, not the other way around.

Is it difficult to operate? Depends what you mean by 'operate'. To use responsibly(not hitting airliners) as part of an integrated air defence system against military opposition, yes. To 'make thing go boom', not at all the only skill required be fluency in Russian, it's designed to be user friendly and everything is clearly marked. Not to mention many of the rebels have military training, being defectors and veterans. Most Russian SAM systems are highly standardised, with instruction manuals and simulators are available online. If they'd trained on any cold war era SAM they'd be more than comfortable using the BUK, if not it's easy to learn. Like most Russian weapons from the Kalashnikov on up hard to master certainly, hard to use? Not at all.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

It was a Serbian SA6 not an SA11 which was used. Plus the Serbians were actually quite skilled in the use of their SAM systems. Look at how they shot down the F117?? They used an obsolete SA3 FFS and realised that the F117 could be detected under certain conditions. Even with the F16 shoot down,it was not simply "yank a switch and airplane be gone!". They actually knew very well that NATO had AR missiles themselves which would destroy the batteries if they switched on their radars for any length of time,and it was a game of cat and mouse in both cases. It was the preparation of the Serbians which was the reason they managed to actually shoot down any of the aircraft in the first place.

Plus most of the equipment was in quite poor technical condition due to the years of civil war too,with a lot of the more advanced equipment being years past their overall times.. They were certainly not untrained,especially when they managed to protect a huge amount of their own armour by using various tactics during the NATO operation. Their use of misdirection sucessfully against a much more technologically advanced and larger foe was an indication of this. This is why NATO was shocked at how much of the Serbian war machine managed to survive the bombing campaign.

[chuckskull]

You're right Cat it was a Kub, the Buk's predecessor. They look very similar, my mistake. Post edited.

[j1979]

What are the facts thus far?

• A plane crashed on rebel controlled territory
• Ukraine has not yet published air traffic control data
• Rebels shot down aeroplanes in the run up

Aside from those, do we have any other evidence as to what shot down the plane? How high was the plane actually flying when it was hit? Can the alleged BUK system shoot down a plane at 33,000 feet travelling at 550mph?

Who operated the BUK system? These things are incredibly complex to operate, requires a whole team of trained individuals, requires several different vehicles, i doubt the rebels could have operated this BUK system unless the Russians trained them. Maybe the russians operated the BUK system, maybe former Ukrainian army? Which makes me believe this was no error if it was actually shot down by the BUK system as they would be highly trained individuals, it's not a simple point and shoot rocket.

There are a lot of rumours being circulated but the fact is we know very little at this moment and until there is some concrete evidence suggesting the rebels/russians shot down the aeroplane there will be no action from any party.

I personally feel the Ukraine government has the most to gain from this, they have had little to no help from the West but a scenario where rebels killed innocent NATO members would surely bring in some help.

Russia do not gain anything, neither do the rebels, it doesn't help their cause.

Either way, we actually know very little and it seems we will probably never know for sure.

Russia TV almost all channels are saying the Ukrainian air traffic told them to lower the altitude to 20,000 and fly closer to Donesk.

• A plane crashed on rebel controlled territory
• Ukraine has not yet published air traffic control data
• Rebels shot down aeroplanes in the run up

As well as your facts you need to take into account, as others have pointed out.

• Ukraine have not fired a single anti aircraft missile in this conflict. (despite several incursions into it's airspace by Russia)
• The separatists don't have any aircraft.
• The separatists shot down aeroplanes in the run up, but have been shooting down helicopters for months.
• They stole a system missile system in late June.
• They bragged on VK and Twitter for about 2 hours before word got out it was MH17.
• They were recorded saying they shot it down by Ukrainian intelligence service.
• The Rebels and Russia have a very long history of deception in this conflict.
• They held onto the black box for 4 days before handing it over. (Did it take a trip to Moscow and back?)
• Videos of the BUK system leaving Ukraine back over the Rebel controlled boarder have emerged.

Russia will keep pushing it's "not me Gov" approach, as they have since November. Top_gun wrote about the rebels "undermined their own credibility" but what credibility have they got. Most of them are from Chechnya, and not Ukrainian and sorry but they really should go home to their own country and stop trying to expand Russia's boarder.

So even if Russian military did not fire the missile, it is highly likely a Russian citizen did. It's an open and shut case with regards to some Russian involvement, the only cloudy area will be the spanners thrown in the works by Russia and Putin. If Russia are saying on TV to it's citizens Ukrainian air traffic control told the flight to lower it's altitude, expect some falsified evidence to "emerge". Russia have lied from day one, they continue in the same vein, they are guilty and i guarantee you GCHQ, BND the Pentagon etc. already know this, and probably have some damning evidence, they are simply leaving Putin some room for maneuver, because it's easier that way, than to confront the Russians openly.

David Cameron, Mark Rutte, Tony Abbott, Obama and would not be talking the way they have been, unless they were already sure.

The Russians are guiltier than the man behind the grassy knoll!

[j1979]

Good link j1979, thanks.. watching now.
The problem is "The West" and NATO are beginning to look weak now. Questions will be circulating when will NATO actually do anything at all.
It's worth saying again, that hundreds of innocent civilizans were killed of which the majority were citizens of NATO countries amongst them were eighty children as well as Western ally nation civilians such as Australians/New Zealander plus the Malaysians and Indonesians. To be honest, all that has happened so far is a cosy chat between Obama and Putin and the usual verbal diahorrea at the UN.

It is highly likely that the rebels/cossacks with a BUK type anti-aircraft system were responsible. Maybe the US should release intel(spy satellite footage/images amongst other sources) confirming this.
Obviously Obama will decide what happens (e.g. not much), but NATO could easily justify conducting tactical airstrikes against the anti-air systems used by the rebels/cossacks in east Ukraine to secure the airspace. Putin likes to flex his muscles, maybe it's time NATO gave him a bloody nose.

If we are honest with ourselves if there were 189 US citizens on MH17 and not 189 Dutch citizens, I would be willing to bet the NATO bombs would already be falling on rebel/cossack positions (No offence to any Americans or Dutch).

You are spot on about the American vs Dutch assessment. The west were prepared to brush Putin's proxy war under the carpet until this, but it never would have come to this if, there were some western leaders with some principles. Germany and UK are too closely related in the business world, to put principles before profit. And America want to get away from the bad world image, they can't justify sending troops for one dead American.

Im just counting the days until Putin's bubble bursts, because he is only boosting his popularity by this Ultra nationalist approach. I have thought at time a NATO response would make him think twice, but actually, real and tough Iran style sanctions will finish Putin off.

Russia's economy is pathetic, it's based on Gas and Oil and thats about it. They are already heading into another recession, and if hard times come again to Russia, and the people relly feel the pinch, corruption and human rights will sky rocket, then the people will turn on Putin just the same as they came for Yanukovych and democracy in it's rawest form will finish him off.

I can't wait for that day...

Then we can get back to building a relationship with Russia, after the nationalism has subsided. If the world did not have nukes, I think we would already be at war.

[TooNice]

Where is Wikileaks when you need them. It would be interesting to know what kind of talks go on behind closed doors of the party involved. The diplomatic chess game goes on (not what I want, but what I expect).

[kompukare]

The question about who gains from this is dependent upon intention and good judgement. A mistake or poor judgement would render this question almost entirely moot.

As concerns the question of system complexity, even with the required training/coordination required to operate the BUK system (or any other), one should never underestimate the power of human error.

Exactly. While there certainly have been real conspiracies in the past and they will happen again, this obsession with conspiracy theories has gotten a bit silly.

In the Independent, Patrick Cockburn wrote a piece:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/...g-9616863.html

and despite the headline (which was probably more to do with the sub-editor), it was basically saying that the vast majority of conspiracy theories are people's imagination running riot. Two sentences jumped out at me:

Conspiracy theories often stem from joining up dots that are really quite separate. This is done by asking "cui bono?" or "who benefits" from an event and then assuming that the beneficiary must be secretly behind whatever has happened.

Politics is largely about taking advantage of the mistakes and opportunities made by an opponent.

So yes, there are dodgy shadow players in most major countries, and yes they may shameless take advantage of every situations that presents itself. But this rarely means that they sat around a shadowy table and planned everything. A healthy scepticism of official government lines is one thing, but this of conspiracy theory mania is akin to fatalism.

Funny thing about that article is that the Independent had allowed comments earlier (they've removed them all now) and 90% of those comments were just people peddling their favourite conspiracy theory and down voting anyone who agreed with Cockburn.

[chuckskull]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28415769

Rebels cutting away and removing parts of the plane. Guessing they're trying to obscure the missile impact point.

[TheAnimus]

So apparently the US FAA have put restrictions on fights to Israel now. Apparently the jetways are not sacristan after all.

[wasabi]

So. I'm looking at the elephant. Fight Russia or not?

[Saracen]

So apparently the US FAA have put restrictions on fights to Israel now. Apparently the jetways are not sacristan after all.

The restriction is a maximimum of 24 hours only, pending review, and Ben Gurion airport only not Israel, because a Hamas rocket landed about a mile away from the airport.

http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releas...m?newsId=16694

[Saracen]

So. I'm looking at the elephant. Fight Russia or not?

Not.

Sanctions maybe, hard-hitting ones possibly. If it gets really nasty, suspend flights to/from Russia is possible but highly unlikely.

Fighting? Can't see it, personally, and I wouldn't support it. Even if there was evidence that Russia deliberately and intentionally ordered the downing of that aircraft, I doubt military action would follow though a diplomatic and trade rift of gargantuan proportions would.

[Top_gun]

So. I'm looking at the elephant. Fight Russia or not?

I fail to see the rationale on taking military action against the separatists and the Russians. How is the separatists/Russian actions any different to when the CIA interfered in the Afghan/Russian conflict during the 1980s?