Never Forget: 4 months ago, before civilian airliner downing, Russian-backed forces downed UKR plane

[uhnope]

Last Saturday, pro-Russia separatists shot down a Ukrainian military transport plane in the eastern city of Luhansk, killing 49. It was the deadliest incident since the conflict in eastern Ukraine broke out in April.

The country's military has been struggling to regain control over the porous border with Russia as separatists continue to set up checkpoints and engage in sporadic fighting. Meanwhile, civilians are fleeing from towns in the area to avoid being caught in the crossfire.

VICE News is in Luhansk to meet some of the separatist men and women who are determined to keep battling the government at any cost.

more

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/07/18/did-the-ukrainian-rebels-even-know-they-were-shooting-at-a-civilian-aircraft/
Did the Ukrainian rebels even know they were shooting at a civilian aircraft?

One of the remaining mysteries about the Malaysian airliner crash is why the pro-Russian Ukrainian separatists would've gone after a civilian airliner when until now they'd been targeting primarily military aircraft — low-flying helicopters and the like. That's a departure from the separatists' previous pattern. What changed?

Without speculating too much on the rebels' motives, there are a few things we might be able to glean by looking at the technology that was used in the incident. To date, the rebels had reportedly been using man-portable surface-to-air missiles. But that equipment isn't capable of striking high-flying aircraft, hence the use of SA-11/17 mobile missile platforms, which can engage targets as high up as 82,000 feet.

That's some sophisticated equipment. Speaking to reporters Friday, President Obama said U.S. intelligence officials had gathered strong evidence suggesting the separatists had been trained by Russian forces.

[The Magistrate]

1. The Incidents Are Not Really Comparable, Sir

The transport was down low, in reach of shoulder-fired weapons, and likely in clear sight of the people wielding them.

The airliner was up at a good altitude, and reachable only by fairly sophisticated equipment, on which those operating it may not have been well trained, or properly patched in to a guiding network.

The only plausible explanation available remains that the rebel operators mistook the airliner for a Ukrainian military transport, and acted on that misapprehension.

[Wellstone ruled]

2. To many pieces in this puzzle.

Stories about US state department playing Empire Games with NGO's. Merch's shooting people at a demonstration in Kiev. Stories about were did these Merch's come from and who paid them. Was the CIA NSA or another one of our black bag operators do the deed. It seems funny how the time frame and the establishing of what is a allturnitive banking source other than the IMF,the so called BRICS bank. Inquiring minds need to know. BRICS==Brazil,Russia,India,China,and South Africa. Enough said.

[uhnope]

3. thx for the CT

but sometimes the obvious is most likely the truth

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregsatell/2014/07/26/why-putin-shot-down-mh-17/

Miscalculation. Failure. Escalation - Why Putin Shot Down MH-17

While investigations continue, at this point most people accept that the missile that shot down Malaysian Airlines flight MH-17 was supplied by Russia, came from an area that its separatists controlled and involved training—if not outright participation—from the Russian military.

It has also become clear that the person most responsible for the tragedy is Vladimir Putin. None of this could have happened without not only his approval, but his active support. Sophisticated military assets simply do not get up and walk across borders by themselves.

[SkyDaddy7]

6. EXACTLY!!! nt.

[jtuck004]

4. Anything like when we blew the Iranian airliner out of the sky with our warship?

The USS Vincennes.

[The Magistrate]

5. Which Incident, Sir?

Taking down a military transport is a legitimate military action, and even if one disagrees with the cause in which it is done, ought to be so regarded.

The destruction of the Iranian airliner does seem to have been an error, that in my view anyway owed a great deal to lax leadership, since the claim made was that the control crew were seriously rattled by the fact that the ship was being fired at with heavy machine-guns from a couple of motor-boats at the time a signal from the plane was registered, and interpreted as that of a fighter bomber. A well-led and well-trained crew one would expect to stay cool and efficient under such a circumstance.