Exactly. They wouldn't.why would russian troops deliberately shoot down an airliner in an aera that would instantly cast suspicion upon them?
Exactly. They wouldn't.
The plan was to blame it on the Russians.
Exactly. They wouldn't.
The plan was to blame it on the Russians.
Interesting video about the Dutch Safety Board's investigation into the causes of the crash :
The plan was to blame it on the Russians.
The second issue is that, US and Russian satellites should have been able to detect the launch of the missile
There are 2 issues I am not clear on though... Why the hell did Ukraine not shut down air-space over Donbass knowing full well that rebels possessed at least Man-pad surface to air missiles.
They did, up to the heights they knew the Rebels had equipment to fire at (and then some).
Unfortunately if you shut down such airspace fully you end up disrupting hundreds/thousands of flights a day, and typically you assume that anyone with a weapon capable of shooting down a civilian airliner at cruising heights also has the training to identify their target and not just fire at anything that moves (normally such training would be a fairly big part of training how to use the weapons, as you don't tend to want your anti aircraft batteries shooting down your own aircraft).
Using what tech?
Cameras/IR wouldn't see it due to a few things -
A - You'd have to be zoomed right in to a very small area (a couple of football fields) to see it visually but then you'd need to be pointing at the right area or
B - You could be zoomed out to see a bigger area but you get no resolution to see a small truck sized object.
C - The missile itself is tiny to see visually or via IR
Alternatively a satellite based Radar can't see something as small as a missile at the distances involved either.
I've got many years of viewing ISR work and it's sadly not as amazing as hollywood would make you believe.
Which would probably rule out option B. e Unless the Rebels had already been trained how to use the system.
Indeed, and its not exactly like nicking a digger and learning how to use it, its an advanced anti air missile system.
I think A can be ruled out. The Ukranians wouldn't have had any reason to:
a) be in that position so close to the Russian border
b) be firing at a plane that is about to leave it's airspace
[TW]Fox;28679333 said:Why would it be A? What purpose would a Ukrainian BUK have been serving given the rebels had no aircraft?
There are 2 issues I am not clear on though... Why the hell did Ukraine not shut down air-space over Donbass knowing full well that rebels possessed at least Man-pad surface to air missiles.
Don't forget that in the run up to the downing of MH-17, the pro-Russian rebels had shot down some Ukrainian military aircraft - almost as if they had been given a new toy
There is evidence of the pro-Russian rebels possessing and using some sort of fairly advanced anti-aircraft system in the area.
Do you realize how childish this makes you look?
I am pretty sure Putin dumped into his pants once he got told that the airliner has been shot down in Donbass.
If not for some clever juggling and dancing around fire by him, NATO could`ve easily used this incident to bomb rebels to middle ages.
This incident had no benefits to Putin or Rebels what so over, only thing it had is to further vilify and risk being bombed by NATO or even UN sanctioned operation if Russia got so backed into corner that they wouldn't even veto to save their face on world arena.
In all honesty, I am still rather shocked US didnt grab this by the **** and bury Russia in the mud, they had every capability to do so.
Have we blamed this on the Israelis or Thatcher yet?