Skip to main content

View Diary: President Obama statement on downed airliner, situation in Ukraine (286 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  WAPO--Preliminary assessment (20+ / 0-)

    that Russian separatists shot the plane down, and here is Power's quote:

    “Our assessment is that Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 . . . was likely downed by an SA-11 missile, operated from a separatist-held location in eastern Ukraine,” U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power told the U.N. Security Council on Friday.

    She added that “because of the technical complexity of the SA-11,” it was unlikely that the separatists could have effectively operated it on their own. “We cannot rule out Russian technical assistance,” Power said.

    •  "unlikely that the separatists could have (8+ / 0-)

      effectively operated it on their own???"

      Even separatists who had training on the system owing to previous membership in Ukrainian (or Russian) military??

      Blanket statements like this lead to trouble.

      Their real God is money-- Jesus just drives the armored car, and his hat is made in China. © 2009 All Rights Reserved

      by oblomov on Fri Jul 18, 2014 at 08:28:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Although "previous membership in Russian (7+ / 0-)

        military" means Russian nationals, who can be distinguished from Ukrainian separatists, and are something to complain about.

        Sooooooooo.................you don't have any questions for me after all?

        by Inland on Fri Jul 18, 2014 at 08:32:07 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Well, you know there is a simulator for that (0+ / 0-)

        though it only goes up to the SA-8.  Why don't you download it (along with the instructions) and try doing it yourself?

        You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

        by Throw The Bums Out on Fri Jul 18, 2014 at 08:53:48 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yep (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        oblomov, shaharazade, CenPhx, protectspice

        just like how 'sure' everyone was about who used the Sarin-gas in Syria mere hours after the events happened, when in reality to this day there is significant data on both sides.

        Theres plenty of fault to go around in this. Obviously Whoever shot down the plane but also whoever made the the decision to fly over a war-zone, and Susan 'fuck the EU' Powers' both bear some blame as well.

        The Ukraine military was full of people who defected to the seperatists who would know perfectly well how to use this kind of machinery and Susan Powers knows that.

        If you stand for nothing you will fall for anything.

        by LieparDestin on Fri Jul 18, 2014 at 09:06:12 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No, there is not significant data on both sides. (4+ / 0-)

          There is credible data blaming the Syrian government, and some CT b.s. that people really committed to siding with Assad can pretend to believe.

          Don't bother posting the silly, long-rebutted story from the Russian Foreign Ministry about the fossilized remains for Seymour Hersh.

          You sound like a global warming denier.

          Art is the handmaid of human good.

          by joe from Lowell on Fri Jul 18, 2014 at 09:18:37 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Umm... thats just not true (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            shaharazade, CenPhx, protectspice

            Its one thing to disagree with me and present some evidence to challenge my assertion, but all together just pretty lame to name call as some 'global warming denier' when the UN clearly disagrees with you:

            http://articles.latimes.com/...

            “I was a little bit stupefied by the first indications we got ... about the use of nerve gas by the opposition,” Del Ponte told Swiss Italian broadcaster RSI.

            She said the evidence emerged from interviews conducted by investigators with victims, physicians and others in neighboring countries.  

            Del Ponte did not rule out the possibility that President Bashar Assad's government may also have used chemical agents on the battlefield.

            Thus my comment about data pointing to use by both sides remains factual... while yours just remains an attempt at namecalling instead of discussion.

            If you stand for nothing you will fall for anything.

            by LieparDestin on Fri Jul 18, 2014 at 09:35:20 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The UN does not disagree with me. (3+ / 0-)

              The one person, speaking months before the attacks took place, that you quote is not "the UN."

              Your facts are wrong. You can keep insisting, LIKE A GLOBAL WARMING DENIER, that there is comparable evidence on both sides, but your determination won't change the reality of the evidence in this case any more than it does in the comparable case of global warming denial.

              Art is the handmaid of human good.

              by joe from Lowell on Fri Jul 18, 2014 at 09:44:24 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Planes flew there routinely (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          LieparDestin, Capt Crunch

          At 30,000 feet, there's not that much danger from what's happening on ground. This was at best an irregular war.

          •  But the fact that (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            protectspice, bananapouch1

            some airlines changed routes to not go over this part of the Ukraine shows that there were known concerns. When presented with a choice from 'not much danger to flying over a warzone' to 'even less danger by not flying over a warzone', I would hope airlines always make the second decision. I'm sure this will inspire new protocols.

            If you stand for nothing you will fall for anything.

            by LieparDestin on Fri Jul 18, 2014 at 09:42:39 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  The SA-11 requires additional radar support. (9+ / 0-)

        The actual launch unit itself only has radar to detect the plane overhead and link the launcher to the control unit.  You need additional radar to detect approaching planes and radar technicians to triangulate the exact location for greatest accuracy.  It's 90% accurate when all those factors are in place.

        This isn't just unit where you take aim and push a button.  The system is designed to be used in multiple sites with one central radar control center.  

        There was a weapons expert on CNN who said this morning that since the SA-11 can set up and launch quickly (about 5 minutes) what may have happened is that they saw a blip on the radar and, without any analysis of trajectory or altitude, they launched.

        In fact, he said, if they're going bare bones with equipment, they might not have the equipment or expertise to determine the altitude of incoming flying craft.

        •  I think you're agreeing that it can operate in (0+ / 0-)

          both a networked and stand-alone mode, the latter being less accurate and reliable but certainly sufficient as shown yesterday.

          Their real God is money-- Jesus just drives the armored car, and his hat is made in China. © 2009 All Rights Reserved

          by oblomov on Fri Jul 18, 2014 at 11:59:32 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site