What purpose do the black boxes hold when we know what happened to the plane? The pilots wouldn't have seen it coming and everyone would've been incapacitated straight away wouldn't they? Whether being blown out if the plane or rendered unconscious due to the lack of oxygen
What other aircraft would they be referring to having shot down that day then, exactly?Yeah, the reason I'm skeptical is because it's coming from Kiev. The last time that happened we got this fiasco. That's why I want a little bit more before I'm convinced that they're talking about MH17 specifically.
I'd say trying to convince everyone in Russia would be a lost cause from the get-go. Even if the Putin Government is approved by truly 80% of the population one-in-five are critical of his decisions. You can't tell me that Pussy Riot is believing everything that is told on Russian State-sponsored media. I don't want to suggest undermining the regime's narrative, just counter it with the irrefutable proof (if established) that there is a clear link between the separatists and Putin or the Kremlin.I think convincing Russians of anything is a lost cause at this point. The population at large has made their bed with Putin and no amount of evidence to suggest any wrongdoing will work. The best one can hope for is that they eventually wise up further down the line.
Any investigation would be for the rest of the world. The goal should be to try and force Russia to leave Ukraine alone so it can stabilize and hopefully eventually prosper. Crimea is a lost cause, I doubt Russia will be willing to hand it back no matter what, but hopefully the rest of Ukraine can be left intact.
CNN is saying the US government provided this image showing what they believe to be the missile trajectory
That's it? I could've made that in Paint.
That's it? I could've made that in Paint.
France with their impeccable timing:
"We lost them amongst the confusion and adverse weather"
EDIT
France with their impeccable timing:
NY Times: Jet Wreckage Bears Signs of Impact by Supersonic Missile, Analysis Shows
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/22/w...n-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=1
I have a german one, if that helps.Source? I can't seem to find that story on the BBC
That's it? I could've made that in Paint. I'm hoping they can provide something else to back up their statements.
I have a german one, if that helps.
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausla...ines-streit-ueber-waffenembargo-a-982303.html
Lol, not really but thanks I appreciate the effort!
I'm sure it's true, but I want to cite the article elsewhere so I need a link really.
Ah, I thought you just wanted confirmation that it's real.Lol, not really but thanks I appreciate the effort!
I'm sure it's true, but I want to cite the article elsewhere so I need a link really.
Hollande said a first warship was nearly finished and would be delivered as planned in October.
"For the time being, a level of sanctions has not been decided on that would prevent this delivery," Hollande said.
"Does that mean that the rest of the contract - the second Mistral - can be carried through? That depends on Russia's attitude," Hollande added.
The EU has so far hit 72 Ukrainian and Russian figures with travel bans and asset freezes but there is reluctance to go further due to close economic ties between Russia and some EU member states, notably Germany and France. The current sanctions are referred to as Phase 2 in diplomatic circles.
British Prime Minister David Cameron on Monday had called on the EU to adopt tougher "Phase 3" sanctions and to halt all arms sales to Russia, specifically citing the 1.1 billion-euro French contract for two warships.
But speaking to reporters on Monday, Hollande noted that, The Russians have paid. Should we repay 1.1 billion euros if the boat was not delivered to the purchaser? he asked. "The contract was signed in 2011, the boat is almost finished and should be delivered in October."
[...]
http://www.france24.com/en/20140722-us-uk-oppose-france-sale-mistral-warship-russia-ukraine-cameron/
I think this was the original story the BBC were talking about:
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/france-russia-mistral-deal-is-now-unthinkable-cameron-says/503838.html
Looks like UK may not be the only one to bring up prior events. Looks like more and more in Poland are bringing up the 2010 crash that killed Poland's President and a ton of other officials
That'll do cheers, but I always prefer a BBC article where there is one.
"We lost them amongst the confusion and adverse weather"
EDIT
France with their impeccable timing:
I just came to post this. I'm going to create a thread for it unless someone else wants to. The conspiracy theories that are being reported by the state controlled news are beyond belief:
The New Republic said:The best of the bunch is, of course, an elaborate one: MH17 is actually MH370, that Malaysia Airlines flight that disappeared into the Indian Ocean. According to this theory, the plane didnt disappear at all, it was taken to an American military base, Diego-Garcia.
Then it was taken to Holland. On the necessary day and hour, it flew out, bound for Malaysia, but inside were not live people, but corpses. The plane was flown not by real pilots; it was on autopilot. Or take-off (a complicated procedure) was executed by live pilots, who then ejected on parachutes. Then the plane flew automatically. In the necessary spot, it was blown up, without even using a surface-to-air missile. Instead the plane was packed with a bomb, just like the CIA did on 9/11.
He's a bog-standard Champagne Socialist idiot. Mali was conducted with intel and army folks left over from Sarkoleon (whom a sizeable number of French people now regret having dumped).What the fuck is wrong with Hollande? Every thing that he do (except for Mail) is a major fuck up.
I just came to post this. I'm going to create a thread for it unless someone else wants to. The conspiracy theories that are being reported by the state controlled news are beyond belief:
He's a bog-standard Champagne Socialist idiot. Mali was conducted with intel and army folks left over from Sarkoleon (whom a sizeable number of French people now regret having dumped).
He's a bog-standard Champagne Socialist idiot. Mali was conducted with intel and army folks left over from Sarkoleon (whom a sizeable number of French people now regret having dumped).
I just came to post this. I'm going to create a thread for it unless someone else wants to. The conspiracy theories that are being reported by the state controlled news are beyond belief:
“On Thursday afternoon, our commanders ordered us to get into the lorries with our weapons and plenty of ammunition. Perhaps ten minutes earlier, there had been a huge explosion in the sky. ‘We’ve just shot down one of the Kiev Fascists’ planes’, they told us, warning us to take care because at least some of the crew had reportedly baled out. White objects had been seen floating in the clouds. We might have had to fight to round them up”, the soldier explained.“
That explains this pic.
Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera posted an interview w/ separatist soldiers
http://www.corriere.it/english/14_l...wn-51e99c60-118f-11e4-affb-3320a03d21e8.shtml
I don't think this has been posted yet, but here's a speech by Dutch Minister of Foreign Affairs Frans Timmermans to the UN Security Council: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcGCBHNcKyI
It's heartbreaking, but all said: pretty much perfect.
That explains this pic.
Worse. Far worse.Does he have herpes on his hand or something? Damn...
Looking at the pictures of the shrapnel-ridden wreckage: could, or better would an Air-to-Air missile do that kind of damage?
As far as I understand SAM technology it works very much like Anti-Air-Artillery: exploding not on contact with, but in close proximity to the target, thus sending a huge amount of shrapnel flying, resulting in a shotgun-like effect on the target.
An Air-to-Air missile is smaller - even if they utilize the same principle (which I don't know), how easy would it be to rule out the russian version of an attack-jet firing the missile, just by the distribution pattern?
Looking at the pictures of the shrapnel-ridden wreckage: could, or better would an Air-to-Air missile do that kind of damage?
As far as I understand SAM technology it works very much like Anti-Air-Artillery: exploding not on contact with, but in close proximity to the target, thus sending a huge amount of shrapnel flying, resulting in a shotgun-like effect on the target.
An Air-to-Air missile is smaller - even if they utilize the same principle (which I don't know), how easy would it be to rule out the russian version of an attack-jet firing the missile, just by the distribution pattern?
Looking at the pictures of the shrapnel-ridden wreckage: could, or better would an Air-to-Air missile do that kind of damage?
As far as I understand SAM technology it works very much like Anti-Air-Artillery: exploding not on contact with, but in close proximity to the target, thus sending a huge amount of shrapnel flying, resulting in a shotgun-like effect on the target.
An Air-to-Air missile is smaller - even if they utilize the same principle (which I don't know), how easy would it be to rule out the russian version of an attack-jet firing the missile, just by the distribution pattern?
Looking at the pictures of the shrapnel-ridden wreckage: could, or better would an Air-to-Air missile do that kind of damage?
As far as I understand SAM technology it works very much like Anti-Air-Artillery: exploding not on contact with, but in close proximity to the target, thus sending a huge amount of shrapnel flying, resulting in a shotgun-like effect on the target.
An Air-to-Air missile is smaller - even if they utilize the same principle (which I don't know), how easy would it be to rule out the russian version of an attack-jet firing the missile, just by the distribution pattern?
that obviously depends on the angle of attack and how the warhead works. which is my question: are air-to-air missiles designed to directly hit a target like they show it in Top Gun or will they also detonate in the near vicinity of a target.How likely is it than an air to air missile explodes in front of the target?
I don't think this has been posted yet, but here's a speech by Dutch Minister of Foreign Affairs Frans Timmermans to the UN Security Council: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcGCBHNcKyI
It's heartbreaking, but all said: pretty much perfect.
How likely is it than an air to air missile explodes in front of the target?
that obviously depends on the angle of attack and how the warhead works. which is my question: are air-to-air missiles designed to directly hit a target like they show it in Top Gun or will they also detonate in the near vicinity of a target.
that article only states what I wrote about SAM missiles, but does not give info about the difference to air-to-air missiles. does that class of weapons also use fragmentation warhead and if so: how reliably can they be differentiated from another, by effect on target (distribution pattern of perforations).