Ukraine: Witness the rise of a new Russian Empire, live!

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**LordofHats**

Iron_Captain wrote:
Welcome to realpolitik, tovarishch.

And while I'm on Cracked;

Russian "realpolitik" means basing your politics on practicality instead of ideas. Modern Russia elevates that to practically cutting out the idea of politics itself, especially the idea that more than one group should be allowed to take part. In 2011, Parnas, the People's Freedom Party, was denied registration just before the elections. This "freedom party" wasn't a bearded hippie representing his constituency of beard lice, but a serious opposition bloc including a former prime minister and deputy prime minister.

The Russian justice ministry claimed that the new party failed to meet several legal requirements, of which "supporting Vladimir Putin" was presumably the most mandatory. They also pointed out that the party's proposed charter did not provide for a rotation of leadership. They said this in 2011, when Dmitry Medvedev was busily eating rose petals so that his farts would gently scent the presidential chair before he gave it back.

**Soladrin**

Holy feth Iron captain, you must hate living a the Netherlands where we at least have a modicum of respect for other people and don't refer to certain groups as "fringe elements" that we can hate.

Let me guess, you would vote for Wilders if you were old enough?

**thenoobbomb**

Too early to blame Russia.

For all that's possible the BUK could've been taken from an Ukranian military base earlier.

**whembly**

thenoobbomb wrote:
Too early to blame Russia.

For all that's possible the BUK could've been taken from an Ukranian military base earlier.

I would blame Russia if it's proven that the sepratist group did indeed fire that missile, even in mistake.

Just not sure what the international community can do... other than forcing Russia for restitution.

**thenoobbomb**

whembly wrote:
thenoobbomb wrote:
Too early to blame Russia.

For all that's possible the BUK could've been taken from an Ukranian military base earlier.

I would blame Russia if it's proven that the sepratist group did indeed fire that missile, even in mistake.

Just not sure what the international community can do... other than forcing Russia for restitution.

Even if there's no proof that Russia dupplied anything?

Might as well start blaming the US for ISIS and the Taliban, what with the US allegedly supplying them with weapons. Though that is of course another topic entirely.

**easysauce**

whembly wrote:
thenoobbomb wrote:
Too early to blame Russia.

For all that's possible the BUK could've been taken from an Ukranian military base earlier.

I would blame Russia if it's proven that the sepratist group did indeed fire that missile, even in mistake.

Just not sure what the international community can do... other than forcing Russia for restitution.

so are we going to ask the states for restitution for the proven cases supplying arms to (insert any one of a plethora of places, rebel factions, outright terrorist groups, and so on that the US supplied arms to) who then used those arms for illegitimate purposes?

do we ask the USA to provide restitution for all the UNPROVEN cases as well?

pretty conveinant that russia gets 100% of the blame despite not actually having control of the groups or region, especially when ukraine is ukraines responsability.

**whembly**

thenoobbomb wrote:
whembly wrote:
thenoobbomb wrote:
Too early to blame Russia.

For all that's possible the BUK could've been taken from an Ukranian military base earlier.

I would blame Russia if it's proven that the sepratist group did indeed fire that missile, even in mistake.

Just not sure what the international community can do... other than forcing Russia for restitution.

Even if there's no proof that Russia dupplied anything?

I thought it was proven during the Crimean event. (I'm not joking... am I wrong?)

Might as well start blaming the US for ISIS and the Taliban, what with the US allegedly supplying them with weapons. Though that is of course another topic entirely.

Different topic and has already happened.

**d-usa**

easysauce wrote:

pretty conveinant that russia gets 100% of the blame despite not actually having control of the groups or region, especially when ukraine is ukraines responsability.

So if strangers break into your house and give a gun to your child, and the child shoots your wife, is it then your fault because your house is your responsibility?

**cincydooley**

chaos0xomega wrote:
The West didn’t react in time, or with enough resolve, to the initial invasion and partition of Ukraine last spring, and there’s no reason to think our reaction will be any more effective or resolute this time. It would be reassuring to think America and Europe will now fully engage on the problem of Russian aggression, but it’s unlikely.

Well that's it in a nutshell, isn't it?

This shouldn't have happened. The US, while not as culpable as Russia, is still to blame for it's embarrassing inaction.

**easysauce**

d-usa wrote:
easysauce wrote:

pretty conveinant that russia gets 100% of the blame despite not actually having control of the groups or region, especially when ukraine is ukraines responsability.

So if strangers break into your house and give a gun to your child, and the child shoots your wife, is it then your fault because your house is your responsibility?

nice straw man, OFC its the robbers fault in that situation where the source of the gun is PROVEN.

in the case of russia, it is simply speculated and alledged that they have supplied anti air missile platforms, and every legit western source simply makes that allegation, and you run with it like its a proven fact when it simply is not.

at this point the "stranger in the house" could be kiev, could be russia, could be some other party as well, the ukraine hasnt exactly kept good tabs on their own people/equiptment, and has been proven to have MUKs in the area (PROVEN, not alleged), though its not proven they used them.

**Soladrin**

cincydooley wrote:
chaos0xomega wrote:
The West didn’t react in time, or with enough resolve, to the initial invasion and partition of Ukraine last spring, and there’s no reason to think our reaction will be any more effective or resolute this time. It would be reassuring to think America and Europe will now fully engage on the problem of Russian aggression, but it’s unlikely.

Well that's it in a nutshell, isn't it?

This shouldn't have happened. The US, while not as culpable as Russia, is still to blame for it's embarrassing inaction.

I'd say the blame should weigh much heavier on the EU.

**Iron_Captain**

Wyrmalla wrote:Yeah, but again I think the Russian government are a bunch of baby eating gakheads, so its easier for me to put up with the lies of the pro-western Kiev government.

Finally someone who admits being biased.
I like you.

MrDwhitey wrote:Well Iron, you just went straight back to pathetic shill.

ffs grow up. It's so fething tiring. Even when trying to be "reasonable" you have to put the fething boot into the Ukraine. I'm done responding in any sense. Feel free to dismiss with a joke picture or w/e.

It is my patriotic duty as a son of Mother Russia

MrDwhitey wrote:You know when you apologise then try to make an excuse/justify/say someone else is as bad? Then it's not an apology.

And that justification of the repression of "fringe groups". Holy fething gak that is genuinely disgusting.

It is neither an apology nor a justification, merely an explanation.

A Town Called Malus wrote:That a lot of people support something terrible does not make it good.

People (and they are people, not "fringe groups") being assaulted in the street because of their sexual preference is disgusting and there is no excuse that any decent human being can give to justify it.

I fully agree with you. Plenty of other Russians would too. But there is also a large, very vocal group that would just shout: "Homosexuality is a US plot to bring down Great Russia!" or something like that.

Soladrin wrote:
Holy feth Iron captain, you must hate living a the Netherlands where we at least have a modicum of respect for other people and don't refer to certain groups as "fringe elements" that we can hate.

Let me guess, you would vote for Wilders if you were old enough?

Nyet, I am a proud socialist, coming from a proud line of communists ever since my ancestors betrayed the Tsar and the White Army.
I am in fact a member of the youth movement of the Socialist Party, and SP is what I would vote.
I would also like to point out that fringe elements of society are also being repressed in the Netherlands: fascists, racists, homophobes, pedophiles and I am sure there are more groups to think of. I would say that at least in some cases it is desirable to repress certain groups of society. That doesn't mean I agree with what happens in Russia though.

LordofHats wrote:

Russian "realpolitik" means basing your politics on practicality instead of ideas. Modern Russia elevates that to practically cutting out the idea of politics itself, especially the idea that more than one group should be allowed to take part. In 2011, Parnas, the People's Freedom Party, was denied registration just before the elections. This "freedom party" wasn't a bearded hippie representing his constituency of beard lice, but a serious opposition bloc including a former prime minister and deputy prime minister.

The Russian justice ministry claimed that the new party failed to meet several legal requirements, of which "supporting Vladimir Putin" was presumably the most mandatory. They also pointed out that the party's proposed charter did not provide for a rotation of leadership. They said this in 2011, when Dmitry Medvedev was busily eating rose petals so that his farts would gently scent the presidential chair before he gave it back.

Serious opposition blocks do not exist in Russia. Count on Putin to keep it that way. That is the way the KGB rolls, they make sure they stay in absolute control of everything from a distance. If there is an opposition party, Putin is either in control or it is made sure that the opposition will never get a chance to grow and become a threat.

**chaos0xomega**

cincydooley wrote:
chaos0xomega wrote:
The West didn’t react in time, or with enough resolve, to the initial invasion and partition of Ukraine last spring, and there’s no reason to think our reaction will be any more effective or resolute this time. It would be reassuring to think America and Europe will now fully engage on the problem of Russian aggression, but it’s unlikely.

Well that's it in a nutshell, isn't it?

This shouldn't have happened. The US, while not as culpable as Russia, is still to blame for it's embarrassing inaction.

Err, I think I'm being misquoted? I never said that...

**whembly**

Soladrin wrote:
cincydooley wrote:
chaos0xomega wrote:
The West didn’t react in time, or with enough resolve, to the initial invasion and partition of Ukraine last spring, and there’s no reason to think our reaction will be any more effective or resolute this time. It would be reassuring to think America and Europe will now fully engage on the problem of Russian aggression, but it’s unlikely.

Well that's it in a nutshell, isn't it?

This shouldn't have happened. The US, while not as culpable as Russia, is still to blame for it's embarrassing inaction.

I'd say the blame should weigh much heavier on the EU.

Really? How so? Just interested in this track of though, I'm not trying to single you out.

EDIT: Also, this is a good read:
http://breakingdefense.com/2014/07/2-overlooked-clues-russian-or-proxies-shot-down-malaysian-jetliner/

2 Overlooked Clues Russians Or Proxies Shot Down Malaysian Jetliner

[UPDATED 2:10 pm with comment from President Obama & Pentagon spokesman Kirby] Western media are hardly going easy on Russia. But in all the often-excellent coverage I’ve read so far of the Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 disaster – which claimed 295 lives – no one* is pointing out two basic facts that point towards Russia and its separatist proxies:

1) MH17 was flying eastwards.

2) The Russian-backed rebels don’t have an air force.

Both these factors make it extremely unlikely Ukrainian government forces shot down the airliner. It’s not that Ukrainian troops are incapable of such a horrific mistake: They accidentally shot down a Russian jetliner during a military exercise in 2001, killing 78 people, and frankly the Ukrainian military’s skills have only degenerated since. Even the well-trained US Navy shot down an Iranian airliner in 1988, killing 290, because, amidst high tensions in the Gulf, the USS Vincennes mistook the approaching airliner for an attack plane.

But context matters. First, from a Ukrainian perspective, MH17 was flying from friendly, government-controlled territory towards rebel-held territory and Russia. That outbound vector would make it much harder for an anxious, trigger-happy Ukrainian air defense officer to mistake it for an incoming attack. From the perspective of a separatist or Russian gunner, however, MH17 was inbound from enemy territory.

Second, Ukrainian air defenses haven’t been shooting at anything so far this war because they haven’t had anything to shoot at. Russia has given the separatists weaponry, even rocket launchers and main battle tanks, but the rebels still don’t have aircraft. Russia itself does, of course, and Kiev claims a Russian aircraft shot down a Ukrainian Su-25 fighter Wednesday, so Ukrainian air defense units probably are now watching the skies more nervously than before (although, again, they would be watching for aircraft flying westwards).

But Russian-backed separatists have an actual track record of shooting down Ukrainian government aircraft, including a large-bodied AN-26 transport. A Ukrainian military AN-26 doesn’t look particularly like a Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777: It’s much smaller, with straight wings and propellers, in contrast to the larger, swept-wing jet. But the two look much more like each other than either looks like, say, a fighter plane, especially on radar where details of shape would be obscured. And, notoriously, a separatist commander (and suspected Russian operative) known as Col. Igor Strelkov tweeted a claim the rebels had shot down an AN-26 just after MH17 crashed – a post later deleted.

If rebel forces did fire the fatal missile, however, their regular shoulder-launched weapons couldn’t have reached the high-altitude airliner: They would have had to use a more sophisticated anti-aircraft system such as the Russian-made Buk (in English, “Beech”; NATO codenames “SA-11 Gadfly” and “SA-17 Grizzly” depending on the variant). AP reporters have seen a Buk in rebel hands, and the rebels themselves claimed to have captured one from Ukrainian government forces. With ex-Soviet, ex-Ukrainian, and ex-Russian military personnel in their ranks, it’s quite possible they had enough former air defense troops to get the Buk working – although they would not have had a supporting infrastructure of command, control, and sensor networks to help them distinguish hostile from friendly aircraft.

It is also possible that Russian operatives sent by Moscow were working the advanced equipment on the rebels’ behalf. I personally think it unlikely (not impossible) that the highly centralized Russian military would have opened fire by accident – but personnel loaned to the Ukrainian separatists would be operating outside the usual safeguards.

[UPDATE: At a press conference this afternoon, the Pentagon's top spokesman, Rear Adm. John Kirby, demurred on most questions about the tragedy, citing the ongoing investigation, but he did make some blunt statements.

"The SA-11 [missile], the one we believe was used to down Flight 17, is a sophisticated piece of technology,” Kirby said. “It strains credulity to think it could be used by separatists without at least some measure of Russian support and technical assistance.”

That could include the training of separatists on “vehicle-borne” anti-aircraft systems, which European Command chief Gen. Philip Breedlove has said has already happened on Russian soil. Or it could be Russian personnel working for or with the separatists. “We don’t know,” said Kirby.

But the US is now confident that the missile that downed MH-17 was fired from separatist-controlled territory, Kirby said — a statement so damning that I felt compelled to email the admiral to confirm I heard it correctly (he said I had). President Barack Obama said the same thing.]

Those of us – myself included – who have long been suspicious of Putin’s Russia should be careful not to rush to judgment. But the circumstantial evidence so far makes it highly unlikely the blame falls on Ukraine.

**d-usa**

easysauce wrote:
d-usa wrote:
easysauce wrote:

pretty conveinant that russia gets 100% of the blame despite not actually having control of the groups or region, especially when ukraine is ukraines responsability.

So if strangers break into your house and give a gun to your child, and the child shoots your wife, is it then your fault because your house is your responsibility?

nice straw man, OFC its the robbers fault in that situation where the source of the gun is PROVEN.

in the case of russia, it is simply speculated and alledged that they have supplied anti air missile platforms, and every legit western source simply makes that allegation, and you run with it like its a proven fact when it simply is not.

at this point the "stranger in the house" could be kiev, could be russia, could be some other party as well, the ukraine hasnt exactly kept good tabs on their own people/equiptment, and has been proven to have MUKs in the area (PROVEN, not alleged), though its not proven they used them.

It's not a strawmen, it's your scenario.

Your wife is dead, your kid has a gun that is not yours, there are clear signs that somebody broke into the house. By you will be responsible for her death because it's your house.

At least that is what Putin is saying and what you are saying.

**cincydooley**

chaos0xomega wrote:
cincydooley wrote:
chaos0xomega wrote:
The West didn’t react in time, or with enough resolve, to the initial invasion and partition of Ukraine last spring, and there’s no reason to think our reaction will be any more effective or resolute this time. It would be reassuring to think America and Europe will now fully engage on the problem of Russian aggression, but it’s unlikely.

Well that's it in a nutshell, isn't it?

This shouldn't have happened. The US, while not as culpable as Russia, is still to blame for it's embarrassing inaction.

Err, I think I'm being misquoted? I never said that...

Sorry Chaos. It's from the article you linked. My bad.

**Soladrin**

whembly wrote:
Soladrin wrote:
cincydooley wrote:
chaos0xomega wrote:
The West didn’t react in time, or with enough resolve, to the initial invasion and partition of Ukraine last spring, and there’s no reason to think our reaction will be any more effective or resolute this time. It would be reassuring to think America and Europe will now fully engage on the problem of Russian aggression, but it’s unlikely.

Well that's it in a nutshell, isn't it?

This shouldn't have happened. The US, while not as culpable as Russia, is still to blame for it's embarrassing inaction.

I'd say the blame should weigh much heavier on the EU.

Really? How so? Just interested in this track of though, I'm not trying to single you out.

Well, America world police doesn't mean the EU get's to sit back and twiddle their thumbs. We are right next to them, in a much better position for quick support.

**whembly**

Soladrin wrote:
whembly wrote:
Soladrin wrote:
cincydooley wrote:
chaos0xomega wrote:
The West didn’t react in time, or with enough resolve, to the initial invasion and partition of Ukraine last spring, and there’s no reason to think our reaction will be any more effective or resolute this time. It would be reassuring to think America and Europe will now fully engage on the problem of Russian aggression, but it’s unlikely.

Well that's it in a nutshell, isn't it?

This shouldn't have happened. The US, while not as culpable as Russia, is still to blame for it's embarrassing inaction.

I'd say the blame should weigh much heavier on the EU.

Really? How so? Just interested in this track of though, I'm not trying to single you out.

Well, America world police doesn't mean the EU get's to sit back and twiddle their thumbs. We are right next to them, in a much better position for quick support.

Is that related to their efforts to be admitted into the EU? Or Nato?

**Saldiven**

easysauce wrote:
d-usa wrote:
easysauce wrote:

pretty conveinant that russia gets 100% of the blame despite not actually having control of the groups or region, especially when ukraine is ukraines responsability.

So if strangers break into your house and give a gun to your child, and the child shoots your wife, is it then your fault because your house is your responsibility?

nice straw man, OFC its the robbers fault in that situation where the source of the gun is PROVEN.

I'll give you a better comparison then.

One man assists another in breaking into your home. The second man, while in your home, finds a firearm, and then commits an unprovoked murder.

Is not the first man significantly responsible? In US criminal law, he would be guilty of murder.

**easysauce**

d-usa wrote:
easysauce wrote:
d-usa wrote:
easysauce wrote:

pretty conveinant that russia gets 100% of the blame despite not actually having control of the groups or region, especially when ukraine is ukraines responsability.

So if strangers break into your house and give a gun to your child, and the child shoots your wife, is it then your fault because your house is your responsibility?

nice straw man, OFC its the robbers fault in that situation where the source of the gun is PROVEN.

in the case of russia, it is simply speculated and alledged that they have supplied anti air missile platforms, and every legit western source simply makes that allegation, and you run with it like its a proven fact when it simply is not.

at this point the "stranger in the house" could be kiev, could be russia, could be some other party as well, the ukraine hasnt exactly kept good tabs on their own people/equiptment, and has been proven to have MUKs in the area (PROVEN, not alleged), though its not proven they used them.

It's not a strawmen, it's your scenario.

Your wife is dead, your kid has a gun that is not yours, there are clear signs that somebody broke into the house. By you will be responsible for her death because it's your house.

At least that is what Putin is saying and what you are saying.

No its not what I am saying, stop misrepresenting me and making up my argument for me (strawmanning)

This UNKNOWN "robber" is unknown in YOUR scenario, and could very well have been the ukraine.

You keep saying its russias fault, even though we do not know that it was russia who "robbed the house" or shot the kid.

Its not my scenario, you clearly made up the "robber" scenario not me, so again, stop making up my argument for me.

If you are just going to make up both sides of the argument it shows how biased you really are, and how unwilling you are to accept any information other then what is spoon fed to you by your preferred bias of news sources.

Whoever gave them the gun has responsability, whoever shot the gun has responsability. Whoever owns the house, has a responsability to protect its inhabitants, even if its not criminally CULPABLE for the actual act. Just like the police are responsable for protecting you, though they are not to blame when you get shot by a crook.

WHO gave it, WHO shot it, are not proven yet, you are acting like they are.

And if we are going to play the speculation game,

its far more likely that IF it was separatists, that the SAM was looted from ukrainian stores then russia driving over the border and giving them one.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Saldiven wrote:
easysauce wrote:
snip

I'll give you a better comparison then.

One man assists another in breaking into your home. The second man, while in your home, finds a firearm, and then commits an unprovoked murder.

Is not the first man significantly responsible? In US criminal law, he would be guilty of murder.

mhmm, and under canadian law, if it was my house, I AM STILL RESPONSABLE tertiarily because I am supposed to have all the guns secured so they cannot be stolen.

the point is, we do NOT know who did what, yet we have people asserting as FACT that they DO know who did what.

**Soladrin**

whembly wrote:
Soladrin wrote:
whembly wrote:
Soladrin wrote:
cincydooley wrote:
chaos0xomega wrote:
The West didn’t react in time, or with enough resolve, to the initial invasion and partition of Ukraine last spring, and there’s no reason to think our reaction will be any more effective or resolute this time. It would be reassuring to think America and Europe will now fully engage on the problem of Russian aggression, but it’s unlikely.

Well that's it in a nutshell, isn't it?

This shouldn't have happened. The US, while not as culpable as Russia, is still to blame for it's embarrassing inaction.

I'd say the blame should weigh much heavier on the EU.

Really? How so? Just interested in this track of though, I'm not trying to single you out.

Well, America world police doesn't mean the EU get's to sit back and twiddle their thumbs. We are right next to them, in a much better position for quick support.

Is that related to their efforts to be admitted into the EU? Or Nato?

wut.

**whembly**

Soladrin wrote:
whembly wrote:
Soladrin wrote:
whembly wrote:
Soladrin wrote:
cincydooley wrote:
chaos0xomega wrote:
The West didn’t react in time, or with enough resolve, to the initial invasion and partition of Ukraine last spring, and there’s no reason to think our reaction will be any more effective or resolute this time. It would be reassuring to think America and Europe will now fully engage on the problem of Russian aggression, but it’s unlikely.

Well that's it in a nutshell, isn't it?

This shouldn't have happened. The US, while not as culpable as Russia, is still to blame for it's embarrassing inaction.

I'd say the blame should weigh much heavier on the EU.

Really? How so? Just interested in this track of though, I'm not trying to single you out.

Well, America world police doesn't mean the EU get's to sit back and twiddle their thumbs. We are right next to them, in a much better position for quick support.

Is that related to their efforts to be admitted into the EU? Or Nato?

wut.

LOL... I guess what specifically could the EU do?

**Soladrin**

whembly wrote:
Soladrin wrote:
whembly wrote:
Soladrin wrote:
whembly wrote:
Soladrin wrote:
cincydooley wrote:
chaos0xomega wrote:
The West didn’t react in time, or with enough resolve, to the initial invasion and partition of Ukraine last spring, and there’s no reason to think our reaction will be any more effective or resolute this time. It would be reassuring to think America and Europe will now fully engage on the problem of Russian aggression, but it’s unlikely.

Well that's it in a nutshell, isn't it?

This shouldn't have happened. The US, while not as culpable as Russia, is still to blame for it's embarrassing inaction.

I'd say the blame should weigh much heavier on the EU.

Really? How so? Just interested in this track of though, I'm not trying to single you out.

Well, America world police doesn't mean the EU get's to sit back and twiddle their thumbs. We are right next to them, in a much better position for quick support.

Is that related to their efforts to be admitted into the EU? Or Nato?

wut.

LOL... I guess what specifically could the EU do?

I don't fething know.

At least A thing?

At this point I have no clue what anyone can do about the situation.

**Laemos**

President Obama has made statements about the crash, but has he condemned Russia yet?

**whembly**

Wo
New video allegedly shows ‘Buk’ missile system en route to Russia

A short video posted to YouTube by the Ukrainian government reportedly shows a “Buk,” or SA-11 “Gadfly,” surface-to-air missile system en route from eastern Ukraine to the Russian border on Friday.

While the video cannot be independently verified, the footage appears to show the system with at least one of its missiles missing. It also appears to be mounted on a tracked chassis, although it has been loaded onto a flatbed trailer. Tracked vehicles are decidedly slower than their wheeled counterparts. The use of the truck could indicate the system’s own propulsion system is disabled, or that speed is a priority for whomever is moving it.

U.S. officials asserted Friday that the Malaysian airliner that crashed in Ukraine was likely downed by an SA-11 operated from a separatist-held location.

The SA-11 is only one variant of the Buk family of medium-range surface-to-air missiles that have been in service since the late 1970s. A newer model, the SA-17, has a longer engagement range and engagement altitude due to an enhanced radar tracking system that extends on a telescopic arm. Missiles fired by the newer variants can reach up to 70,000 feet, more than twice as high as MH17′s cruising altitude.

Both the SA-11 and SA-17 can be interfaced with other anti-aircraft systems through a command vehicle, creating a specific air defense grid for certain missions or defensive postures. Both systems can also be used in a standalone mode and can target aircraft with their on-board radars, regardless of whether there is a command vehicle present.

If such a missile system was used to down the MH17, it most likely would have been operating in standalone mode, as intelligence reports have indicated that the U.S. detected only one active anti-air radar system in the vicinity of the shoot-down.

While the SA-11 and SA-17 can fire a variety of different missiles, their average missile speed is roughly three times the speed of sound, or Mach 3, meaning the missile can travel approximately 89,000 feet per minute once it reaches top speed.

If the launcher was directly underneath MH17 when it fired, which it most likely wasn’t, the missile would have taken a little over 20 seconds to reach the airliner.

**Wyrmalla**

IIRC he and the US representative at the UN said that the weapon used could have only came from Russia and with Russian technicians firing it. Or well they said it was highly likely that this was the case. In the US' eyes the culprits are obvious, though they're inherently biased against the Russians in this situation obviously. They probably have their own agents in the area that they have a clear idea about exactly what happened, but its up to them whether they want to show that particular hand just yet.

As I see the events the situation went down something like this: a Russian launcher was deployed in the area to strike at Ukrainian transports. The presence of this launcher was known to the locals, who gloat about it in footage of the plane going down. Separatists go on social media also to gloat about hitting a military aircraft. The launcer is then wheeled back into Russia so there's no evidence of the Russians supplying the Separatists with direct aid (even though everyone and their mother knows their at it). Problem, the silhouette of a transport plane is a lot like a civilian aircraft, so they hit something they shouldn't. So immediately the online posts are removed and the Separatists go into full denial mode about the event, then to the default blame Kiev line. The Russians do their bid to muddy up the evidence and ask the international media why'd they'd think they'd be so stupid to do such a thing and instead say that it must've been Kiev that did it, as they clearly are a bunch of baby eaters (uh, before spending five minutes listing off all of Kiev's supposes faults, ignoring the point). The rest of the international community facepalms, but grit their teeth because they know just how much Putin's playing them. =P

Decent summary? Miss any points? Meh, if the paperwork hasn't been shredded already (which it probably has, if assets deployed in Ukraine or Crimea were even recovered in the first place) the real truth about this matter might be leaked eventually. It'd be a massive embarrassment for Putin's government though, so the Russians are going to do their damnedest to deny they had anything to do with any of this. If they're found out to have been involved in supplying the launcher, let alone its crew, then I doubt the UN would be too happy. At the moment know there's no tangible proof, at least none which the Russians can't find some way of worming themselves away from, so nothing can be done other than make snide remarks to one another (as ever, countries do have to get good at hiding this kind of crap otherwise nobody would be talking to anyone).

**chaos0xomega**

whembly wrote:
Wo
New video allegedly shows ‘Buk’ missile system en route to Russia

A short video posted to YouTube by the Ukrainian government reportedly shows a “Buk,” or SA-11 “Gadfly,” surface-to-air missile system en route from eastern Ukraine to the Russian border on Friday.

While the video cannot be independently verified, the footage appears to show the system with at least one of its missiles missing. It also appears to be mounted on a tracked chassis, although it has been loaded onto a flatbed trailer. Tracked vehicles are decidedly slower than their wheeled counterparts. The use of the truck could indicate the system’s own propulsion system is disabled, or that speed is a priority for whomever is moving it.

U.S. officials asserted Friday that the Malaysian airliner that crashed in Ukraine was likely downed by an SA-11 operated from a separatist-held location.

The SA-11 is only one variant of the Buk family of medium-range surface-to-air missiles that have been in service since the late 1970s. A newer model, the SA-17, has a longer engagement range and engagement altitude due to an enhanced radar tracking system that extends on a telescopic arm. Missiles fired by the newer variants can reach up to 70,000 feet, more than twice as high as MH17′s cruising altitude.

Both the SA-11 and SA-17 can be interfaced with other anti-aircraft systems through a command vehicle, creating a specific air defense grid for certain missions or defensive postures. Both systems can also be used in a standalone mode and can target aircraft with their on-board radars, regardless of whether there is a command vehicle present.

If such a missile system was used to down the MH17, it most likely would have been operating in standalone mode, as intelligence reports have indicated that the U.S. detected only one active anti-air radar system in the vicinity of the shoot-down.

While the SA-11 and SA-17 can fire a variety of different missiles, their average missile speed is roughly three times the speed of sound, or Mach 3, meaning the missile can travel approximately 89,000 feet per minute once it reaches top speed.

If the launcher was directly underneath MH17 when it fired, which it most likely wasn’t, the missile would have taken a little over 20 seconds to reach the airliner.

Until someone familiar with the area can come forward and say that 'yes, this road is located in x town and the direction of travel would place it heading towards y direction.' this video is just a video of a piece of military equipment on a flatbed in an undisclosed part of Ukraine.... thankfully there are a couple of possible landmarks in the video that can help make identifying the location either, hopefully someone does come forward, but I doubt anyone will.

**Jihadin**

US Military. SSG. Boyd in the US Embassy in Ukraine witness the shoot down

NSFW due to language

Live

**Shadow Captain Edithae**

Jihadin wrote:
US Military. SSG. Boyd in the US Embassy in Ukraine witness the shoot down

NSFW due to language

Spoiler:

Live

**cincydooley**

Laemos wrote:
President Obama has made statements about the crash, but has he condemned Russia yet?

That would be a negative, ghostrider.