SYRIA thread

[Fragony]

I always thought that the separatists did it in the sense that one of them gave the order and another pushed the button.

I just thought they were equipped, supplied, trained, supported, and coached by the Russians -- who did nothing to convince them NOT to shoot at an airliner either. Other than that, the Russians weren't culpable at all.

It was shot from behind, Ukraine pronanly did it, they have the same systems. Not intentionaly, just a horrible mistake

[Gilrandir]

It was shot from behind, Ukraine pronanly did it, they have the same systems. Not intentionaly, just a horrible mistake

It seems you aren't aware of the investigation undertaken by Bellingcat and later corroborated by the official commission. They traced all the way Buk came from Kursk (Russia) and back there and even enumerated the staff of Russian regular army servicemen that operated Buk.

https://www.om.nl/onderwerpen/mh17-v...ntation-joint/
http://www.whathappenedtoflightmh17....wning-of-mh17/

[Fragony]

Cockpit has exit damage, no way it could have come from upfront, I don blame Ukraine if they did it because it wasn;t intentional, I do blame our minister of foreign affairs who quikly took a fake-job in Brussels, that plane should not have been there, all other countries knew the dangers but that boy was too busy shining (even tried to use it at first with an open solicitation for a job at the UN, fake tears). With the association-treaty, and the (diplomatic) hostility against Russia that would certainly been have capitalised itś kinda hard to think otherwise.

[Gilrandir]

Cockpit has exit damage, no way it could have come from upfront,

The source, please.

[Fragony]

https://www.google.com/search?q=m17+...AD12-3C7Vi4QM:

That is exit damage. The investigation-report comes from Kiev, of whoś all radars 'had maintanance'. In a war.

[Gilrandir]

https://www.google.com/search?q=m17+...AD12-3C7Vi4QM:

That is exit damage. The investigation-report comes from Kiev, of whoś all radars 'had maintanance'. In a war.

You are an expert on modern missiles and damage they cause and in the veracity of random photos one can find in the internet?

But even if we, for a second, believe (in spite of JIT report and other investigations) that it is exit damage, how does it prove that Ukraine is to blame? If there was exit damage then it would clearly indicate that something blew up INSIDE the cockpit - which would mean that there was explosive on the plane. And why would Ukrainians shoot at flying objects when separatists never (before the accident or after) had any air forces?

[Sarmatian]

It doesn't matter who did. Yes, theoretically, both sides could have done it to blame it on the other side. That carries huge risks, though, and I'm not convinced either would accept those risks, simple as that.

There was nothing to gain, militarily or politically, from shooting the plane down.

So, the most reasonable conclusion is that it was a mistake, probably by the pro-Russian forces.

Don't see how it is relevant for this discussion, though.

[Fragony]

You are an expert on modern missiles and damage they cause and in the veracity of random photos one can find in the internet?

But even if we, for a second, believe (in spite of JIT report and other investigations) that it is exit damage, how does it prove that Ukraine is to blame? If there was exit damage then it would clearly indicate that something blew up INSIDE the cockpit - which would mean that there was explosive on the plane. And why would Ukrainians shoot at flying objects when separatists never (before the accident or after) had any air forces?

Because it was simply not intentional, and the political stakes were high at the moment

[Seamus Fermanagh]

https://www.google.com/search?q=m17+...AD12-3C7Vi4QM:

That is exit damage. The investigation-report comes from Kiev, of whoś all radars 'had maintanance'. In a war.

Frags, it is evidence of some form of explosive force directed outwards from the cockpit.

At exactly 16:20:03 local time (13:20:03 UTC) a Buk Surface to Air missile (which had been launched a few miles east from the aircraft) detonated just above the cockpit to the left. An explosive decompression occurred, resulting in both the cockpit and tail sections to tear away from the middle portion of the fuselage. All three sections disintegrated as they descended rapidly towards the ground.

Thus we have both missile fragments (beginning as a spheroid explosion altered by forward momentum imparted from the missle) that likely went all the way through the cockpit at squirrely angles (and ask any combat veteran and they will confirm high explosive does weird things), accompanied by explosive decompression as the pressurized cabin popped when suddenly cracked open at more then 10k meters. Just as with Kennedy's head seemingly going the wrong way relative to Oswald's shot, it is the expulsion of the contained whatever from within resulting from the breach that creates the effect.

Somebody with more skill at the math's could point you to the relevant physics equations.

[Husar]

What does the location of the explosion tell us about who fired the missile anyway?

And I find it hard to believe that this was done by a trained radar operator because I'm pretty sure they could differentiate a commercial airliner from an attack aircraft. You know, the airliner is quite a bit LARGER and may also fly in completely different patterns, at different heights, etc.

It all hints towards a barely trained crew of amateurs with itchy trigger fingers. Like a bunch of redneck separatists eager to score a kill...