Evidence=Putin

[JWBooth]

Cui bono?

(Who benefits?)

 

[Wry Catcher]

I doubt this can be classified as war crimes* but there must be sanctions, "aiding & abetting" would be the legal term in the US.

*But I will not argue it isn't either.

It's irresponsible to give terrorists WMDs, especially when they turned around and used them on innocent civilians.

But yes, the EU needs to sign on to the sanctions.

A SAM is not a WMD. Words mean things.

How massive must the body count be for it to qualify as a WMD in your opinion? I suspect the friends and relatives of those murdered might hold a different opinion.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Cui bono?

(Who benefits?)

An excellent question. Who indeed will benefit from such an act? I suspect most will agree there is no benefit to such an act, other than those engaged in terrorism. Thus, those nations who arm developing nations and non nation states need to stop doing so, and we are one of those nations.

Global Arms Sales By Supplier Nations, in the following link:

The Arms Trade is Big Business ? Global Issues

 

[dilloduck]

It's irresponsible to give terrorists WMDs, especially when they turned around and used them on innocent civilians.

But yes, the EU needs to sign on to the sanctions.

A SAM is not a WMD. Words mean things.

How massive must the body count be for it to qualify as a WMD in your opinion? I suspect the friends and relatives of those murdered might hold a different opinion.

If that's true then "baby Bush" was right about Iraq all along. Make up your minds folks.

 

[Wry Catcher]

A SAM is not a WMD. Words mean things.

How massive must the body count be for it to qualify as a WMD in your opinion? I suspect the friends and relatives of those murdered might hold a different opinion.

If that's true then "baby Bush" was right about Iraq all along. Make up your minds folks.

Nice try - the war mongering of the neo cons & their "mushroom cloud" rhetoric was utter bullshit as is your post. My comment was clear to all but the most biased:

"I suspect the friends and relatives of those murdered might hold a different opinion".

 

[dilloduck]

How massive must the body count be for it to qualify as a WMD in your opinion? I suspect the friends and relatives of those murdered might hold a different opinion.

If that's true then "baby Bush" was right about Iraq all along. Make up your minds folks.

Nice try - the war mongering of the neo cons & their "mushroom cloud" rhetoric was utter bullshit as is your post. My comment was clear to all but the most biased:

"I suspect the friends and relatives of those murdered might hold a different opinion".

Is a rocket a WMD or not ? If so the Bush and the neocons were right all along. Saddam had them. Classic case of lefties wanting their cake and eating it too.

 

[Peach]

If that's true then "baby Bush" was right about Iraq all along. Make up your minds folks.

Nice try - the war mongering of the neo cons & their "mushroom cloud" rhetoric was utter bullshit as is your post. My comment was clear to all but the most biased:

"I suspect the friends and relatives of those murdered might hold a different opinion".

Is a rocket a WMD or not ? If so the Bush and the neocons were right all along. Saddam had them. Classic case of lefties wanting their cake and eating it too.

No threat outside of Iraq, thus the lies. And a surface to air missle isn't a WMD. Yet SAMs can cause many deaths. WMDs are defined not only by daeth tolls, bit delivery capability, and RANGE. ICBMs and CRUISE missles can travel hundreds or even thousnds of miles, Saddam had -0-.

 

[dilloduck]

Nice try - the war mongering of the neo cons & their "mushroom cloud" rhetoric was utter bullshit as is your post. My comment was clear to all but the most biased:

"I suspect the friends and relatives of those murdered might hold a different opinion".

Is a rocket a WMD or not ? If so the Bush and the neocons were right all along. Saddam had them. Classic case of lefties wanting their cake and eating it too.

No threat outside of Iraq, thus the lies. And a surface to air missle isn't a WMD. Yet SAMs can cause many deaths. WMDs are defined not only by daeth tolls, bit delivery capability, and RANGE. ICBMs and CRUISE missles can travel hundreds or even thousnds of miles, Saddam had -0-.

ty

 

[Wry Catcher]

If that's true then "baby Bush" was right about Iraq all along. Make up your minds folks.

Nice try - the war mongering of the neo cons & their "mushroom cloud" rhetoric was utter bullshit as is your post. My comment was clear to all but the most biased:

"I suspect the friends and relatives of those murdered might hold a different opinion".

Is a rocket a WMD or not ? If so the Bush and the neocons were right all along. Saddam had them. Classic case of lefties wanting their cake and eating it too.

Only the most biased and ignorant pursue this line ^^^ of 'reasoning'. Let's pretend the invasion and occupation of Iraq was based on Saddam having SAMs. Did it justify the cost in blood and treasure? I off to the dog park, I'll look forward to your comprehensive defense of the Bush years.

 

[dilloduck]

Nice try - the war mongering of the neo cons & their "mushroom cloud" rhetoric was utter bullshit as is your post. My comment was clear to all but the most biased:

"I suspect the friends and relatives of those murdered might hold a different opinion".

Is a rocket a WMD or not ? If so the Bush and the neocons were right all along. Saddam had them. Classic case of lefties wanting their cake and eating it too.

Only the most biased and ignorant pursue this line ^^^ of 'reasoning'. Let's pretend the invasion and occupation of Iraq was based on Saddam having SAMs. Did it justify the cost in blood and treasure? I off to the dog park, I'll look forward to your comprehensive defense of the Bush years.

Be sure to bag your dog shit. They all can be little WMDs.

 

[Sunni Man]

It's irresponsible to give terrorists WMDs, especially when they turned around and used them on innocent civilians.

Kinda like when the U.S. government gave Saddam chemical weapons and he used them on the Kurds and Iranians?? ..

 

[Peach]

It's irresponsible to give terrorists WMDs, especially when they turned around and used them on innocent civilians.

Kinda like when the U.S. government gave Saddam chemical weapons and he used them on the Kurds and Iranians?? ..

Yes, the Reagan Admistration approved the sales, no one liked him, but RR thought he "anti-Commie". Reagan also armed the mujahideen; they became the Taliban, then spun off al Qaeda.

 

[Katzndogz]

I doubt this can be classified as war crimes* but there must be sanctions, "aiding & abetting" would be the legal term in the US.

*But I will not argue it isn't either.

It's the Russian version of 'black ops,' not unlike the way the CIA funneled weapons and money to 'anti-communists' during the Cold War.

Not as well hidden, I'd call 'em "light brown ops".

Mulatto ops.

 

[Ravi]

It's irresponsible to give terrorists WMDs, especially when they turned around and used them on innocent civilians.

Kinda like when the U.S. government gave Saddam chemical weapons and he used them on the Kurds and Iranians?? ..

Yes, just like that.

 

[Indofred]

This is looking more and more like the rebels shot it down in error, believing it to be a Ukrainian transport.
However, that evidence is all produced by very biased sources that simply can't be trusted without independent back up.
There are still far too many inconsistencies, the big one being, why would a Ukrainian transport be flying towards Russia?

 

[Peach]

This is looking more and more like the rebels shot it down in error, believing it to be a Ukrainian transport.
However, that evidence is all produced by very biased sources that simply can't be trusted without independent back up.
There are still far too many inconsistencies, the big one being, why would a Ukrainian transport be flying towards Russia?

The launching didn't use all resources, they acted on usual practices, Murked explained it.