Malaysia Airlines Is To Blame. Not the Russians

[protectionist]

I do blame the people who shot the plane down, but the airlines need to rethink their routes as well.

Did "people" shoot it down, or a radar-computer ?

 

[protectionist]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrasqV7M2Vc

1994 legally binding agreement signed by Bill Clinton obligates America to defend Ukraine
at Forgotten treaty could drag U.S. into war with Russia



Read more at Forgotten treaty could drag U.S. into war with Russia

And you would support this ? Commiting US troops to fight and die in Ukraine to stop them from being united with Russia ?

For all we know, it could be that the majority of Ukranians might WANT to be reunited as part of Russia (which it has been for centuries)

I hate to be pessimistic, but this seems to be shaping up very similar to how the US got involved in Vietnam, and wound up in a war with 58,000 lost US lives, for really no good reason at all. So Putin annexes Ukraine (which has always been Russian) ? So ? Didn't the USA annex Hawaii (which had never been American), and Alaska (which had never been American) ???? (without giving the native Hawaiins or Eskimo Alaskans much to say about it). (??????????)

You asked a question, I answered it. I dont support military action, but we could defeat the Russians economically by flooding the market with natural gas which we have plenty of. That would kill their economy...what your great love for the Russians? Putin is a thug dictator

I don't love Putin, I just don't see any reason to oppose what he is doing, especially if it costs US tax dollars or lives. So on what basis do you call him a "thug dictator" ? (when he has an 83% approval rate among his people)

http://www.gallup.com/poll/173597/russian-approval-putin-soars-highest-level-years.aspx

 

[protectionist]

Saying the blame lies with MA, as this thread contends is like saying a young girl raped walking through a bad neighborhood is to blame, not the rapist.

In fairness to the airliners that flew over the area, many girls have been raped while walking through a bad neighborhood, but no one has ever shot down a commercial airliner with a missile until now. Kind of caught everyone off guard. Who would suspect a WMD would be given to some random rogue group of thugs. These are people who can't be trusted to guard over dead bodies for a night or two and Russia gave them an anti aircraft system.

Well, it was certainly a surprise, but this isn't the first time an airliner was shot downed with missiles.

Many nations, including the U.S., Europe and the Middle East, routinely fly at high altitudes over tense conflict zones such as the Ukraine, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Dozens of other countries that are hot beds of terrorism have numerous flights at both low and high altitudes. If an airline is shot down, some blame the airline for being there. It seems far more logical to blame those that shot the plane down.

I disagree 100%. Anybody who flys over a "tense conflict zone" even once, is an irresponsible idiot, let alone doing this routinely. When there's a war going on you don't fly, sail, or walk through it, and you don't know if any PERSON - whom you describe as "those" even did this (as opposed to a computer acting on its own)

 

[protectionist]

There is a more fundamental point. The Separatists do not have any military airplanes to shoot down, only the Ukrainians have military airplanes. Guess who pulled the trigger.

Who said there was a "trigger" ? See Post # 58.

Post number 58 was only marginally lame. Not understanding the concept of 'figure of speech' is, like, really lame

I understand quite well what you said. You said "who pulled the trigger". That's not a figure of speech. Those are words with a meaning. One which you are now running away from, apparently.

 

[Flopper]

In fairness to the airliners that flew over the area, many girls have been raped while walking through a bad neighborhood, but no one has ever shot down a commercial airliner with a missile until now. Kind of caught everyone off guard. Who would suspect a WMD would be given to some random rogue group of thugs. These are people who can't be trusted to guard over dead bodies for a night or two and Russia gave them an anti aircraft system.

Well, it was certainly a surprise, but this isn't the first time an airliner was shot downed with missiles.

Many nations, including the U.S., Europe and the Middle East, routinely fly at high altitudes over tense conflict zones such as the Ukraine, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Dozens of other countries that are hot beds of terrorism have numerous flights at both low and high altitudes. If an airline is shot down, some blame the airline for being there. It seems far more logical to blame those that shot the plane down.

I disagree 100%. Anybody who flys over a "tense conflict zone" even once, is an irresponsible idiot, let alone doing this routinely. When there's a war going on you don't fly, sail, or walk through it, and you don't know if any PERSON - whom you describe as "those" even did this (as opposed to a computer acting on its own)

Anyone who shots down an airliner with 298 innocent people including 80 children is either an irresponsible idiot or a murderer. Take your pick.

 

[Politico]

Exactly. When you fly over areas where they are shooting down planes you get what is coming to you.

Please provide credible sources disclosing where other planes have been shot down over Ukraine during this period of time.

Ukrainian military plane shot down; all 49 aboard dead - CNN.com

The Russian separatists/terrorists took credit for that attack.

And just because the airspace wasn't on the fly around list, that was enough for most airlines to avoid the area which they were doing.

 

[saveliberty]

Guess if I walk in a bad neighborhood and get killed its all my fault huh?

 

[mudwhistle]

Can we blame the bartender or the liquor store for drunk driving?


Can we blame Russia for giving those idiots a missile system that can blow a jet out of the sky at 30,000 ft?

Yes.

Can we blame Obama for giving 50cal weapons to drug cartels who then shoot at our border agents with them, or blame the deaths of 150,000 Syrian on Obama for arming rebels?


Nope. Blame Bush.

 

[martybegan]

In fairness to the airliners that flew over the area, many girls have been raped while walking through a bad neighborhood, but no one has ever shot down a commercial airliner with a missile until now. Kind of caught everyone off guard. Who would suspect a WMD would be given to some random rogue group of thugs. These are people who can't be trusted to guard over dead bodies for a night or two and Russia gave them an anti aircraft system.

Well, it was certainly a surprise, but this isn't the first time an airliner was shot downed with missiles.

Many nations, including the U.S., Europe and the Middle East, routinely fly at high altitudes over tense conflict zones such as the Ukraine, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Dozens of other countries that are hot beds of terrorism have numerous flights at both low and high altitudes. If an airline is shot down, some blame the airline for being there. It seems far more logical to blame those that shot the plane down.

I disagree 100%. Anybody who flys over a "tense conflict zone" even once, is an irresponsible idiot, let alone doing this routinely. When there's a war going on you don't fly, sail, or walk through it, and you don't know if any PERSON - whom you describe as "those" even did this (as opposed to a computer acting on its own)

And yet 100's of flights per day fly over these areas without an issue. All of a sudden when one is shot down by big bad Russia, its all the fault of those greedy airlines.

 

[Flopper]

Ukrainian military plane shot down; all 49 aboard dead - CNN.com

The Russian separatists/terrorists took credit for that attack.

Seems to lay the blame at the feet of Russia then, contrary to the OP's position. Air flights are often diverted for weather reasons, so it is understandably strange that a commercial flight would enter a war zone. Still no excuse for shooting down an obvious commercial flight.

1. Planes flying at 32,000 feet are not "obvious" anything.

2. If in World War II, Americans shot down a commercial plane at 32,000 feet, during the Battle of the Bulge, you'd say they'd have had no excuse ?

3. You don't even know if a person shot the plane down or if was done by a machine. Do you ?

At 33,000 feet it's pretty obvious that a shoulder held SAM was not used. At that attitude the Russian SA-11 radar guided missile is the likely culprit. The MA airline would have lit up the operator radar screen in the battery but it would have been impossible for the operator to tell whether the target was an airline or a similar hostile aircraft. Who ever gave the order to fire either didn't know or didn't care that a number of commercial airliners were in that air space.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Everybody seems to be quickly blaming the Russians and the Russian-supported Ukranian separatists, for the downing of the Malaysian passenger jet MH17. I disagree. The Russians, the separatists, and the Ukranians are involved in a war, which is really nobody's business but theirs. How would Americans like it if people in Russia said we in America should not rule over the island of Puerto Rico ?... and if Puerto Ricans rebelled, we should not send troops. And that the Russians might send arms to the Puerto rican separatists. We'd probably tell them to mind their own business.

I could understand if Putin was sending troops into Ukraine, Belarus, Latvia, Estonia, and Finland, in something reminiscient of Hitler's blitzkrieg upon Europe. But this is just a matter between 2 countries, which really ought to be nobody's business but theirs.

So what you have is a war combat zone. Well anyone in his right mind knows that is place to stay away from. Everyone but the people in Malaysia Airlines that is, and the dummies at the International Civil Aviation Organization, who the company has stupidly listened to. Malaysia Airlines said: “The usual flight route was earlier declared safe by the International Civil Aviation Organsiation."

Well, if you see somebody climb to the top of the tallest bridge in your town, and jump off, do you do that too ? It should have been common sense to avoid a combat zone, and Malaysia Airlines and the ICAO both are the ones to blame fro being just plain STUPID. Other airlines rerouted their flights months ago when this zone became one of combat (Quantas, China Airlines, Korean Air, Asiana).

Professor Geoff Dell, a Central Queensland University accident investigation and safety specialist, said Malaysia Airlines should not have been flying over Ukraine.

“From as soon as the conflict started they shouldn’t have been going anywhere near it,’’ Prof Dell said. “They should’ve shifted to alternate routes, like all the other airlines seemed to have done.’’

So if anyone wants to blame anyone they should blame the officials at Malaysia Airlines and the International Civil Aviation Organization.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...ukraine-conflict/story-e6frg95x-1226993474860

Invalid thread. You posted someone else's opinion....

 

[thereisnospoon]

Sorry yourself. It IS their fault. You don't fly into war zones. MA should be sued, big time.

Multiple airlines use this air corridor. Jesus Christ this is like blaming he fucking rape victim.

Not anymore they don't. It should have been declared a no fly zone long ago instead of now.

Perhaps....However let us remember, this is your opinion.

 

[dilloduck]

Multiple airlines use this air corridor. Jesus Christ this is like blaming he fucking rape victim.

Not anymore they don't. It should have been declared a no fly zone long ago instead of now.

Perhaps....However let us remember, this is your opinion.

and the opinion of many others---links have already been provided

 

[dilloduck]

Seems to lay the blame at the feet of Russia then, contrary to the OP's position. Air flights are often diverted for weather reasons, so it is understandably strange that a commercial flight would enter a war zone. Still no excuse for shooting down an obvious commercial flight.

1. Planes flying at 32,000 feet are not "obvious" anything.

2. If in World War II, Americans shot down a commercial plane at 32,000 feet, during the Battle of the Bulge, you'd say they'd have had no excuse ?

3. You don't even know if a person shot the plane down or if was done by a machine. Do you ?

At 33,000 feet it's pretty obvious that a shoulder held SAM was not used. At that attitude the Russian SA-11 radar guided missile is the likely culprit. The MA airline would have lit up the operator radar screen in the battery but it would have been impossible for the operator to tell whether the target was an airline or a similar hostile aircraft. Who ever gave the order to fire either didn't know or didn't care that a number of commercial airliners were in that air space.

Maybe because they are at war and planes are flying in supplies to be used against them.
Is the west completely in the blind about what is going on there ????

 

[thereisnospoon]

Not anymore they don't. It should have been declared a no fly zone long ago instead of now.

Perhaps....However let us remember, this is your opinion.

and the opinion of many others---links have already been provided

Right...Seems a lot of people have opinions.
Should MA-17 been in that air space. I do not believe so.
Is this tragedy and slaughter 100% the fault of Malaysian Airlines? Absolutely not.
And anyone that states this is blaming the victims.

 

[williepete]

At 33,000 feet it's pretty obvious that a shoulder held SAM was not used. At that attitude the Russian SA-11 radar guided missile is the likely culprit. The MA airline would have lit up the operator radar screen in the battery but it would have been impossible for the operator to tell whether the target was an airline or a similar hostile aircraft. Who ever gave the order to fire either didn't know or didn't care that a number of commercial airliners were in that air space.

From what I know now, I'd go with the didn't know, didn't care or wasn't fully trained on the equipment. The SA-11/17 both have IFF interrogation capability to prevent fratricide. Did the operating team know how to use it or were they knowledgeable enough to know what an airline squawk code was compared to a military code?

A team was working the TELAR (transporter erector launcher and radar). They were probably tied into some sort of command and control network. It's hard for me to believe the decision to launch was made in a vacuum.

Some of you may find this article and video interesting. Warning though: If you play the video, turn your sound down unless you like rap music.

What it’s like to be sitting behind a radar screen of an SA-11 Buk SAM system

The Aviationist » What it?s like to be sitting behind a radar screen of an SA-11 Buk SAM system




----------------------------------------------------------

 

[Unkotare]

Sorry bub, not the fault of the airline.

Sorry yourself. It IS their fault. You don't fly into war zones. MA should be sued, big time.

Multiple airlines use this air corridor. Jesus Christ this is like blaming he fucking rape victim.

Logic and reason are not his forte.

 

[Camp]

Who said there was a "trigger" ? See Post # 58.

Post number 58 was only marginally lame. Not understanding the concept of 'figure of speech' is, like, really lame

I understand quite well what you said. You said "who pulled the trigger". That's not a figure of speech. Those are words with a meaning. One which you are now running away from, apparently.

Turning on your imaginary computerized automatic robotic weapons system would in and of itself be equal to pulling the trigger. The "Operator", a human being would have turned on the programmed computer system to shoot down anything that came in range without human source identification. Hence, the trigger was pulled when the human being "triggered" the system to be in the "power on" position.

 

[Camp]

At 33,000 feet it's pretty obvious that a shoulder held SAM was not used. At that attitude the Russian SA-11 radar guided missile is the likely culprit. The MA airline would have lit up the operator radar screen in the battery but it would have been impossible for the operator to tell whether the target was an airline or a similar hostile aircraft. Who ever gave the order to fire either didn't know or didn't care that a number of commercial airliners were in that air space.

From what I know now, I'd go with the didn't know, didn't care or wasn't fully trained on the equipment. The SA-11/17 both have IFF interrogation capability to prevent fratricide. Did the operating team know how to use it or were they knowledgeable enough to know what an airline squawk code was compared to a military code?

A team was working the TELAR (transporter erector launcher and radar). They were probably tied into some sort of command and control network. It's hard for me to believe the decision to launch was made in a vacuum.

Some of you may find this article and video interesting. Warning though: If you play the video, turn your sound down unless you like rap music.

What it’s like to be sitting behind a radar screen of an SA-11 Buk SAM system

The Aviationist » What it?s like to be sitting behind a radar screen of an SA-11 Buk SAM system




----------------------------------------------------------

The question of the day for investigators is what kind of radar system was being used and by who. The normal system used with the SA-11 Buk would have been able to calculate altitude, speed and size. That data would make the type aircraft identifiable to a trained technician.

 

[Discombobulated]

Everybody seems to be quickly blaming the Russians and the Russian-supported Ukranian separatists, for the downing of the Malaysian passenger jet MH17. I disagree. The Russians, the separatists, and the Ukranians are involved in a war, which is really nobody's business but theirs. How would Americans like it if people in Russia said we in America should not rule over the island of Puerto Rico ?... and if Puerto Ricans rebelled, we should not send troops. And that the Russians might send arms to the Puerto rican separatists. We'd probably tell them to mind their own business.

I could understand if Putin was sending troops into Ukraine, Belarus, Latvia, Estonia, and Finland, in something reminiscient of Hitler's blitzkrieg upon Europe. But this is just a matter between 2 countries, which really ought to be nobody's business but theirs.

So what you have is a war combat zone. Well anyone in his right mind knows that is place to stay away from. Everyone but the people in Malaysia Airlines that is, and the dummies at the International Civil Aviation Organization, who the company has stupidly listened to. Malaysia Airlines said: “The usual flight route was earlier declared safe by the International Civil Aviation Organsiation."

Well, if you see somebody climb to the top of the tallest bridge in your town, and jump off, do you do that too ? It should have been common sense to avoid a combat zone, and Malaysia Airlines and the ICAO both are the ones to blame fro being just plain STUPID. Other airlines rerouted their flights months ago when this zone became one of combat (Quantas, China Airlines, Korean Air, Asiana).

Professor Geoff Dell, a Central Queensland University accident investigation and safety specialist, said Malaysia Airlines should not have been flying over Ukraine.

“From as soon as the conflict started they shouldn’t have been going anywhere near it,’’ Prof Dell said. “They should’ve shifted to alternate routes, like all the other airlines seemed to have done.’’

So if anyone wants to blame anyone they should blame the officials at Malaysia Airlines and the International Civil Aviation Organization.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...ukraine-conflict/story-e6frg95x-1226993474860

Your superficial characterization of two countries being at war is completely stupid and wrong. Perhaps you just haven't been following the details very closely.