MH17: the four persons named as suspects

Sep 2012
3,843
Bulgaria
#2
Likes: sparky
Aug 2010
16,202
Welsh Marches
#6
There is a lot of arse covering going on here. We will never get a true answer.
That is how modern (or postmodern!) Russian propaganda works, by muddying the waters so much that eveyone comes to think we will never know the truth. There is every reason to think that this plane was brought down by Russian-backed separatists, which would count as an unfortunate accident from the point of view of the Russian authorities.
 
Aug 2014
272
New York, USA
#9
That is how modern (or postmodern!) Russian propaganda works, by muddying the waters so much that eveyone comes to think we will never know the truth. There is every reason to think that this plane was brought down by Russian-backed separatists, which would count as an unfortunate accident from the point of view of the Russian authorities.
Yes, but a lot of people in the West, especially the media, propagate the view that Putin is personally responsible, as though he personally gave an order to shoot down the plane... which is ridiculous. I am pretty sure even the people who were directly commanding the rebels didn't know it happened until after the fact. I am also surprised that there is not a lot of blame assigned to the airline itself that chose to fly over an active warzone, where they routinely shot down planes before, just so they can save on fuel...
 
Likes: Linschoten

Willempie

Ad Honorem
Jul 2015
5,209
Netherlands
#10
That is how modern (or postmodern!) Russian propaganda works, by muddying the waters so much that eveyone comes to think we will never know the truth. There is every reason to think that this plane was brought down by Russian-backed separatists, which would count as an unfortunate accident from the point of view of the Russian authorities.
What I don't like is the idea that the 4 Russkies that were made a suspect, didn't actually fire the thing. It would seem the main accusation is that they supplied the BUK installation, not shot it. By this logic one could charge anyone that supplied weaponry that was used against civilians.

Who I do like to see in court:
-The Russian-Ukranian rebels that fired the BUK.
-The Ukranians who should have closed the air.
-The Dutch officials who didn't warn or close the airspace for planes leaving Schiphol (this gets conveniently forgotten here by the government)

The first ones should get the maximum penalty, which is why I hope that if they ever get charged it wont be here.

And I also would like a proper explanation on the absence of (radar) images.
 

Similar History Discussions