Slashdot Mirror

It's not clear that Russia has any intention to minimize civilian casualties. For one thing, their proxy forces (the DNR and LNR) get paid to fire off a certain amount of salvos, and when they shoot these artillery shells, they often fire pretty indiscriminately. This guy is located in Lugansk, and his Twitter timeline is dedicated to keeping track of the artillery shelling, in case anyone's curious about it. Second, Russia controls all of the media in the occupied territories, and their MO has been to get one of their GRU/FSB-connected "journalists" into an area (there are certain channels, such as LIfeNews, which are particularly linked to Russian security services), have the Russian journalist direct artillery or tank fire into a civilian target, and then present the footage under the guise of "the junta" shelling Donbas civilians - this is intended to foment a local uprising against Ukraine, but it only works on the most gullible individuals, and according to Russian pollsters, most people in Donbas still support Ukraine.

Possibly two most famous incidents of Russia shelling civilians in Donbas were the Volnovakha bus station bombing (it was an MH17-like situation, where the Russians thought they hit a Ukrainian military target, took credit for it, realized they hit a civilian target, and started fabricating stories that Ukraine did it) and the Mariupol bombing, in which Russia killed at least 29 people, and injured at lest 97. Another famous one was a Donetsk city mortar shelling, which, of course, the Russians tried to pin on Ukraine, until everyone realized that the shelling was done by mortar, the mortar used has a range of a few km, at most, and the nearest Ukrainian position is 20km away; at that point, the Russian terrorists shut up about it. In summary - the only sure way to limit civilian casualties, is to get the Russian invading force off of Ukrainian territory.

UN GA just days ago adopted a resolution finally admitting that Ukraine is a victim of the Russian military aggression.

For better or worse, the part of the United States' electorate, to whom you want to appeal, view the United Nations with skepticism. So, instead of appealing to a questionable authority, try the following argument...

Imagine, Americans, Mexican government declaring Trump's election "a coup", his assemblage of generals — a junta, which placed the Latinophobic Nazi in power, contrary to the wishes of most Americans. Out of concern for the brotherly nation, Mexican government is encouraging volunteers to cross into California, Arizona, and Texas to help the local Spanish-speaking "self-defense" militias protect themselves against the White English-speaking bigots, who've persecuted the Spanish-speaking minority for years. In places stolen from Mexico before, these polite volunteers in military uniforms without any official insignia are already organizing a referendum to leave the US and join Mexico.

Patriotic Americans attempting to resist the invasion are denounced as racists and shot at with military-style efficiency. Although officially Mexico is not a party to this "civil war", its troops are regularly encountered on the battlefields — all of them are then found to have been "on leave" from their units. Artillery bombardment of American forces seems to originate from across the border, but no one can say for sure.

Would you still say, it is a civil war — Americans fighting other Americans?

You're assuming that it's equally easy to get damaging materials from both countries. That's an incorrect assumption.

It may not be equally easy with Russia, but it is quite easy nonetheless. It is just very few people care. Ukrainians, for example, have been collecting undeniable proofs of Russia's official involvement in the alleged "civil" war in Ukraine's East. They don't have governmental backing, but they have patience enough to sift through social media looking for selfies, that Russian conscripts post online (with geotagging enabled). And yet, you can still encounter people even on Slashdot, who would deny Russian involvement...

Similarly, there is solid evidence — put together by volunteers and governmental investigators, that a Russian SAM shot down the Malaysian Boeing in 2014... And yet, a Google search for it today still brings up a theory, that it was a Ukrainian jet (top altitude 5000m), that shot down the airliner (flying at 10000m)...

Their latest propaganda line by the Russians is "the report is flawed, as the Russian findings were not taken into account" and that Russia was "kept out of the loop of the investigation". Which, of course, is total BS.
 

Allow me to help you comrade.

I have never understood the blatant lies coming out of the Russian military or their proxies when they claim it was Ukrainian forces who shot down the airliner. I can only presume they believe people around the world are as gullible as the average Russian, and possibly just as drunk, because they have never answered any of the following questions.

>> All these questions have been comprehensively answered. I will repeat the answers here.

If Ukraine was the only one who had helicopters and jets, why would they need anti-aircraft weapons against farmers and miners (the term Putin has used to refer to his troops in Ukraine)?

>> In order to cast false accusations on Russia, thus justifying intervention by the west in the Ukranian citizens' fight for their freedom.

If the plane was coming from the West, meaning it was flying into Ukrainian airspace from a known location, why would Ukraine, if it had anti-aircraft weapons deployed, target then shoot down an aircraft not coming from the East?

>> This question has already been answered.

How does Russia and their proxies explain the fact postings were made on known Twitter accounts and radio intercepts recorded of Russian proxies bragging about shooting down a Ukrainian jet?

>> No such postings have been made. These are part of the extravagant western propaganda campaign.

Why is it that pictures of a Buk missile system were taken near the shoot down site, the same system which was then tracked on its way back to Russia AND which had one missile missing?

>> The freedom fighters did shoot down some Ukranian military aircraft. These photos were probably of those buk launchers.

How does Russia and its proxies explain that people in the area witnessed the launch of the missile from territory under Russian control? Not just one person, but several, all pointing to the same general area?

>> Lies and propaganda

Why did Russia and its proxies prevent investigators from entering the crash site for days afterwards? What evidence were they trying to hide?

>> They were merely ensuring the safety of the remains, and making sure that this provocation could be properly recorded before western spies messed with the evidence.

If Russia or its proxies did not shoot down the civilian airliner, why did Russia veto a UN resolution to fully and openly investigate the incident? If Russia is innocent they should have been happy to have an investigation to prove their innocence.

>> The west has clearly demonstrated that it will lie and deceive in order to misrepresent Russian support for Ukranian self-determination. Such a biased western-run investigation would be used as a vehicle for further propaganda.

It is quite clear Russian troops and/or their proxies shot down a civilian airliner, then bragged about it, yet beyond all reasonable comprehension they stubbornly cling to the fantasy they are not criminally responsible. It's as if the they've learned nothing over the last 100 years since the coup.

>> It is only clear to those who are deceived by the corrupt western media.

Remember that Putin doesn't really need to convince the western audience. He cares more about convincing his home audience, and throwing enough doubt into the game to limit direct repercussions.

Russians know not to trust the news - particularly the western news which is so obviously a corrupt mouthpiece of the western governments.
The west clearly wants to impose their will on Russia (you can see the sanctions, and the falling oil prices as clear evidence of this) - but plucky Russia won't be cowed.

The western hypocrisy is simply staggering; While the west interferes in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria where they have no citizens, and no defensible int

Following the Bellingcat report Origin of the Separatists’ Buk, which showed that the Buk missile launcher linked to the downing of MH17 was filmed inside Russia a few weeks earlier, the Bellingcat investigation team has continued to search for additional information, and has recently discovered two more images of the Buk missile launcher linked to the downing of MH17.

https://www.bellingcat.com/new...

I have never understood the blatant lies coming out of the Russian military or their proxies when they claim it was Ukrainian forces who shot down the airliner. I can only presume they believe people around the world are as gullible as the average Russian, and possibly just as drunk, because they have never answered any of the following questions.

If Ukraine was the only one who had helicopters and jets, why would they need anti-aircraft weapons against farmers and miners (the term Putin has used to refer to his troops in Ukraine)?

If the plane was coming from the West, meaning it was flying into Ukrainian airspace from a known location, why would Ukraine, if it had anti-aircraft weapons deployed, target then shoot down an aircraft not coming from the East?

How does Russia and their proxies explain the fact postings were made on known Twitter accounts and radio intercepts recorded of Russian proxies bragging about shooting down a Ukrainian jet?

Why is it that pictures of a Buk missile system were taken near the shoot down site, the same system which was then tracked on its way back to Russia AND which had one missile missing?

How does Russia and its proxies explain that people in the area witnessed the launch of the missile from territory under Russian control? Not just one person, but several, all pointing to the same general area?

Why did Russia and its proxies prevent investigators from entering the crash site for days afterwards? What evidence were they trying to hide?

If Russia or its proxies did not shoot down the civilian airliner, why did Russia veto a UN resolution to fully and openly investigate the incident? If Russia is innocent they should have been happy to have an investigation to prove their innocence.

It is quite clear Russian troops and/or their proxies shot down a civilian airliner, then bragged about it, yet beyond all reasonable comprehension they stubbornly cling to the fantasy they are not criminally responsible. It's as if the they've learned nothing over the last 100 years since the coup.

https://www.bellingcat.com/

Overall, the case is getting stranger with every relevation.

No, no it is not. This is a pretty blatant forgery - for a step-by-step walkthrough of what's obviously faked about it (including screenshots of the months-old Google Maps images and others that were used) please visit here.

Giving this any credence by saying the case "gets stranger" is like reading some 9/11 truther's article and saying that it makes the truth behind the attacks "more puzzling." It doesn't. It just shows that some people are either disconnected from the truth or (in this case) willing to actively fabricate things to obscure it.

For a decent debunking go to the Bellingcat blog. Also saw some graphic somewhere that clearly showed that the perspective was wrong by an order of magnitude, either the plane was 1 km wide or the satellie was orbiting at 20 km or so. This fake is so bad, that I think the only target audience is the Russian public, most of whom believe everything that Putin's propaganda machine feeds them. I have a Russian colleague, whom I normally regard reasonably high, that believes some really strange facts about this incident. She probably gets all her info from Russian websites.