Slashdot Mirror
Malaysian Passenger Plane Reportedly Shot Down Over Ukraine
An anonymous reader writes The Russian newswire service Interfax is reporting that a Malaysian passenger plane carrying 295 people was shot down with a Buk ground-to-air missile over Ukraine near the Russian border. The Associated Press cites an adviser to Ukraine's Interior Minister as the source. First reports are that it was mistaken for a Ukrainian AN-26.
Malaysia airlines confirms they lost contact with the plane (last known position), but there's no confirmation it was shot down (yet). The Ukrainian government accused Russia of shooting down a fighter jet in Ukrainian airspace last night. Reports indicate there are no survivors.
What a horrible tragedy, and one that changes the political climate considerably. Obama will face much less resistance from Europe if Russia turns out to be responsible. It also gives the Ukraine a reason to call in US "specialists" for help with the investigation.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Citation required (seriously, you couldn't be bothered?)
I can't find anything to back your claim.
Please help metamoderate.
And by the way, why would a commercial airliner fly through such an airspace anyway?
Because the time & fuel savings were weighed to be more significant than any risks to commercial air traffic? Until today.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
To answer your question...
The location tracking clearly indicated it is a normal flight path and at an altitude where only radar guided type missiles could hit. In other words, the weapons that could reach the altitude for it to hit should have known it was a passenger airplane. Unless they were rebels given equipment with very little training and no infrastructure to compare the flight paths with known flights.
If civilian commercial aviation is becoming fair game for armies seeking to gain advantage, then the world has just gone to a very bad place.
I, for one, live in Odessa and consider Russia to be the major aggressor in this war. Vast majority of locals think the same. We elected new president just 6 weeks ago, so please stop making noises about illegality of UA's government. This was ridiculous at the time Russians started saying this, and it's old now.
ITAR-TASS (Russian state owned) reported eyewitness claims that "Militiamen of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic (DPR) brought down a military transport Antonov-26 (An-26) plane of the Ukrainian Air Force on the outskirts of the town of Torez..."
Given that the geographic area is predominantly occupied by separatists ("eyewitnesses"), and the speed with which the report got to Russia, that report may be a "smoking gun," almost literally.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
I, for one, live in Odessa and consider Russia to be the major aggressor in this war. Vast majority of locals think the same.
Go ask the same question in Donetsk or Sevastopol, and you are likely to get a different answer.
Yep, just like the neo-Nazi's who refuse to recognize Obama as President of the U.S. Same retards, different language.
... to replace the democratically elected pro-Russian president, who was overthrown by military force.
You mean when he fled the country with his looted money in the face of mass civilian protests. No military force was necessary, just a fear of justice after years of robbing his country and people.
>> I, for one, live in Odessa and consider Russia to be the major aggressor in this war. Vast majority of locals think the same.
>Go ask the same question in Donetsk or Sevastopol, and you are likely to get a different answer.
That would be a bit complicated since these territories are controlled by terrorists these days. As far as I know from refugees (and we have LOTS of those coming from Donetsk and Luhansk regions), local support for terrorists is minimal. It is mostly limited to local criminals, ex- political leaders (Communist and "Party of Regions" parties).
>>We elected new president just 6 weeks ago,
>... to replace the democratically elected pro-Russian president, who was overthrown by military force. This new election was held in full knowledge that the eastern (pro-Russian) regions were in turmoil and could not meaningfully participate.
Yanukovich was not overthrown by military force. There were clashes in the center if Kiev, but police and military was on his side at the time, and they had guns, grenades, armed vehicles; rebels had one catapult and molotov's. Yanukovich didn't care about anything besides money, and he fled the country as soon as he realized that there's not much more to make. Basically, he bled Ukraine's economy in a major way - to the extent where we had a revolution with majority support from UA's population. Odessa has been one of "his" regions. Majority of locals supported President Poroshenko (new elect), same goes for all other ex-Yanukovich's regions - Nikolaev, Kherson, Zaporizhya, Dnepropetrovsk, Kharkov, parts of Donetsk and Luhansk where there was no turmoil at the time.
One last bit on "democratically elected" - I participated in 2004 elections as an observer - there's no such thing as democratic vote in regions controlled by Yanukovich representatives.
You say it like it's a good thing.. a big country isolated, hated and full of unhappy people. What could go wrong? I live right next door to them, and I'd much rather see them happy and enjoying life, because that way they'd probably be lot less likely to start new conflicts.
Only dumb birds land downwind.