Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

MH17 missile 'brought in from Russia'

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 98 posts

Re: MH17 missile 'brought in from Russia'

#21

Post by mikeash »

lfx wrote: post #7

It is me or title looks very ambiguous? It sounds that missile was launched from Russian grounds. What a scary way to begin a morning.

To me the title sounds like they just mean the missile was made in Russia, which was obvious from the start. (Even if the Ukranians had been responsible, their missiles were still made in Russia!)

What they actually mean is that the missile was transported in from Russia shortly before the shootdown, and the launcher and remaining missiles went back to Russia not long after. But yes, the wording of the title is way too vague.

Re: MH17 missile 'brought in from Russia'

#22

Post by ahoka »

readhn wrote: post #18
okket wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If there is solid evidence and especially if there are multiple witnesses then this should be taken to court! Which court?

that's a question for lawyers out there. im sure there are precedents in our history. Track down who gave the order and sue them! Does not matter who it is - P. or his buddies. Otherwise what is the point of this "investigation"?

There are precedents: they are called world wars.

Re: MH17 missile 'brought in from Russia'

#24

Post by readhn »

ahoka wrote: post #22
readhn wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that's a question for lawyers out there. im sure there are precedents in our history. Track down who gave the order and sue them! Does not matter who it is - P. or his buddies. Otherwise what is the point of this "investigation"?

There are precedents: they are called world wars.

haha sure. no one is going to world war III over this! I hope you realize this.

What needs to happen is proper legal process and some heads need to roll at the Russian ministry of defense.

Re: MH17 missile 'brought in from Russia'

#25

Post by verytrivial »

jkot wrote: post #9

> was fired from to a field in territory controlled by Russian-backed rebels. > "...that came from the Russian Federation," chief Dutch police investigator Wilbert Paulissen said I think the wording 'territory of the Russian Federation' is not best choice. Report says it was fired from Ukraine, 10 km from border. It implies that donbas is already part of russia.

I agree. These are two separate assertions: fired from location X, and "came" (originated or transported) from location Y but that could be read as "fired" too.

Re: MH17 missile 'brought in from Russia'

#26

Post by erkkie »

andreasley wrote: post #16
erkkie wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you for real? There's war zones all over the world, usually that doesn't mean shooting down a passenger flight 10km high, for which you need specialized equipment, not just a random shoulder carry rocket. Until the incident, airspace at civilian cruising altitudes was free and open in Ukraine. Hint: space is 3d, lower levels were closed in various places.

On July 14th 2014, just three days before the MH17 incident, an Antonov AN-26 Ukrainian military transport plane was hit at 21 000 feet altitude, so there was a strong indication that SAMs were available to the seperatists. According to the Dutch Safety Board, the airspace should have been closed [1]. [1] http://www.airspacemag.com/daily-planet/dutch-safety-board-u...

Thanks for the link, hit at 21000 feet just earlier does change the risk profile, but then again, it's hard for the Safety Board to come to any other conclusion post the facts.

Re: MH17 missile 'brought in from Russia'

#27

Post by ivan_gammel »

okket wrote: post #14
readhn wrote: post #12

If there is solid evidence and especially if there are multiple witnesses then this should be taken to court! Im not sure who the defendant should be on the Russian side, the ministry of defense?

> If there is solid evidence and especially if there are multiple witnesses then this should be taken to court! Which court?

National courts first, then European Court of Human Rights if they will not win in national courts.

Based on this report relatives of victims can sue in ECHR all involved parties, including both Russian Federation (for providing military equipment to separatists) and Ukraine (for not closing air space for civil flights).

Re: MH17 missile 'brought in from Russia'

#28

Post by readhn »

chrischen wrote: post #23
readhn wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

im sure you are kidding. no one is going to war with Russia anytime soon! lol ..so it is likely to be a nothing.

Even more sanctions

Sanctions are a dirty western political trick just so the politicians here can say "we did something".

Sanctions are useless!

Do you know who they affect? Regular people ONLY. Who have no say in politics anymore over there (elections are rigged).

Facts:

1. Top Russian government officials transferred their assets to Europe / USA over the years. They have their families and kids living abroad and going to European/American universities. 2. They have assets offshore not affected by russian currency fluctuations. Most have dual citizenships.

If you want to hit them hard: arrest their wealth offshore; kick out their families from usa/europe.

Why is that not happening? Why are we still allowing illegal wealth transfer through use of offshores?

Why is prime-minister of Russia allowed to own a $20mil apartment in London?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3182636/Vladimir-Put...

Whats sanctions? Against who? Its a big joke!

Re: MH17 missile 'brought in from Russia'

#30

Post by [deleted] »

ivan_gammel wrote: post #27
okket wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If there is solid evidence and especially if there are multiple witnesses then this should be taken to court! Which court?

National courts first, then European Court of Human Rights if they will not win in national courts. Based on this report relatives of victims can sue in ECHR all involved parties, including both Russian Federation (for providing military equipment to separatists) and Ukraine (for not closing air space for civil flights).

[deleted]
Post reply on HN