Boeing-777 was downed by Ukrainian MiG-29 flown by Polish Pilot, Romanian expert says

[notgoodenough]

These are the facts. The ukrainian military has the PROVEN military capability to bring that plane down. They have both mig29 and buk. This is a proven fact. Not speculation or hearsay. Secondly. The ukrainian military has been targeting civilians since the beginning of this war. This is also a fact. That means their leadership doesnt care about human lives. This is conjecture. But with thousands of dead civilians. Its obvious.

The Donbass defenders on the otherhand have neither migs nor buks nor the necessary expert teams to man them. Nor the radars to effectively bring down a plane at 11000 meters in the air. This is also a fact unless shown otherwise by proof. Secondly, the Donbass defenders have NEVER targeted or killed civilians. How could they, their own families are the civilians.

Lastly. Where are the flight recorders? Why werent they released? Why are they being kept secret? If youre too stupid to figure out the answer yourself, you deserve to remain oblivious. And just look. After Russia released the radar info about the ukie jet shadowing the passenger plane. America nato and ukraine all became instantly silent and all the nato news stations just forgot about the plane.

And a last piece of food for thought, not for you but for a thinking human. Why was a mig29 just a few kilometers away from and following that plane on that day and why were american satelites positioned exactly on the spot of the plane downing. And why hasnt the US released their sat data?

Anyway. Its nice you want to continue to put doubt onto this subject but intelligent thinking individuals can see right through this farce.

Sometimes i ask myself. Are people really this stupid or are they just pretending for a paycheck. I dont think youre doing this for a pay check.

It was shot down by the rebels, or it was shot down by ukraine. Both sides will blame each other, and the public won't know the truth. This will be another of those events where there are going to be several theories, and all of them completely different. You can argue it both ways

 

[bobo6661]

I.e. neither Su-25 nor Mig-29 can gun a plane down at 3-5km, consistent with the observed radar track of the Su-25/Mig-29

Youre saying a MIG29 cant bring down a boeing at close range?

did you even bother to read what he writen? probably not ... so 3-5km is close combat for you?

 

[Audio]

Gotta love the incompetence of the 50 kopejka brigade leadership.
They tell their bots that they are supposed to call everyone a paid propagandist while it's crystal clear who posts new threads, posts "new damning evidence" from shills posted on dubious sites called Millenium report and from where the forum suddenly got a new influx of posters.

The sheer amateurism and the associated antics while they try to run a propaganda campaign are hilarious.

 

[notgoodenough]

So basically you have nothing of value to add to the discussion other than gibbering rantings? Any proof of ANYTHING? are you being paid to troll threads that dont conform to nato story lines?

Gotta love the incompetence of the 50 kopejka brigade leadership.
They tell their bots that they are supposed to call everyone a paid propagandist while it's crystal clear who posts new threads, posts "new damning evidence" from shills posted on dubious sites called Millenium report and from where the forum suddenly got a new influx of posters.

The sheer amateurism and the associated antics while they try to run a propaganda campaign are hilarious.

 

[Audio]

So basically you have nothing of value to add to the discussion other than gibbering rantings? Any proof of ANYTHING? are you being paid to troll threads that dont conform to nato story lines?

What value would i add? You're so awesome you do it for all of us.

 

[TankMan]

Valentin Vasilescu does make a few good points, like:

The plane could not be shot down by Buk-M1 as there was no electromagnetic radiation from the missile complex registered. There was no thick plume or white condensation of 10-35 kilometers from the earth, which appears and lasts for several minutes after launch.

This was the first thing that came in my mind when I heard about the Buk theory. Someone, somewhere would have seen or atleast heard the missile being fired, but no one did.

 

[notgoodenough]

If you actually read his analysis, its very thorough and it makes perfect sense. This plane was definitely shot down air to air. Now if it was a missile or cannons or other munitions, we will see but there is no way this plane was shot down from the ground.

Valentin Vasilescu does make a few good points, like:



This was the first thing that came in my mind when I heard about the Buk theory. Someone, somewhere would have seen or atleast heard the missile being fired, but no one did.

 

[TankMan]

If you actually read his analysis, its very thorough and it makes perfect sense. This plane was definitely shot down air to air. Now if it was a missile or cannons or other munitions, we will see but there is no way this plane was shot down from the ground.

Yes, all his points make sense and he has even provided proof for most of them. The question is, why was MH17 attacked? Its pretty hard to shoot down a plane like that by accident. What could anyone benefit from this? Aside from giving foreign investigators access to the crash site and making the Pro-Russians look bad, this incident hasn't changed much in the conflict.

 

[notgoodenough]

False flag to blame Russia and try and label the Donbass people " terrorists ". That and the fact that the ukie forces were completely trapped and encircled in an adjacent area and the ukies needed a distraction and a lull in fighting to try and reposition their outflanked brigades. It also gave fog of war rassmussen an excuse to start verbally attacking Russia. Not to mention the sanctions that were put o Russia, this was used as an excuse. Dont forget all the nato jets that also got repositioned on Russias borders, this incident was used as an excuse as well. Too many reasons. Its the same thing with the false Flag in Syria a year ago. These nato scum dont care about human life. They only want to win the " world " and everything in it.

Yes, all his points make sense and he has even provided proof for most of them. The question is, why was MH17 attacked? Its pretty hard to shoot down a plane like that by accident. What could anyone benefit from this? Aside from giving foreign investigators access to the crash site and making the Pro-Russians look bad, this incident hasn't changed much in the conflict.

 

[Penguin]

Youre saying a MIG29 cant bring down a boeing at close range? Im sorry but thats the stupidest thing ive heard all day. The Romainian military pilot whos flown these jets probabky has a better understanding of what exactly its capable of and what damage to look for on a plane thats been downed by one.

Id suggest sticking to your day job and not making pronouncements based on some wikipedia calculations. Smh

Learn to read before you speak.

I compared the stated distance 3-5 km between Boeing and Su-25/Mig-29 with the effective range of their aircraft guns: in order to kill it with its gun.an attacking aircraft would have had to be much close to the Boeing than the Russians stated it actually came . That disqualifies a theory, it says nothing about the capabilities of a Mig29, which are a given in this.

 

[notgoodenough]

Right. So you looked up some stats on wikipedia. Made an assumption based on that and youve solved everything. Well who needs expert analysis when you can just wikipedia a quick stat. We dont know exactly what happened between the fighter jet and the passanger plane. What we do know is they were right next to each other and then the passanger plane went down and the jet didnt. Make your own conclusions all you want but you would be stupid not to acknowledge the obvious. How did the jet bring the 777 down? You say it wasnt 30mm guns. Then what was it? Because nothing else brought that plane down other than the fighter jet that was stalking it.

Learn to read before you speak.

I compared the stated distance 3-5 km between Boeing and Su-25/Mig-29 with the effective range of their aircraft guns: in order to kill it with its gun.an attacking aircraft would have had to be much close to the Boeing than the Russians stated it actually came . That disqualifies a theory, it says nothing about the capabilities of a Mig29, which are a given in this.

 

[Penguin]

If you actually read his analysis, its very thorough and it makes perfect sense. This plane was definitely shot down air to air. Now if it was a missile or cannons or other munitions, we will see but there is no way this plane was shot down from the ground.

How. He discredits the use of proximity fused missiles,... which also eliminates AAMs.That leaves the gun theory. How can you not notice a fighter jet coming within 1000m and shooting. Like the plumes, someone would have noted that....

Right. So you looked up some stats on wikipedia. Made an assumption based on that and youve solved everything. Well who needs expert analysis when you can just wikipedia a quick stat. We dont know exactly what happened between the fighter jet and the passanger plane. What we do know is they were right next to each other and then the passanger plane went down and the jet didnt. Make your own conclusions all you want but you would be stupid not to acknowledge the obvious. How did the jet bring the 777 down? You say it wasnt 30mm guns. Then what was it? Because nothing else brought that plane down other than the fighter jet that was stalking it.

It wasn't my theory that it was an a2a engagement. So I don't have to prove that at all.

Your argument was: no one saw a plume hence it was A2A. Don't you think an AAM would have left a smoke trail? (conversely, if you have smokeless AAMs, you can also have smokeless SAMs). SO, if it is not a missile, it has to be a gun. But no one saw a plane (instead of a missile or its plume) either and you can't gun down an plane unless you get real close.

 

[notgoodenough]

People did see the fighter jet flying alongside the plane. This has been documented on the bbc. No less. Before it got deleted that is.

And now dont be a coward and explain to me how it is that a fighter jet was stalki g the pla e and only the fighter jet made it out alive?

You see if you only use selective evidence, well then your conclusions will always be selective as well. In other words wrong.
But I get it. You dont want to give or look for answers. You just want to cast doubt. How very convenient.

How. He discredits the use of proximity fused missiles,... which also eliminates AAMs.That leaves the gun theory. How can you not notice a fighter jet coming withing 1000m and shooting. Like the plumes, someone would have noted that....


It wasn't my theory that it was an a2a engagement. So I don't have to prove that at all.

Your argument was: no one saw a plume hence it was A2A. Don't you think an AAM would have left a smoke trail? (conversely, if you have smokeless AAMs, you can also have smokeless SAMs). SO, if it is not a missile, it has to be a gun. But no one saw a plane either and you can't gun down an plane unless you get real close.

 

[Penguin]

These are the facts. The ukrainian military has the PROVEN military capability to bring that plane down. They have both mig29 and buk.

So do the russians and by extention their allies.

The ukrainian military has been targeting civilians since the beginning of this war. This is also a fact. That means their leadership doesnt care about human lives. This is conjecture. But with thousands of dead civilians. Its obvious.

This is inherent in an 'civil war' situation. Seperatists will by definition challenge authority structures. Responses will be against 'civilians'.

Lastly. Where are the flight recorders? Why werent they released? Why are they being kept secret? If youre too stupid to figure out the answer yourself, you deserve to remain oblivious. And just look. After Russia released the radar info about the ukie jet shadowing the passenger plane. America nato and ukraine all became instantly silent and all the nato news stations just forgot about the plane.

On 18 July, it was reported that the flight recorders had been recovered by separatists.[107] On the same day, the head of Donetsk Regional State Administration, Kostiantyn Batozky, stated that both flight recorders had been found.[108

And a last piece of food for thought, not for you but for a thinking human. Why was a mig29 just a few kilometers away from and following that plane on that day and why were american satelites positioned exactly on the spot of the plane downing. And why hasnt the US released their sat data?

Why wouldn't warplanes be over a warzone? Why assume the US sat wasn't on that area all the along, permanently. I would think the US would be keeping a close watch all of the time. Why would the US reveal its capabilities to Russia?

Anyway. Its nice you want to continue to put doubt onto this subject but intelligent thinking individuals can see right through this farce.

Sometimes i ask myself. Are people really this stupid or are they just pretending for a paycheck. I dont think youre doing this for a pay check.

YHou are resorting to namecalling, which shows your position is weak.

People did see the fighter jet flying alongside the plane. This has been documented on the bbc. No less. Before it got deleted that is.

If it was deleted how come it is here?

And now dont be a coward and explain to me how it is that a fighter jet was stalki g the pla e and only the fighter jet made it out alive?

Please observe I've never taken position against the statement that a military jet was present. I've just pointed out that such a jet, whether Su-25 or Mig-29 had to be as close as 800m and that this does not correspond to the statement based on russian radar that a jet was 3-5 km from the boeing.

You see if you only use selective evidence, well then your conclusions will always be selective as well. In other words wrong.
But I get it. You dont want to give or look for answers. You just want to cast doubt. How very convenient.

I don't have to prove your or anybody elses positions. I only need to disprove some theory as some put it forward.
Falsifiability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The fact is that there is NOT a verdict on the cause as yet. And I'll take the word of the pertinent Dutch authority over your word on a forum any day.[/quote]

 

[notgoodenough]

Wow. The level of your ignorance runs deep. In flight recorders as in the recordings between kiev towers and pilot before the plane was shot down by the ukrainian fighter jet. They unkraine interior ministry confiscated them and never released them. Where are they? Why havent they been released. Lol. Ill wait for your pitiful excuse. I need something to laugh at today.


Like i said. You only want to believe what your nato masters tell you. Thats okay. You can stick to that story. The rest of the world who has a functioning brain. Well, we already know what happened.

So do the russians and by extention their allies.


This is inherent in an 'civil war' situation. Seperatists will by definition challenge authority structures. Responses will be against 'civilians'.


On 18 July, it was reported that the flight recorders had been recovered by separatists.[107] On the same day, the head of Donetsk Regional State Administration, Kostiantyn Batozky, stated that both flight recorders had been found.[108


Why wouldn't warplanes be over a warzone? Why assume the US sat wasn't on that area all the along, permanently. I would think the US would be keeping a close watch all of the time. Why would the US reveal its capabilities to Russia?


YHou are resorting to namecalling, which shows your position is weak.


If it was deleted how come it is here?


Please observe I've never taken position against the statement that a military jet was present. I've just pointed out that such a jet, whether Su-25 or Mig-29 had to be as close as 800m and that this does not correspond to the statement based on russian radar that a jet was 3-5 km from the boeing.


I don't have to prove your or anybody elses positions. I only need to disprove some theory as some put it forward.
Falsifiability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The fact is that there is NOT a verdict on the cause as yet. And I'll take the word of the pertinent Dutch authority over your word on a forum any day.

[/quote]