Support NeoGAF

[mikeyw85]

Can you posit a scenario in which the separatists did not fire the missile and yet still account for the facts we know to be true, ie the range of the missile system and the location of the crash?

A Ukrainian Sukhoi shot it down. There.... that accounts for both points.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

I'm not dodging. It's just really late here and I actually wanted to sleep. I can't read every single reply and answer it, because there are simply way too many and plenty are just asking me questions and I have to look through all the things that I read in the last few days, which takes time.

When you snip out one part of a person's post and ignore the rest of the same post, you are not simply failing to respond to a bunch of posts.

And my premise simply isn't that "Ukraine did it". That's actually my actual problem with it. Everyone seems to have to take sides (and does so). Mass media in Russia does propaganda against Ukraine. Mass media in the west does propaganda against Russia and the rebels. That's my beef with it, because noone knows anything for sure. Russia at least released satellite footage today, which are not trustworthy on here I guess.

My premise always was that I'm pretty sure that whoever is responsible for the airplane didn't do it on purpose. And I really mean anyone.

No one is claiming that anybody shot down a civilian airliner on purpose (in that they knew it was an airliner), so you're arguing against nobody. But you are blatantly ignoring what people are telling you in regards to evidence as to who shot it down, or trying to change the subject, when you take a side (yes, you are taking a side here) and claim that Ukraine shot down the plane (yes, that is what you are doing).

 

[Ollie Pooch]

A Ukrainian Sukhoi shot it down. There.... that accounts for both points.

Edit : totally wrong on that point, sorry.

The obviously means they didn't want to take down that particular aeroplane. mistaken identity, if that's even possible.

True, but that also doesn't explain why he is ignoring all the evidence that Russia/rebels were responsible, regardless of their intent.

 

[mikeyw85]

Didn't do what on purpose? Shoot down an airplane? You mean they manned, locked onto, and fired on a plane without confirming what it was or knowing the end result? Or that they shot down the airliner thinking it was something else?

Either way they're 100% responsible for the deaths of every single person on it, and so far all evidence points to Russian backed rebels being responsible, and no evidence so far points to Ukraine.

The obviously means they didn't want to take down that particular aeroplane. mistaken identity, if that's even possible.

 

[Partial Gamification]

The UN resolution from earlier today:

[...]
Resolution

The full text of resolution 2166 (2014) reads as follows:

“The Security Council,

“Deploring the downing of a civilian aircraft on an international flight, Malaysia Airlines flight MH17, on 17 July in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine, with the loss of all 298 passengers and crew on board,

“Reaffirming the rules of international law that prohibit acts of violence that pose a threat to the safety of international civil aviation and emphasizing the importance of holding those responsible for violations of these rules to account,

“Recalling its press statement of 18 July 2014,

“Stressing the need for a full, thorough and independent international investigation into the incident in accordance with international civil aviation guidelines, noting in this regard the crucial role played by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) in aircraft accident and incident investigations, and welcoming the decision by ICAO to send a team to work in coordination with the Ukrainian National Bureau of Incidents and Accidents Investigation of Civil Aircraft in this investigation, following a request for assistance by Ukraine to ICAO and others,

“Expressing serious concern that armed groups in Ukraine have impeded immediate, safe, secure and unrestricted access to the crash site and the surrounding area for the appropriate investigating authorities, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Special Monitoring Mission in Ukraine and representatives of other relevant international organizations assisting the investigation in accordance with ICAO and other established procedures,

“1. Condemns in the strongest terms the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 on 17 July in Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine resulting in the tragic loss of 298 lives;

“2. Reiterates its deepest sympathies and condolences to the families of the victims of this incident and to the people and governments of the victims’ countries of origin;

“3. Supports efforts to establish a full, thorough and independent international investigation into the incident in accordance with international civil aviation guidelines;

“4. Recognizes the efforts under way by Ukraine, working in coordination with ICAO and other international experts and organizations, including representatives of States of Occurrence, Registry, Operator, Design and Manufacture, as well as States who have lost nationals on MH17, to institute an international investigation of the incident, and calls on all States to provide any requested assistance to civil and criminal investigations related to this incident;

“5. Expresses grave concern at reports of insufficient and limited access to the crash site;

“6. Demands that the armed groups in control of the crash site and the surrounding area refrain from any actions that may compromise the integrity of the crash site, including by refraining from destroying, moving, or disturbing wreckage, equipment, debris, personal belongings, or remains, and immediately provide safe, secure, full and unrestricted access to the site and surrounding area for the appropriate investigating authorities, the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission and representatives of other relevant international organizations according to ICAO and other established procedures;

“7. Demands that all military activities, including by armed groups, be immediately ceased in the immediate area surrounding the crash site to allow for security and safety of the international investigation;

“8. Insists on the dignified, respectful and professional treatment and recovery of the bodies of the victims, and calls upon all parties to ensure that this happens with immediate effect;

“9. Calls on all States and actors in the region to cooperate fully in relation to the international investigation of the incident, including with respect to immediate and unrestricted access to the crash site as referred to in paragraph 6;

“10. Welcomes in this regard the statement on 17 July 2014 by the Trilateral Contact Group of senior representatives of Ukraine, the Russian Federation and the OSCE and demands that the commitments outlined in that statement be implemented in full;

“11. Demands that those responsible for this incident be held to account and that all States cooperate fully with efforts to establish accountability;

“12. Urges all parties to the Convention on International Civil Aviation to observe to the fullest extent applicable, the international rules, standards and practices concerning the safety of civil aviation, in order to prevent the recurrence of such incidents, and demands that all States and other actors refrain from acts of violence directed against civilian aircraft;

“13. Welcomes the full cooperation of the United Nations offered by the Secretary-General in this investigation, and requests the Secretary-General to identify possible options for United Nations support to the investigation and to report to the Security Council on relevant developments;

“14. Decides to remain seized of the matter.”
[...]
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2014/sc11483.doc.htm

 

[KHarvey16]

A Ukrainian Sukhoi shot it down. There.... that accounts for both points.

It wouldn't account for such a plane apparently not appearing on radar and it also doesn't account for the missile that was fired from the ground. I also didn't present an exhaustive list of the facts.

 

[Zoon]

After following this thread as close as I could, there are two possibilities:
If it was indeed ground-to-air missiles it would be the separatists who did it.
The second possibility would the plane to be taken down by the Ukrainian air force.
Also I am wondering, are there Ukrainian/Russian radar logs? or something to determine exactly the type of missile used? Because the US ones from the other side of the globe seems a bit weird to me.

 

[CTLance]

I gotta say that I nearly spewed my tea when the Dutch minister read his statement at the UN.

(roughly 3:20 minutes in)

Just for one minute, not addressing you as representatives of your countries, but as husbands and wives, fathers and mothers, just imagine that you first get the news that your husband was killed and then within two or three days you see images of some thug removing the wedding band from their hands. Just imagine that this could be your spouse.

Well, in my defense, THUG and FUCK sound kind of similar.

Thought for a second that he had lost composure.

 

[antonz]

After following this thread as close as I could, there are two possibilities:
If it was indeed ground-to-air missiles it would be the separatists who did it.
The second possibility would the plane to be taken down by the Ukrainian air force.
Also I am wondering, are there Ukrainian/Russian radar logs? or something to determine exactly the type of missile used? Because the US ones from the other side of the globe seems a bit weird to me.

Mh17 was flying at over double the max height the Ukrainian fighter can. That's why Russia's fighter claim is laughable.

 

[CHEEZMO™]

This is about the time I should probably tell yall that a Ukrainian Sukhoi shooting down the plane is, I believe, one of the narratives cooked up by the Russian MoD. It supposedly led to some humorous shenanigans with Moscow IP addresses trying to repeatedly edit the specifications of the model in question on Russian wikipedia.

 

[Osiris]

This is about the time I should probably tell yall that a Ukrainian Sukhoi shooting down the plane is, I believe, one of the narratives cooked up by the Russian MoD. It supposedly led to some humorous shenanigans with Moscow IP addresses trying to repeatedly edit the specifications of the model in question on Russian wikipedia.

After taking over the majority of the press and having free reign over the narrative there it must be hilariously frustrating for them to be so unable to control the narrative with the rest of the world.

"This shit we're throwing, it just ain't sticking!, more shit please to the front, more shit! Keep throwing please for the love of Saint Nicholas throw more shit!"

It's comically bad.

 

[mikeyw85]

It wouldn't account for such a plane apparently not appearing on radar and it also doesn't account for the missile that was fired from the ground. I also didn't present an exhaustive list of the facts.

Russia are saying one got within 5km, and that they have evidence of this.

I'm not putting the blame on anyway. I'm just saying there's 'evidence' put forward by both sides.

 

[Chittagong]

This is about the time I should probably tell yall that a Ukrainian Sukhoi shooting down the plane is, I believe, one of the narratives cooked up by the Russian MoD. It supposedly led to some humorous shenanigans with Moscow IP addresses trying to repeatedly edit the specifications of the model in question on Russian wikipedia.

If it wasn't for some 290 innocent people dead, nearly 100 of which kids, I would say they are now just taking the piss.

 

[Osiris]

Russia are saying one got within 5km, and that they have evidence of this.

I'm not putting the blame on anyway. I'm just saying there's 'evidence' put forward by both sides.

The US have AWACS patrolling the Polish border, and NATO increased coverage and patrols of the Russian border when the Crimea annexation took place, if there was other aircraft and Air to Air missile launches, the US would know about it, and not from third parties but from their own assets.

 

[KHarvey16]

Russia are saying one got within 5km, and that they have evidence of this.

I'm not putting the blame on anyway. I'm just saying there's 'evidence' put forward by both sides.

Was this tracked on radar anywhere? Was the missile it fired tracked on radar anywhere? And finally, why was a ground to air missile fired at the moment of the crash in the crash area at a height corresponding to that of flight MH17?

One side does not cancel the other out by simply providing the same number of claims.

 

[antonz]

Russia are saying one got within 5km, and that they have evidence of this.

I'm not putting the blame on anyway. I'm just saying there's 'evidence' put forward by both sides.

The very image Russia released for their proof has major issues. It says the Fighter was flying at 10,000 Meters. SU-25 cannot go higher than 5,000 meters when it carries weapons and unarmed it can reach 7,000meters

 

[Zoon]

Mh17 was flying at over double the max height the Ukrainian fighter can. That's why Russia's fighter claim is laughable.

Well, according to this: http://planes.findthebest.com/l/211/Sukhoi-Su-25 the max height is a little more than 6.8km.
But I can't find the max range of it's weapons.Someone with better knowledge on that could enlighten me.

 

[mikeyw85]

Mh17 was flying at over double the max height the Ukrainian fighter can. That's why Russia's fighter claim is laughable.

No it wasn't. It was at 10km and a SU-25 can flay at 7km and shoot things higher.

 

[Osiris]

The very image Russia released for their proof has major issues. It says the Fighter was flying at 10,000 Meters. SU-25 cannot go higher than 5,000 meters when it carries weapons and unarmed it can reach 7,000meters

Easily solved, the truth is just a quick wikipedia edit away

Although I did see one very amusing rebuttal to that 'fact', apparently according to some pro-Russian posters, the US could have supplied upgraded engines so that Ukraine could make the SU-25 fly higher, I shit you not!

 

[Chittagong]

Russia are saying one got within 5km, and that they have evidence of this.

I'm not putting the blame on anyway. I'm just saying there's 'evidence' put forward by both sides.

Which, looking at the map, would put that Ukrainan fighter jet some 200-300km deep in the enemy territory. Enemy territory where there might be anti-air weaponry.

So instead of simply dropping the plane while it was flying through their own airspace, Ukraine decided to follow it as deep as possible to enemy airspace. They were mighty determined to follow this plane, then.

 

[Ollie Pooch]

Which, looking at the map, would put that Ukrainan fighter jet some 200-300km deep in the enemy territory. Enemy territory where there might be anti-air weaponry.

So instead of simply dropping the plane while it was flying through their own airspace, Ukraine decided to follow it as deep as possible to enemy airspace. They were mighty determined to follow this plane, then.

And shoot it from the front while flying 3km below it, if we are to believe that pic of the nose cone covered in shrapnel holes.

 

[mikeyw85]

Was this tracked on radar anywhere? Was the missile it fired tracked on radar anywhere? And finally, why was a ground to air missile fired at the moment of the crash in the crash area at a height corresponding to that of flight MH17?

One side does not cancel the other out by simply providing the same number of claims.

I presume it was tracked by some means, yes, the plane that is. No idea about a missile.

If there was (for certain) a missile fired to the same place and time and MH17, things would be pretty cut and dried already.

 

[mikeyw85]

Which, looking at the map, would put that Ukrainan fighter jet some 200-300km deep in the enemy territory. Enemy territory where there might be anti-air weaponry.

So instead of simply dropping the plane while it was flying through their own airspace, Ukraine decided to follow it as deep as possible to enemy airspace. They were mighty determined to follow this plane, then.

Or maybe mighty determined to make it look like it was done by the enemy, by shooting it in their territory.

 

[mikeyw85]

The US have AWACS patrolling the Polish border, and NATO increased coverage and patrols of the Russian border when the Crimea annexation took place, if there was other aircraft and Air to Air missile launches, the US would know about it, and not from third parties but from their own assets.

Maybe the US does know. I hope they share the info, to put minds at rest.

 

[KHarvey16]

I presume it was tracked by some means, yes, the plane that is. No idea about a missile.

If there was (for certain) a missile fired to the same place and time and MH17, things would be pretty cut and dried already.

All indications are that things are pretty cut and dried already. That a missile was fired is a certainty at this point. We know it was there.

 

[Ollie Pooch]

Or maybe mighty determined to make it look like it was done by the enemy, by shooting it in their territory.

An enemy who had shot down multiple planes in the days preceding, and just happened to be firing a SAM which was caught on radar at the same time, followed by a since-removed Facebook post claiming responsibility for a downed plane, an intercepted phone call claiming the same, and the apparently hurried removal of a missile launcher back over the Russian border.

*rolls eyes so far they fall out the back of my head*

 

[mikeyw85]

An enemy who had shot down multiple planes in the days preceding, and just happened to be firing a SAM which was caught on radar at the same time, followed by a since-removed Facebook post claiming responsibility for a downed plane, an intercepted phone call claiming the same, and the apparently hurried removal of a missile launcher back over the Russian border.

*rolls eyes so far they fall out the back of my head*

The Ruskibook post, video and manoeuvred launcher could all be fabricated. That's kind of clutching at straws to suggest that, but it's all given to us by people who want us to know it's true.

The video appeared very quick, with multiple translations, and a creation date of before the event. I don't know if that's been explain, but it was fishy.

I've not seen the missile on radar reports I don't think.

 

[Osiris]

...That's kind of clutching at straws to suggest that...

You think?

 

[antonz]

This image was taken in Torez Ukraine the morning of the 17th. Before the incident. Torez is Rebel territory and just happens to be directly South of the crash site about 5-6 miles away.

It also just happens to be on the trailer being pulled by the same truck we see fleeing into Russia

 

[Ollie Pooch]

The Ruskibook post, video and manoeuvred launcher could all be fabricated. That's kind of clutching at straws to suggest that, but it's all given to us by people who want us to know it's true.

The video appeared very quick, with multiple translations, and a creation date of before the event. I don't know if that's been explain, but it was fishy.

I've not seen the missile on radar reports I don't think.

I'd be more inclined to be open to that possibility if the Russian rebels weren't making it difficult for investigators to do their job, like seizing the black box recorders and stopping access to the site.

Sure, you could treat the evidence as (potentially) fabricated but the fact remains there's no evidence incriminating Ukraine and piles of it - from independent journalists, the US, and others, as well as behaviour post-crash - incriminating Russia.

Plus Occams Razor, etc etc.

 

[mikeyw85]

You think?

Not impossible if you wanted to frame someone though. In fact, it's probably exactly what you would do.

 

[Tamanon]

The Ruskibook post, video and manoeuvred launcher could all be fabricated. That's kind of clutching at straws to suggest that, but it's all given to us by people who want us to know it's true.

The video appeared very quick, with multiple translations, and a creation date of before the event. I don't know if that's been explain, but it was fishy.

I've not seen the missile on radar reports I don't think.

Creation date was actually shown to be weirdness with Youtube's timestamps.

 

[mikeyw85]

I'd be more inclined to be open to that possibility if the Russian rebels weren't making it difficult for investigators to do their job, like seizing the black box recorders and stopping access to the site.

Sure, you could treat the evidence as (potentially) fabricated but the fact remains there's no evidence incriminating Ukraine and piles of it - from independent journalists, the US, and others, as well as behaviour post-crash - incriminating Russia.

Plus Occams Razor, etc etc.

I think they are cooperating to an extent. Some stories made it sound like they weren't allowing the investigators on site, when they were, and have been. They have (eventually) handed the black boxes over too.

They only evidence you're going to get that incriminated Ukraine will come from Russia, and there has been some. It gets dismissed though, for that reason.

Creation date was actually shown to be weirdness with Youtube's timestamps.

Well yeah, that is weird.

 

[CTLance]

Do the Ukrainian SU's still use the R-60M's (which are the default loadout, IIRC)? Because those use a different warhead, resulting in a very different strike pattern to the shrapnel blast seen on the pic of the plane.

The other default missile system is the K-13. lol.

It's a pretty bad fit for the SU-25, anyway. It's more of a ground attack/support type. It can barely keep up with the plane at cruising speed, anyway. With full armament the SU-25 caps out at Mach 0.82, while the civvie craft happily cruises along at Mach 0.84.


edit: Ooooh, neat. Someone already wrote up a detailed page about it. Just ignore the first two paragraphs and the strange use of the word "Rooskies".

 

[Ollie Pooch]

I think they are cooperating to an extent. Some stories made it sound like they weren't allowing the investigators on site, when they were, and have been. They have (eventually) handed the black boxes over too.

They only evidence you're going to get that incriminated Ukraine will come from Russia, and there has been some. It gets dismissed though, for that reason.

What 'evidence' was provided by Russia? All I've seen is them claiming a Ukrainian jet that can't fly as high or as fast as the airliner shot it down somehow.

The evidence against Russia has been provided by US data as well as reports on the ground.

 

[Psychotext]

This image was taken in Torez Ukraine the morning of the 17th. Before the incident. Torez is Rebel territory and just happens to be directly South of the crash site about 5-6 miles away.

It also just happens to be on the trailer being pulled by the same truck we see fleeing into Russia

Can't really see from that pic, but I wonder if it has all the rockets there (the one being taken to Russia is short a couple).

 

[mikeyw85]

Creation date was actually shown to be weirdness with Youtube's timestamps.

What 'evidence' was provided by Russia? All I've seen is them claiming a Ukrainian jet that can't fly as high or as fast as the airliner shot it down somehow.

The evidence against Russia has been provided by US data as well as reports on the ground.

I think they have satellite imagery of a few Ukrainian Buk's that moved and then some appeared a short distance away, which was apparently striking distance, but also should have been rebel-held.

The plane diverted so that it became above a hostile region, with no real reason.

There's also the Spanish ATC that saw the plane being escorted, but I haven't really looked into that.

 

[Osiris]

I think they have satellite imagery of a few Ukrainian Buk's that moved and then some appeared a short distance away, which was apparently striking distance, but also should have been rebel-held.

The plane diverted so that it became above a hostile region, with no real reason.

There's also the Spanish ATC that saw the plane being escorted, but I haven't really looked into that.

You mean the supposed Spanish ATC, that Spain themselves have said didn't exist?

Or are Spain in on the conspiracy too?

 

[antonz]

Can't really see from that pic, but I wonder if it has all the rockets there (the one being taken to Russia is short a couple).

At that point it has a camo cover on it. So sometime between then and running to Russia it lost its cover.

can see it a bit better with this link https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bsw1xAxCUAAWfge.jpg:large

 

[Uzzy]

Do the Ukrainian SU's still use the R-60M's (which are the default loadout, IIRC)? Because those use a different warhead, resulting in a very different strike pattern to the shrapnel blast seen on the pic of the plane.

The other default missile system is the K-13. lol.

It's a pretty bad fit for the SU-25, anyway. It's more of a ground attack/support type. It can barely keep up with the plane at cruising speed, anyway. With full armament the SU-25 caps out at Mach 0.82, while the civvie craft happily cruises along at Mach 0.84.


edit: Ooooh, neat. Someone already wrote up a detailed page about it. Just ignore the first two paragraphs and the strange use of the word "Rooskies".

The Russians can't seriously be saying that an SU-25 shot the plane down, can they? Don't they know that the Ukrainian Air Force has SU-27s around and can fly them, and it'd make much more sense to say that a dedicated air superiority fighter made an interception?

Freaking morons. Can't even get their lies in order.

 

[BlastProcessing]

A Ukrainian Sukhoi shot it down. There.... that accounts for both points.

We have a reported heat signature from the ground detected by a US satellite. We have pictures of the fuselage that show shrapnel damage (air to air missiles have no shrapnel). Both of these point to a surface to air missile not a fighter attack.

 

[mikeyw85]

You mean the supposed Spanish ATC, that Spain themselves have said didn't exist?

Or are Spain in on the conspiracy too?

Ha, don't ask me.

I think RT or someone interviewed him on video though.

 

[Ollie Pooch]

The Russians can't seriously be saying that an SU-25 shot the plane down, can they? Don't they know that the Ukrainian Air Force has SU-27s around and can fly them, and it'd make much more sense to say that a dedicated air superiority fighter made an interception?

Freaking morons. Can't even get their lies in order.

This is what I thought - and why I edited my former post about the Sukhoi not flying above a certain altitude - I had assumed they would have said an SU 27 shot it down. Haha.

 

[Phoenix]

A Ukrainian Sukhoi shot it down. There.... that accounts for both points.

Doesn't account for the fact that the missile was detected coming from the ground, that there was no aircraft in the region, etc. So it doesn't really account for anything.

 

[Osiris]

The Russians can't seriously be saying that an SU-25 shot the plane down, can they? Don't they know that the Ukrainian Air Force has SU-27s around and can fly them, and it'd make much more sense to say that a dedicated air superiority fighter made an interception?

Freaking morons. Can't even get their lies in order.

Why use an SU-27 or even Mig-29 (which they also have) when they have a ground attack aircraft like the SU-25!

I know if I was going to shoot down an aircraft, the first thing I would do would be to scramble a fighter that specializes in ground offensive use!

 

[BlastProcessing]

A good article on New Republic about how the Russian media is covering the event.

My favorite quote

Watching some of these Russian newscasts, one comes away with the impression of a desperate defense attorney scrounging for experts and angles, or a bad kid caught red-handed by the principal, trying to twist his way out of a situation in which he has no chance.

 

[Phoenix]

Why use an SU-27 or even Mig-29 (which they also have) when they have a ground attack aircraft like the SU-25!

I know if I was going to shoot down an aircraft, the first thing I would do would be to scramble a fighter that specializes in ground offensive use!

That wouldn't be a good reason to discount it though. In that entirely implausible hypothetical scenario, you could have had an SU-25 that was engaging ground forces and then picked up the air track and engaged it. It just doesn't account for the fact that there is absolutely no evidence of any military aircraft in the area. That and the fact that an SU-25 generally wouldn't engage an aircraft flying at 30k if it were in a ground attack role. Not even Russia is claiming that.

An SU-25 in any type of attack position at 30k is going to be as visible as a naked chick walking through a comic book convention.

 

[Stinkles]

Ha, don't ask me.

I think RT or someone interviewed him on video though.

RT is not a legitimate source of anything except Putin ballwashing. It should actually be banned here, but for the fact that its lies are actually newsworthy and important in and of themselves.

It's actually a pretty disturbing organization.

 

[Partial Gamification]

This is the problem:

Russians, too, exhibited a certain defensive anger about the current accusations, convinced that the West leapt to condemn them no matter what the issue.

Anastasia Lukina, 30, a sales manager in Moscow, said either side might have shot down the plane. “So the West says it wants a full investigation, but they’ve already accused us of killing those people?” she said. “We all know what the conclusion to that investigation will be. So why even bother pretending? Russia is the world’s scapegoat.”

That is the theme of much of coverage on state-run television, which has also aired all manner of theories lifted from the dark corners of the web.

One such theory holds that whoever shot down the plane was actually gunning for Mr. Putin, whose plane was over Eastern Europe at the time, returning from Latin America, for example.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/22/w...ne-and-a-robust-crash-investigation.html?_r=0

If Russia is going to be implicated, there are a lot of claims that need to be backed up with irrefutable evidence. There are millions of people that are just going to believe what they are told, and they feel like they are destined to receive the shit-end of the stick from the West.

"There is no truth in the news, and there is no news in the truth."

 

[antonz]

The Russians can't seriously be saying that an SU-25 shot the plane down, can they? Don't they know that the Ukrainian Air Force has SU-27s around and can fly them, and it'd make much more sense to say that a dedicated air superiority fighter made an interception?

Freaking morons. Can't even get their lies in order.

I think they are backed into a corner because Ukraine has limited its air power usage to SU-25 because they are using them for ground ops since they face no air opposition.

They could claim an SU-27 but since SU-27 haven't been launched at all during this it would be even more a stretch