Russia Says Has Photos Of Ukraine Deploying BUK Missiles In East

[wehateporn]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...-warplanes-mh1

Ukraine hasn?t said how it immediately knew rebels downed Malaysian plane, notes the Russian Foreign Ministry, as it unveils 10 awkward questions for Ukraine (and perhaps the US 'snap judgment') to answer about the MH17 disaster. However, what is perhaps more concerning for the hordes of finger-pointers is that:

RUSSIA HAS IMAGES OF UKRAINE DEPLOYING BUK ROCKETS IN EAST: IFX
RUSSIA: UKRAINE MOVED BUK NEAR REBELS IN DONETSK JULY 17: IFX
RUSSIA DETECTED UKRAINIAN FIGHTER JET PICK UP SPEED TOWARD MH17

Obviously, if there is proof that this is so, aside from CIA-created YouTube clips, these would deal another unpleasant blow to US foreign policy.

Continued http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...-warplanes-mh1

[wehateporn]

http://rt.com/news/174412-malaysia-p...ussia-ukraine/

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by wehateporn

http://rt.com/news/174412-malaysia-p...ussia-ukraine/

Any fourteen year old can make a graphic like that...

[wehateporn]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Any fourteen year old can make a graphic like that...

If we look at history, who is more likely to have shot it down? The West is the one with the history of false flags to start up wars, it would be really silly of Russia to do this, how would they benefit? Only those who want war benefit

[Klen]

Originally Posted by wehateporn

If we look at history, who is more likely to have shot it down? The West is the one with the history of false flags to start up wars, it would be really silly of Russia to do this, how would they benefit? Only those who want war benefit

And how exactly would west or u. government benefit from this?

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by wehateporn

If we look at history, who is more likely to have shot it down? The West is the one with the history of false flags to start up wars, it would be really silly of Russia to do this, how would they benefit? Only those who want war benefit

it would be naive to think this isn't desired by certain parties on the russian side.. of course putin is set up to appear dictator-like, but is his control/power so absolute in russia?

[bronco67]

Originally Posted by wehateporn

If we look at history, who is more likely to have shot it down? The West is the one with the history of false flags to start up wars, it would be really silly of Russia to do this, how would they benefit? Only those who want war benefit

What reason would Ukraine have to shoot down an airliner full of people, whether by accident or not? Russia didn't pull the trigger in this...but their responsible for giving military hardware to a bunch of rednecks -- and they accidentally shot down the plane.

The rebels have no planes, so why would Ukraine be taking potshots at any random plane in the sky? These are the thing Russia should think about before making up this bullshit. There's no motive for Ukraine to do this. You obviously don't think too much either.

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by bronco67

What reason would Ukraine have to shoot down an airliner full of people, whether by accident or not? Russia didn't pull the trigger in this...but their responsible for giving military hardware to a bunch of rednecks -- and they accidentally shot down the plane.

The rebels have no planes, so why would Ukraine be taking potshots at any random plane in the sky? These are the thing Russia should think about before making up this bullshit. There's no motive for Ukraine to do this. You obviously don't think too much either.

why does Ukraine have BUK systems in the area? speaking of thinking

[bronco67]

Originally Posted by _Richard_

why does Ukraine have BUK systems in the area? speaking of thinking

Why would any military force have AA capabilities? In case they need them. They may be fighting a proxy war with Russian backed foot soldiers now, but how are they supposed to know if they won't start seeing helos or jets from Russia?

[Dmcontent]

Originally Posted by _Richard_

why does Ukraine have BUK systems in the area? speaking of thinking

They don´t comrade, they hardly have any operational BUK leave it alone having them around that area.

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by bronco67

Why would any military force have AA capabilities? In case they need them. They may be fighting a proxy war with Russian backed foot soldiers now, but how are they supposed to know if they won't start seeing helos or jets from Russia?

why would that military force deny having the AA capabilities there? what exactly would these AA capabilities do, if russia just decided to finally invade ukraine?

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by Dmcontent

They don´t comrade, they hardly have any operational BUK leave it alone having them around that area.

care to direct me to the closest concentration camp, fascist?

that's what you're doing, you know. don't like what i have to say..

[directfiesta]

Originally Posted by _Richard_

why does Ukraine have BUK systems in the area? speaking of thinking

,,and Ukraine did supply 6 BUK systems to Georgia in 2008 ... it was used to down 4 russian military planes ...

[Dmcontent]

Originally Posted by directfiesta

,,and Ukraine did supply 6 BUK systems to Georgia in 2008 ... it was used to down 4 russian military planes ...

They have them but not close enough to track and shoot down the Malaysia airlines.

[Klen]

Originally Posted by bronco67

What reason would Ukraine have to shoot down an airliner full of people, whether by accident or not? Russia didn't pull the trigger in this...but their responsible for giving military hardware to a bunch of rednecks -- and they accidentally shot down the plane.

The rebels have no planes, so why would Ukraine be taking potshots at any random plane in the sky? These are the thing Russia should think about before making up this bullshit. There's no motive for Ukraine to do this. You obviously don't think too much either.

Funny how you mentioned that,since they totally look like Us south rednecks,they remind me to those characters from redneck rampage game.

[Dmcontent]

Originally Posted by _Richard_

care to direct me to the closest concentration camp, fascist?

that's what you're doing, you know. don't like what i have to say..

Me fascist? you must be joking I have 7 comrades here next to me and they are laughing their socks off when I told them that..

EDIT: 5 comrades 2 of them denied being my comrades

[directfiesta]

Originally Posted by Dmcontent

They don´t comrade, they hardly have any operational BUK leave it alone having them around that area.

wow ... and your source ????

here is some source :

Buk missile system
Soviet Union
Medium Range Air Defense
SA-17 Grizzly
SA-11 Gadfly

60

Naturally , it was made by the soviets , as 90% of their armement :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraini...orces#Vehicles

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by directfiesta

,,and Ukraine did supply 6 BUK systems to Georgia in 2008 ... it was used to down 4 russian military planes ...

been recent reports about the rebels capturing military hardware.. buk included

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by directfiesta

wow ... and your source ????

here is some source :

Buk missile system
Soviet Union
Medium Range Air Defense
SA-17 Grizzly
SA-11 Gadfly

60

Naturally , it was made by the soviets , as 90% of their armement :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraini...orces#Vehicles

source? whatever tv tells him.

[Dmcontent]

Originally Posted by _Richard_

source? whatever tv tells him.

I only watch porn. nothing else

[just a punk]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Any fourteen year old can make a graphic like that...

[pornmasta]

Originally Posted by _Richard_

been recent reports about the rebels capturing military hardware.. buk included

who cares ? this plane had no reason to be in a war zone.

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by pornmasta

who cares ? this plane had no reason to be in a war zone.

oh, i dunno, the guy i was responding to?

[just a punk]

Originally Posted by _Richard_

why does Ukraine have BUK systems in the area? speaking of thinking

This is something to think about. The Ukrainian army has the BUK systems in that area (this is a fact, proven by the satellite photos. The question is WHY, is separatists have no aviation. As far as I know, no answer was given so far...

When I told that I believe the plane was shot down by either Ukrainian army or Ukrainian separatists with a 50/50 probability, I knew that both sides of the conflicts had BUK SAM's in that area. I mean it was a known fact BEFORE the tragic accident.

[seeandsee]

I guess we will never know who did what there...

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by CyberSEO

This is something to think about. The Ukrainian army has the BUK systems in that area (this is a fact, proven by the satellite photos. The question is WHY, is separatists have no aviation. As far as I know, no answer was given so far...

When I told that I believe the plane was shot down by either Ukrainian army or Ukrainian separatists with a 50/50 probability, I knew that both sides of the conflicts had BUK SAM's in that area. I mean it was a known fact BEFORE the tragic accident.

we knew the government was listening to everything 10 years before everyone accepted the government was listening to everything

in comparison, this misinformation is a no-brainer

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by Dmcontent

Me fascist? you must be joking I have 7 comrades here next to me and they are laughing their socks off when I told them that..

EDIT: 5 comrades 2 of them denied being my comrades

if the shoe fits

[Dmcontent]

Originally Posted by _Richard_

if the shoe fits

yes comrade, what´s next?

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by wehateporn

If we look at history, who is more likely to have shot it down? The West is the one with the history of false flags to start up wars, it would be really silly of Russia to do this, how would they benefit? Only those who want war benefit

They did it by accident. They thought it was a military plane and it obviously wasn't.

[sperbonzo]

Originally Posted by CyberSEO

This is something to think about. The Ukrainian army has the BUK systems in that area (this is a fact, proven by the satellite photos. The question is WHY, is separatists have no aviation. As far as I know, no answer was given so far...

Just off the top of my head. If I were in charge of the Ukrainian military, and there was the potential of a major Russian incursion, I would certainly put AA closer to my border, if only as a precautionary measure. I also would not "answer questions" about the deployment of my AA batteries to anyone, since that would obviously be dangerous to operational security.



Just sayin'.



.



.

[pornmasta]

Originally Posted by sperbonzo

...

.

and this is the same thing for the rebels and they anti-aircraft warfare...
So the whole thing could be an excuse to interfere in the problem and the real author could be far from ukraine. (yes, i don't real doubt that they can kill 300 people for this purpose)

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by pornmasta

and this is the same thing for the rebels and they anti-aircraft warfare...

also, the rebels aren't missile striking civilian populations. but, nothing new in that.. eh?

[woj]

Originally Posted by CyberSEO

This is something to think about. The Ukrainian army has the BUK systems in that area (this is a fact, proven by the satellite photos. The question is WHY, is separatists have no aviation. As far as I know, no answer was given so far...

obviously all weapons should be moved to the west, or put in storage... cause obviously it would make no sense at all to deploy them in areas where there is conflict or conflict is likely to escalate...

are you just fucking around or trolling or what? I mean seriously, think for a second, if you were commanding Ukraine army, where would it make most sense to deploy SAM systems?

[_Richard_]

oh i dunno.. in locations where they keep getting pushed back, and losing military equipment such as tanks, AA, so forth. real sharp military pizzazz

but hey, i guess it's a real slick way to say 'the russians are arming them'

[qwe]

Originally Posted by bronco67

What reason would Ukraine have to shoot down an airliner full of people, whether by accident or not?

very simple, Ukraine shoots it down and blames Russian separatists, nato + usa of course support that view... now, every western news channel plays how bad Putin is over and over, news paper print "Putin give us our children back" (btw already printed in few), that creates very bad image for Russia, more people around the world have more negative view of Russia... west only support presidents who destroy Russia(gorvachev+yeltsin), but when Putin is somewhat trying to make things better he automatically becomes a bad guy and "dictator"

[pornmasta]

Originally Posted by woj

where would it make most sense to deploy SAM systems?

where i have a good chance to resell them to make money :p

[just a punk]

Originally Posted by woj

obviously all weapons should be moved to the west, or put in storage... cause obviously it would make no sense at all to deploy them in areas where there is conflict or conflict is likely to escalate...

That's a pretty good idea to move all the weapons to the war zone... Course if you wanna to make a gift to your enemy This is how at least two Ukrainian BUK's were captured by separatists. Don't even wanna think what would happen if Ukrainian army had nukes and moved them there to (just for a case).

[aka123]

Originally Posted by CyberSEO

This is something to think about. The Ukrainian army has the BUK systems in that area (this is a fact, proven by the satellite photos. The question is WHY, is separatists have no aviation. As far as I know, no answer was given so far..

It might have something to do with the Russian forces on the other side of the border. This might not be obvious if you have read just Russian news, but the biggest question and concern is that will Russia invade Ukraine?

[ZiggiZiggiCrew]

Originally Posted by CyberSEO

заебали пидары, еще за корейский лайнер 1983 не ответили

[just a punk]

Originally Posted by aka123

This might not be obvious if you have read just Russian news, but the biggest question and concern is that will Russia invade Ukraine?

Why Russia? What not Mozambique? Why Ukraine? Why not China? I don't see any reason for Russia to invade Ukraine. Do you?

1) Nothing happens without a reason.
2) Ukrainian BUK's can not protect against theoretical Russian invasion because they will be easily eliminated (e.g. by Grad systems, Tochka-U etc).

[pornmasta]

Originally Posted by aka123

It might have something to do with the Russian forces on the other side of the border. This might not be obvious if you have read just Russian news, but the biggest question and concern is that will Russia invade Ukraine?

it's far better if the rebels do the job alone: it will discredit the ukrainian gvt, so it's not gonna happen (at least not openly)

[ZiggiZiggiCrew]

1983


2014


what's fucking different? no any ideas in CIA?
блядь, заебали одну и ту же хуню устраиваить: пидары бля

и да, Путин-хуйло, ла-ла-ла \ and yes, Putin-penis, la-la-la

[just a punk]

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogsp...rs-headed.html

[femdomdestiny]

Originally Posted by bronco67

Why would any military force have AA capabilities? In case they need them. They may be fighting a proxy war with Russian backed foot soldiers now, but how are they supposed to know if they won't start seeing helos or jets from Russia?

in that case, they would run as fast as possible

[just a punk]

[directfiesta]

Originally Posted by sperbonzo

Just off the top of my head. If I were in charge of the Ukrainian military, and there was the potential of a major Russian incursion, I would certainly put AA closer to my border, if only as a precautionary measure. I also would not "answer questions" about the deployment of my AA batteries to anyone, since that would obviously be dangerous to operational security.



Just sayin'.



.



.

that does make sense ...

amazing that it is hard for some to see that , even in the light that Russia had massed troops and planes on their border ..

[directfiesta]

Originally Posted by qwe

very simple, Ukraine shoots it down and blames Russian separatists, nato + usa of course support that view... now, every western news channel plays how bad Putin is over and over, news paper print "Putin give us our children back" (btw already printed in few), that creates very bad image for Russia, more people around the world have more negative view of Russia... west only support presidents who destroy Russia(gorvachev+yeltsin), but when Putin is somewhat trying to make things better he automatically becomes a bad guy and "dictator"

.. .and Europe imposes sanctions on Russia ( that the USA was trying to force them to do ) that they were not ready to impose the day before the shoot down .

[aka123]

Originally Posted by CyberSEO

Why Russia? What not Mozambique? Why Ukraine? Why not China? I don't see any reason for Russia to invade Ukraine. Do you?

1) Nothing happens without a reason.
2) Ukrainian BUK's can not protect against theoretical Russian invasion because they will be easily eliminated (e.g. by Grad systems, Tochka-U etc).

Why Russia and not Mozambique? Maybe because Russia is massing it's forces on Ukraine's border and Mozambique isn't.

I see a bunch of reasons why Russia would invade Ukraine and not the least is Russia's leaders lust for power.

And whether those BUKs cannot offer protection against Russian invasion or not, they are better than nothing and Russia have same and similar AA systems, as the BUK is Russian system in the first place. Why have you built those if those are no use?

[just a punk]

Originally Posted by aka123

Why Russia and not Mozambique? Maybe because Russia is massing it's forces on Ukraine's border and Mozambique isn't.

I didn't get this. Once again: what is the profit of invading the Ukraine for Russia? Dude, no profit = no deal.

Originally Posted by aka123

I see a bunch of reasons why Russia would invade Ukraine and not the least is Russia's leaders lust for power.

Share with us please.

Originally Posted by aka123

And whether those BUKs cannot offer protection against Russian invasion or not, they are better than nothing and Russia have same and similar AA systems as the, as BUK is Russian system in the first place.

As I said above, nothing happens without a reason. BUK's can't not be used to protect the Ukraine from theoretical Russian invasion, however they are a cool target for the separatists who will try to capture them (as they did already) and then use against the Ukrainian aviation.

[aka123]

Originally Posted by CyberSEO

I didn't get this. Once again: what is the profit of invading the Ukraine for Russia? Dude, no profit = no deal.

Share with us please.

As I said above, nothing happens without a reason. BUK's can't not be used to protect the Ukraine from theoretical Russian invasion, however they are a cool target for the separatists who can capture them (as they did already) and use against the Ukrainian aviation.

Everything doesn't focus on money. There isn't need for profit. I already shared the main reason and it is Russian leaders own personal want's and goals.

And the BUKs aren't supposed to protect from Russian invasion, they are just one weapon in the arsenal. And they will offer protection as does any AA system. End result is unknown.