Ukraine Megathread: Crimea River Part Deux

[Shofercia]

I've seen how Ukraine "prosecutes" in Odessa. No thanks.

The government of Ukraine didn't kill those people.

No, they just whitewashed the crime of those who burned them alive, akin to the way that the South used to do under Jim Crow.

So nice to see Obama supporting that government /sarcasm

Ok, so why isn't he on trial in the Netherlands or in Malaysia? Also, can I get a source for your initial claim?

It was a long time ago, he said what happened in a press conference, I will see if I can find it. I apologize in advance if I fail in this regard.

It's ok, I'll chalk up the failure to your love for Stalin

[Novus America]

Bullshitting is not always a good idea. In fact it is usually a bad idea. And how are those lies working? On either side? Not at all.

And the questions about why Russia is backing the rebellion are legitimate questions to ask. And when your officers and soldiers lead a rebellion, you take responsibility for its actions. That is how it works. Russia is responsible for the rebels. When Russia does bad things they deserved to be questioned. Same as for everbody else.

No, you're responsible for the Rebel Factions that you support. Otherwise, guess who's rebelling against Assad? That's right, ISIS. And the US is supporting anti-Assad Rebels. Congratulations Novus America, you just made the US the biggest sponsor of terrorism. Or, we can go back to logic, and not hold you responsible for actions of groups that you don't control, and that you have little to no influence with. Take your pick.

Russia should freeze all aid to rebels until the group responsible identifies itself.

And if said group refuses, the Rebels could end up starving to death... yeah, I think I'm going to go with the plan that doesn't involve starvation.

Russia should try to find the group responsible and stop supporting them.

What makes you think that Russia supported them at all? What makes you think that Russia didn't end any support quietly? I'd agree that Russia should stop supporting said group, if Russia actually did. We don't know that.

Totally different. U.S. officers and troops are not imbedded with ISIS. And the U.S. is fighting ISIS.

The key factors are direction and control.
http://legal.un.org/legislativeseries/d ... t1_ch2.pdf
Russia has direction and control over many of the rebels and likely most. Of course this is fact specific so yes Russia could argue that maybe they did not control that specific group.

This is likely to be a court case to decide if the act can be attributed to Russia.

But how it works is if you control a group, you are responsible.

[Geilinor]

The government of Ukraine didn't kill those people.

No, they just whitewashed the crime of those who burned them alive, akin to the way that the South used to do under Jim Crow.

So nice to see Obama supporting that government /sarcasm

When Ukraine tries to bring order by fighting the rebels, you condemn it. When it doesn't stop them, you condemn it.

[Ikania]

The government of Ukraine didn't kill those people.

No, they just whitewashed the crime of those who burned them alive, akin to the way that the South used to do under Jim Crow.

So nice to see Obama supporting that government /sarcasm

It was a long time ago, he said what happened in a press conference, I will see if I can find it. I apologize in advance if I fail in this regard.

It's ok, I'll chalk up the failure to your love for Stalin

Yeah, damn those Ukrainians. Should've used polonium like any good state-sponsored terrorist.

[Shofercia]

No, you're responsible for the Rebel Factions that you support. Otherwise, guess who's rebelling against Assad? That's right, ISIS. And the US is supporting anti-Assad Rebels. Congratulations Novus America, you just made the US the biggest sponsor of terrorism. Or, we can go back to logic, and not hold you responsible for actions of groups that you don't control, and that you have little to no influence with. Take your pick.




And if said group refuses, the Rebels could end up starving to death... yeah, I think I'm going to go with the plan that doesn't involve starvation.




What makes you think that Russia supported them at all? What makes you think that Russia didn't end any support quietly? I'd agree that Russia should stop supporting said group, if Russia actually did. We don't know that.

Totally different. U.S. officers and troops are not imbedded with ISIS. And the U.S. is fighting ISIS.

The key factors are direction and control.
http://legal.un.org/legislativeseries/d ... t1_ch2.pdf
Russia has direction and control over many of the rebels and likely most. Of course this is fact specific so yes Russia could argue that maybe they did not control that specific group.

This is likely to be a court case to decide if the act can be attributed to Russia.

But how it works is if you control a group, you are responsible.

Russian officers weren't embedded with said Rebel faction either. Russia is responsible to factions that they can control. Otherwise, it'd be foolish to blame Russia. Yes, if you control a group, you're responsible. But if Russia controlled said group, they'd tell them to not shoot the plane down, because Russians had a functioning radar and are very cautious about shooting down planes after a certain incident.

[Novus America]

No, they just whitewashed the crime of those who burned them alive, akin to the way that the South used to do under Jim Crow.

So nice to see Obama supporting that government /sarcasm

When Ukraine tries to bring order by fighting the rebels, you condemn it. When it doesn't stop them, you condemn it.

He will condemn the current government of Ukraine no matter what.

[Shofercia]

No, they just whitewashed the crime of those who burned them alive, akin to the way that the South used to do under Jim Crow.

So nice to see Obama supporting that government /sarcasm

When Ukraine tries to bring order by fighting the rebels, you condemn it. When it doesn't stop them, you condemn it.

Yes, I like Referendums. If Ukraine held a fair Referendum, (before the shooting started,) and won it, then they could give a choice for the losing side to stay or leave. But burning people alive, not really my thing. Shelling schools? Yeah, not a fan of that either.

Yeah, damn those Ukrainians. Should've used polonium like any good state-sponsored terrorist.

There's a difference between burning protesters and killing a traitor. Hopefully you know what it is.

[Shofercia]

When Ukraine tries to bring order by fighting the rebels, you condemn it. When it doesn't stop them, you condemn it.

He will condemn the current government of Ukraine no matter what.

The government that whitewashes mass arson, causes a flood of refugees, fights a war, and begs Obama for my tax dollars? Yeah, not seeing why I should support them.

[Dortmundia]

Russia should apologise to the Dutch people for shooting down MH17. The West would not be tolerant to Russia and will never forgive it, unless it does not do it.

Let's recap:

Someone stupidly redirects MH-17.
Kiev's forces callously leave BUK at the border to be captured.
Locals capture BUKs and accidentally shoot down plane.

Who does Dortmundia blame? That's right, Russia!

So, according to you it is the blame of Ukraine as if purposely left the BUK just that the rebels later accidently shot down the plane?

Yes, it is the blame of Russia since thoose rebels are figting for russian interests, as well they are all Russians themself. Thoose rebels are now radicalised to the extend of being bloodthisty and tribalistic just like their icone Stalin. Russia has a tradition of shooting down civilian aeroplanes so this is nothing new.

[Ikania]

When Ukraine tries to bring order by fighting the rebels, you condemn it. When it doesn't stop them, you condemn it.

Yes, I like Referendums. If Ukraine held a fair Referendum, (before the shooting started,) and won it, then they could give a choice for the losing side to stay or leave. But burning people alive, not really my thing. Shelling schools? Yeah, not a fan of that either.

Yeah, damn those Ukrainians. Should've used polonium like any good state-sponsored terrorist.

There's a difference between burning protesters and killing a traitor. Hopefully you know what it is.

Exposing the corruption of the Russian government? What a crime that is. Maybe polonium is too low-profile, a good shooting will do.

[Geilinor]

When Ukraine tries to bring order by fighting the rebels, you condemn it. When it doesn't stop them, you condemn it.

Yes, I like Referendums. If Ukraine held a fair Referendum, (before the shooting started,) and won it, then they could give a choice for the losing side to stay or leave. But burning people alive, not really my thing. Shelling schools? Yeah, not a fan of that either.

Yeah, damn those Ukrainians. Should've used polonium like any good state-sponsored terrorist.

There's a difference between burning protesters and killing a traitor. Hopefully you know what it is.

The government of Ukraine isn't burning people alive. I think you're just paranoid. Everyone's out to get the poor Russians.

[Novus America]

Totally different. U.S. officers and troops are not imbedded with ISIS. And the U.S. is fighting ISIS.

The key factors are direction and control.
http://legal.un.org/legislativeseries/d ... t1_ch2.pdf
Russia has direction and control over many of the rebels and likely most. Of course this is fact specific so yes Russia could argue that maybe they did not control that specific group.

This is likely to be a court case to decide if the act can be attributed to Russia.

But how it works is if you control a group, you are responsible.

Russian officers weren't embedded with said Rebel faction either. Russia is responsible to factions that they can control. Otherwise, it'd be foolish to blame Russia. Yes, if you control a group, you're responsible. But if Russia controlled said group, they'd tell them to not shoot the plane down, because Russians had a functioning radar and are very cautious about shooting down planes after a certain incident.

Well we do not know at this point. Because of Russia's intransigence and lies we cannot be sure at this point. And if Russian officers were there maybe they screwed up too. Though we will have to see, although we may never know for sure. Although this will certainly be argued in court.

[Novus America]

Yes, I like Referendums. If Ukraine held a fair Referendum, (before the shooting started,) and won it, then they could give a choice for the losing side to stay or leave. But burning people alive, not really my thing. Shelling schools? Yeah, not a fan of that either.




There's a difference between burning protesters and killing a traitor. Hopefully you know what it is.

Exposing the corruption of the Russian government? What a crime that is. Maybe polonium is too low-profile, a good shooting will do.

Plus it blatantly violated the UKs sovereignty.

But I guess anybody who dares to leave and criticize Russia is a traitor who must be killed according to him. Obviously he cares nothing about violating sovereignty. Although how would he feel if the CIA killed Snowden in Moscow? Hmmm?

Oh and before some Russian says "but dur US does bad things too"...
A) that is not a valid defense, which you should have learned when you are like five. "mommy, but he did..." does not get you out of trouble.

B) the U.S. has not killed Snowden with a radiological weapon in Moscow because that would be totally INSANE! And an act of war!

[Dortmundia]

Exposing the corruption of the Russian government? What a crime that is. Maybe polonium is too low-profile, a good shooting will do.

Plus it blatantly violated the UKs sovereignty.

But I guess anybody who dares to leave and criticize Russia is a traitor who must be killed according to him. Obviously he cares nothing about violating sovereignty. Although how would he feel if the CIA killed Snowden in Moscow? Hmmm?[/quote]
Moscow would whine about souveregnity. It would hypocrite as oppositionaries are regularly beatan by Putins hentchman, Russia is currenly like Germany during Hitler.

[Shofercia]

Yes, I like Referendums. If Ukraine held a fair Referendum, (before the shooting started,) and won it, then they could give a choice for the losing side to stay or leave. But burning people alive, not really my thing. Shelling schools? Yeah, not a fan of that either.




There's a difference between burning protesters and killing a traitor. Hopefully you know what it is.

Exposing the corruption of the Russian government? What a crime that is. Maybe polonium is too low-profile, a good shooting will do.

Former KGB agent working for a known enemy of the Kremlin meeting a current KGB agent? Clearly that's all about corruption...

If you want to expose corruption, you just release the corruption files, publicly. For everyone to see. And you arrange to have someone release them after you die and/or are killed. That is, if you're fighting corruption. Still waiting for that Litvenenko release.

Yes, I like Referendums. If Ukraine held a fair Referendum, (before the shooting started,) and won it, then they could give a choice for the losing side to stay or leave. But burning people alive, not really my thing. Shelling schools? Yeah, not a fan of that either.




There's a difference between burning protesters and killing a traitor. Hopefully you know what it is.

The government of Ukraine isn't burning people alive. I think you're just paranoid. Everyone's out to get the poor Russians.

The current government of Ukraine whitewashed the Odessa Arsonists fast enough to make Jim Crow supporters jealous. Yeah, they didn't do it, they just let the criminals get away with it, and blamed the victims.

Russian officers weren't embedded with said Rebel faction either. Russia is responsible to factions that they can control. Otherwise, it'd be foolish to blame Russia. Yes, if you control a group, you're responsible. But if Russia controlled said group, they'd tell them to not shoot the plane down, because Russians had a functioning radar and are very cautious about shooting down planes after a certain incident.

Well we do not know at this point. Because of Russia's intransigence and lies we cannot be sure at this point. And if Russian officers were there maybe they screwed up too. Though we will have to see, although we may never know for sure. Although this will certainly be argued in court.

What can be argued in Court? There's no evidence that Russian agents were involving in shooting down MH-17 and it would make no sense for the Kremlin to order the shooting of a plane that posed no danger to DonBass, (the Russians would've known with their radar,) and could be civilian. What, you just think the Kremlin rolls the dice on plane shootings?

Exposing the corruption of the Russian government? What a crime that is. Maybe polonium is too low-profile, a good shooting will do.

Plus it blatantly violated the UKs sovereignty.

But I guess anybody who dares to leave and criticize Russia is a traitor who must be killed according to him. Obviously he cares nothing about violating sovereignty. Although how would he feel if the CIA killed Snowden in Moscow? Hmmm?

Oh and before some Russian says "but dur US does bad things too"...
A) that is not a valid defense, which you should have learned when you are like five. "mommy, but he did..." does not get you out of trouble.

B) the U.S. has not killed Snowden with a radiological weapon in Moscow because that would be totally INSANE! And an act of war!

A former KGB agent, working for an enemy of the Kremlin, meets a current KGB agent, yes, clearly, that's the case of the common Russian dissident... what the actual fuck? Your average Russian dissident has no access to classified documents, and the Kremlin's corruption isn't that hard to find. If you work for a clandestine agency, you put your life at risk. Applying to that everyday Russian dissident is a sign of extraordinary stupidity. And when Snowden asks for a meeting with a current CIA agent, fax me.

Moscow would whine about souveregnity. It would hypocrite as oppositionaries are regularly beatan by Putins hentchman, Russia is currenly like Germany during Hitler.

Commence with gas chambers... oh wait, it's just Dortmundia, nevermind.

Let's recap:

Someone stupidly redirects MH-17.
Kiev's forces callously leave BUK at the border to be captured.
Locals capture BUKs and accidentally shoot down plane.

Who does Dortmundia blame? That's right, Russia!

So, according to you it is the blame of Ukraine as if purposely left the BUK just that the rebels later accidently shot down the plane?

Yes, it is the blame of Russia since thoose rebels are figting for russian interests, as well they are all Russians themself. Thoose rebels are now radicalised to the extend of being bloodthisty and tribalistic just like their icone Stalin. Russia has a tradition of shooting down civilian aeroplanes so this is nothing new.

Did I say purposely? I've been saying, refuckingpeatedly, that it was an accident. Do you not understand that "on purpose" and "by accident" are two different things? That they're the opposite of one another? Thus far you've compared Putin to Stalin and Hitler, you still have to compare him to the Khmer Rouge to pick up some extra points, and then to NK's ruler, oh yeah, don't forget Saddam, Khadaffi, and Obama while you're at it. Actually go with Mabus too, if you're going to bullshit, go all the way:

[Novus America]

Exposing the corruption of the Russian government? What a crime that is. Maybe polonium is too low-profile, a good shooting will do.

Former KGB agent working for a known enemy of the Kremlin meeting a current KGB agent? Clearly that's all about corruption...

If you want to expose corruption, you just release the corruption files, publicly. For everyone to see. And you arrange to have someone release them after you die and/or are killed. That is, if you're fighting corruption. Still waiting for that Litvenenko release.

The government of Ukraine isn't burning people alive. I think you're just paranoid. Everyone's out to get the poor Russians.

The current government of Ukraine whitewashed the Odessa Arsonists fast enough to make Jim Crow supporters jealous. Yeah, they didn't do it, they just let the criminals get away with it, and blamed the victims.

Well we do not know at this point. Because of Russia's intransigence and lies we cannot be sure at this point. And if Russian officers were there maybe they screwed up too. Though we will have to see, although we may never know for sure. Although this will certainly be argued in court.

What can be argued in Court? There's no evidence that Russian agents were involving in shooting down MH-17 and it would make no sense for the Kremlin to order the shooting of a plane that posed no danger to DonBass, (the Russians would've known with their radar,) and could be civilian. What, you just think the Kremlin rolls the dice on plane shootings?

Plus it blatantly violated the UKs sovereignty.

But I guess anybody who dares to leave and criticize Russia is a traitor who must be killed according to him. Obviously he cares nothing about violating sovereignty. Although how would he feel if the CIA killed Snowden in Moscow? Hmmm?

Oh and before some Russian says "but dur US does bad things too"...
A) that is not a valid defense, which you should have learned when you are like five. "mommy, but he did..." does not get you out of trouble.

B) the U.S. has not killed Snowden with a radiological weapon in Moscow because that would be totally INSANE! And an act of war!

A former KGB agent, working for an enemy of the Kremlin, meets a current KGB agent, yes, clearly, that's the case of the common Russian dissident... what the actual fuck? Your average Russian dissident has no access to classified documents, and the Kremlin's corruption isn't that hard to find. If you work for a clandestine agency, you put your life at risk. Applying to that everyday Russian dissident is a sign of extraordinary stupidity. And when Snowden asks for a meeting with a current CIA agent, fax me.

Moscow would whine about souveregnity. It would hypocrite as oppositionaries are regularly beatan by Putins hentchman, Russia is currenly like Germany during Hitler.

Commence with gas chambers... oh wait, it's just Dortmundia, nevermind.

So, according to you it is the blame of Ukraine as if purposely left the BUK just that the rebels later accidently shot down the plane?

Yes, it is the blame of Russia since thoose rebels are figting for russian interests, as well they are all Russians themself. Thoose rebels are now radicalised to the extend of being bloodthisty and tribalistic just like their icone Stalin. Russia has a tradition of shooting down civilian aeroplanes so this is nothing new.

Did I say purposely? I've been saying, refuckingpeatedly, that it was an accident. Do you not understand that "on purpose" and "by accident" are two different things? That they're the opposite of one another? Thus far you've compared Putin to Stalin and Hitler, you still have to compare him to the Khmer Rouge to pick up some extra points, and then to NK's ruler, oh yeah, don't forget Saddam, Khadaffi, and Obama while you're at it. Actually go with Mabus too, if you're going to bullshit, go all the way:

Russia's involvment the with the rebels is proven. That is evidence as all rebels at least claimed to have a single over-arching organization.

Also destruction of evidence creates a presumption of guilt.

But we wil have to see, obviously the investigation is ongoing and neither of us have reviewed all of the evidence regarding who was involved.

And Snowden is not some ordinary dissident either. But you are missing the point.

You who are so obsessed with protecting Russia's sovereignty support using radiological weapons in foreign capitals for political purposes.

Obviously you would scream if foreign radiological weapons were used in Moscow, whatever the purpose.

You know that was an act of war, right? You are lucky the British and NATO are too soft to respond with real sanctions.

[Ikania]

I agree, but didn't the Mossad carbomb a bunch of Palestinians in Norway or other NATO locations? And the world kinda just got mad and that was that.

[Shofercia]

Russia's involvment the with the rebels is proven. That is evidence as all rebels at least claimed to have a single over-arching organization.

Hey there, I'm going to claim that the Moon is made of cheese. Have fun using that as evidence. The Rebels aren't a homogenized group. They had internal arrests of group leaders.

Also destruction of evidence creates a presumption of guilt.

And where was Russian involvement in this? Oh right, someone claimed something BORG.

But we wil have to see, obviously the investigation is ongoing and neither of us have reviewed all of the evidence regarding who was involved.

In part because Kiev is also not releasing evidence. Nor are the Rebels. Because they don't trust each other, in part because they're shelling each other. A bit hard to trust someone who just fired guns at you. Which is why I proposed that peacekeepers, not from Russia and/or NATO/EU member states, but rather neutral peacekeepers, occupy the area and let the locals hold a fair Referendum. Kiev called DonBass' Referendum a sham after shelling them during the Referendum. I'm a dedicated voter, but I ain't risking getting killed by artillery to vote.

And Snowden is not some ordinary dissident either. But you are missing the point.

Litvenenko was killed by Lugovoi while trying to recruit Lugovoi, thus he was actively spying against Russia using KGB knowledge. Snowden isn't turning any US spies, and has ceased all spying activities.

You who are so obsessed with protecting Russia's sovereignty support using radiological weapons in foreign capitals for political purposes.

I didn't say that I encouraged it. I said that I didn't give a shit about a traitor being whacked. And chill your hype. Who else was gravely hurt by the Polonium?

Obviously you would scream if foreign radiological weapons were used in Moscow, whatever the purpose.

Actually no, I wouldn't. I don't really give a shit about traitors, irrespective of their country of origin. Was anyone else seriously hurt by the Polonium used to kill Litvenenko?

You know that was an act of war, right? You are lucky the British and NATO are too soft to respond with real sanctions.

Is that "Bawwww" that I'm hearing?

[Novus America]

Russia's involvment the with the rebels is proven. That is evidence as all rebels at least claimed to have a single over-arching organization.

Hey there, I'm going to claim that the Moon is made of cheese. Have fun using that as evidence. The Rebels aren't a homogenized group. They had internal arrests of group leaders.

Also destruction of evidence creates a presumption of guilt.

And where was Russian involvement in this? Oh right, someone claimed something BORG.

But we wil have to see, obviously the investigation is ongoing and neither of us have reviewed all of the evidence regarding who was involved.

In part because Kiev is also not releasing evidence. Nor are the Rebels. Because they don't trust each other, in part because they're shelling each other. A bit hard to trust someone who just fired guns at you. Which is why I proposed that peacekeepers, not from Russia and/or NATO/EU member states, but rather neutral peacekeepers, occupy the area and let the locals hold a fair Referendum. Kiev called DonBass' Referendum a sham after shelling them during the Referendum. I'm a dedicated voter, but I ain't risking getting killed by artillery to vote.

And Snowden is not some ordinary dissident either. But you are missing the point.

Litvenenko was killed by Lugovoi while trying to recruit Lugovoi, thus he was actively spying against Russia using KGB knowledge. Snowden isn't turning any US spies, and has ceased all spying activities.

You who are so obsessed with protecting Russia's sovereignty support using radiological weapons in foreign capitals for political purposes.

I didn't say that I encouraged it. I said that I didn't give a shit about a traitor being whacked. And chill your hype. Who else was gravely hurt by the Polonium?

Obviously you would scream if foreign radiological weapons were used in Moscow, whatever the purpose.

Actually no, I wouldn't. I don't really give a shit about traitors, irrespective of their country of origin. Was anyone else seriously hurt by the Polonium used to kill Litvenenko?

You know that was an act of war, right? You are lucky the British and NATO are too soft to respond with real sanctions.

Is that "Bawwww" that I'm hearing?

On Russian involvement with the rebels, neither you nor I have access to all the information. We know Russia is involved, as far as regarding involvement in the shoot down that is still under investigation. An investigation Russia is doing everything to hinder.

And you are still totally missing the point.

Just because you, an ultranationalist think brutally murdering someone is a good idea does not make a it legal, or a good idea. Lots of ultranationalists think murdering people is good. That does not make it good.

Just because you believe somebody to be a traitor does not mean killing them is justified. Nor does it give Russia extra territorial jurisdiction or the right to trample on the UK's sovereignty.

Now even if I thought Snowden should be extra judicially murdered with a radiological weapon, (I do not, because that would be insane) that does no make it a good idea either. Nor would it make using a radiological weapon in Moscow good. The differences between the two cases is not the point. The point is using radiological weapons in foreign capitals is NEVER a good idea. Or legal.

It is not ok only in one specific case. It is never ok.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7e10653e-3778 ... z3jCgK3E1p

And thousands might have been harmed by the radioactive materials.

And on the last part, yes. It is a bit of a Bawww. I am upset that our leaders are so weak and stupid. Can you blame me?

[Shofercia]

On Russian involvement with the rebels, neither you nor I have access to all the information. We know Russia is involved, as far as regarding involvement in the shoot down that is still under investigation. An investigation Russia is doing everything to hinder.

Russia is involved with some of the Rebels. Common sense dictates that these weren't the ones who shot down the plane. If the Russians had any knowledge of Rebels actually using BUKs, the Russians would instantly tell them not to do it; Russia gave out manpads, (to shoot down non commercial planes,) but not BUKs, (weapons that can reach commercial planes,) since for Russia it's not worth the risk. Do you actually think that Putin would've annexed Crimea if the support was 25-75, instead of 75-25? If so, you, buddy, are deluded.

Just because you, an ultranationalist think brutally murdering someone is a good idea does not make a it legal, or a good idea. Lots of ultranationalists think murdering people is good. That does not make it good.

I didn't say that it was either good or bad. You seem to be fixated on labels and throwing them around, i.e. "zat guyz outdahbattin meh, he mutz b ultranatinalisht, hurr durr, durr hurr", and other blah, blah, blah stuff. I said that I don't give a shit when traitors are whacked.

Just because you believe somebody to be a traitor does not mean killing them is justified. Nor does it give Russia extra territorial jurisdiction or the right to trample on the UK's sovereignty.

And I'm not saying it does. I'm saying that I don't give a shit about traitors being whacked.

Now even if I thought Snowden should be extra judicially murdered with a radiological weapon, (I do not, because that would be insane) that does no make it a good idea either. Nor would it make using a radiological weapon in Moscow good. The differences between the two cases is not the point. The point is using radiological weapons in foreign capitals is NEVER a good idea. Or legal.

You keep on using that word, "radiological", as if I'm somehow supposed to feel bad. And I would, if someone else was gravely hurt. But you know what, the only one who was hurt, was a traitor. If we're to talk about Snowden, I should point out that Snowden didn't give his knowledge to other countries for profit, he published it for everyone to see, so I'm not even sure if he qualifies is a traitor. That said, if he would qualify as a traitor, and the US would whack him in Moscow with polonium, while avoiding grave injuries to anyone else, guess what? I still wouldn't give a shit. I'm not saying it's legal. I'm saying that I don't give a shit about traitors being whacked. Got that?

And thousands might have been harmed by the radioactive materials.

And on the last part, yes. It is a bit of a Bawww. I am upset that our leaders are so weak and stupid. Can you blame me?

Might have? The US Invasion of Iraq might have caused a WMD detonation if Saddam actually had them, so why isn't the Dubya gang in jail? Also, starting a spat with Russia over the Russians whacking a traitor and taking care not to hurt anyone else, isn't really smart. It's really stupid.

[Geilinor]

On Russian involvement with the rebels, neither you nor I have access to all the information. We know Russia is involved, as far as regarding involvement in the shoot down that is still under investigation. An investigation Russia is doing everything to hinder.

Russia is involved with some of the Rebels. Common sense dictates that these weren't the ones who shot down the plane. If the Russians had any knowledge of Rebels actually using BUKs, the Russians would instantly tell them not to do it; Russia gave out manpads, (to shoot down non commercial planes,) but not BUKs, (weapons that can reach commercial planes,) since for Russia it's not worth the risk. Do you actually think that Putin would've annexed Crimea if the support was 25-75, instead of 75-25? If so, you, buddy, are deluded.

You have that much confidence in Russia? You're out of touch with reality. I'm sad for you.

[Shofercia]

Russia is involved with some of the Rebels. Common sense dictates that these weren't the ones who shot down the plane. If the Russians had any knowledge of Rebels actually using BUKs, the Russians would instantly tell them not to do it; Russia gave out manpads, (to shoot down non commercial planes,) but not BUKs, (weapons that can reach commercial planes,) since for Russia it's not worth the risk. Do you actually think that Putin would've annexed Crimea if the support was 25-75, instead of 75-25? If so, you, buddy, are deluded.

You have that much confidence in Russia? You're out of touch with reality. I'm sad for you.

Do I have enough confidence that a major country can conduct a minor risk assessments when no lobbying groups are in play? Yes, yes I do. I also have that much confidence in the US. If you think that's out of touch with reality, I'm truly sad for you.

[Geilinor]

You have that much confidence in Russia? You're out of touch with reality. I'm sad for you.

Do I have enough confidence that a major country can conduct a minor risk assessments when no lobbying groups are in play? Yes, yes I do. I also have that much confidence in the US. If you think that's out of touch with reality, I'm truly sad for you.

Russia may have been unaware of the shoot-down until it happened. Plans backfire and a plan to arm untrained separatists is likely to backfire.

[Shofercia]

Do I have enough confidence that a major country can conduct a minor risk assessments when no lobbying groups are in play? Yes, yes I do. I also have that much confidence in the US. If you think that's out of touch with reality, I'm truly sad for you.

Russia may have been unaware of the shoot-down until it happened.

Yes, I know that. My point is that Russia was unaware, until it happened, because a simple risk assessment was all that it would've taken. "Hey, we really fucked up with the Sakhalin case, and we're winning in Ukraine, so let's not shoot planes flying at commercial altitudes." It's really not that hard to do that assessment for any major country. If Russian fighters do recon off of the coast of Norway, they can certainly do recon around the borders of Ukraine, so why risk a blind shot when you have that capability? Again, it's a very simple risk assessment. Why do you think Russia gave the Rebels hand held AA missiles, but not a single BUK or other weapon that could hit planes flying at that altitude?

Do I have enough confidence that a major country can conduct a minor risk assessments when no lobbying groups are in play? Yes, yes I do. I also have that much confidence in the US. If you think that's out of touch with reality, I'm truly sad for you.

Russia may have been unaware of the shoot-down until it happened. Plans backfire and a plan to arm untrained separatists is likely to backfire.

The German Report stated that the BUKs came from Ukraine, not Russia. German Report. Not Russian. German. Germany is NATO Member. Are you saying that a NATO country is lying to protect Putin? Is that what you're saying?

[New Werpland]

Oh yes we pro west hypocrites forgot about Russia's inalienable right to eliminate traitors, oops.