Breaking news: Malaysian Airliner shot down over Ukraine

[telemann.livejournal.com]

A Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 with 295 people aboard crashed on Thursday in eastern Ukraine near the Russian border, an area roiled by fighting between pro-Russian separatists and Ukrainian forces. Ukrainian officials said the plane might have been shot down, possibly by a Russian-made antiaircraft system. Eastern Ukraine has been roiled for months by a violent pro-Russian separatist uprising in which a number of military aircraft have been downed. But this would be the first commercial airline disaster to result from the hostilities. Despite the turmoil in eastern Ukraine, the commercial airspace over that part of the country is a heavily trafficked route and has remained open.



New York Times with more information, video and analysis.


The incident touched off immediate finger-pointing between Russian separatists and the Ukrainian government. Eastern Ukraine separatist leader Alexander Borodai told Reuters that Ukrainian military forces shot the jet down, but Kiev denied involvement and labeled the incident a "terrorist act." The President of Ukraine on behalf of the State expresses its deepest and most sincere condolences to the families and relatives of those killed in this terrible tragedy," said a statement released by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko's office. "Every possible search and rescue effort is being made." Separatist groups reportedly blocked Ukrainian officials from the scene, and later said the "black box," or flight data recorder, had been sent to Moscow. KT McFarland, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense under President Ronald Reagan, and a Fox News national security analyst said the attack was most likely the work of Russian separatists, not the Russian or Ukrainian armies.

Source.

Comments

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

It does not matter how the people of Russia saw it.
If the people of Crimea had a referndum--a real one, not one that happened WHILE OCCUPIED, then it might carry weight.

The troops rolled into Crimea *BEFORE* they held a referendum and that is, and was, unacceptable.

Of course some sort of retaliatory sanctions had to be put in place.

I really dont care about the WW2 spheres of influence agreements. It's the 21st century, not the 20th century. Invading your neighboring country with UNMARKED military is a no-no. Full stop.

[mudryikot.livejournal.com]

It was probably the only way to ensure that they had a referendum, actually, as the Kievan government did not recognize their right to even have a referendum.

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

Let's be clear here: you support sending unmarked military across national boundaries?

[madam-shapo.livejournal.com]

If you knew anything, you would know that vast majority of population in Crimea are ethnic Russians. And what do you think, would they want to be part of Russia or Ukraine? Referendum is not really needed to figure the results.

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

That's not a response to my question.

I don't think that sending unmarked military troops into a foreign country is a proper way for a government to behave.

Sending in military troops to a foreign country is bad enough--but the fact that they were unmarked meant that they were CLEARLY there to cause trouble--NOT to do some good in broad daylight.

[madam-shapo.livejournal.com]

You were saying that the referendum passed only because there were Russian forces.
If the people of Crimea had a referndum--a real one, not one that happened WHILE OCCUPIED. ADD?

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

Cause armed men in masks wearing unmarked military uniforms never intimidates anyone, right??

[madam-shapo.livejournal.com]

Don't you understand that Crimea Russians would vote to unify with Russia regardless anything? You keep contradicting yourself, so can have the discussion with yourself - you do need me or anybody else.

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

You've successfully avoided the issue.

Sending unmarked, masked, military soldiers into a foreign country is NOT OK.

[mudryikot.livejournal.com]

Leaving them "unmarked" was probably somewhat underhanded - although avoidance of detection is a generally acceptable ruse of warfare. Plus no state of war existed then or now, so there can be no claims of violation of rules of warfare as stipulated by various international treaties. Just like when US had send undercover commando teams to Iraq prior to invasion.
As to sending our forces to Crimea per se - at that moment we had a right to hold a number of troops there (not restricted to naval personnel). Apparently the numbers actually there never exceeded the numbers allowed under treaties.
Nevertheless, I doubt that the presence of our troops had influenced the outcome of the referendum.