Malaysian plane shot down in Ukraine. (1 Viewer)

DiStefano said:

When we appear to be weak, it encourages adventurism in others. It is not a coincidence that the US Embassy in Iran prisoners were released when Ronald Reagan was sworn into office. They were afraid of what he might do.

Click to expand...

mr roboto said:

Christo said:

mr roboto said:

Wait, why is the AIDS angle weird?

Click to expand...

The Russkies don't like the gays. The implication being that particular plane was shot down on purpose.

Click to expand...

That's a bit of a stretch.

Click to expand...

Christo said:

mr roboto said:

Christo said:

mr roboto said:

Wait, why is the AIDS angle weird?

Click to expand...

The Russkies don't like the gays. The implication being that particular plane was shot down on purpose.

Click to expand...

That's a bit of a stretch.

Click to expand...

I didn't say it was a good theory.

Click to expand...

Editor's Note: The following is the July 18 speech by Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, to the United Nations Security Council meeting to discuss the downing of Malaysia Airlines MH17 Flight on July 17.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Yesterday, we were all shocked by the downing of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17. All 298 people aboard – 283 passengers and 15 crew – were killed. As we stared at the passenger list yesterday we saw next to three of the passengers names a capital “I.” As we now know, the letter “I” stands for infant.

To the families and friends of the victims, it is impossible to find words to express our condolences. We can only commit to you that we will not rest until we find out what happened. A full, credible, and unimpeded international investigation must begin immediately. The perpetrators must be brought to justice. They must not be sheltered by any member state of the United Nations.

Let me share with you our assessment of the evidence so far.

We assess Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 carrying these 298 people from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur was likely downed by a surface-to-air missile, an SA-11, operated from a separatist-held location in eastern Ukraine.

The airliner was traveling at a cruise altitude of 33,000 feet and its speed was typical for an airliner along an established flight corridor frequented by commercial traffic. The flight was transmitting its assigned transponder code corresponding with its flight plan, and flight tracking data was publicly available on the internet. There was nothing threatening or provocative about MH17.Of the operational SAM systems located near the border, only the SA-11, SA-20, and SA-22 SAM systems are capable of hitting an aircraft at this flight’s altitude of 33,000 feet. We can rule out shorter-range SAMs known to be in separatist hands, including MANPADS, SA-8 and SA-13 systems, which are not capable of hitting an aircraft at this altitude. Early Thursday, an SA-11 SAM system was reported near Snizhne by a Western reporter and separatists were spotted hours before the incident with an SA-11 system at a location close to the site where the plane came down.Separatists initially claimed responsibility for shooting down a military transport plane and posted videos that are now being connected to the Malaysian airlines crash. Separatist leaders also boasted on social media about shooting down a plane, but later deleted these messages.Because of the technical complexity of the SA-11, it is unlikely that the separatists could effectively operate the system without assistance from knowledgeable personnel. Thus, we cannot rule out technical assistance from Russian personnel in operating the systems.

The Ukrainians do have SA-11 systems in their inventory. However, we are not aware of any Ukrainian SAM systems in the area of the shoot-down. And, more importantly, since the beginning of this crisis, Ukrainian air defenses have not fired a single missile, despite several alleged violations of their airspace by Russian aircraft.

This also follows a pattern of actions by Russian-backed separatists. On June 13th, separatists shot down a Ukrainian transport plane, carrying 40 paratroopers and nine crew. On June 24th, as this Council was meeting to welcome Ukraine’s unilateral ceasefire, we received word that separatists downed a Ukrainian helicopter, killing all nine on board.On July 14th, separatists claimed credit for the downing of a Ukrainian military cargo plane, flying at 6,000 meters, and on July 16, they claimed credit for the downing of a Ukrainian fighter jet.

If indeed Russian-backed separatists were behind this attack on a civilian airliner, they and their backers would have good reason to cover up evidence of their crime. Thus, it is extremely important that an investigation be commenced immediately.

In the first instance, the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission should act as a first responder, laying the foundation for efforts by other international organizations and individual nations including those whose citizens who were victims of this tragedy. Yesterday, President Obama assured Ukraine’s President Poroshenko that U.S. experts will offer all possible assistance upon his request. President Poroshenko has invited the independent and credible International Civil Aviation Organization to join an investigation.

International investigators must be granted immediate, full, and unfettered access to the crash site. All those concerned – Russia, pro-Russian separatists, and Ukraine – should agree to support an immediate ceasefire to facilitate access by international investigators. In this regard, we look to the SMM also to reach agreement with separatists and others in the region to make this possible. All evidence must remain undisturbed, and any evidence removed from the site by the Russian-backed separatists operating in the area should be promptly returned and handed over. Russia needs to help make this happen.

While it may take us some time to firmly establish who shot down a plane filled with innocents, most Council members and most members of the international community have been warning for months about the devastation that would come if Russia did not stop what it started, if it did not reign in what it unleashed.

The context for yesterday’s horror is clear: separatist forces – backed by the Russian government – continue to destabilize Ukraine and undermine the efforts of Ukraine’s elected leaders to build a democratic Ukraine that is stable, unified, secure, and able to determine its own future.

Russia says that it seeks peace in Ukraine, but we have repeatedly provided this Council with evidence of Russia’s continued support to the separatists. Time after time, we have called on the Russian government to de-escalate the situation, by stopping the flow of fighters and weapons into Ukraine, pressing separatists to agree to a cease-fire and release all hostages, and support a roadmap for negotiations. Time after time, President Putin has committed to working towards dialogue and peace: in Geneva in April, in Normandy in June, and in Berlin earlier this month. And every single time, he has broken that commitment.

Here is what we know:

In the last few weeks, Russia has increased the number of tanks, armored vehicles, and rocket launchers in southwest Russia. More advanced air defense systems have also arrived.Moscow has recently transferred Soviet-era tanks and artillery to the separatists and several military vehicles crossed the border.After recapturing several Ukrainian cities last weekend, Ukrainian officials discovered caches of weapons long associated with Russia stockpiles, including MANPADS, mines, grenades, MREs, vehicles, and a pontoon bridge.Ukrainian forces have discovered large amounts of other Russian-provided military equipment, including accompanying documentation verifying the Russian origin, in the areas that they have liberated from separatists in recent days.Recruiting efforts for separatist fighters are expanding inside Russia and separatists have openly said that they are looking for volunteers with experience operating heavy weapons such as tanks and air defenses. Russia has allowed officials from the “Donetsk Peoples’ Republic” to establish a recruiting office in Moscow.

Ukrainian pilot Nadiya Savchenko, who has long had a distinguished career in the Ukrainian military, was taken by separatists in mid-June. She is now being held – where? - in a prison in Voronezh, Russia. According to the Ukrainian government, she was transferred to Russia by separatists.Russia continues to redeploy new forces extremely close to the Ukrainian border.

In addition, this past Monday, a Ukrainian Air Force cargo plane was shot down in Ukrainian airspace; and on Wednesday, a Ukrainian fighter jet was also shot down in Ukrainian airspace. In both instances, the Ukrainian government believes that these planes were fired on from Russian territory.

It is because of these continued destabilizing Russian actions that the United States imposed sanctions on the defense, energy, and financial sectors of the Russian economy—including financial institutions. These measures include freezing the assets of Russian defense companies and blocking new financing of some of Russia’s most important banks and energy companies. These sanctions are significant, but they are also targeted – designed to have the maximum impact on the Russian calculus while limiting the impact on the Russian people and limiting any spillover effects on our interests or those of our allies. The European Union has also announced expanded sanctions against Russia this week. The message is unified and clear: If President Putin continues to choose escalation over de-escalation, the international community will continue to impose costs on Russia.

But this is not what any of us want. We and our allies remain committed to a diplomatic solution, as are the Ukrainian government and the Ukrainian people, who have seen their neighbors, friends, and family members killed in a needless conflict. President Poroshenko has consistently backed up his words with actions. He proposed a comprehensive peace plan and declared a unilateral ceasefire, both of which were cynically rejected by the illegal armed groups and their backers in Moscow.

President Poroshenko’s plan offered amnesty to separatists who lay down their arms voluntarily, and who are not guilty of capital crimes. He committed to providing a safe corridor for Russian fighters to return to Russia; he established a job creation program for the affected areas; included an offer of broad decentralization and dialogue with eastern regions, including the promise of early local elections; and granted increased local control over language, holidays, and customs. President Poroshenko also has reached out to the residents of eastern Ukraine and is pursuing constitutional reform which will give local regions more authority to choose their regional leaders and protect locally-spoken languages. He has said he will meet with separatist at any safe location inside or outside of Ukraine.

The United States’ goal throughout the crisis in Ukraine has been consistent: to support a stable, peaceful, and democratic Ukraine. We will not be satisfied with a temporary halt to violence. Russia must stop destabilizing Ukraine, and allow all of the people of Ukraine to decide their country’s future through a democratic political process.

As we sit here, the remains of nearly 300 people – of innocent infants, children, women, and men – are strewn across a blackened, smoldering landscape in Ukraine. Those victims came from at least nine different nations. They could just as easily have come from any of ours. We must treat all of them as our own victims.

We have a duty to each and every one of those individuals, their families, and their countries to determine why that jet fell out of the sky and to hold the perpetrators accountable. We must stop at nothing to bring those responsible to justice. This appalling attack occurred in the context of a crisis that has been fueled by Russian support for separatists -- through arms, weapons, and training -- and by the Russian failure to follow through on its commitments and by its failure to adhere to the fundamental principles of the UN Charter.

This tragedy only underscores the urgency and determination with which we insist that Russia immediately take concrete steps to de-escalate the situation in Ukraine, support a sustainable cease-fire, and follow the path toward peace that the Ukrainian government has consistently offered.

This war can be ended. Russia can end this war. Russia must end this war.

Click to expand...

MOSCOW — Russian President Vladimir Putin opened a meeting with top economic advisers late Thursday with comments on the crash of a Malaysian airliner in Ukraine. The text of his remarks, as taken from the Kremlin website and translated by The Associated Press:

Dear colleagues!

You know that a terrible event occurred today in the sky over Ukraine, an awful tragedy — a civilian plane was killed, 285 people, according to preliminary information, were killed.

On behalf of the Russian leadership and the Russian government, we express condolences to the bereaved families, the governments of those countries whose nationals were on that plane. I ask you to honor their memory.

(A moment of silence)

In this regard, I want to note that this tragedy would not have happened if there were peace on this land, if the military actions had not been renewed in southeast Ukraine. And, certainly, the state over whose territory this occurred bears responsibility for this awful tragedy.

I have already given instructions to the military departments to provide all necessary assistance in the investigation of this crime. And I also ask the government of the Russian Federation through the available civilian agencies that have the capability to do everything for a thorough investigation of this event. We will do everything — everything that depends on us, anyway — in order that the objective picture of what happened is part of the public domain here, in Ukraine and in the rest of the world. This is an absolutely unacceptable thing, and no one has the right to let this pass without the appropriate conclusions and without all of us having objective information about the incident.

But we have gathered with you for another reason. I would like to talk to you about the socio-economic situation in the country. We also have many other issues of the current character. Let’s talk about them.

Click to expand...

Sinn Fein said:

Doctor Detroit said:

Eminence said:

Who are the bad guys? Russia?

Click to expand...

Carnies

Click to expand...

And, Gypsies

Click to expand...

SaintsInDome2006 said:

Mad Vlad's statement:

MOSCOW Russian President Vladimir Putin opened a meeting with top economic advisers late Thursday with comments on the crash of a Malaysian airliner in Ukraine. The text of his remarks, as taken from the Kremlin website and translated by The Associated Press:

Dear colleagues!

You know that a terrible event occurred today in the sky over Ukraine, an awful tragedy a civilian plane was killed, 285 people, according to preliminary information, were killed.

On behalf of the Russian leadership and the Russian government, we express condolences to the bereaved families, the governments of those countries whose nationals were on that plane. I ask you to honor their memory.

(A moment of silence)

In this regard, I want to note that this tragedy would not have happened if there were peace on this land, if the military actions had not been renewed in southeast Ukraine. And, certainly, the state over whose territory this occurred bears responsibility for this awful tragedy.

I have already given instructions to the military departments to provide all necessary assistance in the investigation of this crime. And I also ask the government of the Russian Federation through the available civilian agencies that have the capability to do everything for a thorough investigation of this event. We will do everything everything that depends on us, anyway in order that the objective picture of what happened is part of the public domain here, in Ukraine and in the rest of the world. This is an absolutely unacceptable thing, and no one has the right to let this pass without the appropriate conclusions and without all of us having objective information about the incident.

But we have gathered with you for another reason. I would like to talk to you about the socio-economic situation in the country. We also have many other issues of the current character. Lets talk about them.

Click to expand...

http://registerguard.com/rg/news/31883468-76/russian-ukraine-everything-tragedy-airliner.html.csp

Click to expand...

Sinn Fein said:

Doctor Detroit said:

Eminence said:

Who are the bad guys? Russia?

Click to expand...

Carnies

Click to expand...

And, Gypsies

Click to expand...

mr roboto said:

SaintsInDome2006 said:

Mad Vlad's statement:

MOSCOW Russian President Vladimir Putin opened a meeting with top economic advisers late Thursday with comments on the crash of a Malaysian airliner in Ukraine. The text of his remarks, as taken from the Kremlin website and translated by The Associated Press:

Dear colleagues!

You know that a terrible event occurred today in the sky over Ukraine, an awful tragedy a civilian plane was killed, 285 people, according to preliminary information, were killed.

On behalf of the Russian leadership and the Russian government, we express condolences to the bereaved families, the governments of those countries whose nationals were on that plane. I ask you to honor their memory.

(A moment of silence)

In this regard, I want to note that this tragedy would not have happened if there were peace on this land, if the military actions had not been renewed in southeast Ukraine. And, certainly, the state over whose territory this occurred bears responsibility for this awful tragedy.

I have already given instructions to the military departments to provide all necessary assistance in the investigation of this crime. And I also ask the government of the Russian Federation through the available civilian agencies that have the capability to do everything for a thorough investigation of this event. We will do everything everything that depends on us, anyway in order that the objective picture of what happened is part of the public domain here, in Ukraine and in the rest of the world. This is an absolutely unacceptable thing, and no one has the right to let this pass without the appropriate conclusions and without all of us having objective information about the incident.

But we have gathered with you for another reason. I would like to talk to you about the socio-economic situation in the country. We also have many other issues of the current character. Lets talk about them.

Click to expand...

http://registerguard.com/rg/news/31883468-76/russian-ukraine-everything-tragedy-airliner.html.csp

Click to expand...

Does he think he's fooling people?

Click to expand...

'We're lying,' Sara Firth quits Russia Today over Malaysia crash coverageRussia Today reporter Sara Firth resigned this morning after accusing the state-run news channel of airing fake claims about yesterday's Malaysian Airlines crash.

"It's flying with that border of overtly lying," Firth told BuzzFeed of Russia Today's coverage.

"Every single day we’re lying and finding sexier ways to do it," she told BuzzFeed.

Malaysian Airlines flight 15 from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur was shot down yesterday.

The Guardian reported that Russia Today's coverage has "suggested Ukraine was to blame for the crash,"while most media organisations have said it was shot down by a suspected Russian-made missile."

• I resigned from RT today. I have huge respect for many in the team, but I'm for the truth.

Firth, a "London-based correspondent," said Russia Today was reporting with "total disregard to the facts."

"We threw up eyewitness accounts from someone on the ground openly accusing the Ukrainian government [of involvement in the disaster], and a correspondent in the studio pulled up a plane crash before that the Ukrainian government had been involved in and said it was ‘worth mentioning,'" she said.

She added in an interview with the Guardian, "It was the most shockingly obvious misinformation and it got to the point where I couldn’t defend it any more."

Earlier today, Firth tweeted:

• RT style guide Rule 1: It is ALWAYS *Ukraine's fault (*add name as applicable)
• Polly Boiko @Polly_Boiko @ukTanos what am i spreading?@Polly_Boiko @ukTanos Lies hun. We do work for Putin. We are asked on a daily basis if not to totally ignore then to obscure the truth

...Earlier this year, Russia Today anchor Liz Wahl resigned on air, Mashable reminded. She said her resignation was because Russia Today "whitewashes the actions of Putin."

Click to expand...

timschochet said:

Going to be a lot of angry speeches over the next few days. But I still don't think it will escalate beyond that. As always, though, Putin worries me...

Click to expand...

SaintsInDome2006 said:

timschochet said:

Going to be a lot of angry speeches over the next few days. But I still don't think it will escalate beyond that. As always, though, Putin worries me...

Click to expand...

Not militarily, that's true. But there will be increased sanctions and just wait for the international investigation to get total access to the plane, the missile and the black boxes.

Click to expand...

timschochet said:

SaintsInDome2006 said:

timschochet said:

Going to be a lot of angry speeches over the next few days. But I still don't think it will escalate beyond that. As always, though, Putin worries me...

Click to expand...

Not militarily, that's true. But there will be increased sanctions and just wait for the international investigation to get total access to the plane, the missile and the black boxes.

Click to expand...

Donyou think we should do what Dr. Detroit suggested? Offer to sell the EU enough natural gas to allow them to stop buying from Russia? I know that would be great for our economy and it MIGHT force Russia to back off, but it also might be seen by Putin as an act of aggression.

Click to expand...

Treynwreck3 said:

Non-partisan question...where do we go from here?

Click to expand...

wdcrob said:

Treynwreck3 said:

Non-partisan question...where do we go from here?

Click to expand...

Probably ramp up sanctions again -- which do bite some. But ultimately Russia will do what they want to do. No one's going to go to war to save the Ukraine.

Click to expand...

timschochet said:

SaintsInDome2006 said:

timschochet said:

Going to be a lot of angry speeches over the next few days. But I still don't think it will escalate beyond that. As always, though, Putin worries me...

Click to expand...

Not militarily, that's true. But there will be increased sanctions and just wait for the international investigation to get total access to the plane, the missile and the black boxes.

Click to expand...

Donyou think we should do what Dr. Detroit suggested? Offer to sell the EU enough natural gas to allow them to stop buying from Russia? I know that would be great for our economy and it MIGHT force Russia to back off, but it also might be seen by Putin as an act of aggression.

Click to expand...

timschochet said:

SaintsInDome2006 said:

timschochet said:

Going to be a lot of angry speeches over the next few days. But I still don't think it will escalate beyond that. As always, though, Putin worries me...

Click to expand...

Not militarily, that's true. But there will be increased sanctions and just wait for the international investigation to get total access to the plane, the missile and the black boxes.

Click to expand...

Donyou think we should do what Dr. Detroit suggested? Offer to sell the EU enough natural gas to allow them to stop buying from Russia? I know that would be great for our economy and it MIGHT force Russia to back off, but it also might be seen by Putin as an act of aggression.

Click to expand...

msommer said:

timschochet said:

SaintsInDome2006 said:

timschochet said:

Going to be a lot of angry speeches over the next few days. But I still don't think it will escalate beyond that. As always, though, Putin worries me...

Click to expand...

Not militarily, that's true. But there will be increased sanctions and just wait for the international investigation to get total access to the plane, the missile and the black boxes.

Click to expand...

Donyou think we should do what Dr. Detroit suggested? Offer to sell the EU enough natural gas to allow them to stop buying from Russia? I know that would be great for our economy and it MIGHT force Russia to back off, but it also might be seen by Putin as an act of aggression.

Click to expand...

The companies with LNG carrying vessels will have a field day if that's the case. The European gas consumption would add 50% to the existing international market. Are there sufficient port facilities and LNG trains to handle that? That would be doubtful.Just to consider the scale here - EU imported 161 billion cubic meters of gas in 2013 from Russia. With a conversion factor of 609 that still leaves 264 million cubic meters to be transported. The largest ship size in operation (Q-max for Qatar max - Qatar being the largest exporter of LNG in the world) takes 266 thousand cubic meters per trip or about one thousand departures. it takes about two weeks to sail from the Gulf to Europe, so each ship can do about 12 trips. Consequently you need 80 ships dedicated to this alone. There are 14 such ships in existence today and they are busy sailing with Qatar's LNG already.

With the current glut in orders you might get the first vessel in 2017 or 2018. the price of one vessel is to the tune of usd 200m

Click to expand...

timschochet said:

msommer said:

timschochet said:

SaintsInDome2006 said:

timschochet said:

Going to be a lot of angry speeches over the next few days. But I still don't think it will escalate beyond that. As always, though, Putin worries me...

Click to expand...

Not militarily, that's true. But there will be increased sanctions and just wait for the international investigation to get total access to the plane, the missile and the black boxes.

Click to expand...

Donyou think we should do what Dr. Detroit suggested? Offer to sell the EU enough natural gas to allow them to stop buying from Russia? I know that would be great for our economy and it MIGHT force Russia to back off, but it also might be seen by Putin as an act of aggression.

Click to expand...

The companies with LNG carrying vessels will have a field day if that's the case. The European gas consumption would add 50% to the existing international market. Are there sufficient port facilities and LNG trains to handle that? That would be doubtful.Just to consider the scale here - EU imported 161 billion cubic meters of gas in 2013 from Russia. With a conversion factor of 609 that still leaves 264 million cubic meters to be transported. The largest ship size in operation (Q-max for Qatar max - Qatar being the largest exporter of LNG in the world) takes 266 thousand cubic meters per trip or about one thousand departures. it takes about two weeks to sail from the Gulf to Europe, so each ship can do about 12 trips. Consequently you need 80 ships dedicated to this alone. There are 14 such ships in existence today and they are busy sailing with Qatar's LNG already.

With the current glut in orders you might get the first vessel in 2017 or 2018. the price of one vessel is to the tune of usd 200m

Click to expand...

So you're saying that even if we wanted to do this, it's not really feasible?

Click to expand...

timschochet said:

msommer said:

timschochet said:

SaintsInDome2006 said:

timschochet said:

Going to be a lot of angry speeches over the next few days. But I still don't think it will escalate beyond that. As always, though, Putin worries me...

Click to expand...

Not militarily, that's true. But there will be increased sanctions and just wait for the international investigation to get total access to the plane, the missile and the black boxes.

Click to expand...

Donyou think we should do what Dr. Detroit suggested? Offer to sell the EU enough natural gas to allow them to stop buying from Russia? I know that would be great for our economy and it MIGHT force Russia to back off, but it also might be seen by Putin as an act of aggression.

Click to expand...

The companies with LNG carrying vessels will have a field day if that's the case. The European gas consumption would add 50% to the existing international market. Are there sufficient port facilities and LNG trains to handle that? That would be doubtful.Just to consider the scale here - EU imported 161 billion cubic meters of gas in 2013 from Russia. With a conversion factor of 609 that still leaves 264 million cubic meters to be transported. The largest ship size in operation (Q-max for Qatar max - Qatar being the largest exporter of LNG in the world) takes 266 thousand cubic meters per trip or about one thousand departures. it takes about two weeks to sail from the Gulf to Europe, so each ship can do about 12 trips. Consequently you need 80 ships dedicated to this alone. There are 14 such ships in existence today and they are busy sailing with Qatar's LNG already.

With the current glut in orders you might get the first vessel in 2017 or 2018. the price of one vessel is to the tune of usd 200m

Click to expand...

So you're saying that even if we wanted to do this, it's not really feasible?

Click to expand...

timschochet said:

I'm not saying that I see it as an act of aggression. I'm suggesting that Paranoid Putin might.

Click to expand...

timschochet said:

I'm not saying that I see it as an act of aggression. I'm suggesting that Paranoid Putin might.

Click to expand...

timschochet said:

Going to be a lot of angry speeches over the next few days. But I still don't think it will escalate beyond that. As always, though, Putin worries me...

Click to expand...

eurotrashman said:

timschochet said:

Going to be a lot of angry speeches over the next few days. But I still don't think it will escalate beyond that. As always, though, Putin worries me...

Click to expand...

Let us know if your feelings or opinions change!!!

Click to expand...

LarryAllen said:

What if Tim's "Operation Unicorn" plan were to somehow come to fruition and either the US and co. Or even the UN amassed a major ground based offensive campaign against Russia. I'm talking 1,000,000+ on the ground with Naval and Air Support.

Would Russia pull the trigger and starting nuking Eastern Europe while we assemble, or would he fight a clean war?

To quote Tim, I'm 99.9% sure this won't happen, but could you imagine the global social economic consequences of a "WWIII". What would the coverage be like in 2014 vs. even the Gulf Wars. Things are real time know.

Click to expand...

timschochet said:

LarryAllen said:

What if Tim's "Operation Unicorn" plan were to somehow come to fruition and either the US and co. Or even the UN amassed a major ground based offensive campaign against Russia. I'm talking 1,000,000+ on the ground with Naval and Air Support.

Would Russia pull the trigger and starting nuking Eastern Europe while we assemble, or would he fight a clean war?

To quote Tim, I'm 99.9% sure this won't happen, but could you imagine the global social economic consequences of a "WWIII". What would the coverage be like in 2014 vs. even the Gulf Wars. Things are real time know.

Click to expand...

Operation unicorn? Listen, my plan is realistic, original, and highly likely to succeed. I'm going to call it Operation Barbarossa, which I just thought up and sounds cool.

Click to expand...

shader said:

timschochet said:

msommer said:

timschochet said:

SaintsInDome2006 said:

timschochet said:

Going to be a lot of angry speeches over the next few days. But I still don't think it will escalate beyond that. As always, though, Putin worries me...

Click to expand...

Not militarily, that's true. But there will be increased sanctions and just wait for the international investigation to get total access to the plane, the missile and the black boxes.

Click to expand...

Donyou think we should do what Dr. Detroit suggested? Offer to sell the EU enough natural gas to allow them to stop buying from Russia? I know that would be great for our economy and it MIGHT force Russia to back off, but it also might be seen by Putin as an act of aggression.

Click to expand...

The companies with LNG carrying vessels will have a field day if that's the case. The European gas consumption would add 50% to the existing international market. Are there sufficient port facilities and LNG trains to handle that? That would be doubtful.Just to consider the scale here - EU imported 161 billion cubic meters of gas in 2013 from Russia. With a conversion factor of 609 that still leaves 264 million cubic meters to be transported. The largest ship size in operation (Q-max for Qatar max - Qatar being the largest exporter of LNG in the world) takes 266 thousand cubic meters per trip or about one thousand departures. it takes about two weeks to sail from the Gulf to Europe, so each ship can do about 12 trips. Consequently you need 80 ships dedicated to this alone. There are 14 such ships in existence today and they are busy sailing with Qatar's LNG already.

With the current glut in orders you might get the first vessel in 2017 or 2018. the price of one vessel is to the tune of usd 200m

Click to expand...

So you're saying that even if we wanted to do this, it's not really feasible?

Click to expand...

It will take a long time and be more expensive. Natural has isn't easy to transport over the ocean using ships, as his post perfectly highlighted. It's much, much easier to use a pipeline.

Putin has a stranglehold on Europe for the next few years due to this.

Click to expand...

msommer said:

timschochet said:

msommer said:

timschochet said:

SaintsInDome2006 said:

timschochet said:

Going to be a lot of angry speeches over the next few days. But I still don't think it will escalate beyond that. As always, though, Putin worries me...

Click to expand...

Not militarily, that's true. But there will be increased sanctions and just wait for the international investigation to get total access to the plane, the missile and the black boxes.

Click to expand...

Donyou think we should do what Dr. Detroit suggested? Offer to sell the EU enough natural gas to allow them to stop buying from Russia? I know that would be great for our economy and it MIGHT force Russia to back off, but it also might be seen by Putin as an act of aggression.

Click to expand...

The companies with LNG carrying vessels will have a field day if that's the case. The European gas consumption would add 50% to the existing international market. Are there sufficient port facilities and LNG trains to handle that? That would be doubtful.Just to consider the scale here - EU imported 161 billion cubic meters of gas in 2013 from Russia. With a conversion factor of 609 that still leaves 264 million cubic meters to be transported. The largest ship size in operation (Q-max for Qatar max - Qatar being the largest exporter of LNG in the world) takes 266 thousand cubic meters per trip or about one thousand departures. it takes about two weeks to sail from the Gulf to Europe, so each ship can do about 12 trips. Consequently you need 80 ships dedicated to this alone. There are 14 such ships in existence today and they are busy sailing with Qatar's LNG already.

With the current glut in orders you might get the first vessel in 2017 or 2018. the price of one vessel is to the tune of usd 200m

Click to expand...

So you're saying that even if we wanted to do this, it's not really feasible?

Click to expand...

Over time it would be, but not any time soon. To build a LNG train also takes time and costs a bundle. There are some under construction in the US for when the export restrictions are removed permanently (expected 2019) but not to this level. I was looking at a project in Mozambique about six months ago in another context and they are expected to start construction this year (don't know if they did) and be ready for export in 2019. IIRC some pretty big European companies involved and the size of the plant itself would be second only to Qatar's.

So it would be a massive undertaking. At the same time you would be competing against a lower transport cost (from Russia via pipeline), some fairly big investments required in Europe (port facilities, tanks etc.).

That aside, I am sure that the US will enter the European gas market as a big player, the more Putin behaves like a nutter, the more certain that becomes. But taking it all I would doubt. The price of gas vs. coal, vs. renewables, focus on climate change etc. also plays a big role as to the scale to which Europe will buy gas in the future from anyone.

Click to expand...

Doctor Detroit said:

msommer said:

timschochet said:

msommer said:

timschochet said:

SaintsInDome2006 said:

timschochet said:

Going to be a lot of angry speeches over the next few days. But I still don't think it will escalate beyond that. As always, though, Putin worries me...

Click to expand...

Not militarily, that's true. But there will be increased sanctions and just wait for the international investigation to get total access to the plane, the missile and the black boxes.

Click to expand...

Donyou think we should do what Dr. Detroit suggested? Offer to sell the EU enough natural gas to allow them to stop buying from Russia? I know that would be great for our economy and it MIGHT force Russia to back off, but it also might be seen by Putin as an act of aggression.

Click to expand...

The companies with LNG carrying vessels will have a field day if that's the case. The European gas consumption would add 50% to the existing international market. Are there sufficient port facilities and LNG trains to handle that? That would be doubtful.Just to consider the scale here - EU imported 161 billion cubic meters of gas in 2013 from Russia. With a conversion factor of 609 that still leaves 264 million cubic meters to be transported. The largest ship size in operation (Q-max for Qatar max - Qatar being the largest exporter of LNG in the world) takes 266 thousand cubic meters per trip or about one thousand departures. it takes about two weeks to sail from the Gulf to Europe, so each ship can do about 12 trips. Consequently you need 80 ships dedicated to this alone. There are 14 such ships in existence today and they are busy sailing with Qatar's LNG already.

With the current glut in orders you might get the first vessel in 2017 or 2018. the price of one vessel is to the tune of usd 200m

Click to expand...

So you're saying that even if we wanted to do this, it's not really feasible?

Click to expand...

Over time it would be, but not any time soon. To build a LNG train also takes time and costs a bundle. There are some under construction in the US for when the export restrictions are removed permanently (expected 2019) but not to this level. I was looking at a project in Mozambique about six months ago in another context and they are expected to start construction this year (don't know if they did) and be ready for export in 2019. IIRC some pretty big European companies involved and the size of the plant itself would be second only to Qatar's.

So it would be a massive undertaking. At the same time you would be competing against a lower transport cost (from Russia via pipeline), some fairly big investments required in Europe (port facilities, tanks etc.).

That aside, I am sure that the US will enter the European gas market as a big player, the more Putin behaves like a nutter, the more certain that becomes. But taking it all I would doubt. The price of gas vs. coal, vs. renewables, focus on climate change etc. also plays a big role as to the scale to which Europe will buy gas in the future from anyone.

Click to expand...

Interesting stuff, thanks. Like I said, transportation is the issue but I didn't know it was this involved.

Do they get a lot of their NG from Qatar now? What about the fields in Turkmenistan via Azerbijan? I know Europe had a goal of reducing their dependence on Russian natural gas and crude some years ago, but not 100% sure of the progress. The northern Europeans have the Norwegian lines, I guess the south had plans to get more of theirs from Libya but the instability has led to that being an obvious problem. With these other sources and possible U.S. expansion into the market, how long before EU nations in particular can be Russia free?

I know with crude this is all a little easier but again this is also problematic with Iran, LIbya and recently Iraq being players in the market. Seems like Russia, especially in crude, is using conflict to gain shares in the market. Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Steve Tasker said:

Sinn Fein said:

Doctor Detroit said:

Eminence said:

Who are the bad guys? Russia?

Click to expand...

Carnies

Click to expand...

And, Gypsies

Click to expand...

The US military's new battle hymn: link

Click to expand...

TwinTurbo said:

It would require some extensive training to operate a Buk missile system and actually be able to shoot down a commercial plane even by accident. It takes a team of operators and multiple vehicles to run it. How does a group of mouth breathing separatists learn how to use this type of complex weapons system, much less get their hands on it, without significant assistance from Russia?

Click to expand...

Pentagon: Russia helped deploy missile that hit planeWASHINGTON — The Pentagon said Friday it is unlikely that pro-Russian separatists in east Ukraine could obtain or operate the sophisticated missile system allegedly used to shoot down the Malaysia Airlines plane without Russian help.

"It strains credulity to think that they could do this without some measure of Russian support and assistance," Rear Adm. John Kirby, the Pentagon press secretary, said Friday. "It is a sophisticated system."

The Pentagon says there is strong evidence the missile, a SA-11, was fired by Russian-backed separatists since the missile was fired from an area controlled by rebels.

The international outrage generated by the tragedy is placing additional pressure on Russian President Vladimir Putin to back off support for the rebels.

"Time and again, Russia has refused to take the concrete steps necessary to de-escalate the situation," Obama said Friday.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel lashed out at Russia in unusually blunt language on Friday. "The Russians have been instigating this trouble in Eastern Ukraine," he said in an interview on Bloomberg Television's Political Capital with Al Hunt. "The Russians continue to isolate themselves in the world. ...This is a very serious international incident. And the Russians are going to have to take some responsibility."

Kirby said it is not clear whether the rebels thought they were targeting a Ukrainian military aircraft. A Ukrainian fighter and cargo aircraft were shot down earlier this week.

The Obama administration said preliminary evidence suggests the cargo aircraft was hit by a surface-to-air missile. Ukraine's government says the fighter was shot down by a Russian aircraft.

Kirby said there was no specific intelligence suggesting Russia provided separatists with the SA-11, but he said Russia continues to support separatists with arms, financing and training. The Pentagon said Russia has been supplying rebels with tanks and armored vehicles.

Kirby said Russia has massed between 10,000 to 12,000 troops near the border of Ukraine. "They're growing in size week by week," he said.

Samantha Powers, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, addressed an emergency meeting of the Security Council on Friday, saying the United States could not rule out that Russia provided technical assistance in deploying the system.

Russia's U.N. ambassador, Vitaly Churkin, did not respond to the U.S. allegations, but called for an international commission to investigate the crash, the Associated Press reported.

He asked why Ukraine allowed civilian aircraft to fly over an area where military clashes and airstrikes were taking place, according to the AP. Putin said both sides should put down their arms.

Central to the Obama administration's argument linking Russia to the attack is the type of missile allegedly used by the separatists.

Unlike portable anti-air weapons, which can fit in the trunk of a car and be fired by one person, the SA-11 is a sophisticated Russian-built system that is typically tied into a radar and requires a trained crew to operate.

The Malaysia Airlines flight was cruising at 33,000 feet when it was hit, well beyond the range of a portable weapon system, which can generally reach about 10,000 feet, according to IHS Jane's Defence Weekly.

Typically, the SA-11 is deployed in a system with separate vehicles for a command post, a radar system and missiles in launchers, according to IHS Janes. The missiles could only be operated by a trained crew, the report said.

The Ukrainian Interior Ministry released a video that they said showed a truck with an SA-11, also called a Buk, with one missile missing headed for the Russian border, according to the AP. The video could not be verified.

Click to expand...

TwinTurbo said:

It would require some extensive training to operate a Buk missile system and actually be able to shoot down a commercial plane even by accident. It takes a team of operators and multiple vehicles to run it. How does a group of mouth breathing separatists learn how to use this type of complex weapons system, much less get their hands on it, without significant assistance from Russia?

Click to expand...

Doctor Detroit said:

msommer said:

timschochet said:

msommer said:

timschochet said:

SaintsInDome2006 said:

timschochet said:

Going to be a lot of angry speeches over the next few days. But I still don't think it will escalate beyond that. As always, though, Putin worries me...

Click to expand...

Not militarily, that's true. But there will be increased sanctions and just wait for the international investigation to get total access to the plane, the missile and the black boxes.

Click to expand...

Donyou think we should do what Dr. Detroit suggested? Offer to sell the EU enough natural gas to allow them to stop buying from Russia? I know that would be great for our economy and it MIGHT force Russia to back off, but it also might be seen by Putin as an act of aggression.

Click to expand...

The companies with LNG carrying vessels will have a field day if that's the case. The European gas consumption would add 50% to the existing international market. Are there sufficient port facilities and LNG trains to handle that? That would be doubtful.Just to consider the scale here - EU imported 161 billion cubic meters of gas in 2013 from Russia. With a conversion factor of 609 that still leaves 264 million cubic meters to be transported. The largest ship size in operation (Q-max for Qatar max - Qatar being the largest exporter of LNG in the world) takes 266 thousand cubic meters per trip or about one thousand departures. it takes about two weeks to sail from the Gulf to Europe, so each ship can do about 12 trips. Consequently you need 80 ships dedicated to this alone. There are 14 such ships in existence today and they are busy sailing with Qatar's LNG already.

With the current glut in orders you might get the first vessel in 2017 or 2018. the price of one vessel is to the tune of usd 200m

Click to expand...

So you're saying that even if we wanted to do this, it's not really feasible?

Click to expand...

Over time it would be, but not any time soon. To build a LNG train also takes time and costs a bundle. There are some under construction in the US for when the export restrictions are removed permanently (expected 2019) but not to this level. I was looking at a project in Mozambique about six months ago in another context and they are expected to start construction this year (don't know if they did) and be ready for export in 2019. IIRC some pretty big European companies involved and the size of the plant itself would be second only to Qatar's.

So it would be a massive undertaking. At the same time you would be competing against a lower transport cost (from Russia via pipeline), some fairly big investments required in Europe (port facilities, tanks etc.).

That aside, I am sure that the US will enter the European gas market as a big player, the more Putin behaves like a nutter, the more certain that becomes. But taking it all I would doubt. The price of gas vs. coal, vs. renewables, focus on climate change etc. also plays a big role as to the scale to which Europe will buy gas in the future from anyone.

Click to expand...

Interesting stuff, thanks. Like I said, transportation is the issue but I didn't know it was this involved.

Do they get a lot of their NG from Qatar now? What about the fields in Turkmenistan via Azerbijan? I know Europe had a goal of reducing their dependence on Russian natural gas and crude some years ago, but not 100% sure of the progress. The northern Europeans have the Norwegian lines, I guess the south had plans to get more of theirs from Libya but the instability has led to that being an obvious problem. With these other sources and possible U.S. expansion into the market, how long before EU nations in particular can be Russia free?

I know with crude this is all a little easier but again this is also problematic with Iran, LIbya and recently Iraq being players in the market. Seems like Russia, especially in crude, is using conflict to gain shares in the market. Thoughts?

Click to expand...

jonessed said:

TwinTurbo said:

It would require some extensive training to operate a Buk missile system and actually be able to shoot down a commercial plane even by accident. It takes a team of operators and multiple vehicles to run it. How does a group of mouth breathing separatists learn how to use this type of complex weapons system, much less get their hands on it, without significant assistance from Russia?

Click to expand...

The only question is whether the Russians actually trained a team of separatists to operate it autonomously or there were Russian special forces actively involved in the shooting down. We don't seem to have direct evidence of the latter, but given the sophistication of the system and it's operation it seems to be more likely.

Click to expand...

Koya said:

While it will take some time to filter through, there has to be some uproar in Russia itself within pockets of the population, no? The news can't be so airtight nowadays as to prevent some truth about 300 innocents killed being the likely doing of their nation / leaders.

Click to expand...

the United States never released an apology or acknowledgment of wrongdoing. George H. W. Bush, the vice president of the United States at the time commented on the incident during a presidential campaign function (2 Aug 1988): "I will never apologize for the United States — I don't care what the facts are... I'm not an apologize-for-America kind of guy." Bush used the phrase frequently during the 1988 campaign and promised to "never apologize for the United States" months prior to the July 1988 shootdown and as early as January 1988. Half the legal wrangling as well as the settlement occurred under Clinton, who also refused to apologize for the incident.

Click to expand...

mr roboto said:

Can someone fill me in in why Russia is trending totalitarian/old school co and and control vs. open trade capitalism. Is it because the Western Econ model didn't work? Too much cultural baggage? I know why Russian oligarchs and the military want to revert, but from what I hear the nationalistic ethos is alive and well within the population as well.

Click to expand...

WhatDoIKnow said:

Does it matter who did the shooting, if the shoot down was a mistake? From reading the transcripts of the intercepted communications, it sounds like it was a mistake.

Or do you think they targeted a civilian aircraft?

Click to expand...