• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pictures show pro-Russian seperatists moving missles away from MH 17 crash site.

brothern said:
There wasn't? ... I'm young. The Iranian 655 accident happened before I was. As far I know, that event and the US' refusal to apologize, or even acknowledge our wrongdoing colored Iranian-American relations for years.
Click to expand...

Did you read the link I posted in the thread Maggie started about this very incident? Not only did we apologize, but we paid millions of dollars to the families of the dead. I understand you weren't around when it happened, which is an even larger reason to read about the facts and not make unfounded statements.
 
apdst said:
I guess that's why the Russians were monitored talking about splashing flight 17.

Stop with the, "blame America", bull****.
Click to expand...

Soon they'll be blaming George Bush. They're relentless.
 
Montecresto said:
Who's translating that into English?

And since we agree that they weren't targeting civilians, the supposedly deleted tweet names the military model plane that was hit, then its an accident and we don't need to start a war with them.
Click to expand...

Interesting that now you want to know where the information comes from, as it doesn't agree with your viewpoint. However, you're completely ready to accept you-tube videos posted anonymously online. The tweet is there, if you don't believe that it's right, find someone who knows the language and they'll tell you just the same.

With everything aside though, I'm not in favor for going to war either. If anything, I really blame the Malaysians for thinking it was a good idea to fly over that war-zone when everyone knew that the rebels had been shooting down planes. If we do become more committed to the region (whether that is with military aid or intelligence or beefing up our forces in eastern Europe), it's not really because they shot down the airplane so much as the confirmation that they are receiving support from the Russians. And if Russia is going to get involved within a civil war, and their neck deep into it to be sure, then we have to supply support to counter their ambitions in Ukraine. Honestly, I wish everyone would just stay out of it, but that's not the world we live in.
 
Hamster Buddha said:
Interesting that now you want to know where the information comes from, as it doesn't agree with your viewpoint. However, you're completely ready to accept you-tube videos posted anonymously online. The tweet is there, if you don't believe that it's right, find someone who knows the language and they'll tell you just the same.

With everything aside though, I'm not in favor for going to war either. If anything, I really blame the Malaysians for thinking it was a good idea to fly over that war-zone when everyone knew that the rebels had been shooting down planes. If we do become more committed to the region (whether that is with military aid or intelligence or beefing up our forces in eastern Europe), it's not really because they shot down the airplane so much as the confirmation that they are receiving support from the Russians. And if Russia is going to get involved within a civil war, and their neck deep into it to be sure, then we have to supply support to counter their ambitions in Ukraine. Honestly, I wish everyone would just stay out of it, but that's not the world we live in.
Click to expand...

Why is it interesting that I want to know your source? You like the english version so confirmation isn't necessary for you. Not sure what video you speak of. What could you mean, the shooting down of this plane is confirmation that Russia is supporting Russian separatists? You didn't know this all along, have you ever listened to the Russian foreign minister all these months? You can't just listen to US propaganda you know, you will be ill informed. Of course Russia has chosen a side in this conflict, much as the US has chosen sides in dozens of conflicts ever since the infancy of our imperialism.
 
Last edited:
What advantage could Russia or the rebels possibly have gained by shooting down an airliner?
 
apdst said:
There are people that still think 9/11 was an inside job, too.
Click to expand...

Some people, and the number is growing, KNOW that it was an inside job.

There are people who still believe the very tall tale told by the MSM and the government, 13 years later. But, people believed the earth was the center of the universe for hundreds of years, so that puts things into perspective. ;)
 
Montecresto said:
When the US accidentally shot down an Iranian airliner, there was little reaction or fallout, so IF the separatists shot this plane down, there should be the same response. I'm suggesting Ukraine has the motive and the means to have done this, that's all I'm saying, I'm not making the accusation.
Click to expand...

Uh ... I'm not sure you understand how nation states work.

Being a citizen of a nation state is like being a made man in an organized crime syndicate. The backing of that organization and its resources makes you untouchable among other criminals who would otherwise be inclined to stab you in the back or take you for a mark. Similarly, if the nation doesn't back you up, then everyone (enemies, dependants, allies) loses belief in its power and its stops being able to exert influence on world affairs because nobody takes them seriously when they claim they will be able to make things happen. The less able the United States or European Union are able to retaliate for this action, the less *everyone* believes in them.

One of the disadvantages of being a rogue or a weak state is that when bad things happen to you, you don't have the diplomatic, military, and economic connections -- "the muscle" -- to make things worse for the person who wronged you.
 
Last edited:
Henry David said:
What advantage could Russia or the rebels possibly have gained by shooting down an airliner?
Click to expand...

That's been the point I've been making all along. It's only effect is damaging and global condemnation as were seeing plenty of now, long before all the hearsay, rumour, disinformation, truths, half truths and lies have been sifted through. And before an investigation has even begun, let alone been completed. But then none of that matters when your in the business of fixing the intelligence around the policy.
 
apdst said:
There are people that still think 9/11 was an inside job, too.
Click to expand...

Well of course there is, just like there are actually people that still think that Bush was a good president, and there should only be vanilla ice cream. There's still people that think black people are not equal to a whole person.
 
Morality Games said:
Uh ... I'm not sure you understand how nation states work.

Being a citizen of a nation state is like being a made man in an organized crime syndicate. The backing of that organization and its resources makes you untouchable among other criminals who would otherwise be inclined to stab you in the back or take you for a mark. Similarly, if the nation doesn't back you up, then everyone (enemies, dependants, allies) loses belief in its power and its stops being able to exert influence on world affairs because nobody takes them seriously when they claim they will be able to make things happen. The less able the United States or European Union are able to retaliate for this action, the less *everyone* believes in them.

One of the disadvantages of being a rogue or a weak state is that when bad things happen to you, you don't have the diplomatic, military, and economic connections -- "the muscle" -- to make things worse for the person who wronged you.
Click to expand...

Why in the hell would the US or the EU "NEED" to retaliate for this action. The Ukraine isn't part of either of them and its far from confirmed exactly what and who brought this plane down. Less than a year ago, a fraction of the Ukrainian population showed up in the capital, and with a little Western support, toppled the Ukrainian government chasing the president out of the country under fire and seized control. That not pleasing ALL the citizens of the country, we now see a portion standing up for their self determination as well, and they are receiving the backing and support of the Russians, much like militant Islamic groups in Syria are receiving US support to help in their effort to overthrow president Assad, such is our lust to recognise a decades old goal of Syrian "regime change".
 
Montecresto said:
Why in the hell would the US or the EU "NEED" to retaliate for this action. The Ukraine isn't part of either of them and its far from confirmed exactly what and who brought this plane down. Less than a year ago, a fraction of the Ukrainian population showed up in the capital, and with a little Western support, toppled the Ukrainian government chasing the president out of the country under fire and seized control. That not pleasing ALL the citizens of the country, we now see a portion standing up for their self determination as well, and they are receiving the backing and support of the Russians, much like militant Islamic groups in Syria are receiving US support to help in their effort to overthrow president Assad, such is our lust to recognise a decades old goal of Syrian "regime change".
Click to expand...

... lots of dead European Union citizens? We are talking about a shot down plane, here. Again, I'm not sure you understand how nation states work. The reason why Putin is taking a hard line against Russian responsibility and is staring down foreign critics trying to make him responsible is because he thinks that strategy is going to make them back down because they are afraid of damaging their diplomatic and economic ties with Russia. Aka, staring Europeans down do good things for Russia, more than taking responsibility for financing rebels. On the flip side, if European governments don't hold him or the rebels responsible, then that means European governments can protect or avenge their body politics from harm. Aka, voting populations shouldn't believe in them or feel safe.

Nation states exist primarily to make good things happen for themselves in anyway they can no matter how petty or irresponsible, not uphold universal human goods or to pursue universal justice. Again, crime syndicates. Crime syndicates that don't stand up for themselves get rubbed out.
 
Last edited:
Morality Games said:
... lots of dead European Union citizens? Again, I'm not sure you understand how nation states work. The reason why Putin is taking a hard line against Russian responsibility and is daring Europeans to try to make him responsible is because he thinks that strategy is going to make them back down. Aka, is good for Russia. If European governments doesn't hold him or the rebels responsible, then that means European governments can protect or avenge their body politics. Aka, voting populations shouldn't believe in them or feel safe.

Nation states exist primarily to make good things happen for themselves in anyway they can no matter how petty or irresponsible, not uphold universal human goods or to pursue universal justice. Again, crime syndicates.
Click to expand...

Your argument is baseless and premature. Who and what caused this plane to crash has not been confirmed. And what's your schtick on nation states.
 
Montecresto said:
Your argument is baseless and premature. Who and what caused this plane to crash has not been confirmed. And what's your schtick on nation states.
Click to expand...

You start talking about how there "should be" no "fallout" or "reaction" to this event because, when the United States shot an Iranian airliner out of the sky, there was no fallout or reaction.

My "sthick" on nation-states was to explain that that had nothing to do with morality or justice, but the realities of power. "Should be" doesn't factor much into the equation when Iran doesn't have the power to make "should be" into "will be".

As for being "premature", your remarks about 'fallout' implied working acceptance over the notion that the Russian-backed rebels shot down the plane.
 
Morality Games said:
You start talking about how there "should be" no "fallout" or "reaction" to this event because, when the United States shot an Iranian airliner out of the sky, there was no fallout or reaction.

My "sthick" on nation-states was to explain that that had nothing to do with morality or justice, but the realities of power. "Should be" doesn't factor much into the equation when Iran doesn't have the power to make "should be" into "will be".

As for being "premature", your remarks about 'fallout' implied working acceptance over the notion that the Russian-backed rebels shot down the plane.
Click to expand...

No, my working acceptance is that both Kiev and the separatists had means but only Kiev had motive. Because the separatists have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to gain by targeting a civilian aircraft, and everything to loose. So at this early date, prudence doesn't allow casting of blame.
 
Montecresto said:
No, my working acceptance is that both Kiev and the separatists had means but only Kiev had motive. Because the separatists have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to gain by targeting a civilian aircraft, and everything to loose. So at this early date, prudence doesn't allow casting of blame.
Click to expand...

Er, but they didn't have the technical skill to reliably differentiate a civilian aircraft from a military one, so your point is moot. Ukraine also has extremely limited operational capability in that region. Then there's eyewitness accounts and photographs and account from the international team that their access to the jet has been impeded by militants.

All the signs of trying to cover up something which by its nature and the nature of technology in the 21st century "can't" be covered up.
 
Morality Games said:
Er, but they didn't have the technical skill to reliably differentiate a civilian aircraft from a military one, so your point is moot. Ukraine also has extremely limited operational capability in that region. Then there's eyewitness accounts and photographs and account from the international team that their access to the jet has been impeded by militants.

All the signs of trying to cover up something which by its nature and the nature of technology in the 21st century "can't" be covered up.
Click to expand...

Who are you saying lacks that skill, the Ukrainian military, or the Russian separatists?
 
Morality Games said:
... lots of dead European Union citizens? We are talking about a shot down plane, here. Again, I'm not sure you understand how nation states work. The reason why Putin is taking a hard line against Russian responsibility and is staring down foreign critics trying to make him responsible is because he thinks that strategy is going to make them back down because they are afraid of damaging their diplomatic and economic ties with Russia. Aka, staring Europeans down do good things for Russia, more than taking responsibility for financing rebels. On the flip side, if European governments don't hold him or the rebels responsible, then that means European governments can protect or avenge their body politics from harm. Aka, voting populations shouldn't believe in them or feel safe.

Nation states exist primarily to make good things happen for themselves in anyway they can no matter how petty or irresponsible, not uphold universal human goods or to pursue universal justice. Again, crime syndicates. Crime syndicates that don't stand up for themselves get rubbed out.
Click to expand...

Nation states are a natural result of a society of human individuals. Men are social creatures.
 
TeleKat said:
Not really.
Click to expand...

In terms of behavior there is no difference between one man and 10?

When one joins a group, one surrenders some measure of individuality. Rules change. Pack mentality is different than individual mentality.

It's great when the crowd happens to conform to one's individual preferences, but it doesn't always happen.
 
Henry David said:
In terms of behavior there is no difference between one man and 10?

When one joins a group, one surrenders some measure of individuality. Rules change. Pack mentality is different than individual mentality.

It's great when the crowd happens to conform to one's individual preferences, but it doesn't always happen.
Click to expand...

Voluntarily joining a group is different than creating a nation state with a violent protection racket holding a monopoly on it. Individuals, even in groups, can be social without creating nation states.
 
I suspect there have been nation states WITHOUT violent protection rackets. Though I've never lived in one.

In a civilized society, the rule of law is supposed to compensate for violent protection rackets, and ideally preclude their existence.

But I'm an idealist. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom