Cyprus-Forum.com

[Robin Hood]

They don't need to have Rebels trained to fire a BUK. There were Russian Troops in Ukraine assigned with the rebels and they had BUK Missiles.

There were even Russian Spetznaz deployed in Ukraine, as rebels. They were everywhere. In addition it only takes about 3 to 4 weeks to train someone on a BUK. It isn't rocket science you know! And it isn't that sophisticated either.

In addition, there were no Ukrainian BUKs anywhere near where MH17 was bought down and even the investigation teams couldn't get to the crash site for 3 weeks because it was in Russian Controlled areas of Ukraine and the rebels kept firing their guns onto their vehicles every time they tried. They didn't let them until they went though the debris in an effort to hide evidence of course.

It's not hypothesis at all but fact. The missile was launched in Russian held areas and the aircraft crashed in Russian held areas. Ukraine had nothing to do with oit and absolutely nothing to gain.

In fact, they would have risked worldwide condemnation and a full scale Russian Invasion if they started shooting down airliners thinking they were Antonov's

Right now, Ukraine has widespread international support through the UN, because Russia's actions are of illegitimate annexation of its sovereign territory. So it is Russia that would gain the most not Ukraine.

And no there is NOTHING at all credible that has come out to accuse Ukraine for the downing of MH17. On the contrary, all the official ICAO investigators point the finger squarely at Russia.

What a load of rubbish you spout. I am afraid when they brainwashed you, what brain you do have must have shrunk! Your comments are dictated not by rational analysis or even common sense but an outright hate of Russia. Your boastful and conceited opinions of YOUR military prowess is reflected in your admiration for Trump ..... in fact what you present here is very much like the attitude he presents to the world. Thank goodness the world is now seeing the USA for what it is and are turning their backs on them. They lose friends and allies every day ...... not just by what they do to other countries but what their leader says.

You are just too far up your own rectum to converse with sensibly! But I will disseminate your delusional rubbish later ..... just for fun

[Paphitis]

I am really sorry but it is you spouting utter and complete nonsense. You really are and everyone knows it as well.

it is common knowledge accepted worldwide that Russia had its own troops in Ukraine, and not only that, they also had deployed many BUK Missile units and even their Special Forces Spetznaz were deployed.

The rebels would not have succeeded without such Russian support.

Even Australian, British, American, Malaysian, German and Dutch TSB investigators were fired at by Russian forces as they tried to access the crash site and because of that couldn't do so for over 3 weeks. Their vehicles even had bullet holes. There were even journalists with them from 60 minutes. The poor bastards (nothing more than Government public servants) were risking their lives and had to wear bullet proof vests as Russian snipers were taking pot shots at them, all for a measly public service wage.

You think we are all stupid but we are not.

[Robin Hood]

I am really sorry but it is you spouting utter and complete nonsense. You really are and everyone knows it as well.

it is common knowledge accepted worldwide that Russia had its own troops in Ukraine, and not only that, they also had deployed many BUK Missile units and even their Special Forces Spetznaz were deployed.

The rebels would not have succeeded without such Russian support.

Even Australian, British, American, Malaysian, German and Dutch TSB investigators were fired at by Russian forces as they tried to access the crash site and because of that couldn't do so for over 3 weeks. Their vehicles even had bullet holes. There were even journalists with them from 60 minutes. The poor bastards (nothing more than Government public servants) were risking their lives and had to wear bullet proof vests as Russian snipers were taking pot shots at them, all for a measly public service wage.

You think we are all stupid but we are not.

Repeating the same story over again does not make it any more believable! And don't automatically assume you have the authority to speak for the opinions of others.

[Robin Hood]

I said I would respond .... really just for something to do as I have run out of films/documentaries to watch ..........
Paphitis:

They don't need to have Rebels trained to fire a BUK. There were Russian Troops in Ukraine assigned with the rebels and they had BUK Missiles

.
Are you referring to the Ukraine reports? The ones that claimed there were columns of Russian tanks, APC’s, artillery and thousands of Russian troops pouring into Eastern Ukraine. It turned out to be 10 Russians Paratroopers on exercise, in a military vehicle that crossed the border by accident. The border between the two states is as open as the one between England and Scotland!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... order.html

Any other search on this subject shows these wild accusations are frequently made by Ukraine, inevitably never come to anything and turn out to be nothing more than fabrication.

There were even Russian Spetznaz deployed in Ukraine, as rebels. They were everywhere. In addition it only takes about 3 to 4 weeks to train someone on a BUK. It isn't rocket science you know! And it isn't that sophisticated either.

It only takes 2-3 days to train a person to fly an aeroplane ........ so that’s not rocket science either!

I expect they do have special forces there ......... just like YOU have special forces and 14 military bases inside Syria (equally illegal).

The difference between Ukraine and Syria is; the Russians share a border with Ukraine; many Russians have relatives in Ukraine; they speak the same language and practice the same religion and the Russians do not use their air power to support the rebels by softening up the government forces that oppose them. The rebels are also referred to as ‘ pro-Russian’ as opposed to ‘anti-Regime’.

In Syria ........ your rebels are predominantly foreigners; YOUR special forces are from countries thousands of miles away; YOU don’t speak their language or practice their religion, although maybe many of you are related to these foreign insurgents? But these rebels are called ’anti-Regime’. Note the play on words to condemn one lot of rebels as being ‘pro’ YOUR enemy, although their cause has some legitimacy, as opposed to describing your client terrorists as fighters against a wicked‘Regime’ but who arereally acting as a US Proxy Army and pushing the US agenda for regime change.

In addition, there were no Ukrainian BUKs anywhere near where MH17 was bought down.

Think about that! Because they did and there are satellite photos that show the BUKs, loading module and command module, and their Ukraine army attired crews, at the time of the incident. The rebels even captured a BUK transporter with its load, at one time, so the Ukraine's had them within easy reach of the rebels. So, why did the Ukraine's need BUK’s designed to take down aircraft at high altitudes ..... when their enemy does not even have an air force? Strange that ......... or maybe they had them to shoot down high flying Russian aircraft ........ after all they have done that before .......but they were just incompetent and hit MH17 instead?

Try reading this article from an Australian news outlet and then analyse what you are expected to believe from the headline, to what it ACTUALLY says. The two do not line up! And THIS is how you form your opinions and reach your conclusions. It is littered with statements like these:

“......While admitting the images do not definitively prove Russia was behind the disaster ......” , “.....Many speculated it had originated from an anti-aircraft missile brigade based in Russia.” , ”.... which appeared to place the BUK system in question near separatist-controlled Donetsk .......”, “....This aligns with the body of existing circumstantial evidence.....” etc.etc. Hardly what you would call irrefutable evidence, is it?

http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/incidents/mh17-the-satellite-images-russia-doesnt-want-us-to-see/news-story/8c03f8e87971d36f70b5402ffbda16ff

Read it ..... there is not a single piece of evidence to support what you say. In fact, it is what the article fails to point out that blows your theory apart ....... WHERE IS THE COMMAND MODULE and its RADAR Unit ???

The drawings show a missile exploding a metre above MH17. I have no problem with that ...... but how in hells name do they manage that accuracy WITHOUT the means to programme in all the RADAR data of the target like, altitude, speed, heading? Without that you stand absolutely no chance of getting within thousands of feet of the target. Now explain that one away.

The BUK onboard guidance system apparently only controls the missile when it is within a few hundred metres of its target. The only conclusion I can reach is that this was not the missile unit that was used to bring down MH17. Even taking into account Bellingcat's staged version of the fact, can you argue otherwise?

The investigation teams couldn't get to the crash site for 3 weeks because it was in Russian Controlled areas of Ukraine and the rebels kept firing their guns onto their vehicles every time they tried. They didn't let them until they went though the debris in an effort to hide evidence of course.

Inspectors actually arrived within a few days and later thanked the rebels for doing what they had. They recovered bodies and body parts; took them 9km to a railroad yard where they arranged for refrigerated storage; they also recovered personal items; they marked the site with cross reference tags to locate all removed items.

The inspectors had to quit the site when it came under attack from the Ukraine military ..... not as you suggest, the rebels. What you are quoting is wild stories which showed a rebel collecting belongings that the journalist then assumed he was stealing. Later proved to be another piece of FAKE NEWS! I repeat, yet again, there are not and have never been Russian controlled areas of Ukraine!

It's not hypothesis at all but fact. The missile was launched in Russian held areas and the aircraft crashed in Russian held areas. Ukraine had nothing to do with it and absolutely nothing to gain.

It was launched from Ukraine ..... there were no ‘Russian held’ areas! If Ukraine had nothing to gain ..... then explain what gain there would have been for Russia? You explain admirably exactly what Ukraine had to gain ..... blame it on the rebels and thus demonise the Russians. What happened to all the Ukraine and US irrefutable evidence? Don’t you find it strange all this is missing from the equation. If they had the evidence they would have produced it ......... but they have to hide the evidence they have because it does not bear out their accusations against either the rebels or Russia
.

In fact, they would have risked worldwide condemnation and a full scale Russian Invasion if they started shooting down airliners thinking they were Antonov's

You mean a blame game, like they are trying to do with Russia ..... and I might add without a shred of credible evidence. The rebels did not have the equipment to use the BUK, it would have been a line-of-sight aim at a distant vapour trail .......... so far you have failed to explain that anomaly away.

Ukraine is now another one of the US created failed States, nobody, even the Americans have no time for them, they are now just useful idiots! What the hell has Russia’s so called ‘illegal’ annexation of Crimea got to do with MH17? How would bringing down a civilian airliner improve their case ........ when it would be obvious to a blind imbecile that they would get caught. Try and apply common sense to your arguments.

And no there is NOTHING at all credible that has come out to accuse Ukraine for the downing of MH17. On the contrary, all the official ICAO investigators point the finger squarely at Russia

Likewise with your ‘Russia/Pootin did it’ rhetoric. But looked at from the legal precedent of means/motive/opportunity ...... the highest degree of probability says it was the Ukraine Army, most likely by accident as they thought it was Putin’s flight returning from Mexico. They are the ONLY ones who had both the MEANS (A complete BUK missile Unit) and MOTIVE ..........maybe an attempt to kill Putin? But Ukraine’s ‘means’ gets the rebels and the Russians off-the-hook ..... in my book, as neither had the ‘means’ and only Ukraine operates the model of BUK missile identified in the Dutch report.

But of course ..... the Dutch report does not make the ‘Russia-did-it’ accusations that you do! As I told you before their brief was to find out WHAT not WHO, and I have no reason to believe their report is anything other than accurate based on the evidence they have reviewed! Even the Russians acknowledge that! But is the evidence (Bellingcat?) credible .... and do they have all the evidence, like the missing Ukraine/US irrefutable evidence? I doubt it very much!

[Paphitis]

No I am not referring to anything other than the Dutch reports and the fact that the International Investigation Team were staying in Rusian Held Areas such as Donetsk to access the crash site, which they were not able to do because they were continuously shot at by Russian Forces and their rebels.

Also for the fact that there were no Ukrainian Forces for a few hundred kilometers. The entire area was controlled by Russia right up to their border and there were Russian Forces everywhere. Not just a few hundred, but many thousands of Russian troops with the Rebels.

There were no Ukrainian troops at all in that area let alone any BUK.

This was an International Team that was involved as per the ICAO Rules. An International Team comprising Dutch, British, Australian, Malaysian, and German crash investigators. Ukrainian investigators were suppose to be there because it is their country but we told them not to go, plus they would probably endanger the lives of the entire team because the Russians would not have liked it and probably would have tried to kill them. It was Russian held territory.

[Pyrpolizer]

No I am not referring to anything other than the Dutch reports and the fact that the International Investigation Team were staying in Rusian Held Areas such as Donetsk to access the crash site, which they were not able to do because they were continuously shot at by Russian Forces and their rebels.

Also for the fact that there were no Ukrainian Forces for a few hundred kilometers. The entire area was controlled by Russia right up to their border and there were Russian Forces everywhere. Not just a few hundred, but many thousands of Russian troops with the Rebels.

There were no Ukrainian troops at all in that area let alone any BUK.

This was an International Team that was involved as per the ICAO Rules. An International Team comprising Dutch, British, Australian, Malaysian, and German crash investigators. Ukrainian investigators were suppose to be there because it is their country but we told them not to go, plus they would probably endanger the lives of the entire team because the Russians would not have liked it and probably would have tried to kill them. It was Russian held territory.

Next thing you are going to tell us is that you were there too Genius!

[Paphitis]

No I am not referring to anything other than the Dutch reports and the fact that the International Investigation Team were staying in Rusian Held Areas such as Donetsk to access the crash site, which they were not able to do because they were continuously shot at by Russian Forces and their rebels.

Also for the fact that there were no Ukrainian Forces for a few hundred kilometers. The entire area was controlled by Russia right up to their border and there were Russian Forces everywhere. Not just a few hundred, but many thousands of Russian troops with the Rebels.

There were no Ukrainian troops at all in that area let alone any BUK.

This was an International Team that was involved as per the ICAO Rules. An International Team comprising Dutch, British, Australian, Malaysian, and German crash investigators. Ukrainian investigators were suppose to be there because it is their country but we told them not to go, plus they would probably endanger the lives of the entire team because the Russians would not have liked it and probably would have tried to kill them. It was Russian held territory.

Next thing you are going to tell us is that you were there too Genius!

What are you talking about boofhead who seems to think the Brits are our enemy! When are you going to leave the 1950s and be in the 21st century let alone the year 2018? Always looking back you are in the most futile of exercises whereas if you had half a brain you would be thinking about today, tomorrow and the future!

It isn’t very bright to foster feelings of mistrust with Britain, or even any animosity. If there is, and it continues to this day, then our politicians have failed us because it is this they should have ended a long time ago and actually make sure we are best of friends. Britain is a partner.

Ukraine was suppose to Head the investigation because the crash occurred in their dejure jurisdiction. The other countries told them to not even be involved in the investigation so as to not provoke the Russians further. As a result Holland was appointed as the lead investigator since MH17 departed Holland. They were second in line. USA was involved because the aircraft involved was a Boeing. Germany, Britain, Australia were involved because they lost the most people. Any country that loses people has a right to be involved. If a Cypriot citizen was on board, then Cyprus could as an ICAO signatory be involved in the investigation.

Ukraine was not in control of the areas the incident occurred in but have legal responsibility under international law.

The Ukraine Government has every right to insist they lead the investigation but did not do so because the other partners didn’t think that would be such a great idea.

[Paphitis]

No I am not referring to anything other than the Dutch reports and the fact that the International Investigation Team were staying in Rusian Held Areas such as Donetsk to access the crash site, which they were not able to do because they were continuously shot at by Russian Forces and their rebels.

Also for the fact that there were no Ukrainian Forces for a few hundred kilometers. The entire area was controlled by Russia right up to their border and there were Russian Forces everywhere. Not just a few hundred, but many thousands of Russian troops with the Rebels.

There were no Ukrainian troops at all in that area let alone any BUK.

This was an International Team that was involved as per the ICAO Rules. An International Team comprising Dutch, British, Australian, Malaysian, and German crash investigators. Ukrainian investigators were suppose to be there because it is their country but we told them not to go, plus they would probably endanger the lives of the entire team because the Russians would not have liked it and probably would have tried to kill them. It was Russian held territory.

Next thing you are going to tell us is that you were there too Genius!

And use your friggin brain mate.

The ‘we’ is because we are all involved internationally when a country is illegally invaded and annexed by a froreign power.

For your information, it was Cyprus that commenced UN GA proceedings against Russia for the illegal annexation of Ukrainian territory. Something that was noted by the powers I am sure, both Pootin and USA.

Cyprus was up to its eyeballs and it took a lot of courage I am sure to make such a political point in condemning Russia. In the end, over 100 countries condemned the Russians. That’s because they violated international law.

Did you know this? Or do you subscribe to the Kafeneio rubbish about Mother Russia and that our Orthodox brothers are just too holy and the Americans too evil? Our politicians, for all their flaws, are not as stupid as you to abstain on a UN GA vote involving the annexation of a UN State’s sovereign territory.

And for all the flaws of the USA, when was it in history when they actually invaded, occupied and annexed a foreign country or part of their territory? Never? Britain did but USA for all the military might they possess have not till this day.

[Robin Hood]

Paphitis:

And use your friggin brain mate.

That’s rich coming from you!

The ‘we’ is because we are all involved internationally when a country is illegally invaded and annexed by a froreign power.

For your information, it was Cyprus that commenced UN GA proceedings against Russia for the illegal annexation of Ukrainian territory. Something that was noted by the powers I am sure, both Pootin and USA.

Cyprus was up to its eyeballs and it took a lot of courage I am sure to make such a political point in condemning Russia. In the end, over 100 countries condemned the Russians. That’s because they violated international law.

Did you know this? Or do you subscribe to the Kafeneio rubbish about Mother Russia and that our Orthodox brothers are just too holy and the Americans too evil? Our politicians, for all their flaws, are not as stupid as you to abstain on a UN GA vote involving the annexation of a UN State’s sovereign territory.

But in YOUR book it doesn’t apply to Israel ? (Golan, Palestinian lands) or The Kurds in Eastern Syria? It only applies to Russia even though, unlike the previous examples, Crimea was not taken by an act of war, it was voted on by the people that live there and they exercised their right to self determination. (That entitlement is enshrined in the UN Charter I believe?) If you go back in history a very large part of the US is territories it illegally annexed from other countries, in fact the US itself was annexed by American settlers from the British!

And for all the flaws of the USA, when was it in history when they actually invaded, occupied and annexed a foreign country or part of their territory? Never? Britain did but USA for all the military might they possess have not till this day.

For someone who believes he is a military genius, I am surprised you have yet come to realise that mass military invasions of a country are now a thing of the past. Simple reason ..... far too costly in men and materials and that, once conquered , the conqueror is continually at war with the people they have dispossessed. Again far too costly! The US learnt the lesson in Vietnam and the remedy from the British in Cyprus.

They saw what the British did in Cyprus and took it to a whole new level .......... let the people govern themselves and you control their Government. Brilliant solution, you get what you want .... in Cyprus' case the Sovereign Bases ....... and they get to run their own country, provided they toe the line. If they don’t then they get a repeat of Cyprus 1974 when one of the US's local allies are used to punish them for not doing what the US wants them to do. Didn't the Aussies do the same in East Timor at the behest of the US? A massive death toll and years of murder, rape and destruction!

It is the sole reason for regime change ...... you put in a sometimes brutal regime you can manipulate that will control the people. Buy off the loyalty of your selected dictator and his cronies, and then strip the resources or exploit a strategic value, which is the end game for any invasion. Simple really, I am surprised someone as intelligent as you hasn’t worked it out yet!

So with its 800+ military bases across some 100+ countries , the US in effect controls a very large part of the Planet ..... well for the time being but their time is running out, hence all the threats against countries that have yet to become victims of US Regime change and/or are displaying signs of resistance. The first step is US unilateral declaration of sanctions, in itself an act of war. Now, where do we see this being applied, certainly not to Israel ? You tell me.

[Paphitis]

Oh sowflakes you are very pathetic.

The Vietnam War was not an American Invasion. It was a Viet Cong invasion of South Vietnam and the French, Americans and Australians were invited by the South Vietnamese Government. There was never any intention to occupy Vietnam but defend the South from being overwhelmed by the Communist North.

Secondly, the law applies for Israel equally. But there is not much that can be done because there is no one to negotiate with who is willing to accept the dejure existance of Israel. In addition, they are not prepared to do any negotiating with Hesbollah or Hamas. That is an anathema to all our principles.

Furthermore, the US had so many opportunities to invade and occupy and even annex up to a certain point provided it was in its own strategic sphere of influence. I say to certain point because if they did this to Hungary or Poland, they would have probably triggered WW3 and a Nuclear Catastrophe.

The USA would just swipe the EEZ of other nations and just steal its resources. It didn’t.

And literally how expensive is it? It isn’t that expensive occupying a country when you probably steal all the resources? Not anymore expensive that the Iraq Wars or Afghanistan. So what are you suggesting? That the USA influences some countries? Well why wouldn’t it? It did but that was decades ago when they will install their own puppets with a Coup and it isn’t any different to what the Soviet Union did which was on a far larger scale than the USA. These days they prefer sending aid, and establishing close ties and they have been good at establishing and cementing great relations with most countries.

The USA does not have 800 bases in other countries. There aren’t even that many bases in the USA. We have US bases willingly. We invited them. We want them. We do not want to see them go. We are partners and allies. We have treaties. We were not forced by them. It was 100% voluntary! The relationship is symbiotic.

And yes, Israel can keep Golan Heights UFN. Hezbollah is in charge in Syria and therefore we are at war with them.

What is very apparent to us, is the fact that other countries will not be as willing as the US to at least make an effort in respecting the sovereignty of smaller Stares. The USA was the most proactive in defending the rights of smaller nations achieve self determination throughout the 60s, 70s and 80s. For instance, China is literally stealing the EEZ of all its neighbors. Russia is annexing other lands. This is only the beginning. China with its 1.6 billion people will have to invade and overwhelm others one day if it can get away with it. For now, they fear the Americans. The Japanese are very frightened by the Chinese. There is a lot of animosity. The Japanese did invade China once and they were friggin brutal. The Chinese have not forgotten that.

The Japanese were also brutal with us, but we have short memories or are more willing to move on from that as is generally the case with everything. We just don't seem to hold a grudge very well like the Chinese do.