It is unwise as it might take one toward misleading results to investigate a case in a manner that limits the inquiry towards ones first impression.
On the other hand if it looks like a duck if it sounds like a duck if it walks like a duck then just possibly it could be a duck.
Who had the technology? According to their earlier boasts the separatists had BUK anti-aircraft missiles.
Have they used such weapons previously? Yes. Were threats made to protect the Peoples Republics air space by any means? Yes.
Could they have done so in the case of the Malaysian plane? A few minutes after the shot-down the destruction of a plane -alleged to be Ukrainian- was reported by the separatists. The published discussion between leading military personnel -if proven to be authentic- is revealing. The sentence in which the passenger plane is described as a camouflaged vehicle bringing spies suggests authenticity: it is a typical example of Soviet thinking.
An overlooked criterion: Who controls the territory from which the missile had to be fired? Moscows agents.
It would seem that the separatists were clever enough to make use of their weapon but sufficiently unskilled to be unable to investigate their target and to estimate the consequences of their actions. We have local guys -have they rather typically been drinking a bit?- that have acted from a limited local perspective. Even so that set events in motion beyond the reach of their ability to comprehend. Does this sound a bit like Sarajevo 1914?
There will be a temptation to solve the problem by downgrading it. Hiding behind a thin veil of real or artificially created uncertainties will facilitate this. Rest assured that once cumulated the dividends of evasion would be more devastating than the original deed. Why? Because if we can get away with this then we can get away with anything".
It is unwise as it might take one toward misleading results to investigate a case in a manner that limits the inquiry towards ones first impression.
On the other hand if it looks like a duck if it sounds like a duck if it walks like a duck then just possibly it could be a duck.
Who had the technology? According to their earlier boasts the separatists had BUK anti-aircraft missiles.
Have they used such weapons previously? Yes. Were threats made to protect the Peoples Republics air space by any means? Yes.
Could they have done so in the case of the Malaysian plane? A few minutes after the shot-down the destruction of a plane -alleged to be Ukrainian- was reported by the separatists. The published discussion between leading military personnel -if proven to be authentic- is revealing. The sentence in which the passenger plane is described as a camouflaged vehicle bringing spies suggests authenticity: it is a typical example of Soviet thinking.
An overlooked criterion: Who controls the territory from which the missile had to be fired? Moscows agents.
It would seem that the separatists were clever enough to make use of their weapon but sufficiently unskilled to be unable to investigate their target and to estimate the consequences of their actions. We have local guys -have they rather typically been drinking a bit?- that have acted from a limited local perspective. Even so that set events in motion beyond the reach of their ability to comprehend. Does this sound a bit like Sarajevo 1914?
There will be a temptation to solve the problem by downgrading it. Hiding behind a thin veil of real or artificially created uncertainties will facilitate this. Rest assured that once cumulated the dividends of evasion would be more devastating than the original deed. Why? Because if we can get away with this then we can get away with anything".