Patterico's Pontifications

7/17/2014

Open Thread: Malaysian Airlines Passenger Jet Shot Down

Filed under: General — Dana @ 11:14 am

[guest post by Dana]

According to Fox News:

A Malaysia Airlines passenger plane was shot down by a surface-to-air missile in Ukraine near the Russian border, a day after a Ukrainian military jet was downed.

Of course, it’s way too soon to know much for sure, but according to Anton Gerashenko, an adviser to Ukraine’s Interior Minister, all 280 passengers and 15 crew members were killed.

The flight manifest is said to list the names of 23 Americans, however, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki would not confirm, only saying “we don’t have any additional details at this point on American citizens” aboard the plane.

And not surprisingly, accusations and finger-pointing between Russian separatists and the Ukrainian government:

Eastern Ukraine separatist leader Alexander Borodai told Reuters that Ukrainian military forces shot the jet down, but Kiev denied involvement and labeled the incident a “terrorist act.”

–Dana

Update: The president responds:

“Before I begin, obviously the world is watching reports of a downed passenger jet near the Russia-Ukraine border, and it looks like it may be a terrible tragedy,” he said. “Right now, we’re working to determine whether there were American citizens on board — that is our first priority — and I’ve directed my national-security team to stay in close contact with the Ukrainian government.”

“The United States will offer any assistance we can to help determine what happened and why, and as a country, our thoughts and prayers are with all the families of the passengers wherever they call home,” he added, before resuming his speech on increased infrastructure spending.

UPDATE BY PATTERICO: The death toll stands at 298, as there were three infants on board. Almost enough to spoil your burger.

Almost.

Update 2: I’m adding an obligatory video clip and summary of President Obama’s statement made this morning. I notice that he took the time to put on a suit and a wear a face of appropriate seriousness, unlike yesterday. Someone must have had a word with him.

President Obama called on Russian president Vladimir Putin and the Russian government to work with the international community in investigating the downed Malaysian Airlines flight 17. The president also revealed that at least one American citizen died in the disaster, and called all deaths “an outrage of unspeakable proportions.”

“This should snap everybody’s heads to attention,” he said from the White House briefing room on Friday. “We don’t have time for propaganda, we don’t have time for games, we need to know exactly what happened.”

The president called for an “immediate cease-fire” by Russian, Ukrainian, and separatist forces in the region to allow the investigation to take place.

309 Responses to “Open Thread: Malaysian Airlines Passenger Jet Shot Down”

  1. It certainly is too soon to know much, but anyone’s thinking will be influenced by the fact that Russia has a history of shooting down civilian airliners.

    pst314 (ae6bd1)

  2. This is eerie! I just watched Alfred Hitchcook’s Foreign Correspondent.
    At the end, a passenger plane is shot down.

    Prayers offered for the victims and families.

    felipe (960c75)

  3. Yes, indeed, felipe. I was talking with my wife when they began showing some seriously graphic pics of the scene. Some stuff can’t be unseen.

    Colonel Haiku (d63e9f)

  4. Only one side in this conflict has been shooting down ‘heavies’ with missiles, and it doesn’t answer to Kiev.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  5. pst314 (ae6bd1) — 7/17/2014 @ 11:27 am

    …even one’s that the interceptor pilot can see (KAL 007).

    askeptic (efcf22)

  6. the tranquility of the global community?

    substantially improved!

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  7. From Hotair:

    “Russian GRU officer Strelkov admitting that he ordered the missile strike
    against the Malaysian jet.”

    Strelkov is reportedly the Commander of the ‘separatist’ forces around Donetsk.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  8. The Guns of August are barking early this Century.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  9. “Russian GRU officer Strelkov admitting that he ordered the missile strike
    against the Malaysian jet.”

    …and then deleted the Facebook post when he learned that it was a civilian airliner rather than a Ukrainian military jet.

    pst314 (ae6bd1)

  10. A number of Ukrainian planes have been shot down in the area from similar altitudes recently.

    A real US President would order an air strike on the launchers. Wish we had one.

    Kevin M (b357ee)

  11. If Ukraine had been accepted into NATO, it would present one hell of a dilemma for President Present.
    The question now arises:
    What international conventions apply to the shooting down of civilian airliners in normal commerce?

    askeptic (efcf22)

  12. Can’t a brotha just enjoy his burger and fries without all this international crises interrupting his happy meal?

    Hadoop (379e8e)

  13. 12- You caught that over at H/A didn’t you?
    In bad visuals, this guy is the Todd Akin of the Left.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  14. Now begins the Obama administration’s furious flurry of unfriending Strelkov on FB… to teh Keyboards!!!

    Colonel Haiku (207b84)

  15. Maybe teh First Lady can take one of those pouty Instagram pics she favors

    Colonel Haiku (c27e3f)

  16. unfriending might be seen by some as an overreaction but Strelkov is clearly failing to live by the promise of hashtag Mr. Colonel

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  17. Russian proxies shoot down Malaysian passenger plane over Ukraine;
    Iranian Nuclear Talks at impasse;
    Islamic Caliphate consolidates position;
    IDF mounts ground offensive into Gaza;
    USA southern border undefined, and undefended.

    Please tell me what the good news is going to be?

    askeptic (efcf22)

  18. Where are the adults? This admin has put us on an island ruled by chirren.

    felipe (960c75)

  19. The president’s statement:

    “Before I begin, obviously the world is watching reports of a downed passenger jet near the Russia-Ukraine border, and it looks like it may be a terrible tragedy,” he said. “Right now, we’re working to determine whether there were American citizens on board — that is our first priority — and I’ve directed my national-security team to stay in close contact with the Ukrainian government.”

    “The United States will offer any assistance we can to help determine what happened and why, and as a country, our thoughts and prayers are with all the families of the passengers wherever they call home,” he added, before resuming his speech on increased infrastructure spending.

    Dana (4dbf62)

  20. a red pen, my kingdom for a red pen…

    and a phone!

    presedenting be hard, yo! that’s why i need two weeks at the Hamptons with my peeps.

    Barry the Dimwitted (abd49e)

  21. Hashtag Diplomacy and other idiocies:
    #TwitteristhevoiceoftheAmericanBird-brain.

    I’m thinking of you Jen, and Marie.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  22. well, there are credible reports, with pictures, purporting to show Russian made BUK SAMs in the area, and they have more than enough range to reach a 777 at altitude, and a 777 isn’t designed to take missile damage at all, so, at first glance, this isn’t hard to figure out.

    the big question is, “who thought overflying a contested area known to be full of SAMs & idiots” was a good idea, lower fuel usage or not?

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  23. Dana, if it was someone who wasn’t so in love with hearing his own voice, it could have been handled thus:

    This is a serious development in the Ukraine situation, and this government is doing all it can within diplomatic channels to discover the facts.

    But, we’re talking about President Precious, aren’t we.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  24. PS: i’m really tired of living through history like this…

    can we please have the adults back in charge?

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  25. red, recent history shows a remarkable lack of thought within the Malay transportation community.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  26. not just in theirs… there were all sorts of planes in teh area at the time of the shoot down.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  27. Oops, video of the cheerful president thinking this just might indeed, be a tragedy.

    Dana (4dbf62)

  28. “i wanna be a happy idiot…”

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  29. BamBam’s theme song

    (and yes, i know, “raycissssss!” so sue me. 8-)

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  30. This looks like it might be a terrible tragedy?!?!? WTF

    JD (21c837)

  31. not to steal Pat’s traffice, but Gateway Pundit has some interesting links on this story.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  32. I’ve added the president’s response to the post.

    Dana (4dbf62)

  33. I wonder how the Ukrainians feel about this: The “black box” from the airplane traveled to Moscow “for investigation” Russian radio Kommersant FM reported.

    Dana (4dbf62)

  34. IDF mounts ground offensive into Gaza;

    That was the good news, askeptic.

    It’ll turn bad when they back out too early, but.

    luagha (5cbe06)

  35. People might want to locate it in the back of the bookshelf, dust it off, and re-read their copy of The Guns of August.

    elissa (ad35b3)

  36. 35- They shouldn’t stop until they reach the Egyptian Border.

    36- We won’t have to read it elissa, we’re going to get to live it.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  37. I try not to make rash decisions, but I am very close to saying that I plan never to board a Malaysia Airlines flight. Two lost craft under mysterious circumstances in the space of four months is just a little too freaky.

    elissa (ad35b3)

  38. “Hundreds dead, but seriously folks, I shoulda never bought that Texas BBQ with my Visa card while on camera… I don’t know any pricey hookers… help me out here… “

    Colonel Haiku (d9226e)

  39. Open thread on Israel/Gaza up.

    Dana (4dbf62)

  40. Well the Bamster made his brief statement–then dashed in for his hamburger photo op. Way to stay on the case Barry! Heck of a job!

    Skeptical Voter (12e67d)

  41. Thanks for the army post, elissa.

    mg (31009b)

  42. Putin blames the shootdown on Ukraine’s inability to control the violence. “This tragedy would not have happened if there was peace in this land”

    Kevin M (b357ee)

  43. Bpob Schieffer was on the CBS Evening news last night – to help out Scott Pelley really. He said that the situation in the world is more dangerous than anything he can remember (I think)

    He said it was more dangerous than during teh Cold War.

    http://freebeacon.com/national-security/schieffer-world-may-be-more-dangerous-now-than-during-cold-war

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  44. Yes, how dare they resist the Russian aggression.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  45. Yes, how dare they resist the Russian aggression.

    What Russian aggression? It seems to me that Donetsk is not attacking Kiev, but Kiev is attacking Donetsk. Who says Donestsk ought to be under Ukranian rule? Why should it be so?

    And that goes double for the Crimea, to which the Ukraine has never had any claim at all. How can anyone say “it’s ours because Kruschev gave it to us as a birthday present” without laughing?

    Milhouse (b95258)

  46. ever the contrarian… wasn’t their a treaty involved and did Putin not flagrantly disregard that treaty?

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  47. Did you see Schieffer’s rhuemy eyes, Sammy? He looks like he’s coming down with teh TB…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  48. The intercepted conversation reported at Gateway Pundit seems to show that they genuinely thought it was a Ukranian military plane, and were shocked when they found out it wasn’t. Which would make it not much different from when the Vincennes shot down an Iranian civilian airliner, mistaking it for an F-14 coming to attack them.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  49. terrorist-mullah asskisser…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  50. ever the contrarian… wasn’t their a treaty involved and did Putin not flagrantly disregard that treaty?

    Treaties can be abrogated at will. How many treaties has the USA abrogated? And why would Putin’s agreement be any more valid than Kruschev’s bizarre birthday present? The Russian people living there didn’t agree to anything. They’ve been unhappy with Ukrainian rule all along, but they put up with it. Then came the threat of neo-nazis taking over in Kiev, and they decided enough with that.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  51. awww horsesh*t, milhouse.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  52. Milhouse you are a phuquing idiot.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  53. I am shocked, shocked I tell you, to find out…..
    Get your winnings before you leave.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  54. Milhouse you are a phuquing idiot.

    Please explain why you think so. Please explain why the Russian residents of Donetsk should be ruled by neo-nazis in Kiev, against their will. And I’d love to hear why the Crimea should be ruled by the Ukraine, just because Kruschev gave it away, and Yeltsin, at a time when Russia was weak, had no choice but to agree to the status quo. Especially when the status quo has changed.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  55. I don’t think it was an accident that an airplane was shot down. I don’t think it was an accicdent that it was Malaysian airliner.

    Former KGB agent Vladimir Putin was on the phone with Obama and notified him in the middle of the call.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  56. Ukraine was just your ‘straw’ moment.
    Adios!

    askeptic (efcf22)

  57. Huh?

    Milhouse (b95258)

  58. “Then came the threat of neo-nazis taking over in Kiev, and they decided enough with that.”

    Yeah, “neo-nazis” – the Russian boogyman. An worthless charge, but it does come in handy for attacking neighboring states.

    Mike Giles (930031)

  59. 55. …And I’d love to hear why the Crimea should be ruled by the Ukraine, just because Kruschev gave it away, and Yeltsin, at a time when Russia was weak, had no choice but to agree to the status quo. Especially when the status quo has changed.

    Milhouse (b95258) — 7/17/2014 @ 4:37 pm

    Great. According to Milhouse every single peace treaty ever signed can be legally abrogated whenever the defeated belligerent has recovered sufficiently to be able to state, “the status quo has changed.”

    You do realize this isn’t a new concept, Milhouse. The name for it is perfidy.

    Steve57 (dce389)

  60. Mike, what side were the Ukranians on in WW2?

    Milhouse (b95258)

  61. Milhouse @61, what side weren’t they on?

    Steve57 (dce389)

  62. Don’t think of Milhouse as an idiot; think of him as someone who propagandizes for our enemies.

    pst314 (ae6bd1)

  63. Steve, the history is fairly clear. Most Ukranians welcomed the German invasion, and willingly collaborated with the Germans. And Ukranian nationalists like the ones who recently took over in Kiev can be heard admiring their grandparents who did so, and whitewashing the Germans’ crimes. It’s not unreasonable for the Russians living in the eastern part of the Ukraine to worry about such a regime ruling them, even more than they worry about Putin ruling them. And it’s certainly not unreasonable for Crimeans, who have never had any connection to the Ukraine anyway, and over whom the Ukraine has no claim that passes the laugh test, to take advantage of the coup in Kiev to call it quits. They’d probably like to be independent too, but that’s not a practical option, and between Ukraine and Russia they’d rather be ruled by Russia as they were for most of the past 200 years.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  64. A brief review of how we got here;

    http://www.nybooks.com/contributors/timothy-snyder-2/?tab=tab-blog

    narciso (24b824)

  65. Again, nothing but the usual horsesh*t from the site’s contrarian.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  66. Actually you know who are the real Crimeans, the Tatars who were deported by Stalin in the 30s, along with the Chechens, the Ingush, the Kalmycks, et al.

    narciso (24b824)

  67. #46: It’s very very simple: because all existing borders are presumed to be valid. Otherwise you would have everyone fighting everyone over undoing the last Nth flip. To undo a border that has existed requires long a tedious negotiations and multilateral agreement. Any other rule just invites aggressors.

    You might as well say: “Who said that Texas was separate from Mexico? Just because some rednecks had a lot of guns? Doesn’t pass the laugh test.” Just don’t say it in Texas.

    Kevin M (b357ee)

  68. We would rather California be ruled by Mexico. When can we give it back?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  69. The intercepted conversation reported at Gateway Pundit seems to show that they genuinely thought it was a Ukranian military plane, and were shocked when they found out it wasn’t. Which would make it not much different from when the Vincennes shot down an Iranian civilian airliner, mistaking it for an F-14 coming to attack them.

    When Korean Air flight 007 was shot down by the Soviets in the 80′s, I remember a neoMarxist at work who immediately suggested they thought it was a spy plane. Similar garbage.

    Kevin M (b357ee)

  70. We would rather California be ruled by Mexico. When can we give it back?

    Never, I live there.

    Kevin M (b357ee)

  71. Aw fer …, Milhouse. Stalin had starved 7 million Ukrainians to death eight years earlier. And the Ukrainians who came out to welcome the Nazis found themselves machine-gunned or sent to dig rocket tunnels for Von Braun with their bare hands. While the world didn’t even shout “Eloi, eloi, la ma savakhthani” for them. Ask who was on the Ukrainians’ side before, during, and after WWII.

    nk (dbc370)

  72. Is there a calamity short of nuclear attack that would keep Obama away from a fundraiser? Or trying out his second-rate Henny Youngman schtik?

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  73. I hear the Russian’s got concerned when the Ukrainians attacked a Russian border post. Or was that Poland and Germany? I get my invasion pretexts confused.

    Kevin M (b357ee)

  74. What makes you think a nuclear attack would keep him away? Assuming the actual venue was still standing, of course.

    Kevin M (b357ee)

  75. You know, if the president could manage to get just a touch of “food poisoning” at one of his fundraisers or hamburger joint stops he could avoid the media for several days until his vacay starts.

    elissa (dcf2ac)

  76. He has a food taster, elissa. http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/taster.asp

    nk (dbc370)

  77. Millhouse,

    When do borders actually count?

    Dana (4dbf62)

  78. Milhouse @64, the historical record is clear. You just can’t trust those durned Ukrainians.

    They never do their due diligence. Had those remaining peasants simply Googled the search terms “Hitler” and “Nazi” they’d have learned why they shouldn’t throw in with the devil they didn’t know as opposed to the genocidal Bolsheviks who subjected the to the Holodomor throughout the ’30′s.

    Ungrateful bastards.

    Next, Milhouse will tell us why the minority Russians, pure as he driven snow, are rightfully fearful of the Estonians, Latvians, and Lithuanians, who the Russians never did anything to, neither.

    Steve57 (dce389)

  79. Lots of tragedy. My Polish friends have still not gotten over the plane “crash” in Russia in which their president and other government officials were killed several years ago. One of them still insists “wasss no accident!”

    elissa (dcf2ac)

  80. So the plane today was Amsterdam to Kuala Lampur? Was flying directly over a red hot war zone the only way to get there? Do we have any flight plan experts in the crowd here?

    elissa (dcf2ac)

  81. Oh look:

    Reuters reports that the flight route taken by Malaysia Airlines flight that went down in Ukraine had been declared safe by the United Nations’ aviation division. According to the International Air Transportation Association, Malaysia Airlines “had stated that the airspace the aircraft was traversing was not subject to restrictions”.

    elissa (dcf2ac)

  82. and that previous event, occurred on the anniversary of Katyn, and akin to the Sikorski crash;

    http://www.flightnetwork.com/destinations/Kuala-Lumpur/Amsterdam_Kuala-Lumpur.html

    narciso (24b824)

  83. Don’t think of Milhouse as an idiot; think of him as someone who propagandizes for our enemies.

    only an idiot would do that.

    or a traitor.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  84. It’s very very simple: because all existing borders are presumed to be valid.

    Even when you know that it isn’t?! So now the new border is just as valid, right? Or is that somehow different? What’s the difference between Russia annexing the Crimea this year, and Kruschev giving it away in the first place? Who the hell gave Kruschev the right to do that?

    The intercepted conversation reported at Gateway Pundit seems to show that they genuinely thought it was a Ukranian military plane, and were shocked when they found out it wasn’t.

    When Korean Air flight 007 was shot down by the Soviets in the 80′s, I remember a neoMarxist at work who immediately suggested they thought it was a spy plane. Similar garbage.

    We have the intercepted conversation, don’t we? That’s the whole proof that the separatists did it in the first place. And that very conversation shows that the participants thought it was a Ukranian war plane. Surely you admit that mistakes of this kind do happen; otherwise you’d have no choice but to dismiss the Vincenenes claim that they thought the Iranian plane was a fighter too.

    Stalin had starved 7 million Ukrainians to death eight years earlier. And the Ukrainians who came out to welcome the Nazis found themselves machine-gunned or sent to dig rocket tunnels for Von Braun with their bare hands.

    Bulldust. They willingly collaborated, and formed units to fight for the Germans. So did the Lithuanians and Latvians and Estonians. And they’re proud of it to this day.

    When do borders actually count?

    That’s a very good question, but not one relevant here. I think everyone can recognise that Kruschev was not the owner of Russia, and had no right to give parts of it away as party favors. Especially when he only “gave it away” from his right hand to his left hand, because he was the dictator of both the Ukraine and Russia. If he’d done the opposite, and given a bit of the Ukraine to Russia, would you say that was valid too?

    You just can’t trust those durned Ukrainians.

    They never do their due diligence. Had those remaining peasants simply Googled the search terms “Hitler” and “Nazi” they’d have learned why they shouldn’t throw in with the devil they didn’t know

    They quickly learned; and to this day they don’t regret it. And those Estonians, Latvians, and Lithuanians were at least as bad, if not worse. They were more bloodthirsty than the Germans themselves. And today they put up statues to those murderers, and march in celebration of them. While the Ukranians have made that filthy animal Bogdan Khmenitzky their national hero. Don’t talk to me about their innocence while they do that.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  85. “…at a time when Russia was weak…”

    pro tip: they are *still* weak. all their recent actions are that of a bully, with limited resources and skills, trying to bully & bluff their way to importance instead of impotence.

    the russians have always had an inferiority complex, and with good reason: th3y sucxors. Communist rule for the last 100 years or so, plus two world wars hasn’t helped any.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  86. My Polish friends have still not gotten over the plane “crash” in Russia in which their president and other government officials were killed several years ago. One of them still insists “wasss no accident!”

    He may be right. Putin’s no angel.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  87. Don’t talk to me about their innocence while they do that.

    and those peace loving russians you admire so much pine for teh days of Stalin.

    somehow, i can see you doing the same thing.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  88. “…at a time when Russia was weak…”

    pro tip: they are *still* weak.

    And yet clearly stronger than they were in 1991. As evidenced by the fact that they have the Crimea back, and nobody seriously expects them to ever give it up.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  89. and those peace loving russians you admire so much pine for teh days of Stalin.

    1. What makes you think I admire them? 2. They don’t pine for him. 3. Stalin was not Russian.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  90. they only have it because we are weaker and because Bush didn’t stop them in Georgia, in part because of bed wetters like you.

    personally, i’d have used B-2′s to block tunnels and cause landslides on their LOCs through the mountian passes into Georgia, on the Georgia side of the border, stranding their army and starving their troops out until they surrendered and were allowed to walk home.

    *THAT* would have been smart poser.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  91. Bogdan Khmelnitzky? Really? How do you feel about Ferdinand and Isabella?

    nk (dbc370)

  92. Bogdan Khmelnitzky? Really? How do you feel about Ferdinand and Isabella?

    How do you expect me to feel? They were monsters, and nothing has happened to make their memory stink any less.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  93. The Drudgereport has the following link currently up on its page:

    Obama gives crash 40 seconds before telling jokes

    Well, what do you expect. But hardly unusual. Obama’s reaction today is reminiscent (but in reverse order) of the way he acted the day following the Fort Hood massacre. Or the occasion when he started his speech in the Rose Garden with a jocular “I want to give a shout out…”

    My theory is that quite a few people who embrace liberalism — particularly if it’s well past their youth, past their teenage years, past their college years or, say, well past their 30′s, 40′s — are that way not just because of an innate lack of common sense, but also because of a guilty conscience. They must believe their own rotten nature will be offset by their running around as a left-leaning human. Or a person who supposedly (repeat: supposedly) is so imbued with great humanity, love, generosity and compassion.

    Pffft.

    dailymail.co.uk, July 17, 2014: President Barack Obama provoked fury in the U.S. on Thursday by casually devoting less than a minute to the deaths of 295 people aboard a Malaysian airliner, as he began an often jokey 16-minute speech about the need to expand America’s transportation infrastructure.

    “Before I begin, obviously the world is watching reports of a downed passenger jet near the Russia-Ukraine border. And it looks like it may be a terrible tragedy. Right now we’re working to determine whether there were American citizens on board. That is our first priority.’

    ‘And I’ve directed my national security team to stay in close contact with the Ukrainian governemnt. The United States will offer any assistance we can to help determine what happened and why. And as a country, our thoughts and prayers are with all the families and passengers, wherever they call home.

    Obama then jarringly quickly returned to his prepared remarks.

    ‘I want to thank Jeremie for that introduction’ he said. ‘Give Jeremie a big round of applause.’

    ‘It is great to be in the state that gave us Joe Biden. We’ve got actually some better-looking Bidens with us here today. We’ve got Beau and his wife, Hallie, are here. Give them a big round of applause. We love them.’

    ^ I guess this shows that his flippancy following the day a lot of military personnel at Fort Hood were left in a bloody heap wasn’t necessarily due to his antipathy to the US Army. Simply put, when it comes to his having a truly sincere, truly heartfelt concern about human life, he’s two-faced about people in general. (I won’t say anything about his and many other liberals’ come-see, come-saw emotions about late-term abortions.)

    Mark (2a5744)

  94. Khmelnitsky was a butcher, and as far as I’m concerned anyone today who lionizes him becomes an accomplice after the fact to his crimes, and is my personal enemy and the enemy of all Jews.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  95. ^ I guess this shows that his flippancy following the day a lot of military personnel at Fort Hood were left in a bloody heap wasn’t necessarily due to his antipathy to the US Army. Simply put, when it comes to his having a truly sincere, truly heartfelt concern about human life, he’s two-faced about people in general.

    What about the video of Bill Clinton leaving Ron Brown’s funeral, laughing and joking until he saw a camera, and then suddenly turning on the tears?

    Milhouse (b95258)

  96. 1. What makes you think I admire them? 2. They don’t pine for him. 3. Stalin was not Russian.

    1. you’re carrying their water in this discussion. what other reason would there be?
    2. yes they do: try reading some news or doing an internet search on the matter.
    2. so he was born in Georgia… you were the one arguing borders don’t matter. besides, he ruled the CCCP for decades, and he is still revered by many people, there and elsewhere. once again, do some research before you post inanities.

    PS: 3 strikes, you’re out!

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  97. The Georgians and the Cossacks were mortal enemies for centuries. It’s only half a joke that Stalin was Georgia’s revenge on Ukraine.

    nk (dbc370)

  98. What about the video of Bill Clinton leaving Ron Brown’s funeral, laughing and joking

    Speaking of which…

    freebeacon.com, June 16, 2014: In 1975, the same year she married Bill, Hillary Clinton agreed to serve as the court-appointed attorney for Thomas Alfred Taylor, a 41-year-old accused of raping the child after luring her into a car.

    “It was a fascinating case, it was a very interesting case,” Clinton says in the recording. “This guy was accused of raping a 12-year-old. Course he claimed that he didn’t, and all this stuff”

    Describing the events almost a decade after they had occurred, Clinton struck a casual and complacent attitude toward her client and the trial for rape of a minor.

    “I had him take a polygraph, which he passed – which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs,” she added with a laugh.

    Clinton can also be heard laughing at several points when discussing the crime lab’s accidental destruction of DNA evidence that tied Taylor to the crime.

    Mark (2a5744)

  99. Sheet happens all over, all at once.

    Try to relax and breathe deeply.

    gary gulrud (46ca75)

  100. Suppose, Milhouse, that Putin is a modern Nazi. Nationalist, classic state-labor-business fascism with a Leader! Someone in the future might say that you were siding with the fascists.

    Kevin M (b357ee)

  101. red, not only was Stalin Russian, he was RUSSIA for all intents and purposes.

    Kevin M (b357ee)

  102. 1. What makes you think I admire them? 2. They don’t pine for him. 3. Stalin was not Russian.

    1. you’re carrying their water in this discussion. what other reason would there be?
    2. yes they do: try reading some news or doing an internet search on the matter.
    2. so he was born in Georgia… you were the one arguing borders don’t matter. besides, he ruled the CCCP for decades, and he is still revered by many people, there and elsewhere. once again, do some research before you post inanities.

    1. That’s insane. To draw that conclusion from that evidence is literally a sign of insanity. Or at least of an utter inability to think rationally.

    2. No, they don’t. Some communists pine for him. Russians whose parents and grandparents remember him do not pine for him at all.

    3. He wasn’t just born in Georgia, he was Georgian, not Russian. His tyranny was just as much against Russia as against the Ukraine. (Over Georgia too, but he did go easier on his fellow Georgians. I know of people who fled the NKVD to Georgia, because its hand was lighter there.)

    Milhouse (b95258)

  103. And wbere did the Protocols come from. the Okrana, the home of Pobestedenev, Alexander 111′s tutor, Ignatiev, Trepov, the Black One Hundreds, as much as Petlura or Bandera, there’s a reason they call that whole area the ‘Bloodlands’ as Snyder, dubbed his interwar cronicle,

    narciso (24b824)

  104. When do borders actually count?

    That’s a very good question, but not one relevant here.

    As an aside, Millhouse, if I ask a question of you, it is because of something you have stated, or a particular direction you are taking the discussion toward. It is not personal, nor flippant. Therefore, while you may believe the question not relevant to the discussion, I believe it is. Specifically, because of the thrust of your comments at the time and before I react to them, I think it’s important to understand what you actually believe about borders and their significance. Consider what you are saying might warrant the question.

    Anyway, thank you for answering.

    Dana (4dbf62)

  105. Suppose, Milhouse, that Putin is a modern Nazi. Nationalist, classic state-labor-business fascism with a Leader! Someone in the future might say that you were siding with the fascists.

    Putin may be a fascist, though I think not. Fascism is a Marxist heresy, and Putin grew up with Marxism, so it’s not surprising to see some similarities between whatever it is that he really believes (if anything) and Fascism. But he’s certainly no Nazi. There’s no indication that he has any bloodthirsty tendencies, let alone that he’s into pagan mysticism or crazy racial theories. If anything, he seems most likely to simply want to be a modern Czar, successor to the Romanovs, but without the hereditary thing. (He doesn’t seem to be training his daughters for any sort of political role; the only legacy he seems to want to leave them is lots and lots of money.)

    Milhouse (b95258)

  106. I wonder when the Pollyannas will allow that yes, WWIII is begun?

    gary gulrud (46ca75)

  107. the pattern could be seen, not by the times reporter,

    http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/t/sabrina_tavernise/index.html

    narciso (24b824)

  108. When do borders actually count?

    That’s a very good question, but not one relevant here.

    As an aside, Millhouse, if I ask a question of you, it is because of something you have stated, or a particular direction you are taking the discussion toward. It is not personal, nor flippant. Therefore, while you may believe the question not relevant to the discussion, I believe it is.

    I didn’t take it personally. It is a good question, and worth exploring some time, but that exploration isn’t necessary for this discussion. This isn’t a borderline case (pun intended). One needn’t have an exact definition of borders or a full theory of their significance to realise that the Ukranian claim over the Crimea is illegitimate, just as one needn’t have a complete and thought-out definition of p*rn*graphy to know that a John Holmes movie counts.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  109. State Dept goes all Smart Sassy Power after a rough day of teh Smart Diplomacy http://hotair.com/archives/2014/07/17/smart-power-state-department-ends-tumultuous-day-with-stirring-relevant-tweet/

    Colonel Haiku (1011ad)

  110. #110… Milhouse takes 13 to the chin…

    Colonel Haiku (cabbd2)

  111. #110… Milhouse takes 13 to the chin…

    Sorry, I don’t know what that means.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  112. You will…

    Colonel Haiku (b924f9)

  113. Care to explain it? Is it some idiom I’m unaware of? I even tried googling it, with no result.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  114. Try gargling it…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  115. Oh, is this a John Holmes joke?

    Milhouse (b95258)

  116. Waddya mean by that?

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  117. Maybe nothing. I was trying to puzzle out what you could have meant by it, and I’ve got a dirty mind.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  118. The matter of Russia vs Ukraine to me is one of those murky messes where both sides — Putin on one end, supposed Nazi sympathizers opposing him and Russia on the other — deserve mainly skepticism or ambivalence. I think of situations like this one:

    theamericanconservative.com, January 2014:

    The Folly of Arming the Syrian Opposition Revisited

    It is hard to see how the U.S. arms and supplies [groups like the Islamic Front, Jabhat al-Nusra or ISIS] without effectively bolstering and aiding the others, especially when their members have fought alongside one another. We are told that the U.S. needs to prevent “a massive Al Qaeda presence across all or part of Syria,” but that for the time being the U.S. should encourage all opposition groups to fight only [Syrian president Bashar] Assad and thereby ensure that there is “a massive Al Qaeda presence across all or part of Syria.”

    If the U.S. interest in this conflict is now to limit the power of jihadist groups, arming a group whose members “often fight” on their side is a horrible way to go about it. We should all recognize at this point that the U.S. cannot manipulate the competing groups in Syria’s civil war, and that it shouldn’t look for new ways to entangle itself in the conflict.

    Mark (2a5744)

  119. It is a good question, and worth exploring some time, but that exploration isn’t necessary for this discussion.

    Millhouse, stop telling me whether the exploration is necessary or not. Just because you do not believe it to be, does not make it so. If it is not necessary for you in this discussion, then that’s fine. But if I feel it is, then that’s fine, too. My point is: stop being such a condescending twit. It makes you look like a dork. And that’s very unbecoming.

    Dana (4dbf62)

  120. Defining a category is only necessary when discussing an edge case. This isn’t one.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  121. Dana +eleventy

    JD (404a73)

  122. I’m not being condescending, you’re being evasive. Demanding an exploration of the whole subject of borders before agreeing that this border isn’t sacred is just evading the question.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  123. One doesn’t need to lay out a well-defined view on whch health scares to worry about and which ones to ignore, in order to say that smoking is a significant cause of cancer and living near power lines isn’t.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  124. This border should matter because the “separatists” are apparently Russian komitaji. It’s no an insurgency, it’s an invasion. http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/191947/

    nk (dbc370)

  125. Onanism on display…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  126. 1. It is condescending when *you* alone assume the position of arbiter of what is or is not relevant to a discussion. If you don’t believe it is, that’s fine. But others might. And that is perfectly fine, too.
    2. I asked a question – I did not demand. Hence, the question mark. You are perfectly allowed to politely decline to answer. No harm done.
    3. I’m not being evasive, and will watch that in the future if that’s what it appears like. And so you know, it wasn’t a loaded question. Just a simple one to get a better understanding of where you’re coming from.

    Have a good evening.

    Dana (4dbf62)

  127. General McCaffrey says that the US embassy in the Netherlands should have been able to tell the State Dept in Washington within an hour of the crash if there were Americans on board and who. He is seething at Psaki and the state department.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39GgbxCHC_M

    elissa (dcf2ac)

  128. Dana – you weren’t evasive. Milhouse will determine what is relevant and worthy of discussion.

    JD (404a73)

  129. This has certainly gone south.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  130. If you’re referring to elissa’s link, Ag80, yes, it has.

    If you’re referring to my exchange with Millhouse, I apologize. I never want to cause a thread to become one best avoided.

    Dana (4dbf62)

  131. this is the fellow on the tape;

    http://hausmieten.potiori.com/Igor_Bezler.html

    narciso (24b824)

  132. Jen Psaki only knows what follows a #.
    Otherwise, she’s a blithering idiot.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  133. if we do not call out teh 5t00pid, teh 5t00pid will run teh rampant, and Mr Feets will read us all the riot act for it.

    i shudder to think.

    8-)

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  134. Reading between the lines, Bezler, likely served at least a tour or three in Chechnya, part of that forever they’ve been waging since 1818 if not earlier,

    narciso (24b824)

  135. that reminders me

    whoever shot this plane down, our friend Mr. Akin is deeply in their debt

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  136. Wachoo talkin’ bout, happyfeet?

    nk (dbc370)

  137. yes, feets, I saw that fiasco earlier. Todd should hire a professional spokesperson like carnie or Psaki or Earnest so there would not constantly be stupid statements attributed directly to him. Oh wait!

    elissa (dcf2ac)

  138. they took the spotlight off his ridiculous interview from this morning is all

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  139. Some accounts, have Bezler serving as far back as Afghanistan, which is possible.

    narciso (24b824)

  140. You’ve got too much time on your hands. Give me a minute and I’ll find you the link for the complete Robert E. Howard stories free online.

    nk (dbc370)

  141. todd’s on a book tour, nk, and he gave an unfortunate interview to nbc.

    elissa (dcf2ac)

  142. UPDATE BY PATTERICO: The death toll stands at 298, as there were three infants on board. Almost enough to spoil your burger.

    Almost.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  143. Here. Just scroll down a little. http://gutenberg.net.au/plusfifty-a-m.html#letterH

    nk (dbc370)

  144. He didn’t get all that “legitimate rape” stuff quite all off his chest before.

    elissa (dcf2ac)

  145. oh cool i think there’s some way to get those onto the kindle

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  146. I keep looking at the news, but they seem to be avoiding the number of American citizens on the plane. Some sources say 23. Is this accurate?

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  147. Let me know how you do it. I managed to store one on my Kindle Content folder, as a test, but then I saw no way to open it with Kindle for PC. I didn’t try it with Kindle for Android on the Samsung.

    nk (dbc370)

  148. 1. It is condescending when *you* alone assume the position of arbiter of what is or is not relevant to a discussion. If you don’t believe it is, that’s fine. But others might. And that is perfectly fine, too.
    2. I asked a question – I did not demand. Hence, the question mark. You are perfectly allowed to politely decline to answer. No harm done.
    3. I’m not being evasive, and will watch that in the future if that’s what it appears like. And so you know, it wasn’t a loaded question. Just a simple one to get a better understanding of where you’re coming from.

    1. I have no idea what’s got you upset. I gave my opinion that your question is irrelevant to the current discussion — that we need not reach it to resolve the matter before us. If you think we do need to reach that question, you are of course free to explain why, and to give your opinions on it. And of course anyone else who wants to chip in is free to do so as well. But I can’t see why you take umbrage at my giving my opinion that we needn’t reach it, that the current matter doesn’t depend on it.
    2. You asked the question, and I addressed it, to the extent that it’s relevant to my opinion as expressed here. “It’s not relevant” is an answer, for the limited purposes of this discussion. I don’t want to be dragged into a whole side-discussion on a matter that is complicated, deserves its own thread, and as far as I can see doesn’t need to be resolved now. Whatever ones view on that topic, the answer to the current matter should be the same. 3. The original question didn’t seem evasive, but your refusal to accept the way I addressed it did. And certainly your calling me condescending and a dork for not wanting to follow a red herring seemed evidence of evasion on your part. I will take your word that it wasn’t. (Incidentally, let the record show that, as usual, I did not take things personal, others did, and as usual I am the target of insults, not the origin. If I responded with less than my usual politeness, I think I was entitled. If someone should be apologising here, I don’t see how it’s me.)

    Milhouse (b95258)

  149. See discussion above ag80 (caffrey) the state dept has not announced. weird, huh?

    elissa (dcf2ac)

  150. 110. One needn’t have an exact definition of borders or a full theory of their significance to realise that the Ukranian claim over the Crimea is illegitimate, . . .
    Milhouse (b95258)

    Well yes, one does.
    Let’s go with a quick and dirty review:

    14th century – The Golden Horde rolls through, killing like John Kerry’s Congressional testimony, The state of Kievan Rus’ breaks up.
    15th century – The Golden Horde breaks up. The Crimean Khanate forms in The Crimea and the Black Sea coast of what is now Ukraine. Cossacks establish themselves in the rest of Ukraine but are ruled by the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
    16th-17th centuries – Cossack state gradually transferred to Russian control in a series of wars. Crimean Khanate falls under the sway of the Ottomans.
    18th century – Russia finally seizes the Crimean Khanate from the Ottomans. Establishes “New Russia” in the conquered territory.
    19th century – Russia tries to Russify the Crimea and fails, but maintains control of the Crimean Tatars. Russia tries to Russify the rest of New Russia and fails, the territory becoming integrated into Ukraine.
    1930s – Stalin starves Ukraine.
    1940s – Hitler shows up. Some Crimean Tatars sell out. Stalin comes back and deports them all and imports Russians. The same happens in Ukraine, but Stalin just starves the Ukrainians some more.
    1950s – Kruschev tries to suck up to Ukraine by transferring the Crimea to them. Also tries Russifying Ukraine some more.
    1980s – Gorbachev tries to suck up to the Crimean Tatars by letting them go back to the Crimea.
    1990s – Reagan wins, Gorbachev loses. Ukraine becomes a real country. Russia agrees to let them keep Crimea. Everyone guarantees Ukraine’s territory if Ukraine gives up its nuke. Ukraine stupidly agrees.
    2010s – Putin tries to become Tsar of All the Russias. (The only Tsar not available in the current administration.) Using the fiction used to support the creation of Kosovo that he previously exploited in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, he tries to reclaim The Crimea. An “election” is held. Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars boycott or aren’t allowed to vote. Russians who like Russia are allowed to vote. Results are forged anyway. Putin attempts to go further and seize parts of eastern Ukraine that were also parts of New Russia and that have a Russian minority. Phony elections won’t work again so a phony coup is staged.

    Now then . . .
    If Ukraine’s claim to The Crimea is illegitimate, what exactly does that make the Russian claim?
    More, what does that make the Russian claim to various parts of New Russia that are part of Ukraine?
    Who does actually have a legitimate claim to The Crimea?
    If those people want to be part of Ukraine, why should that be ignored in favor of the Russians?

    Sam (e8f1ad)

  151. That’s the gutenberg.au ones that Howard is on. Project Gutenberg, the big one, has a Kindle option but it does not have the Robert E. Howard stories. It does have a lot of other great stuff, though.

    nk (dbc370)

  152. 298 dead. Maybe 23 Americans. I guess that’s a “tragedy.” But hey, let’s debate Ukraine history.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  153. If Ukraine’s claim to The Crimea is illegitimate, what exactly does that make the Russian claim?
    More, what does that make the Russian claim to various parts of New Russia that are part of Ukraine?
    Who does actually have a legitimate claim to The Crimea?
    If those people want to be part of Ukraine, why should that be ignored in favor of the Russians?

    My point is that no matter how you look at it, no matter who can make a legitimate claim to the Crimea, the Ukraine isn’t it.

    Put it this way: who can make a legitimate claim to sovereignty over Alaska? I can think of only three sensible answers:
    1) the USA
    2) Russia
    3) the Alaskans themselves
    Canada is not an option. There is no case to be made for Canada to annex Alaska, unless of course the Alaskans genuinely decide they want it, in which case it becomes a subset of option 3, with Canada as the Alaskans’ proxy. Similarly, as I see it, the Crimea belongs either to Russia, or Turkey, or it should be independent, but there’s no way it belongs to the Ukraine. And I don’t know which people you refer to who want to be part of the Ukraine. As far as I know there isn’t any significant support for that in the Crimea.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  154. Good Allah, a sizable part of the Ukraine belonged to Turkey, Odessa, the jewel of the country, was called Gadibey, the Russians fought at least two wars with the Ottomans to claim that land,

    narciso (24b824)

  155. 298 dead. Maybe 23 Americans. I guess that’s a “tragedy.” But hey, let’s debate Ukraine history.

    The point is that this seems to be a genuine accident, so if the Donetsk resistance has the right to exist, and to defend itself from Ukranian assault, then they can’t be blamed, and this can be compared to the Vincennes. That is the side I’m taking. Those debating me take the view that the resistance is illegitimate, has no right to exist and therefore no right to defend itself, the Ukranians have every right to kill them all, and therefore even if it had been a Ukranian war plane the shooting would have been illegitimate.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  156. Good Allah, a sizable part of the Ukraine belonged to Turkey, Odessa, the jewel of the country, was called Gadibey, the Russians fought at least two wars with the Ottomans to claim that land,

    Yes. Why is this relevant? My point is that at no point was the Crimea considered part of the Ukraine.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  157. Almost a hundred years after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and half of a dozen of its remnants, from Gaza to the Russian/Ukrainian border with Syria and Iraq in between, in hot wars. Where are our resident Apocalypsists? Maybe it’s the Ottoman Empire not the Roman Empire that St. John meant?

    nk (dbc370)

  158. Milhouse.– Of course they can be blamed. A commercial airliner was shot down with a powerful missile and almost 300 people, civilians, who started out the day alive are dead tonight merely because the vessel they paid for to get them to Kuala Lumpur fell to earth. Nobody wants to discuss if the resistance which may have caused “a genuine accident” was legitimate or not. It does not matter. The cluelessness of the approach you are taking to this is what has all of us flummoxed on this thread.

    elissa (dcf2ac)

  159. The Iranian Airbus incident was a crime. You have some really weird ideas about some things, Milhouse.

    nk (dbc370)

  160. Elissa, exactly the same was true about the airliner that the Vincennes shot down, and yet I think we all agree that it was a genuine accident, and no blame attaches to the man who fired the shot, his commander, the US Navy, or the USA as a whole. And the reason for that is that the USA> had a legitimate right to be there in the Gulf, and to resist Iranian attacks. If the USA were a pirate gang with no right to exist, and the Iranians had every right to try to sink the Vincennes, then it wouldn’t matter that they mistook the plane for an F-14, they still wouldn’t have had any right to shoot at it, so all those deaths would have been on their heads.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  161. The Iranian Airbus incident was a crime. You have some really weird ideas about some things, Milhouse.

    Oops, apparently we don’t all agree. Tell us more, nk. Why was it a crime? What was the Vincennes supposed to do, in the middle of a battle, when an enemy plane appeared on the radar, seeming to be coming to attack? Should it have just left itself open to be bombed and perhaps sunk?

    Milhouse (b95258)

  162. What middle of what battle?

    nk (dbc370)

  163. “My point is that at no point was the Crimea considered part of the Ukraine.”

    Milhouse – History after 1954 is irrelevant?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  164. The Vincennes was fighting several Iranian gunboats at the time, and it appeared that the plane was sent out to support the naval forces in attacking the US ship.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  165. Milhouse – History after 1954 is irrelevant?

    Krushchev’s 1954 action was not only clearly illegitimate (there’s just no way to argue with a straight face that it had any force) but also irrelevant since it was a meaningless gesture.

    Put it this way: suppose 0bama decided to unilaterally give Alaska away to Canada. Wouldn’t you expect the next US president with any balls to take the first opportunity that presented itself to recover it?

    Milhouse (b95258)

  166. “The point is that this seems to be a genuine accident, so if the Donetsk resistance has the right to exist, and to defend itself from Ukranian assault, then they can’t be blamed”

    Milhouse – Are you suggesting that a sovereign nation does not have the right to put down an armed rebellion within its own borders? In what sense does it matter in your mind whether the Donetsk resistance “have the right to exist”? Right to exist defined by what, the Ukrainian Constitution, international law, a Ouija Board, or what?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  167. Thin. One of its helicopters reported receiving small arms fire from Iranian gunboats. The Vincennes went after them, into Iranian territory, under a civilian air corridor. Its poopypants captain shot at the first shadow he saw, and it was an ascending civilian airliner. Manslaughter at a minimum, although I’d vote for second degree murder, under criminal law.

    nk (dbc370)

  168. Krushchev’s 1954 action was not only clearly illegitimate (there’s just no way to argue with a straight face that it had any force) but also irrelevant since it was a meaningless gesture.

    Put it this way: suppose 0bama decided to unilaterally give Alaska away to Canada. Wouldn’t you expect the next US president with any balls to take the first opportunity that presented itself to recover it?

    Milhouse – What was illegitimate about it. The USSR was merely rearranging internal borders. Who the hell cares. The Ukraine had been part of the Russian Empire for 200 years. It’s inside baseball. The border became important when the Ukraine became an independent country.

    A U.S. president getting rid of Alaska to another country is an irrelevant and inapt analogy because that is not what Kruschev did with the Crimea. He kept it within the USSR. Giving Alaska to Canada is nothing similar.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  169. Milhouse – Are you suggesting that a sovereign nation does not have the right to put down an armed rebellion within its own borders

    That’s a good question, and it’s certainly arguable that it does not, so long as the rebellion is peaceful, as this one was. But what I’m saying is that regardless of whether it has such a right, the rebels certainly have the right to defend themselves. They can’t be expected to just surrender or let themselves be slaughtered.

    Put it this way, did the UK have the right to try to suppress the American rebellion. I think it did. But the rebels had the right to fight back, and they did, which is why we’re not Canadian. Now that was not a peaceful rebellion. How much more so in the case of Donetsk, where the rebels were peaceful, and it was the Ukranians who intiated bloodshed.

    Milhouse – What was illegitimate about it. The USSR was merely rearranging internal borders. Who the hell cares. The Ukraine had been part of the Russian Empire for 200 years. It’s inside baseball. The border became important when the Ukraine became an independent country

    Exactly. And at that point, why should it have mattered that Krushchev rearranged it? Why should the Ukraine have ended up with the Crimea just because Krushchev said so? What gave him the right?

    A U.S. president getting rid of Alaska to another country is an irrelevant and inapt analogy because that is not what Kruschev did with the Crimea. He kept it within the USSR. Giving Alaska to Canada is nothing similar.

    I think it is, but if you don’t like it then consider another hypo: suppose the Japanese had conquered all of North America in WW2, and they effected this transfer of Alaska from the USA to Canada, so it didn’t matter much at the time, since no matter what it was called it was still under their rule. Then suppose the occupation ended, the USA and Canada regained their independence, and Canada claimed Alaska because of the Japanese action. Would the USA not try to get it back as soon as it could?

    Milhouse (b95258)

  170. That’s a good question, and it’s certainly arguable that it does not, so long as the rebellion is peaceful, as this one was.

    Milhouse – I find the assertion very dubious.

    Exactly. And at that point, why should it have mattered that Krushchev rearranged it? Why should the Ukraine have ended up with the Crimea just because Krushchev said so? What gave him the right?

    Kruschev and his pals were in charge. They made the transfer between two Soviet Republics, which made it legitimate. All you have is hand waving to say the transfer was illegitimate.

    Then suppose the occupation ended, the USA and Canada regained their independence, and Canada claimed Alaska because of the Japanese action. Would the USA not try to get it back as soon as it could?

    America might very well try to get it back but I prefer to deal in real world situations as opposed to hypotheticals. Use Israel as an example. Many Arabs still claim the creation of Israel was illegitimate? Does that make it so? Absolutely not. Is the annexation of territory by Israel after subsequent conflicts beyond its original borders illegitimate? Many Arabs would argue yes. Does that make it so? Absolutely not.

    Like Dana, I want to understand your theory of when borders matter and when then don’t, because you don’t explain yourself, not that you have to.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  171. Kruschev and his pals were in charge. They made the transfer between two Soviet Republics, which made it legitimate.

    How so? Their entire regime was illegitimate. They had no right to rule anybody, let alone to take a whole region away from one country under their tyranny and give it to another. It didn’t belong to them.

    Many Arabs still claim the creation of Israel was illegitimate? Does that make it so? Absolutely not.

    Their claim doesn’t make it so. I don’t understand why you’d think a mere claim can make anything legitimate or illegitimate. The legitimacy of anything has to stand on its own merits, not on what someone chooses to claim about it. I think the creation of Israel was legitimate, and I can defend that opinion if necessary, but I don’t see how the Arabs’ contrary opinion is itself relevant.

    Is the annexation of territory by Israel after subsequent conflicts beyond its original borders illegitimate? Many Arabs would argue yes. Does that make it so? Absolutely not.

    As a point of fact, apart from the Golan Heights Israel hasn’t annexed anything that it didn’t have a claim to right from the beginning. I think you may be making the common mistake of regarding the 1949 armistice line as a border, but the armistice agreement said explicitly that it wasn’t. The parts of the Palestine Mandate that were not under Israeli rule from 1949 to 1967 were not part of Jordan or Egypt, their legal status was that of disputed territory not currently claimed by any nation. Israel had the strongest legal claim to them, though perhaps not the only one.

    In any case, my point is that it doesn’t matter. My argument here is that the Ukraine’s claim to the Crimea is so clearly illegitimate that no matter what your theory about borders and legitimacy it fails.

    Its claim to the eastern areas such as Donetsk is certainly stronger, and you will notice that Russia did not immediately act to annex those areas, as it did with the Crimea. But I do think that the Russian population in that area had legitimate grounds to worry about the new regime in Kiev, and it had a legitimate right to assert independence in a peaceful manner, as it did. I don’t think the Ukranians had the right to respond with deadly force, as they did. If the people of an area want to secede from the country that rules them, and they do so peacefully, I don’t tihnk it’s legitimate to initiate force, let alone deadly force, to compel them to remain under a rule they find repugnant. But even if it is legitimate to use such force, I can’t conceive how it can be illegitimate for them to defend themselves. Such a theory would surely make the USA illegitimate.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  172. The transcript doesn’t prove it wasn’t 100% deliberate. Infact, it is very consistent with it being deliberate.

    A nothing unit has the most advanced anti-aircraft weaponry, and their nominal/technical superiors know nothng about the shootdown till after it happens.

    Both the nominal superiors and their Russian superiors with whom they are in contactare surprised by what kind of a plane it is.

    Sounds like somebody maybe had wrong intelligence information. It sounds very much like that was part of this thing – butthere’s no way someone should have had any kindof genuine information that would lead them to the ideas that there’s some important military reason for shooting down a plane.

    Very, very consistent with a covert operation by Putin.

    There are several possible purposes – one might be to try to scare Obama off from arming his chosen Syrian rebels with anti-aircraft weapons. Obama is known to be scared already of delivering missiles, but he was weakening considerably in his opposition. The Syrian rebsls had already been given TOWs and had useds them properly and they were not saving them for some other occasion.

    Sammy Finkelman (ff268d)

  173. Re; Crimea.

    What happened is that the different parts of the Soviet Union became independent republics with the existing boundaries. Thiswas pure;y for legal reasons – technically every republic seceded.

    This was later, however, ratified several times by Yeltsin and NATO countries.

    Sammy Finkelman (ff268d)

  174. One point about Crimea: Just about nobody there, with the exception of people retired from the russian military, wanted to be part of Russia (in spit of that farce of a referendum taht was conducted taht didn’t offer no ass an option)

    Part of the reason for not wanting to be part of Russia was the government there – they much preferred Ukraine with its potential ties to the European Community, both for economic, asnd even more important, freedom reasons.

    Sammy Finkelman (ff268d)

  175. The CBS Evening News last night was lengthened to an hour but it mostly kept on repeating the exact same things, and trying to find an excuse for skepticism about the plane having been shot down by a missile fired by Ukrainian rebels. Several different segments consisted of people brought in to talk about the plane. Sully Sullenberger was asked whether they should have avoided the whole are

    (Sullenberger’s was trying to make some kind of a point, which was a little unclear to me. It was that there needed to be sharing of security information as well as technical information. This assumes that anybody outside of Russia and its rebels had any idea anyone among the rebels had a missile that could shoot down a Boeing 777 flying at cruising altitude.

    On Gaza, it was still a “homeland” although this time at least Scott Pelley did’t say it had made a “homeland” for the Palestinians in 1948 – he did say, however, it as been occupied by Israel several times (in reality 1956-57, and then 1967-2005)

    And this business about comparing the number of deaths without going into why that was happening. It didn’t mean Israel was under no threat, and should leave things more or less alone. It’s not like Hamas had any cause.

    Sammy Finkelman (ff268d)

  176. The point is that this seems to be a genuine accident…

    For someone so hellbent on defining the legitimacy of prior governments or territorial sovereignty, you seem to have a curious definition of the word accident.

    A mistake is perhaps the mildest descriptive one could apply, shooting down a passenger airliner instead of an expected military transport, perhaps, but firing a medium range SAM at the plane was a very intentional act. It’s not like Sergey tripped over the Buk cord and bumped the firing switch…or had two blips on the same screen and the missile malfunctioned and got the wrong lock. That might (by a stretch) be considered an accident.

    Regardless, as long as you can find some way to minimize it because you sympathize with the shooting side, though, right?

    rtrski (a63dd2)

  177. 178. He work is done hear.

    gary gulrud (46ca75)

  178. gg @ 7/18/2014 @ 6:07 am
    Which commenter’s comment are you referring to when you point to 178,? I often feel that the numbering system must look different to different readers, maybe depending on the system they’re using or something else technical. At this time on my screen #178 belongs to rtrski and I think it is a spot on observation.

    elissa (dcf2ac)

  179. elissa,

    the discrepancy has to do with moderation. Comments that have left moderation will change the numbering, so older comments can be off count. Comments still in moderation will affect the numbering for that commenter, too.

    Dustin (7f67e8)

  180. 180. Considering the authors, no confusion is possible. rtrski’s comment is concise and on target.

    gary gulrud (46ca75)

  181. My real interest lies in Amerikkka mirroring her Mascot, Gay Crack Whore, in pretending the sheet that hit zee fan now splatters her face and what shall shee do but wipe?

    You looking damn silly, girl.

    gary gulrud (46ca75)

  182. Millhouse “Stalin was not Russian.”

    Yeah, and Hitler was not born in Germany. So what?

    Jeff Hall (4e23a4)

  183. Thanks for the votes of confidence, gg and elissa.

    Maybe I’m furious at the wrong thing, but I just hate the whole euphemism treadmill. An accident is when a car, thru driver inattention, road conditions, or mechanical failure, hits another car. The driver had no intent to hit any car, much less the specific one he or she did. This situation is like a soldier intentionally aiming his Humvee at an opposing soldier and stomping the accelerator, only to run over a group of schoolkids instead. They killed the wrong ones…but their intent was clearly to kill.

    Mask the language…mask the intent. Then start looking for mitigating circumstances, ameliorating contexts, and drawing insipid moral equivalence to ‘splain’ it all away.

    Sickening as the act itself, because to my mind it empowers the actors. It’s practically collusion. And yes, I’ll still feel that way if it ended up being the Ukranian military forces pulling the trigger. It’s wrong and it should be named for what it is. Most definitely not an accident.

    rtrski (b47753)

  184. On 7/18/69, a car driven by Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., plunged into a pond at Chappaquiddick, killing Mary Jo Kopechne as brave Ted fled.

    Colonel Haiku (01ad4d)

  185. TB Sammy…

    Colonel Haiku (01ad4d)

  186. Mask the language…mask the intent.

    You got that right, rtrski, but isn’t that what leftists always do? They are constantly changing the language to cover their intent as well as their failures. That’s what PC is all about. There’s a post on American Thinker today on just that topic. Example: illegal aliens are now undocumented immigrants. No they’re not, they’re unwelcome invaders pure and simple.

    Hoagie (4dfb34)

  187. Millhouse “Stalin was not Russian.”

    Yeah, and Hitler was not born in Germany. So what?

    Asked and answered. It’s got nothing to do with where someone happened to be born. Hitler was German; all Austrians are. Stalin wasn’t a Russian who happened to be born in Georgia, he was a Georgian.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  188. you seem to have a curious definition of the word accident.

    A mistake is perhaps the mildest descriptive one could apply, shooting down a passenger airliner instead of an expected military transport,

    The distinction you’re drawing is irrelevant. I compared it to the Vincennes incident; whatever word you prefer to use for that, this appears to deserve the same word. Quibbling over which word to use for both doesn’t change anything; it might as well be “qrtzprgl”.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  189. Murder is a good word for it too.

    nk (dbc370)

  190. A point about the Vincennes incident:
    The Iranian aircraft was squawking an IFF code that was misinterpreted as military by the radar-operators aboard the Vincennes, and was displaying a radar-shadow that was interpreted to be of an F-14 (USN radar operators get a lot of practice tracking F-14′s, and only one other nation in the world flew that aircraft: Iran). The aircraft was hailed (challenged) twice over the radio and did not respond. It was then that the Captain gave the fire order as the aircraft was closing within range of anti-ship missiles that an F-14 may carry.
    I was living in San Diego at the time, and had a number of clients in the Navy, some carrier pilots; no one was happy about what had happened, and it cost a good skipper his career – the Navy is funny about such things and have a tendency not to reward you for a monumental fu..up, no matter what the circumstances. Your fault, their fault, nobody’s fault….you get the gate.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  191. OK, nk, you think the Vincennes incident was murder; how about this one? What word would you use for it? And why would that same word not apply to the current incident?

    Milhouse (b95258)

  192. 155. My point is that no matter how you look at it, no matter who can make a legitimate claim to the Crimea, the Ukraine isn’t it.

    Why?

    Put it this way: who can make a legitimate claim to sovereignty over Alaska? I can think of only three sensible answers:
    1) the USA
    2) Russia
    3) the Alaskans themselves

    Actually, based on your standard for the Crimea, the U.S. is NOT a viable claimant.
    The American claim derives solely from the purchase from Russia; an imperial power that seized the land against the wishes of the inhabitants then transferred it without the consent or even consultation with the inhabitants.
    That completely voids any legitimacy of the American claim.

    Canada is not an option.

    I’m sure it isn’t.
    Of course that is moot as Canada has not made any claim or administered Alaska at any point in time.

    There is no case to be made for Canada to annex Alaska, unless of course the Alaskans genuinely decide they want it, in which case it becomes a subset of option 3, with Canada as the Alaskans’ proxy.

    So then if the Crimean Tatars have indicated a desire to remain with Ukraine then their preferences take precedence.
    Wait, that’s what they have done.
    Uh oh . . .

    Similarly, as I see it, the Crimea belongs either to Russia, or Turkey, or it should be independent, but there’s no way it belongs to the Ukraine.

    Turkey?
    Why Turkey?
    Turkey is not the Ottoman Empire – just ask the Turks every time they deny complicity, or even the existence, of the Armenian Genocide.
    Even then they only had a claim by conquest.
    The Russian claim similarly derives from an imperial transfer, something you reject as legitimate for Ukraine to claim the region. That takes Russia out of the equation.

    And I don’t know which people you refer to who want to be part of the Ukraine. As far as I know there isn’t any significant support for that in the Crimea.
    Milhouse (b95258)

    Then you should investigate the situation further. Here is a start:
    http://www.rferl.org/content/ukraine-crimean-tatar-un-peacekeepers/25317014.html

    I would note, I find it . . . intriguing . . . that you cite the native Alaskans when considering claims to Alaska but you are so unaware of the Crimean Tatars that you bring the Turks in as a claimant instead of them. At that rate, why not cite the Greeks as having a claim from the Byzantine Empire? That is as legitimate as Turkey being the successor to the Ottomans.

    It is clear that despite your claim, barring truly significant parsing of what constitutes a “legitimate” transfer of sovereignty, Ukraine has just as good a claim to the Crimea as does Russia, and given the preference of the Crimean Tatars has a significantly better claim.

    Sam (e8f1ad)

  193. Nk, was Stonewall Jackson murdered?

    Milhouse (b95258)

  194. BTW, as to the confusion over the number of people on board: 295 v. 298.
    Many carriers noted POB’s (People On Board) as “passengers + crew + babes in arms (BIA)”.
    Passengers and crew would be occupying seats; BIA’s are just that, infants carried in the arms of a parent or care-giver as they are too small to be secured in a separate seat.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  195. I would note, I find it . . . intriguing . . . that you cite the native Alaskans when considering claims to Alaska

    Huh? When did I mention one word about the native Alaskans? Where did you get that?

    Milhouse (b95258)

  196. Friendly fire. They were both engaged in war, presumably under the same rules of engagement since they were on the same side, their “buddies” did to them what they had both agreed would be done in that situation. Nothing to do with innocent bystanders being in a place they had a right to be.

    nk (dbc370)

  197. Wild Bill Hickock shot his deputy, too, when he ran up behind him to help him in the middle of a gunfight. It was also a Gunsmoke episode.

    nk (dbc370)

  198. nk, was that something that Ned Buntline wrote about?
    Well then, you can take it to the bank – Ned certainly did.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  199. I might be misreading it of course, but this is starting to feel more like SQUIRREL!!! than an honest discussion over the circumstances of a commercial plane’s destruction and the tragic loss of nearly 300 innocent passengers.

    elissa (dcf2ac)

  200. I blame Gavrilo Pricip for everything that has happened in the last 100-years.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  201. Sara Firth of RT could take the spin no longer.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  202. Actually, based on your standard for the Crimea, the U.S. is NOT a viable claimant.
    The American claim derives solely from the purchase from Russia; an imperial power that seized the land against the wishes of the inhabitants then transferred it without the consent or even consultation with the inhabitants.
    That completely voids any legitimacy of the American claim.

    Why do you automatically suppose claiming land by right of conquest is illegitimate? That’s the main way most territory has changed hands throughout history. Without it hardly anybody can claim anything.

    Turkey?
    Why Turkey?
    Turkey is not the Ottoman Empire – just ask the Turks every time they deny complicity, or even the existence, of the Armenian Genocide.
    Even then they only had a claim by conquest.
    The Russian claim similarly derives from an imperial transfer, something you reject as legitimate for Ukraine to claim the region. That takes Russia out of the equation.

    When the Crimea was under Ottoman rule, what country was it part of? Not Libya or Syria, etc., but Turkey. No? What is Turkey today, but the successor of that Turkey? If Turkey has a claim to Ankara, then why not to the Crimea? It’s not a strong claim, but it’s at least a claim. “We had it once upon a time” is better than “We never had it but we want it now”. The Russian claim is better, because they conquered it fair and square, under international law as it existed at the time. The local inhabitants’ claim is obvious. But what claim has the Ukraine got? The Ukraine never conquered it, never historically had it, they just fell into it by accident in 1991, because of an arbitrary and bizarre act by a regime that was as illegitimate as the Third Reich.

    As for the Tatars, have they spoken at all? A pronouncement by a “spokesman” doesn’t mean anything. But even if they did, they are now a small minority in the Crimea. I’m not sure why you think their views should prevail over those of other Crimeans.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  203. a blue sky Friday
    do these last days and hours mean
    graves without flowers?

    Colonel Haiku (017a27)

  204. No, askeptic, this would have come from newspaper accounts and from the mayor of Abilene who fired Hickock over it. The gunfight itself was more of a personal matter between Hickock and Phil Coe even though Hickock was marshal so I guess people did blame Hickcock some for the shooting.

    nk (dbc370)

  205. One thing’s fer certain, Hitler never would’ve put up with der fooden schtampen.

    Colonel Haiku (017a27)

  206. “Their claim doesn’t make it so. I don’t understand why you’d think a mere claim can make anything legitimate or illegitimate.”

    Milhouse – The irony burns.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  207. That’s gonna leave a mark, daley…

    Colonel Haiku (01ad4d)

  208. What could you possibly mean? When have I ever said or implied that saying something made it so?

    Milhouse (b95258)

  209. Any claim is either true or false. Its truth or falsity exists independently of the claim itself, and can’t be affected by it.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  210. Who woulda thunk Samantha Powers would have bigger nads than the POTUS!?!?

    Colonel Haiku (5348bf)

  211. Power must immediately tender her resignation. Obama won’t point to Putin as the culprit, as that would normally require a POTUS to actually DO something, and he is clueless.

    Colonel Haiku (8e79c6)

  212. Colonel, that opens up an exploration of endless dimensions, one that even H. M. Stanley would be reluctant to undertake.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  213. Milhouse – Mere claims that something is illegitimate does not make it illegitimate. You have said so yourself. Repeating it more times, in this instance with respect to Crimea and the Eastern Ukraine, does not serve much purpose in my view. Repeating the claims do not appear to be swaying people to agree with you that the land transfers were illegitimate. Repeating the claims is just repeating something you repeatedly said.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  214. askeptic… it’s sad and not a little poignant to witness an incompetent narcissist struggle with comprehending just how far out of his element he finds himself.

    Colonel Haiku (8e79c6)

  215. Of course claiming something is illegitimate doesn’t make it illegitimate. When have I ever suggested otherwise? Please stop making things up about me. If you object to something I have written, cite it. The Ukranian claim to the Crimea is illegitimate, not because I said so, but because of the facts. I have explained repeatedly why I think it’s illegitimate. If you disagree, explain exactly why. What gives it legitimacy? Krushchev’s gift?! Or what? It seems to me that you’re the one claiming that your mere words make it so.

    Milhouse (b95258)

  216. And again with the personal insults. Do you think they carry any weight? Do they make you feel good about yourself? If all you have to contribute is to call people names, why don’t you STFU?

    Milhouse (b95258)

  217. Why do you automatically suppose claiming land by right of conquest is illegitimate? That’s the main way most territory has changed hands throughout history. Without it hardly anybody can claim anything.

    Well in that case Crimea is legitimately a part of the Ukraine. The United States defeated the Soviets economically and the terms of surrender ceded Crimea to the Ukraine. You can’t even follow your own rules.

    Separately Milhouse, are you ethnically Russian?

    njrob (e7c34e)

  218. I didn’t read all the thread but the “plebiscite” in Crimea was rigged. The Russians sent a lot of Russian speakers into many of the formerly independent countries that the USSR occupied after the Revolution. The Crimean vote opens the door for similar attacks on Baltic countries that are viable nations and with good economies. Estonia, for example, has many Russian speakers left over from the USSR, many of whom are economic refugees from the gangster economy of Russia.

    Frankly, east Ukraine is the least desirable section of the country as it is littered with ruined industry. Ukraine, itself is no economic powerhouse but the Crimea thing was a grab for the naval bases. Putin is reacting to Obama’s and Europe’s weakness. We could be doing a lot without attacking Russia but this bunch is feckless to the point of real danger.

    Mike K (b5c01a)

  219. askeptic, as has been documented, TFG actually believes he can perform any task better than the expert in the field that is responsible for performing it.

    Colonel Haiku (146aeb)

  220. 205. Why do you automatically suppose claiming land by right of conquest is illegitimate? That’s the main way most territory has changed hands throughout history. Without it hardly anybody can claim anything.

    I never said it was.
    You claim that transfer of land that has been conquered is illegitimate.
    That means Russia could not legitimately give Alaska away under any circumstances.
    You also claim that an existing population has standing over land that was conquered
    That means the Crimean Tatars maintain a primary claim.

    When the Crimea was under Ottoman rule, what country was it part of? Not Libya or Syria, etc., but Turkey. No? What is Turkey today, but the successor of that Turkey? If Turkey has a claim to Ankara, then why not to the Crimea? It’s not a strong claim, but it’s at least a claim. “We had it once upon a time” is better than “We never had it but we want it now”. The Russian claim is better, because they conquered it fair and square, under international law as it existed at the time. The local inhabitants’ claim is obvious. But what claim has the Ukraine got? The Ukraine never conquered it, never historically had it, they just fell into it by accident in 1991, because of an arbitrary and bizarre act by a regime that was as illegitimate as the Third Reich.

    It was part of the Khanate of Crimea.
    The Khanate of Crimea was tributary to the Ottoman Porte, but it was not an integral part of the Ottoman Empire.
    By that standard, the U.K. has full rights to Hannover, despite the succession having passed from its royal family over a century ago.
    Perhaps you should take some time to actually investigate the history of the region before going off on these wild musings regarding legitimate claims of sovereignty.

    As for the claim of Ukraine, as before, what claim does the U.S. have to Alaska under that standard?
    None at all.
    We “fell into it by accident” and such like.
    Meanwhile, Ukraine received the Crimea from the legitimate successor under international law to the legitimate conqueror under international through a legitimate transfer under international law.

    As for the Tatars, have they spoken at all? A pronouncement by a “spokesman” doesn’t mean anything. But even if they did, they are now a small minority in the Crimea. I’m not sure why you think their views should prevail over those of other Crimeans.
    Milhouse (b95258)

    Yes.
    They have.
    The Crimean Tatars have a semi-autonomous status with their own parliament – the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People.
    That group has expressed a desire to remain part of Ukraine.
    They are the people who were living in Crimea when it was conquered by Russia.
    They were expelled by the government you have declared is illegitimate along with all of its acts.
    They were replaced by settlers by that illegitimate government, an act that is a direct violation of international law.
    You have already declared such “indigenous” populations retain a sovereignty claim.
    Given that they are only a minority because of illegal actions by a government you declare to be illegitimate, how can they not have the pre-eminent claim?

    Oh right, by an extreme and egregious parsing and redaction of the definitions regarding the legitimacy of such claims in order to solely and exclusively exclude one claimant but now cannot tolerate that the best claimant left prefers the one you want to exclude.

    “You can vote for anyone you like as long as it is the person I approve.”
    Wasn’t that the definition of “democracy” under the government you have declared illegitimate?

    Sam (e8f1ad)

  221. Hole opens in President Precious’ schedule allowing time for a probe of the circumstances of the downing of MH-17 between visits to burger-shacks.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  222. When have I ever suggested otherwise? Please stop making things up about me.

    Milhouse – When did I suggest you said otherwise? You can stop making it about yourself by ceasing to repeat the same unsupported claim of saying something is illegitimate does not make it illegitimate. That is a concept with which you have specifically agreed on this thread.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  223. I’ve updated the post with an obligatory clip and summary of the president’s statement made this morning.

    Dana (4dbf62)

  224. Yes, that call for an immediate cease-fire is just breath-taking….
    You laugh for five minutes and you’ll be gasping for air too.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  225. This hurts.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  226. 218.Of course claiming something is illegitimate doesn’t make it illegitimate. When have I ever suggested otherwise? Please stop making things up about me. If you object to something I have written, cite it. The Ukranian claim to the Crimea is illegitimate, not because I said so, but because of the facts. I have explained repeatedly why I think it’s illegitimate. If you disagree, explain exactly why. What gives it legitimacy? Krushchev’s gift?! Or what? It seems to me that you’re the one claiming that your mere words make it so.
    Milhouse (b95258)

    Well, you are the one who has unilaterally declared Krushchev’s transfer to be illegitimate.
    Therefore, by the standard you now declare, it is incumbent on you to establish that it really was.

    You have also Godwinned the entire Soviet Union into illegitimacy, so likewise it is incumbent upon you to establish that it really was.

    From there it would help if you actually provided a working definition of what you consider to be “legitimate”.

    For example, is the post-Soviet government of Russia legitimate?
    Can that government make any legitimate transfers of territory or legitimize previous transfers, even of a government that may have been illegitimate, specifically the Soviet Union?
    In such a case, given the agreements signed following the full breakup of the Soviet Union and the Commonwealth of Independent States in which the government of Russia recognized that the Crimea was part of Ukraine, how can Ukraine not have a legitimate claim to the Crimea?

    Sam (e8f1ad)

  227. “The Ukranian claim to the Crimea is illegitimate, not because I said so, but because of the facts.”

    Milhouse – The claims you call facts are that Kruschev’s transfer was illegitimate and that Kruschev’s government was illegitimate. I have seen no “facts” from you supporting either claim. Meanwhile, since Ukraine had been part of the Russian Empire for 300 years, why would internal border adjustment be illegitimate. The Russian Constitution permitted it, although they did have to fiddle a little with the timing of the 1954 events, but the people in charge in a communist dictatorship can pretty much make that happen. Post-1991 separation regret does not make the transfer illegitimate, it is an attempt to rewrite history.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  228. I absolutely love the concept of non-violent separatist movements armed with sophisticated military hardware supplied by a state sponsor in a neighboring country purely for defensive purposes. I believe we have see this movie before.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  229. Still waiting to hear from the Association of Southeast Asia Nations. This is really their baby. Will they sanction Russia? Will they at least raise the prices of their brothels for Russian sailors?

    nk (dbc370)

  230. They say Eskimos have dozens of terms for snow because of its ubiquity and their intimate familiarity.

    Accident, murder, killing, whatever, we are likely to become more discriminating in the near future.

    gary gulrud (46ca75)

  231. Man-caused transition into a non-viable state. — Janet Napolitano

    nk (dbc370)

  232. Well, for the crew it was ‘work place violence’.

    askeptic (efcf22)

  233. Agrarian reformers?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  234. >> Khrushchev’s transfer was illegitimate and that Khrushchev’s government was illegitimate

    That is, of courtse, true, and what’s more the biundary change didn’t really mean anything at the time. Khrushchev may have dione it to reduce the (remote) chances of Ukrainian secession, since ow Ukraine would be less Ukrainian.

    But all the boundaries were ratified, and agreed to later in the 1990s.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  235. “That is, of courtse, true”

    Sammy – What makes those statements true rather than just opinion?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  236. 208. Colonel Haiku (017a27) — 7/18/2014 @ 8:52 am

    One thing’s fer certain, Hitler never would’ve put up with der fooden schtampen.

    Putin is very cautious.

    He always telephones Obama before doing anything to assess his mood.

    He did it this time, too:

    Putin broke news of Flight MH17 crash midway through call to Obama

    The Kremlin said Mr Putin, whose actions in Ukraine were compared to those of Hitler by Prince Charles earlier this year, had informed President Obama of the disaster after learning of it just before a scheduled phone call between the two.

    ‘The Russian leader informed the US president of the report from air traffic controllers that the Malaysian plane had crashed on Ukrainian territory, which had arrived immediately before the phone call,’ it said in a statement.

    I wonder if that checks out and the crash was actually before the call.

    It may not.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/07/17/us-ukraine-crisis-obama-idUSKBN0FM24620140717

    During the call, which came at Moscow’s request, Putin informed Obama about the downed plane.

    “I can confirm that President Putin near the end of this morning’s phone call with President Obama noted the early reports of a downed passenger jet near the Russia-Ukraine border,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said.

    Which sounds like the missile was fired at the plane during the call, not before the call.

    If Obama had said, or not said, different things, perhaps the plane would not have been shot down.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  237. 238. Come on, the rule of the Communist Party in the old Soviet Union and that of Khrushchev himself was not in the slightest bit legitimate.

    Of course, most governments in the worlds’s history have not been legitimate.

    More important maybe is that this was not a real boundary change.

    It has to be said though, that the very concept of an independent Ukraine probably started with Imperial Germany during World War I.

    It also created the very idea of a jihad by murdering individuals. The first fatwas allowing and encouraging Moslems to kill civilians of certain nationalities were written by Max von Oppenheim and translated from the original German into various lanaguages early in World War I.

    Germany of course also installed Communism in Russia by transporting Lenin to Petrograd in a sealed train.

    The evil that men do lives after them…

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  238. Perhaps Putin wasn’t waiting for the call to give the final go-ahead for shooting down the plane, but had sounded out Obama earlier. I don’t know. He still would have needed to make a call.

    Putin doesn’t have any real informants inside the Obama White House. He has to act as his own spy.

    It is not so much that the disaster happened just before a scheduled phone call, but rather the phone call was scheduled for just after the disaster!

    I don’t think it was an accident. It was deliberate, but designed to look somewhat like an accident.

    The disaster had to be scheduled first because the Malaysian plane would only pass over thaat territory at a specific time. Russia had closed its own air space as of midnight, but too soon to affect the flight path of this plane. The timing of the call was forced by the timing of the disaster.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  239. Sammy – You and Milhouse have both now claimed that Kruschev’s government was illegitimate and that his transfer of Crimea to the Ukraine was illegitimate. Milhouse asks us to consider those as facts you say the statements are correct. Absent supporting information I see them as mere statements of opinion from you and Milhouse.

    I am not aware of any provisions under international law which prevent a sovereign nation from redrawing its internal borders among its states, provinces or subdivisions, which is clearly what happened in the case of Crimea. Applicable law would depend on the individual country affected.

    A case of separation anxiety developed almost 40 years later would not appear to have much legal standing IMHO.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  240. Putin, for one thing, had to determine how suspicious Obama was of Russian control over the Ukrainian rebels, and also what kinds of sanctions he might contemplate. There was probably something Putin was afraid of that definitely did not want to be anywhere on the menu.

    He also needed to know if whatever he wanted to achieve by that (say not supplying anti-aircraft missiles to the syrian rebels) had a chance of working.

    There was no spy Putin had available for this mission except Vladimir Putin himself.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  241. Milhouse (b95258) — 7/17/2014 @ 10:24 pm

    this can be compared to the Vincennes.

    I always thought Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger wanted something like that to happen.

    Iran certainly believed that, and as a result, Ayatollah Khomenini quickly ended the Iran-Iraq war.

    There were many members of Iran’s Revolutioinary Guards aboard the plane.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  242. Well in that case Crimea is legitimately a part of the Ukraine. The United States defeated the Soviets economically and the terms of surrender ceded Crimea to the Ukraine. You can’t even follow your own rules.

    None of that happened. There was no conquest and no surrender. The USA had nothing to do with the Ukraine becoming independent.

    Separately Milhouse, are you ethnically Russian

    No, as you’d know if you were paying attention. Quite the contrary.

    Milhouse (50cb78)

  243. Daleyrocks @ 242.

    I am not aware of any provisions under international law which prevent a sovereign nation from redrawing its internal borders among its states, provinces or subdivisions, which is clearly what happened in the case of Crimea. Applicable law would depend on the individual country affected.

    Not illegal under international law. Just illegitimate.

    If there was something really wrong with boundaries theer wa sno reaosn to accept them.

    But Yeltsin completely accepted them in 1994.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  244. Not illegal under international law. Just illegitimate.

    Sammy – Can you explain the distinction?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  245. Illegal has as a consequence that no country recognizes the transfer.

    Illegitimate means there’s no moral authority here.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  246. You claim that transfer of land that has been conquered is illegitimate.
    That means Russia could not legitimately give Alaska away under any circumstances.

    I did not claim that. I claimed that Krushchev had no right to transfer anything to anybody.

    You also claim that an existing population has standing over land that was conquered
    That means the Crimean Tatars maintain a primary claim.

    The Tatars are not the existing population.

    I wrote that there are three parties with some sort of standing to stake a claim: Russia, because they conquered it ~200 years ago and nothing happened since to change that. Turkey, because they had it last, so if Russia’s claim is ruled out they should get it back. The locals, because they live there now, and if they want to be independent it’s hard to make a case why they should be ruled by someone they don’t want.

    The Ukraine’s only basis for standing is Krushchev’s gift, which is obviously invalid. The USSR was an illegitimate regime, just like the Third Reich, and had no right to do anything to anybody. It had no right to exist, let alone to give away parts of Russia. All its acts are inherently null.

    You have already declared such “indigenous” populations retain a sovereignty claim.

    I never made that claim either.

    Milhouse (50cb78)

  247. Illegitimate means there’s no moral authority here.

    Sammy – Is there some requirement somewhere that governments must have moral authority to take actions? Is a vote taken? Does it require a super majority? What happens in countries that are not democracies?

    I’m still seeing opinion, not fact.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  248. “The USSR was an illegitimate regime”

    Milhouse – Settled law or opinion?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  249. Sammy – I reject your moral authority as well as that of Milhouse to determine in the eyes of others what is or is not illegitimate.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  250. Well, you are the one who has unilaterally declared Krushchev’s transfer to be illegitimate.
    Therefore, by the standard you now declare, it is incumbent on you to establish that it really was.

    You have also Godwinned the entire Soviet Union into illegitimacy, so likewise it is incumbent upon you to establish that it really was.

    Come on. If I really have to establish that for you, then we have no common language. The USSR was exactly as illegitimate as the Third Reich, for the exact same reasons. They were both evil regimes, implementations of the most evil ideology ever to infect humanity, and nothing that they did can be allowed to have legal effect. They are the gold standard of illegitimacy, by which others are to be judged.

    For example, is the post-Soviet government of Russia legitimate?

    As legitimate as any. By historical standards more legitimate than most, since it was elected, at least as fairly as many elected goverments have historically been.

    Can that government make any legitimate transfers of territory or legitimize previous transfers, even of a government that may have been illegitimate, specifically the Soviet Union?
    In such a case, given the agreements signed following the full breakup of the Soviet Union and the Commonwealth of Independent States in which the government of Russia recognized that the Crimea was part of Ukraine, how can Ukraine not have a legitimate claim to the Crimea?

    Because Russia was then in a position of weakness and didn’t really have any choice. Again, I compare it to 0bama giving away Alaska; I would expect any future president to repudiate that act and retake it, by whatever means presented themselves.

    Milhouse (50cb78)

  251. 251. This belongs in the category of “Is the sky blue” or “Is the Pope Catholic?”

    I don’t think the Soviet Union was all that much more illegitimate than so many other governments, but it was lwess respectful of people.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  252. “The USSR was an illegitimate regime”

    Milhouse – Settled law or opinion?

    Moral axiom.

    Milhouse (50cb78)

  253. Aviation Expert: Essential Clues to Flight MH17 Crash Being Tampered With

    One separatist noted the crash on social media almost two hours before the event.

    Oops.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  254. A lot of the passengers were flying to Australia for a conference on AIDS. They includeed both “activists” and researchers.

    The {rime Minister of Australia said it was a crime.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  255. Russian media after the crash made the claim it was done by the government of Ukraine because they thought it was Putin’s presidential plane.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  256. http://australia.gotnewswire.com/news/live-missile-expert-arrested-near-border-after-malaysia-airlines-jet-shot-down

    Authorities in Kiev say two men have been captured near the border on the Ukrainian side, one of whom reportedly had paperwork indicating he was a missile specialist.

    I thought maybe there was only one missile of this type in the rebels inventory.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  257. “Because Russia was then in a position of weakness and didn’t really have any choice. Again, I compare it to 0bama giving away Alaska; I would expect any future president to repudiate that act and retake it, by whatever means presented themselves.”

    Milhouse – That’s very nice, but you are comparing an actual event to something which has not happened and in all likelihood will not happen. Your basic position comes down to a personal opinion on moral legitimacy of the Russian government, not facts as you previously averred.

    I personally don’t believe that Barack Obama has the moral authority to be president of this country because he is an America-hating anti-capitalist socialist lying thug and there is a considerable body of evidence which he has attempted to hide supporting that view, but he is nevertheless our president, which saddens me, but it doesn’t make his presidency illegitimate in any commonly used sense of the word. Many of the actions he or his subordinates have taken have been of questionable legality, which does make the legitimacy of such actions dubious.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  258. Scott Pelly and CBS News, don’t mean to single you out among media douches, but fundraisers are “political meetings”? pic.twitter.com/GRpNktpYfW

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  259. Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  260. Scott Pelley had a kind of editorial today – about wars – people ignore ones – pictures could be Ukraine, Gaza, Israel Malaysia.

    There’s actually a big war going on in Syria and Iraq, and Boko Haram just massacred some people today in Nigeria.

    We also learned that the Ukrainian rebel’s voice on the tape where he says some unit downed a plane was recognized by a CBS News (female) reporter. All of the CBS reporters in war zones seem to be female. She and others were detained a few months ago, and perhaps only released when a Russian superior instructed them too.

    (as I said, it seems to have taken him by surprise, even what kind of a plane it was, but it shouldn’t have, so Putin I think operated behind his back. This was a very secret covert operation, whose final go-ahead was not given until Putin had Obama on the phone, and got a sense of Obama’s attitude and how far Obama might go with sanctions. That a certain sanction putin may be afraid of was not mentioned may have been significant.

    Sammy Finkelman (033fec)

  261. Bill Clinton was and is scheduled to address that “AIDS conference” in Melbourne, Australia that about 100 of the crash victims were headed to. That probably tells you something about the true value of that conference. I’m sure some really serious people were roped in.

    Sammy Finkelman (033fec)

  262. 249. I did not claim that. I claimed that Krushchev had no right to transfer anything to anybody.

    On what basis?
    Did the Bolsheviks not own Russia by right of conquest?
    Did Kruschev not control the Soviet Union by right of victory within the troika?
    You have already said such is legitimate.
    Why is Kruschev so special as to not be able to dispose of conquered lands?

    The Tatars are not the existing population.

    Well, yes, they are.

    I wrote that there are three parties with some sort of standing to stake a claim: Russia, because they conquered it ~200 years ago and nothing happened since to change that. Turkey, because they had it last, so if Russia’s claim is ruled out they should get it back. The locals, because they live there now, and if they want to be independent it’s hard to make a case why they should be ruled by someone they don’t want.

    And again, the Bolsheviks conquered Russia, so they get right to dispense the lands as they see fit.

    The Ukraine’s only basis for standing is Krushchev’s gift, which is obviously invalid. The USSR was an illegitimate regime, just like the Third Reich, and had no right to do anything to anybody. It had no right to exist, let alone to give away parts of Russia. All its acts are inherently null.

    Why?
    On what basis?
    Again, you declared right of conquest to be legitimate.
    Why can the Soviets not claim it?
    Just because you don’t like them?

    I never made that claim either.

    Well, yes, you did.
    You did it when you raised the issue of the native Alaskans having a sovereignty claim.
    On what basis do you now deny it to the Crimean Tatars?

    253. Come on. If I really have to establish that for you, then we have no common language.

    Well, yes, you must.
    The Soviet Union, like the Third Reich, both received full international recognition.
    Declaring their governments are ex post facto completely null and void is not merely legally outrageous for destroying the precedents, but legally absurd as it completely invalidates any and all protocols and treaties they are integral too.
    Are you seriously suggesting that all of Russia is terra nullia because the Soviet Union never should have been?

    The USSR was exactly as illegitimate as the Third Reich, for the exact same reasons. They were both evil regimes, implementations of the most evil ideology ever to infect humanity, and nothing that they did can be allowed to have legal effect. They are the gold standard of illegitimacy, by which others are to be judged.

    Yeah, see, uh huh . . . no.
    It doesn’t actually work that way.
    Governments don’t get handwaved out of existence no matter how vile they are.
    By that standard, the PRC is completely invalid.
    Indeed, Turkey is completely invalid as the Ottoman Empire was completely invalid.
    Overall at least half the current countries are voided by that standard. And that is before we start getting subjective about it.

    As legitimate as any. By historical standards more legitimate than most, since it was elected, at least as fairly as many elected goverments have historically been.

    Yes, but it is derived from the Soviet Union, which you have unilaterally expelled from the playground.

    Because Russia was then in a position of weakness and didn’t really have any choice. Again, I compare it to 0bama giving away Alaska; I would expect any future president to repudiate that act and retake it, by whatever means presented themselves.
    Milhouse (50cb78)

    So then . . . because Germany was in a position of weakness after WWII, all territorial concessions they made in those treaties can be repudiated whenever Germany feels strong enough to take the lands back?
    The same with the territory Japan surrendered.
    In fact . . . since Russia only sold Alaska to the U.S. because they felt too weak to keep it in case the British got uppity, Russia can reclaim Alaska whenever it feels strong enough.
    The same with China reclaiming the South China Sea.
    And Mexico the American Southwest.

    What you are describing is nothing about the legal standing of any particular claim, but raw force majeure and nothing else.
    Who inherits? “The strongest.”
    On that basis, “legitimate” is not merely a completely irrelevant term, it is nothing but whining from the loser.

    Sam (e8f1ad)

  263. No… really wouldn’t have mattered who won in November 2012…

    “You said Russia. Not Al Qaida. You said Russia,” Obama said regarding biggest threats. “The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because…the cold war’s been over for 20 years.”

    Romney: “Russia, I indicated, is a geopolitical foe…and I said in the same paragraph I said and Iran is the greatest national security threat we face. Russia does continue to battle us in the U.N. time and time again. I have clear eyes on this. I’m not going to wear rose-colored glasses when it comes to Russia or Mr. Putin…”

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  264. This president has had his head up his narrow behind for over 54 months now. He has had a big hand in making this world much less safe.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  265. ==The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because…the cold war’s been over for 20 years.==

    This president’s smart azzy answer rankled at the time. But it rankles even more to read it again with two years of hindsight upon which to gauge the combined effects of his incompetence and his misunderstanding of geopolitics.

    elissa (e423be)

  266. He told the Russians he’d be more flexible after his re-election, elissa. Hey, y’all prepare yourself for the Rubberband May-an…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  267. Col., I wish after that bizarre “more flexibility” whisper was overhead, that some “journalist” would have asked him or his press secretary just what the hell that “more flexibility” statement actually might mean in hard practice. (If anyone ever did ask, I missed it.)

    elissa (e423be)

  268. http://t.co/8wocznihp8

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  269. It’s eerie how the airline whose jet plane went missing back in June (and which is still missing today) is the same company caught in this disaster. Makes me think of an episode of the Twilight Zone come to life, and made even more unbelievable, or Twilight Zone-ish, by the absurdity of who’s currently occupying the White House.

    If some of these stories had been described to me several years ago, I’d have said they were no more than bad fiction out of a Hollywood screenwriter’s mind. Back then I actually believed enough people in the US had good enough judgment that they’d never pluck the chad or pull the lever next to the name of someone as disreputable as Obama, not just one time but twice.

    Welcome to the era of a reality that’s stranger than fiction, or where life imitates art.

    zerohedge.com, July 17: Almost exactly one year ago, the world was nearly brought to the verge of a global war by proxy involving the US and Russia (and Europe and China) over a staged, false flag YouTube clip “proving” the Assad regime had used toxic gas (gas that was made in Britain as it was later revealed) to kill several hundred civilians in the country’s ongoing war against what subsequently turned out to be al-Qaeda funded and trained rebels (and which now are fighting across the border with another former US-puppet state, Iraq).

    A year later, it is deja vu all over again, when the same energy and geopolitical tensions (Europe, natural gas, etc) are once again at the frontline, and while the theater of combat may be different, the same key players – Russia and the US – are once again behind the proxy conflict in Ukraine, and where Gazprom is once again the fulcrum party. The only missing link was a YouTube clip which would bring the world to the edge of war again.

    Moments ago Ukraine released what may be just that missing “YouTube” link, when it unveiled a 2:23 minute video supposedly proving that “militants of “Bes” group shot down with a Russian anti-aircraft missile a Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777 passenger jet heading from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur.”

    [I]f indeed all the participants in this YouTube are as they have been presented, then surely this does put the pro-Russian rebel movement in a very unsavory light.

    And yet, something here smells very fishy…

    First, the Russian version of the clip which was released in parallel, and shown below, there is a major discrepancy in the time stamp, with the English-dubbed version showing the conversation between Major and Grek taking place at 5:11 pm and 5:32 pm, while the original one has it at 4:33 pm, 5:14 pm and 5:32 pm. Then there is what gmorder [a pro-Russian blogger at gmorder.livejournal.com/1113736.html] has revealed is either a clearly erroneous creation timestamp, or the video was actually uploaded yesterday.

    Finally, we clearly have no way of authenticating the recording or the participants. [I]t was just over a month ago, on June 5, when in another attempt to cast blame and discredit the separatists, Ukraine released another trademark YouTube clip seeking to disparage and frame Kozitsyn, titled “Russian Cossack Formations are Responsible For Chaos In Ukraine.”

    What is quite striking is that the production quality is identical between the two clips, in everything from the design, to the scene and caption selection to the layout of the dubbing. All done very professionally. The only thing missing in the original clip is that translation which was conveniently added to today’s alleged framing of the same Russian forces – after all it is for global consumption – and the very same “cossack” Kozitsyn. A cossack who, the Ukraine defense ministry would want the world to believe, was so stupid he not only knew he was being recorded (as proven explicitly by the pre-existing June 5 recording release, proving every conversation of his was captured “on tape”, something he himself most certainly would be aware of), but would also speak unencrypted and on the record – just like Victoria Nuland did back in February when her leaked recording showed it was the US that was the mastermind behind the Ukraine unrest in the first place – going into gruesome detail of just what kind of plane it is that his men had taken down.

    Mark (1667b9)

  270. Anne Applebaum:

    Before there is any further discussion of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, it’s important that one point be made absolutely clear: This plane crash is a result of the Russian invasion of eastern Ukraine, an operation deliberately designed to create legal, political, and military chaos. Without this chaos, a surface-to-air missile would not have been fired at a passenger plane.
    From the beginning, the Russian government did not send regular soldiers to Ukraine. Instead, it sent Russian mercenaries and security service operatives such as Igor Strelkov—the commander in chief in Donetsk and a Russian secret police colonel who fought in both Chechen wars—or Vladimir Antyufeyev, the Donetsk “deputy prime minister” who led the Latvian KGB’s attempt to overthrow the independent Latvian government back in 1991
    ….
    We will also learn something interesting about the Russian president. So far there is no sign of shock or shame in Russia. But in truth, this tragedy offers Vladimir Putin an opportunity to get out of the messy disaster he has created in eastern Ukraine. He now has the perfect excuse to denounce the separatist movement and to cut its supplies. If he refuses, then we know that he remains profoundly dedicated to the chaos and nihilism he created in Donetsk. We can assume he intends to perpetuate it elsewhere. And if we are not prepared to fight it, we should be braced for it to spread.

    elissa (e423be)

  271. Anne Applebaum:

    Knowing what makes people tick always interests me. Nonetheless, even someone like her may be the proverbial broken clock that tells the correct time twice a day. But still…

    amnation.com, May 2011: From the first time I became aware of Washington Post columnist Anne Applebaum, in an interview on CSPAN a few years ago about a book she had written on the Soviet Gulag, she struck me as a total intellectual mediocrity, a person with nothing going on upstairs except unexamined conventional notions. The columns of hers I’ve read occasionally since then have confirmed that first impression. But she’s outdone herself in her column today (October 28, 2008) on why she cannot vote for John McCain and is voting for Obama.

    In the manner typical of every “right-leaning” independent and soi-disant conservative, she says that she used to admire McCain a lot, especially for his deep knowledge of foreign policy [sic]. In fact (get ready for this), she calls McCain a “true foreign policy intellectual.” But now, she moans, he’s lost his integrity by appealing to the “extreme” base of his party. That’s right. According to Applebaum, McCain is running an “extreme right” campaign. What the “independent” Applebaum really means is: anything that is not 100 percent liberal-approved, is extreme right.

    [Applebaum writes:] “Though he is a true foreign policy intellectual, his supporters cultivate ignorance and fear.”

    Meaning, they actually care about the fact that Obama is a radical leftist. The one thing that phony “independent” types like Applebaum cannot tolerate is attacks on leftism. Any attack on leftism is, for her, right-wing extremism. And as if that weren’t enough to give her away, she says this:

    “Finally, I admired McCain’s willingness to tackle politically risky issues such as immigration, the debate about which has long been drenched in hypocrisy. Those who want to ban it are illogically denying both the role that immigrants, especially the millions of illegal immigrants, already play in the U.S. economy as well as the improbability of forced deportations; those who want to allow it without restriction don’t acknowledge the security risks. McCain tried to put together a bipartisan coalition in an effort to find a rational solution. He failed—blocked by the ideologues in his party.”

    “Those who want to ban it”? The idea of banning (i.e., stopping) immigration is not remotely on the national radar. The battle is between those who want to legalize all illegal immigrants and vastly expand legal immigration, and those who oppose those measures and want to stop (ban) illegal immigration. There has not been any proposal on the table to reduce legal immigration substantially, let alone to “ban” it. Applebaum is brainless or dishonest to suggest otherwise.

    Mark (1667b9)

  272. Mark – Re #272, I was unaware that Alex Jones was one of the Tylers. Plus it is really polite to indicate you have substantially redacted the original published text when cutting and pasting. For example, I enjoyed the following paragraph from the original:

    This is the key segment as it explicitly makes it clear that the plane the alleged separatists in the first part were talking about was not the Su-25 but MH 17. The only problem is that there is absolutely no way to confirm who “Major” and “Grek” are, and considering the entire Ukraine civil war has been merely one provocation and counter-provocation after another, explicitly staged in advance by either the CIA on the side of Kiev or the Kremlin on the Russian side, one does have to wonder whether the said two “smoking gun” participants aren’t merely two random people speaking Russian and reading off a script?

    Here is the link to the original piece, which you neglected to provide:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-07-17/ukraine-releases-youtube-clip-proving-rebels-shot-down-malaysian-flight-mh-17

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  273. Plus it is really polite to indicate you have substantially redacted the original published text when cutting and pasting.

    daleyrocks, I try to condense material because in this day and age, lots of people (including me) tend to breeze through material — we do live in a time of short attention spans — and so the points that stand out (at least to me) are the ones I try to single out and highlight. Plus, I want to avoid copying/pasting getting even more excessive, which I do in the first place since I tend not to click on most links in this readers forum.

    Mark (1667b9)

  274. Mark, I am curious what, if anything you specifically disagree with in Applebaum’s Slate article about Putin that I linked. I guess you must not agree with it since you felt a need to denigrate it by quoting somebody somewhere who once called her an intellectual mediocrity. Yet you made no comment of your own on the premise or conclusions of her new and timely piece, itself.

    elissa (e423be)

  275. Mark – It is fine to condense but nevertheless indicate you have done so as you did in #272 after “something smells fishy” with ellipses, but left the impression you did not delete content prior to that and omitted to provide a link to the original article.

    Only by going to the source was I able to see how much content you had redacted and how crazy sounding the author actually was. You give a very false impression doing what you did.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  276. ==I try to condense material because in this day and age, lots of people (including me) tend to breeze through material ==
    ==Plus, I want to avoid copying/pasting getting even more excessive, which I do in the first place since I tend not to click on most links in this readers forum.===
    Well at least thanks for finally admitting in writing what most of us already knew, Mark.

    elissa (e423be)

  277. I liked the theories on Zerohedge that claim shooting down MH17 was a conspiracy to distract the world from the illegal Zionist invasion of the Gaza Strip. Plus the posts devoted to fighting the NEW World Order.

    There is really not that much crazy on that site. It’s been almost a year and I’m dying for an update on all those missing German gold reserves.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  278. Mrs. Sikorski’s personal political preferences are not surprising, as was her sympathy for Roman Polanski, however when it comes to analysis of the Soviet Russian mindset, it is quiet solid, her description of the m.o, behind the maskirovna (sic) invasion by Volodya, after the triumph of the Maidan, is on point,

    narciso (24b824)

  279. Elissa, I tend not to have too much confidence in the perceptions and judgment of people who lean left. They have a habit of being ass backwards time and time again, transposing the good and bad. So good people (or good situations) become bad, bad people (or bad situations) become good. But, as I said, Applebaum, at worse, may be like the proverbial broken clock. After all, Russia and the Ukraine are not much less murky or ambiguous than the case with Syria’s president and his jihadist-embracing opponents—of which the latter have been supported by the US and EU.

    Daleyrocks, I’m interested only in the specifics — the details — of the points made by the author at zerohedge.com. If those key observations sound crazy to you, then it would help if you singled out each one of them and explained why they’re wacky. Also, and again, the US and EU have for a variety of reasons been sympathizing with Islamic-spouting renegades in Syria. So moral relativism is alive and well and apparently a fixture of these quagmires.

    Strange bedfellows exist out there in the bigger picture. There are plenty for everyone, all away around.

    Mark (1667b9)

  280. i’m a big believer in patterns, Sabrina Tavernise’s links up thread, were a little too preoccupied with trying to rationalize the Ukrainian rebels, but you see that they had downed two aircraft in similar circumstances, so it’s not that surprising that they would down a third, Lufthansa, had flown a similar track recently, as apparently Volodya and Prime Minister Modi from opposite directions,

    narciso (24b824)

  281. “Daleyrocks, I’m interested only in the specifics — the details — of the points made by the author at zerohedge.com. If those key observations sound crazy to you, then it would help if you singled out each one of them and explained why they’re wacky.”

    Mark – Why not react to the paragraph I cut and pasted from the original article. Do you believe the conflict in the Ukraine is part of a CIA plot?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  282. the role of a Girkin or Bezler might be akin to this character. Apis,

    http://www.gavriloprincip.info/synopsis/

    narciso (24b824)

  283. Do you believe the conflict in the Ukraine is part of a CIA plot?

    Daleyrocks, I have no idea. However, I hope you’re not going to naively claim that our spooks are somehow so very different from their spooks that the plausible is probably implausible.

    Skepticism is well deserved in this era of an increasingly (and regrettably) amoral US, with a IRS losing emails on one hand, and a State Department claiming that a video posted to Youtube somehow inflamed jihadists on the other side of the globe.

    Mark (1667b9)

  284. “However, I hope you’re not going to naively claim that our spooks are somehow so very different from their spooks that the plausible is probably implausible.”

    Mark – I have no idea how our spooks compare to their spooks, but I would have thought you would have given your answer a moment’s thought. Given Obama’s desertion of our former allies in Eastern Europe and disengagement from that segment of the world, why the heck would anybody believe the CIA would be behind any plot to foment unrest in the Ukraine? What would the U.S. be hoping to gain? To me it requires a willing suspension of disbelief, but then again I’m not one of those nutjobs writing conspiracy theories on Zerohedge.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  285. It would seem unlikely almost as much, as someone aiding General Hafter in Libya

    narciso (24b824)

  286. 288. Mark – I have no idea how our spooks compare to their spooks, but I would have thought you would have given your answer a moment’s thought.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/19/2014 @ 2:49 pm

    Assuming our spooks were roughly comparable to their spooks, Captain Teleprompter has greatly increased the degree of difficultly in which they operate.

    So now they have to be better than their spooks, to achieve the same results.

    Steve57 (e07d88)

  287. Secretary of State John Kerry was interviewed by Bob Schieffer on Face the Nation and he mostly made a great deal of sense – except that, the bottom line the U.s policy is feckless and little bit more feckless when it comes to Gaza.

    Kerry gave a long litany of evidence.

    But what to do about anything, there’s really nothing. He had no answer for Bob Scieffer’s questions on that.

    Putin made a statement on Friday about how there should be an internation investigation and since then there’s been radio silence.

    I think is or was afraid of some sanction, which he beleives the U.s. ad NATO powers may be THISCLOSE to doing.

    Probably a freeze on all sorts of bank accounts. There is something he fears. Otherwise he wouldn’t be on the telephone so muh with President Obama. He wants to know if some sanction he is worried about is even a glimmer in his eye.

    Mike Morrell also said something sensible, or almost sensible. He said there were 3 levels of responsibily: 1) creating the rebels 2) Sending them the system and 3) A Russian being there when he trigger was pulled. And the first two seem established. I’d say there’s a fourth thing: Putin himself planning this and picking the target.

    He also said that an examination of the debris won’t answer the questions you want to know. For that you need ntelligence. Everybody’s making more sense than usual.

    Now what they can do: You can’t really expect Putin to resign and turn over the country to the best of his cronies or Gary Kasparov, and fly on a plane to the Netherlands and surrender.

    What you may want is some kind of assurance this will not happen again, or maybe significant help with regards to Iran, Syria and Iraq.

    Getting a ceasefire would be exactly what Putin’s goal was in shooting down the plane. (I’m inclined maybe more to this more prosaic reason than that’s to effect Obamas decision on shipping missiles to Syria)

    The Ukrainian government had decided to wipe out the rebels. A ceasefire maintains their existence.

    With regard to Gaza, Kerry is flying to Egypt. But there isn’t anything to negotiate.

    There are only 3 things that can be done 1) prayer 2) buying them off or 3) fighting them.

    Sammy Finkelman (bd89d5)

  288. The missile system was sent over the border shortly after midnight and then shipped back to Russia minus one missile.

    The claim made on Facebook was about shooting down a different kind of plane.

    I think there’s great unclarity, or an unwillingess to say, just exactly at what hour and minute the missile was fired.

    Sammy Finkelman (bd89d5)

  289. Sammy… shilling for a feckless, incompetent administration…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  290. Maybe MH17 got TB and crashed?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  291. numbs my brain… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdaNz5APlh4&sns=em

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  292. 294. Yes, I later saw that article. That article gives the exact time of the shootdown:

    It was parked there at about 4:10 p.m. Thursday when a Russian operator reported to a rebel officer known by the nom de guerre “Miner” that the system had picked up a high-altitude aircraft.

    The printed newspaper indicates that it had been brought to the site only about 10 minutes before “At about 4:00 pm, the Buk…stopped near the village of Pervomaysk.”

    The printed article also gives the time of 4:10 as exact. This transmission was in the clear, or using a code system that the Ukrainians also had, and it is not clear if they are both in the same place.

    Now as to when the call to President Obama was placed:

    The New York Times says:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/20/world/europe/with-jets-fall-war-in-ukraine-is-felt-globally.html?_r=0

    The call was “in the morning”, lasted about an hour, Obama got on a helicopter after the call, Putin started the call with a long-winded complaint about sanctions imposed the day before, Obama responded that Russia was arming the rebels and had sent them anti-aircraft missiles and said “this is not something we’re making up,” about midway through the call Putin said he had received a report of an aircraft going down in Ukraine, but was vague about it, Putin had been in the air that day returning from a trip to Latin America [not by the way, over Ukrainian airspace, although the new York Times doesn't have this] the two planes passed over Warsaw within 37 minutes of each other according to an Interfax report, Putin placed the call “shortly after landing”, Rossiya 24 played clips of Ukrainian figures saying they wanted Putin dead and intervewed supposed experts as to how the two planes could have been confused. [Russian media had other kinds of conspiracy theories also]

    I saw a picture of Putin with Fidel Castro and someone else last week. Castro has a white beard and a cane and looks thin. I think he has a colotomy bag. During the conversation, one Cuban there mistakenl referred to the Soviet Union and then crrected himself to Russia. Putin was also in Venezuela. Fidel Castro is 87 and no longer has any kind of official position in Cuba. He is merely the owner and sole stockholder of Cuba.

    Sammy Finkelman (a1e8fb)

  293. Peter Baker’s a nice guy, but he doesn’t come to the nub of the matter, this was not a narrow corridor, as PM Modi was also transiting through that same general area, as was volodya from different directions, but the BUK platform came from Russia,

    narciso (24b824)

  294. To me it requires a willing suspension of disbelief,

    daleyrocks, that strikes me as not too much less naive than those people who’ve expressed the belief that the excuses coming out of the IRS following Lois Lerner’s departure or the State Department following Benghazi can be taken at face value.

    Moreover, even though President “Goddamn America” is managing many facets of the federal government, and influencing it thereof, I’m sure there are pockets here and there (including at the CIA) that, as the saying goes, march to the beat of their own drummer.

    Mark (1667b9)

  295. “daleyrocks, that strikes me as not too much less naive”

    Mark – That strikes me as a very stupid comment given that you said you had no idea whether it was a CIA plot and have advanced no argument of your own, but that is your style of commenting.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  296. Nothing escapes these two…..

    askeptic (efcf22)

  297. daleyrocks, I think it’s also very stupid to theorize that the idea of the CIA trying to nudge things in a certain direction regarding the Ukraine and Russia requires a “suspension of disbelief.”

    Mark (1667b9)

  298. “daleyrocks, I think it’s also very stupid to theorize that the idea of the CIA trying to nudge things in a certain direction regarding the Ukraine and Russia requires a “suspension of disbelief.””

    Mark – Now we are getting somewhere! I explained my logic for why I thought it was unlikely. The part of the article you left out which I subsequently cut and pasted into this thread does not describe it as a rogue CIA plot, so please explain you change heart and the CIA motive from your stridently squishy, “I dunno.”

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  299. 下馆子喜欢往三里屯 通例赛最艰巨一战:客场打八一 谈及季后赛跟广东的对决,马布里说到, 我跟广东有一种小我恩仇的情绪身分在,于是,&

    365bet (438219)

  300. Daleyrocks, the gist of your question was: “Do you believe the conflict in the Ukraine is part of a CIA plot?” The key word is “conflict.” So to clarify — just in case you think this argument pertains to Flight 17 — the question wasn’t “do you believe shooting down a jet plane is…,” or “do you believe encouraging Ukrainian enlistees or pro-Russian rebels to launch a missile at a passenger plane is…” The question revolves around “conflict.”

    Mark (1667b9)

  301. “Daleyrocks, the gist of your question was: “Do you believe the conflict in the Ukraine is part of a CIA plot?””

    Mark – Refresh your memory. The gist of my question centers around one portion of the text you deliberately omitted from what you cut and pasted earlier in the thread without indicating you had redacted anything which I said gave a false impression of the article. You asked for specifics and I pointed to the paragraph I pasted which indicated the author believed every action in Ukraine is result of a CIA-Russia battle. I asked specifically if you believed that and you said you did not know.

    I explained how unlikely I thought it was and explained my reasoning. If you want to change your position and take a side, please feel free to do so and explain your reasoning. If you are saying you believe it is true because you believe the State Department excuses about Benghazi or IRS excuses about losing emails, that’s fine, but what are our motives?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  302. Mark (2a5744) — 7/17/2014 @ 7:01 pm

    Clinton can also be heard laughing at several points when discussing the crime lab’s accidental destruction of DNA evidence that tied Taylor to the crime.

    There was no accidental destruction. There was just removal of enough matgerial do that it precluded retesting. It wasn’t DNA evidence – this was before DNA evidence. It might be that the testing established that her clienmt wa sthe only one of tha 3 men the girl was with who could have done it. She’s not telling the full story of that case – like was the fanily of the defendant politically connected. I mean they got a New York forensic expert. A public defender doesn’t get that.

    In the end she had him plead guilty to a reduced charge but avoided being present when he described what he had actually done. (better for him than no prosecution because this creates a double jeopardy situation if anyone els elater wants to prosecute)

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  303. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/07/22/ukraine-mh17-bodies-russia/12981325/

    International monitors at the Malaysia Airlines crash site in eastern Ukraine said the Boeing 777′s cockpit inexplicably had been sawed in half during the time the area was under the control of Russian-backed separates.

    What was that all about?

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.6370 secs.