Who shot down MH17?


Everyone has ‘theories’ about who shot down MH17 (Malaysian flight 17). But, how do I decide which theory to believe?

Would you like to read through my decision making process about the shooting down of MH17?

When the airliner was shot down, I originally thought like this:

Do Ukrainian forces have the assets (anti-aircraft missiles) in the area to shoot an airliner down?” I did not know, but I knew, Ukraine had not shot down any enemy aircraft.

But, I did know the rebels claimed they had shot down 7 Ukrainian aircraft over their territory.

As the story developed, reports surfaced of rebel leaders taking credit for the airliner. Then there were reports of rebel forces calling back to Russia.

And then TELS were moved back to Russia. (it has been awhile, but I think TELS stands for transporter, erector, launcher, system).

Then after a long pause, a pause of several days, Russia came out and claimed Ukraine shot down the airliner. Then Russia claimed they had intelligence. Russian sources began to deny previous reports one by one.

But, I noticed that the Russian reports all seemed to be in response to previous reports. Few Russian news stories seemed to be in response to the airliner being shot down, the reports seemed to be in response to ‘western sources.’


How do I analyze what I have read and heard?

If Ukraine had shot down the Malaysian airliner, I would have expected:

(1) Russian sources to release audio (voice intercept) of rebels being surprised that the Ukrainians had mistakenly, or intentionally, shot down an airliner. Even now, I do not think Russian sources have released audio showing the rebels were surprised by a Ukrainian missile launch.

(2) Ukrainian forces would have immediately secured the site and destroyed evidence. Rebel forces seized the site and destroyed evidence. That reads like rebels were responsible, not Ukrainian forces.

(3) Russian sources would have released satellite imagery of the shoot down. Instead Western sources (US) released the first imagery. Again, this points to the rebels not to the Ukrainians.

(4) Had the Ukrainians shot down the airliner, I would have expected the rebel forces to co-operate with western media, and Russian media. They co-operated with very few media. Very strange to pass up such a great media event if it is your favor.

(5) Had Ukraine been responsible, I would have expected a Russian incursion into the area to ‘rightfully’ secure the site.

That last point is a smoking gun. A big smoking gun. Russia seemed to pull back for a couple of days, not the actions of someone righteously angry.

All things considered, I believe rebels accidentally shot down the airliner. I think they used the ‘Buk’ Surface to Air system. And I think Russia pulled those systems back into Russia for at least a few weeks.

Will Russia invade? That is a different question for a different blog post.

I hope you enjoyed reading this post. I hope you do not enjoy what happened to civilians in this incident, and I hope you do not enjoy what is happening in Ukraine.

And I hope you will ask me good questions.



About Wayne

First, I blogged on blogger, then Myspace - soon I was consistently ranked. Next, I quit. Then the blogging addiction came back .... Comments are appreciated. Not nice comments are edited. You can follow me at the top right.
This entry was posted in Blogging, News, Politics and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Who shot down MH17?

  1. Well, do we hang the poor corporal who was following orders to actually press the fire button or do we hang the officer who ordered him to do it? Do we hang the command and control personnel who might have ID’d the plane as being commercial and gave the order to fire to the officer anyway? Do we hang the arms dealers who somehow gave the BUK launcher to whomever used it to shoot down the plane? Do we hang the president of the country that invented the BUK missile system? I mean, all this hanging presumes of course that the shooting down of the plane was not an error. Or maybe we just hang the command and control ID guys for making the mistake to begin with. Here’s my point… when you are a passenger in a plane there has to be a certain expectation of two things when you fly over any country. 1. You’re not going to be in danger of being shot down. and 2. If you are forced to crash or crash land that there’s a reasonable organized emergency response, or an authority to readily authorize an international recovery response. This plane had neither of these expectations as it flew over. Again, the plane was permitted to fly over a war zone. That set events into motion to begin with that directly made the plane a target. Whoever you want to hang for the trigger pull (or button press) will likely never be found.. alive.

  2. Seems to me it’s less about who pulled the trigger and more about how the plane ended up being a target. It’s a damn war zone, for pete’s sake. People pull triggers in war zones… that’s why it’s called a war zone. Belligerents in a war zone will make a strategic target out of anything, either intentionally or by accident, because that’s the nature of warfare. Who thought an “international commercial flight corridor” over a war zone would be bulletproof? That’s who is responsible. The rest is just nonsense.

    • Wayne says:


      Thank you for your comment.

      I agree it was a stupid decision. But, whoever pulled the trigger should be shot.

      Would you agree with me on that as well?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s