General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLet's make a LIST of all the BENEFITS TO PUTIN of the Malaysian airliner tragedy in Ukraine
Bad Guys do bad things that benefit them.That's why they're bad guys, right?
Cui bono ("who benefits" is an important guiding principle in this case, IMO.
So let's make a list of......
BENEFITS TO PUTIN RESULTING FROM THE UKRAINE AIRLINER TRAGEDY:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
ETC ETC
Please help me.
I haven't been able to figure out any.
Surely, somebody out there can help me?
djean111
(14,255 posts)And no, I am not a member of a Putin fan club.
Just, for some reason, cynical.
Maybe it was just a giant fuck-up.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)Neither Putin nor the pro-Russian rebels stood to gain anything but the world united against them.
Ukraine gains world sympathy, so possibly a false flag operation to gin up support.
But most likely Murphy's Law meets Occam's Razor. People with the arms to shoot down airliners, but without the means to positively identify them, in a civil war area where they have been, and continue to, shoot down military aircraft.
nikto
(3,284 posts)And any rational response must entertain (as does yours) at least the remote possibility of a false-flag attack.
The cui bono requires it until we know everything.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)Who most benefits?
malaise
(267,820 posts)as I await facts.
jamzrockz
(1,333 posts)have asked the same question during the whole Syria (and even Libyan) crisis.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)he never planned for his proxy goons to shoot a passenger jet down. but he was reckless enough to give those drunken goons the means and opportunity to do so
Last edited Wed Jul 23, 2014, 08:35 PM - Edit history (2)
That may be it.
If so, what do you think Putin would order to have done to the dumb guys
who made the decision & shot the missile?
Couldn't be pretty.
This makes Putin look so bad.
He's gotta' be super-pissed.
Assuming it actually is a blunder (and not a false-flag).
But it is looking more like a blunder as time passes.
Still, how many champagne toasts do you think
William Kristol and Max Boot have already had over this?
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)He spent millions supporting the separatists and they are collapsing.
But it doesn't make him look bad because he has 100% control over the media and his ratings are at an all time high because propaganda says things like "Putin could not have done it because it'd make him look bad."
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)with fire and 300 innocents got burnt.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)He didn't think his comrades would do something so stupid with the 'toys' he provided them. Now, its blown up in his face, maybe he'll be a bit more cautious when he wants to take back the Baltic states. Maybe not.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)that the rebels shot down the airliner after mistaking it for a Ukrainian military plane. Which you'd know if you'd actually been following any of the news. The fact that you apparently don't know that is a pretty good indicator that you have no idea what you're talking about.
Electric Monk
(13,869 posts)nikto
(3,284 posts)http://static1.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1873572.1405837746!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/index_635_390/putin-trophies.jpg
http://gulfnews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1362011!/image/4277082435.jpg_gen/derivatives/box_475/4277082435.jpg
When admittedly the truth appears to be more like...
That, ofcourse, is assuming there is no neocon involvement and it's not a false-flag incident set-up by
big money in a chaotic part of the world.
But that's just silly.
I know, I know, America doesn't do dishonest stuff like that, except maybe The Maine,
Pear Harbor pre-knowledge questions,
Gulf Of Tonkin, and WMDs in Iraq.
But not anymore.
blm
(112,920 posts)veracity is unimpeachable, because if he was a lying, murderous snake he could NEVER have amassed the enormous fortune he now has, could he?
nikto
(3,284 posts)Last edited Thu Jul 24, 2014, 03:51 AM - Edit history (2)
The ones I really feel sorry for are the Ukraine citizens.
They are caught between the ruthless (but recently bumbling) Putin and his voracious Oligarchs
on one side,
and big European interest$, the neocons and voracious entities like the IMF and World Bank,
on the other.
Talk about Charybdis and Scylla, rock and a hard place, etc.
I don't believe either side has Ukraine's interests in mind, and both see the Ukraine as a rich prize
to be won and exploited in a vicious, high-stakes global dog-eat-dog geopolitical brawl.
blm
(112,920 posts)authorization, most likely by over zealous militia.
Why did you find the need to build a straw man argument?
And..... have you analyzed Putin's immediate claim that HE was the target?
Congressman Patrick Murphy claimed on live TV(The Ed Show) that Putin had it done in retaliation for sanctions.
Throd
(7,208 posts)Putin is an authoritarian dickhead, but he did not want the airliner shot down.
blm
(112,920 posts)programs.
Now - can you post your analysis of Putin's claim on day one that HE was the target? Or, is Murphy's lonely comment the only one you want to analyze and debate?
nikto
(3,284 posts)Although the media-frame seems to be shifting now to the "negligence" angle,
which seems more plausible.
But the "Putin did it intentionally" angle was milked substantially over the first few days,
by media and politicos alike.
blm
(112,920 posts)offer an 'analysis' of Putin's claim being spread across Russia media that HE was the actual target.
There were many cartoons, statements by pols, etc portraying the incident as
a deliberate Putin attack (several cartoons portrayed Putin with airliner wreckage on his mantel, like a trophy.
Admittedly, that was in the first few days (you obviously must have missed that), and
the latest "negligence" media frame is actually just from the last day or so.
Or maybe you just forgot.
blm
(112,920 posts).
Response to nikto (Original post)
Post removed
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)Put down the beer. I've had legit death threats from Russian, Jobbik types, back in 2011.
In fact if you dig enough you'll see that a lot of the online presence is related to Jobbik as a sort of twisted fascist nexus for this crap.
The threats were so legit I had to move because 1) no one and I mean no one has my address at any given time (except for blood relatives) and 2) they found my address.
Brother Buzz
(36,214 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)of the picture. Still so hot from re-entry that it killed the vegetation around as it walked off. Can even see where it stood still for a bit, probably thinking about which direction to the nearest space port.
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)So that as he saves face from backing down in Ukraine no one questions his ability to lead.
Next?
sendero
(28,552 posts).. ACCIDENTS DON'T FOLLOW THE CUI BONO RULE.
nikto
(3,284 posts)It's always wise to ask, cui bono, until one is sure what occurred was not deliberate.
sendero
(28,552 posts)... on this one. The rebels were the only ones in the area using missiles to down aircraft. They were given a sophisticated system for which they undoubtedly were not well trained to use. A plane was not on it's normal flight path (for which some blame might be assigned elsewhere, but most of the blame goes to whoever actually shot the missile). Someone saw a plane and got excited and pushed the button.
I'd lay 10-1 odds it happened just about like that.
Throd
(7,208 posts)The Magistrate
(95,237 posts)"If a man gives a gun to a chimp, and the chimp shoots someone, you don't blame the chimp."
davidpdx
(22,000 posts).
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)tblue37
(64,980 posts)Throd
(7,208 posts)Bad Thoughts
(2,514 posts)Great for homophobia.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)But of course he would.
Forgive me if that's not where you're going, but I believe the current narrative is that Putin armed rebels in order to attack the Ukrainian military, and they *screwed up* and shot an airliner. That has not been definitively proven, but the fact that it would not work to Putin's advantage is not evidence that's not what hapened.
If there's one consistent fact about the way world powers work, it's that they screw up. Constantly.
It is always extremely plausible that a government actor did something that "didn't make sense" or "didn't work in their favor."
Again, may not be where you're headed with this, but the notion sometimes floated that however things turn out, someone must have planned it that way is not a good principle. Most of what goes on in the world is not thought through well at all, and it is the most common thing in the world for a government or a military to do something that blows up in their face.
Edit:
There were more reports today of rebels shooting more Ukrainian military craft with their Russian SAMs, just as they were doing before the airliner strike. So it looks like the only question is "Could they have shot down an airliner by mistake?"
We've shot down airliners by mistake. Russia has done it before, too. That part of the story, at least, is not wildly unlikely in the slightest.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)hack89
(39,171 posts)that is the question.
The MH17 was a tragic error resulting from Putin destabilizing the region to further Russian influence. It was not a deliberate act.
joeybee12
(56,177 posts)Bad guys make mistakes...Putin supplied the weapons to the rebels, they shot it down, probably accidnetally, but they still bear responsibility, as does the scum Putin.
NickB79
(19,113 posts)Since they openly bragged about shooting down an AN-26 at the SAME TIME the Boeing went down on Twitter and Facebook, and have downed other AN-26's before then.
No AN-26's were lost that day.
So, once you put that vital piece of info in, your analysis gets a whole lot more interesting, as the rebels and Putin had a LOT to gain by destroying Ukrainian air assets.
nikto
(3,284 posts)Thanks for stopping by!
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)and you heavily arm a bunch of complete idiots, you end up with unintended results. Common sense.
reorg
(3,317 posts)Who do you think has anything to gain from irrational speculation? Putin!
There are so many arguments in this thread I can hardly count them, so don't you make stuff up:
The rebels bragged, but then they stopped bragging because instead of a military plane an airliner was shot down. Whose fault was that? Putin's!
Bad guys make mistakes. Sometimes mistakes are perhaps not mistakes, but sometimes they are, probably. Whose fault is that? Putin's!
It may have been a tragic error, but Putin doesn't care. So, who wins? You guessed it, Putin!
Negligence might have been a factor. Stuff happens if you don't get your troops in order. So, who is responsible for that, hm? That's right, Putin!
But you fool yourself if you think Putin wouldn't do something stupid. Oh no, he does, so once again we know where to put the blame, right? Putin!
That's even more the case if he was so negligent and stupid at the same time to put a freaking CHIMP in charge! Damn, Putin!
These drunken goons made a decision and, guess what, a plane was hit and people died. We have nobody else to blame other than Putin.
He could just as well have given the direct order to shoot it down.
Anyway, as you can see, all roads lead to Rome, there is a mountain of evidence, the preponderance of which tilting towards the blundering reckless evildoer dictating fascist who is still in the business of selling oil and gas to China and Europe while cowardly hiding behind his atomic bombs.
The only possible benefit of a false flag operation by the Ukrainians could have been to make those who are still blind open their eyes and recognize what a monster he is. Gladly, we have been spared this sacrifice.
nikto
(3,284 posts)nilesobek
(1,423 posts)The rebels do benefit from the shootdown. Everyone but the Ukrainian Air Force is avoiding Eastern Ukraine airspace which favors the rebels who seem to have nice SAMs with probably an inexhaustible resupply of missiles through a porous Ukraine/Russian border.