re: Malaysian Airliner with 295 people on board shot down by SAM missle

quote:

---

WAY2GOLSU

---

just about everything you said is completely accurate, yet still didnt prevent the US Navy from shooting down an Iranian airliner in 1988. we're even talking about the US military making this collosal frickup, not just a bunch of backwoods russian yahoos who just happened to score a surface to air missile launcher.

quote:

---

If you're in a war and you mean to bomb a building holding terrorists and you bomb the house full of children next door, it's an accident

---

Its not an accident; it is a terrible fricking tragedy and inexcusable. I'm not a proponent of using deadly force unless you're unequivocally sure that you're destroying the proper target. That holds true for today's incident and any of our actions in Iraq.

Furthermore, that example pales in comparison to what happened today. A commercial flight is literally flying around the air squawking for the entire world to see that they are an innocent commercial flight. That is a far cry from bombing the wrong house amongst nearly indistinguishable homes, despite both being deplorable and inexcusable.

Sure. I'm not clear on what you're trying to prove. I thought I was pretty straightforward in my first post about why I took issue with the word "accident" in this case.

Every day vehicles collide with other vehicles and they call it an accident as well, but it has nothing to do with this tragedy.

The captain later received a medal when he left the Navy for exemplary service.

quote:

---

...., but it has nothing to do with this tragedy.

---

Are you REALLY so hung up on which word is used to describe this?
Merriam-Webster

quote:

---

accident: a sudden event (such as a crash) that is not planned or intended and that causes damage or injury

---

quote:

---

tragedy: a very bad event that causes great sadness and often involves someone's death

---

Is it possible, just possible, it might be both??

(no message)

(no message)

quote:

---

Whoever fired the missile knew exactly what they were firing at. The tracking/ coordinate systems require detailed info to have a strike. A commercial jet is EASILY identified in this process. A large part due to eliminate a "mistake" like this occurring. And military aircraft " move" different and track different. Firing a missle and striking a plane at 33000 feet is not the same thing as Arnold Schwarzenegger firing a RPG and saving the world in Hollywood.

---

You are talking out of your arse. This is a huuuuuuuuuuge over-statement of the capabilities of a SAM system designed by the Soviets in the 70s. What happened is that a few trigger-happy half-drunk Ivans manning this thing saw a dot on their crappy oldschool radar screen, thought it was one of the cargo planes they and their buddies have been shooting down for weeks in an airspace that every other commercial airline has been avoiding, and let fly.

See: LINK

quote:

---

Still, distinguishing between civilian and military aircraft would be difficult if the system used was lacking the newer tracking systems that use radar signatures and national systems to tell which was which. “The more sophisticated models can,” Finch said. “I know that was the case in Iraq.” Zaloga agrees. The Buk was likely relying on its own radars, he said. “They don’t have that type of information, they don’t know anything about the larger picture,” he said. “They only know what they see on their radar, and with that radar they have very limited data.”

---

quote:

---

Latest figures released by Malaysia Airlines show the plane was carrying at least 173 Dutch nationals, 27 Australians, 44 Malaysians (including 15 crew), 12 Indonesians and nine Britons.

---

Nothing on any Americans yet

quote:

---

Nothing on any Americans yet

---

Is that a question?