====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
At 03:28 20-07-14 +1000, Michael Karadjis via Marxism wrote: > >So of course we can, to some extent, "blame those who shot down the >plane" in as much as they were obviously not very careful Well it's more like they didn't even know the meaning of "careful" in this context. Those sorts of forces receiving such a weapon is like giving matches and gasoline to a 4 year old: no one would be surprised if a fire were thereby started. Weapons of this sort are normally controlled by major militaries who also have radar, communications and transponder electronics, and commercial flight information, so this doesn't happen. Until now. >. But you can't really blame people getting bombed >from the sky for trying to shoot down the planes that bomb them. If you >do, then you have to agree with the shabby and transparently dishonest >excuse the US gives for blocking Manpads to the FSA for years - that >"jihadists" might get them But those have a much shorter range. I don't study military matters, but from what I understand bombing is normally done from low altitudes in order to increase target accuracy, against which the shoulder fired missiles would be effective, and actually more portable. The "separatists" who fired that missile surely did not think they were protecting themselves from a bomber. The American concern for misuse of those portable missiles has to do with them being used closer to an airport where passenger planes are flying low. And anyway, I'm not particularly keen to see ISIS obtain them (though I'll concede they'd have a right to shoot at planes bombing them). But if ISIS were to obtain these BUK missiles? Whoa. Also, I do not think commercial airplane routes are determined the least bit by the countries which they fly through. Except in the particular cases of states which refuse overflight permission (as Ukraine did for flying below 10km). So you can blame the commercial aviation industry, I guess, except what they did was normal: balanced the conservation of fuel (costs) against what they perceived as a very small risk. As everyone had perceived it, until then. - Jeff ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
