======================================================================
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
======================================================================


"hundreds of commercial airplanes fly over Iraq every day."

Hindsight is always 20/20 so now after the shoot down of MH 17, everybody,
especially Putin apologists, want to know why Malaysia air was allowed to
fly there in the first place. Shane Mage even has the absolute gall to
begin this thread with the claim that because Ukraine gave international
civilian aircraft the right to cross Ukraine about 32,000 ft., if they so
chose, that, and I quote! "Ukrainian responsibility for the mass murder."

Here's a News Flash Shane: Major air carriers and air traffic organizations
track conflict zones as well as weather patterns and they hope every
country will open their airspace to transit by international civilian
traffic, and that's how they schedule the routes. They all know the risks
and they should have known that Putin was putting BUKs in the hands of
thugs like Igor Bezler, still they have to fly somewhere.

The short answer is that its a bad world out there and as a result
commercial aircraft overfly war zones all the time and generally speaking
because of the very high attitude of these flights, they are safe.

According to the <a href="
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/malaysia-airlines-flight-mh17-why-planes-fly-over-warzones-9615967.html";>Independent</a>,
before the loss of MH17, flights over east Ukraine where restricted only
below 32,000 ft - Flight Level 320. MH17 was assigned FL330 - 33,000 ft.

Because MH 17 was cruising at 10 km, it was in no danger from MANPADS. They
can't reach that high. The Ukrainian AN-26 can't fly that high either. Only
the Ukrainian IL-76 military transport, with a ceiling of 13km could have
been seen were the Boeing 777 was. It is not a bomber and the Ukrainians
haven't been conducting air attacks from 10km so the argument that shooting
down a plane at 10km [ which require very special and expensive missiles ]
was necessary air defense is weak. But once you've justified the killing of
40 Ukrainian soldiers and a crew of 9 flying over Ukraine in a Ukrainian
air force transport by "pro-Russian separatists" who apparently can go
operational with extremely advanced crew served anti-aircraft weapons
systems, and who are also backed by Russian armor and air power.

So yes, once you've learned to justify Russian imperialist military
aggression in the Ukraine with reference to what I want the FSA to have for
self-defense against that aggression in Syria, I guess all things are
possible. But please remember, I have never advocated supplying the FSA
with weapons that could take out aircraft cruising at 10km. The range of a
MANPADS, about 4.5km will do nicely. Thank You.
________________________________________________
Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to