Re: [Marxism] Ukrainian responsibility for the mass murder

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

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


On 7/20/14 9:33 PM, Marv Gandall wrote:

That was the real beginning and end of it. The decision by the
interim president, a product of the new Ukrainian Parliament which
passed the original measure, was not born of a spirit of tolerance
for the rights of Russian speakers in Ukraine’s east, as you would
have it. It more reflected the new regime’s subordinate status to the
Western powers.


Let me repeat what I said. Even if Russian lost its status as an 
official language, Ukraine was never facing a situation analogous to 
Turkey where Kurdish speakers were victims of national oppression. 
Historically the ethnic Russians who settled in the eastern Ukraine were 
favored by the Kremlin.


Sometimes I really get aggravated by the failure of Marxists to delve 
into Ukrainian history. I have a ton of writing assignments I am working 
on all the time but I have already read a history of Crimea and Anatol 
Lieven's book on the Ukraine (he is no nationalist.) I have plans to 
read Paul Magocsi's 900 page history of Ukraine when I get a chance.


I sometimes get the impression that unless a Marxmail subscriber is a 
grad student, they read no scholarly literature at all. That accounts, I 
guess, for some of the mind-numbing stupidity I have seen here over the 
past 16 years.


Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Ukrainian responsibility for the mass murder

[Marv Gandall via Marxism]

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



On Jul 20, 2014, at 9:10 AM, Louis Proyect via Marxism 
 wrote:

> Maybe I wasn't clear. The issue is "the rights of Russian speakers" in the 
> East, as I was alluding to by referring to Richard Fidler's question, not a 
> "truce or negotiated settlement".
> 
> It is too bad that the Socialist Alliance has not yet published the entire 
> resolution that was adopted since I am curious whether there is any other 
> reference to "the rights of Russian speakers in Ukraine's east".
> 
> To be quite blunt about it, the separatists have used this as an excuse early 
> on and when socialists echo that excuse, they are serving the propaganda aims 
> of the Kremlin and the Donetsk People's Republic.
> 
> Five months ago after a measure was adopted that Russia no longer be a second 
> official language, it was vetoed immediately by an interim president. That 
> was the beginning and the end of it.

It’s not quite so simple as that.

The interim president vetoed the legislation under pressure from the European 
Union. The law was in conflict with the European Charter respecting Regional or 
Minority Languages. The European People’s Party, the right-centre majority in 
the European Parliament had passed a resolution calling “on the Ukrainian 
Parliament and the new government for the adoption of new legislation in line 
with Ukraine’s obligations under the European Charter for Regional or Minority 
Languages which will assure the respect of the rights of citizens in the 
country and the use of Russian and other minority languages”. The EU 
subsequently welcomed “that the acting President of Ukraine did not sign into 
law the new language provisions, thus safeguarding the position of Russian as 
an official language in Ukraine”, stressing “that Ukraine must fully safeguard 
the rights of all communities and minorities in the country.” 

That was the real beginning and end of it. The decision by the interim 
president, a product of the new Ukrainian Parliament which passed the original 
measure, was not born of a spirit of tolerance for the rights of Russian 
speakers in Ukraine’s east, as you would have it. It more reflected the new 
regime’s subordinate status to the Western powers.

I hope my comment will not be misconstrued as serving the propaganda aims of 
the Kremlin and the Donetsk People’s Republic. I’m in agreement with those who 
say neither side is worth dying for - or becoming an apologist for.

Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Ukrainian responsibility for the mass murder

[Clay Claiborne via Marxism]

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


On 07/20/2014 02:09 AM, Michael Karadjis via Marxism wrote:
>
>> I don't think the question is one of blame. Accidents happen.
>
> MK: Exactly. So we need to separate the informational issue of whose
> accident it was from the idea that this has some connection to the
> politics if the conflict. 
I don't think we can just blow this off with "shit happens."

A very aggressive decision was made to take out a plane at 33,000 ft.
This was not a plane involved in air attacks. It followed threats to
attack anything flying over Eastern Ukraine and it required especially
trained crews and weapons. Also see;

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/07/18/why-ukraine-erupted-again.html
> Russia has been escalating its war in Ukraine for weeks. The urgency
> to win turned to recklessness.
>
> President Putin has been recklessly escalating the crisis in eastern
> Ukraine since he was embarrassed and outmaneuvered by the Ukrainian
> president three weeks ago. Allowing a passenger jet to be shot down is
> the act of an increasingly desperate man.
>
> The Kremlin ordered tanks, heavy weapons and Russian fighters to pour
> over the border stoking up the crisis until tragedy struck. We should
> have seen it coming; on Wednesday morning the front page of Foreign
> Policy magazine had a headline that should have sent shockwaves
> through the geopolitical landscape: Russia Is Firing Missiles At
> Ukraine
> .
>
> The story followed several Russian citizens posting videos to social
> media which they said show GRAD rockets being fired from Russian
> territory toward Ukraine. By triangulating the different camera
> angles, my team at The Interpreter proved that the unguided rockets
> were indeed being fired into Ukraine from Russia. Thursday morning,
> there were reports that a group of Ukrainian soldiers had been hit by
> the rocket fire and were actually receiving medical treatment on the
> other side of the border, ironically enough in the same town from
> which the rockets had been launched in the first place.
>
> This should have been huge news. How could things in Ukraine have
> deteriorated to the point where Putin was now engaged in such a
> reckless act of aggression? Of course, it was huge news... but for
> only a few hours. Quickly this headline was buried under the news that
> another Malaysian airlines flight was missing, and evidence is
> steadily growing that either Russian-backed separatists or Russia
> itself may have fired the missile that brought it down.While much of
> the media is trying to figure out who shot this aircraft down, with
> what weapon and where it was obtained, it might be more instructive to
> focus instead on the 'whys' of this incident.
>
> Why would Putin want to shoot down a commercial airliner? And if it
> was an accident, why would Putin allow the separatists to have a
> weapon this powerful without having full control over how it was used?
>
> The answer to that question reveals that the situation in Ukraine, and
> in Moscow, is much, much worse than many had feared.
>
> The first thing we have to understand is that the Kremlin spent a lot
> of time and money to bring down, either deliberately or accidentally,
> Malaysian Airlines flight MH17. The prime suspect is a Buk
> surface-to-air missile system
> . This is not a
> shoulder-fired weapon easily smuggled across the border, a
> point-and-shoot heat-seeking weapon that could be used with little
> training by anyone who got their hands on it. This is an advanced and
> battle-proven series of highly sophisticated vehicles which coordinate
> to track targets with radar and fire missiles so advanced that they
> were designed to knock smart bombs and cruise missiles out of the sky.
> Whoever launched this weapon was highly trained and extremely
> well-equipped.
>


Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Ukrainian responsibility for the mass murder

[Paul Flewers via Marxism]

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


It's true that the Ukrainian authorities should have declared the whole of
the eastern region of the country as dangerous, and putting a 32 000 foot
minimum safe limit was a bit daft considering that they must have known, or
at least strongly suspected, that pro-Russians in the east had
anti-aircraft missiles that could reach twice that height (airliners
usually cruise at between 30 000 and 40 000 feet). It's also wrong that
airlines, in order to save a few bob on fuel, would insist on flying over a
region in which aeroplanes are being shot down up to heights not that far
short of the safe limit.

On the other hand, if one does have possession of such weapons, then it
would be best to have personnel in charge of them who know the dangers
involved in using them. According to the reports of various military
experts, the missiles' guidance systems and ancillary equipment are
insufficient to obtain a detailed identification of the target. This has to
be obtained by other means, usually via communication with the country's
air traffic control, to ensure that one's target is the plane which you
wish to hit.

If this incident was the work of pro-Russian elements, I suspect that they
were aiming at a Ukrainian transport plane and locked the missile on to the
Malaysian airliner by mistake, or that they misidentified the Malaysian
plane as a Ukrainian one. Either way, they were unable properly to identify
it until it was far too late, after it had crashed. Were the missiles of
this type supplied from Russia, taking into account the potentially
disastrous -- and foreseeable -- consequences of a heavy-duty anti-aircraft
missile in amateur hands, it's unlikely that they would have been just
handed over and not accompanied with operators who knew how to handle them
and hopefully avoid disasters (such as this one) occurring. If this did
happen, then this was irresponsible in the extreme.

The Ukrainian authorities were amiss in not declaring the region to be
dangerous and prohibiting all over-flying; the airlines should have avoided
the area once planes started to be shot down (some airlines did do this).
True enough. But responsibility must firstly be placed upon those who
launched the missile and who in so doing failed to establish beforehand the
actual identity of the plane at which they aimed it.

Paul F

Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Ukrainian responsibility for the mass murder

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

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


On 7/20/14 5:09 AM, Michael Karadjis via Marxism wrote:

"There needs to be a negotiated solution to the conflict that can allow
a truce and for the issues driving the conflict, including the rights of
Russian speakers in Ukraine's east and their expressed desire for
greater autonomy or separation from the Ukraine, to be negotiated and
resolved."

Is there anything wrong with that position which calls for a truce and
negotiated settlement? I understand you also don't support the Ukraine
govt ATO right? The excellent anarchist material you have sent expresses
the view that no side is worth dying for. This SA view allows a great
deal of interpretation and certainly doesn't commit anyone to supporting
the rebels.


Maybe I wasn't clear. The issue is "the rights of Russian speakers" in 
the East, as I was alluding to by referring to Richard Fidler's 
question, not a "truce or negotiated settlement".


It is too bad that the Socialist Alliance has not yet published the 
entire resolution that was adopted since I am curious whether there is 
any other reference to "the rights of Russian speakers in Ukraine's east".


To be quite blunt about it, the separatists have used this as an excuse 
early on and when socialists echo that excuse, they are serving the 
propaganda aims of the Kremlin and the Donetsk People's Republic.


Five months ago after a measure was adopted that Russia no longer be a 
second official language, it was vetoed immediately by an interim 
president. That was the beginning and the end of it.


You would think that from the heated rhetoric from the separatists and 
RT.com that this was tantamount to Kurdish activists in Turkey being 
arrested for publishing a newspaper in their own language or something 
like that. This article from Open Democracy puts the question into context.


My fear is that the SA leadership simply is not keeping track of 
articles such as this. A deeper fear is that it is keeping track but 
choosing to ignore them.


http://www.opendemocracy.net/od-russia/uilleam-blacker/no-real-threat-to-ukraine%E2%80%99s-russian-speakers-language-law-ban

No real threat to Ukraine’s Russian speakers

Uilleam Blacker [1] 4 March 2014

What are the ‘legitimate interests’ justifying Putin’s intervention into 
Ukraine? The most frequently identified interest is the situation of 
Russians and Russian-speakers. Is the Russian language really under threat?


Commentators often use the vague phrase ‘legitimate interests’ to 
explain Putin’s intervention into Ukraine. These may include gas and oil 
pipelines, or mistrust of NATO and the EU, but the most frequently 
identified ‘legitimate interest’ is the situation of Russians and 
Russian-speakers in Ukraine.


The law

On the Guardian’s Comment is Free section on 2 March, Jonathan Steele 
stated [11] that: ‘Russia's troop movements can be reversed if the 
crisis abates. That would require the restoration of the language law in 
eastern Ukraine and firm action to prevent armed groups of anti-Russian 
nationalists threatening public buildings there.’ The idea that a 
sovereign government should be expected to legislate under the barrels 
of an invading force’s guns is a curious one. But there is also a simple 
factual error here: the 2012 ‘language law’, allowing regions to adopt 
more than one language for official purposes if they were spoken by at 
least 10% of the local population (for the Russian language, just under 
half of Ukrainian regions meet this standard) was not cancelled; the 
interim president of Ukraine, Oleksandr Turchynov vetoed [12] this snap 
move from the parliament.


Ukraine’s new political elite has realised it needs to do everything it 
can to include Russian-speakers in the ‘revolution.’


Of course, the veto of this short-sighted decision came after the threat 
from Russia became apparent: but at least the interim government 
realised its mistake in potentially alienating Russian-speakers. 
Ukraine’s new political elite seems to have finally realised that it 
needs to do everything it can to include Russian-speakers in the 
‘revolution’ that is being led from Kyiv. The Mayor of Lviv in the 
Ukrainian-speaking west recorded a special appeal to Russian-speakers, 
defending their right to use their language, while intellectuals in west 
and east engaged in a day of swapping languages; journalists who 
normally speak Ukrainian on TV have been switching to Russian.


Such gestures are, in fact, largely unnecessary for many Russophone 
Ukrainians and ethnic Russians, who are already supporters of the 
Maidan; for others, terrified by Russian anti-western and anti-Maidan 
propaganda, they are badly needed. Russian media, which entirely 
dominates the Ukrainian east and south (where Russian is mother tongue 
for 

Re: [Marxism] Ukrainian responsibility for the mass murder

[Michael Karadjis via Marxism]

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


 Original message  
From: Louis Proyect



I don't think the question is one of blame. Accidents happen.


MK: Exactly. So we need to separate the informational issue of whose 
accident it was from the idea that this has some connection to the 
politics if the conflict.


LP: In fact this discussion takes us away from the real issue, which is 
whether the Socialist Alliance is correct by siding with Boris 
Kagarlitsky who is not only on the Kremlin payroll but speaks at 
conferences hosted by the Austrian Freedom Party, a party once led by 
Jorg Haider and that openly promotes antisemitism and nativism.


MK: The SA does not side with Kagarlitsky. A motion from Renfrey to 
adopt a more pro-Russian position was explicitly rejected. I'm not sure 
how many other than Renfrey himself holds the Renfrey/Roger/Boris view.


But in any case that is irrelevant to the argument I made about the 
right to defense against air war - I explicitly prefaced my argument by 
saying "regardless of who is right or wrong in Ukraine."


It is also irrelevant to my own view since as you know SA is not a 
"Zinovievist" organisation. As another example, while the SA has a Syria 
line that is broadly both anti-Assad, and opposed to any imaginary US 
intervention, it is a broad policy that can cover both my pointedly 
pro-revolution view, and Tony Iltis' far more plague on both your houses 
view. I do not think the specifics of my view are a common "SA" view, 
nor should it be.


LP: Would anybody from the Socialist Alliance, including Michael, care 
to defend this from the position adopted in early June?


"There needs to be a negotiated solution to the conflict that can allow 
a truce and for the issues driving the conflict, including the rights of 
Russian speakers in Ukraine's east and their expressed desire for 
greater autonomy or separation from the Ukraine, to be negotiated and 
resolved."


Is there anything wrong with that position which calls for a truce and 
negotiated settlement? I understand you also don't support the Ukraine 
govt ATO right? The excellent anarchist material you have sent expresses 
the view that no side is worth dying for. This SA view allows a great 
deal of interpretation and certainly doesn't commit anyone to supporting 
the rebels.


LP: The Socialist Alliance has also endorsed a statement by the 
Borotba/Kagarlitsky left that includes the following statement:


"The denial of official status to the Russian language in regions where 
more than 90 per cent of the population speak and think in Russian
(roughly half of Ukraine’s territory), together with bans on teaching in 
Russian in the schools; bans on advertisements and films in Russian; 
bans on the use of Russian in the courts and administration, and many 
other absurd segregationist demands and prohibitions amounts to 
additional humiliation of Ukraine’s Russian-speaking population."


Richard Fidler asked:

Can you specify whether the “bans” listed above are in force and are 
being implemented? I would agree that such prohibitions, if they exist, 
would indeed constitute “humiliation of Ukraine’s Russian-speaking 
population,” to say the least. However, it was my understanding that a 
resolution to make Ukrainian the sole official language in Ukraine was 
overruled by the government in Kyiv. Am I mistaken?


MK: I agree with Richard's question and that is also my understanding. 
While I haven't been keeping up much, I wasn't aware of the SA 
endorsing any such statement. Can you give details? Of course, the fact 
that the govt even attempted to pass such reactionary laws 
understandably creates a view among Russian speakers that this isn't 
their govt. This is mixed up with an element of working class resistance 
in the east to the EU-IMF program. But the hijacking of this by 
pro-Russian regime nationalists and fascists is an entirely different 
matter. I've tried to ask Renfrey and others on the GL list the extent 
to which they see these different factors as all the same thing. My 
understanding is that this would be a gross simplification.


In fact, at the very least the attempt to split regions off from Ukraine 
and join them to Russia is divisive of the Ukrainian working class as a 
whole in this necessary struggle against the EU-IMF program. Even within 
the east itself, where ethnic Russians are actually a minority in most 
places, and that among both the ethnic Russians and ethnic Ukrainians in 
the east the support for separatism, as opposed to some kind of regional 
decentralisation, is also a minority view. But that's just my 
semi-formed opinion.

---

This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from 
http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm 

Re: [Marxism] Ukrainian responsibility for the mass murder

[Michael Karadjis via Marxism]

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


-Original Message- 
From: Jeff via Marxism



. 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


Jeff: "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."

MK: OK, if we're making that kind of technical distinction between the 
range of manpads and the BUK system, then that seems sensible enough to 
me. So to be clear, we are in favour of the Syrian rebels getting 
manpads but not anything with a far greater range. Thanks for another 
good argument against the US excuse for blocking manpads to the FSA.


Of course that technical discussion is entirely separate from the 
political discussion of right and wrong in Ukraine. Unfortunately, Clay 
got that confused: he also noted, very usefully, that:


"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."

MK: Good, very useful. Unfortunately, he then confuses this with 
"learn(ing) 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."


A statement which is of course as irrelevant as it is confusing. I 
oppose both sides in the Ukraine, but specifically re this issue, if 
Putin supplied the rebels with warplanes to drop on Ukrainian-loyalist 
cities to try to subdue people who do not want to be subdued to them, 
then certainly Ukrainians would have the right to shoot down planes 
bombing their cities. But in this case, the shoe is on the other foot. 
Whatever your overall view on the Ukraine, launching an air war against 
cities in part of the country that does not want to be subdued by the 
current regime in Kiev is aggression, and the people below have the 
right to shoot down warplanes.


But the more useful part of Clay's (and Jeff's) discussion clarifies 
that they don't need missiles of the range the rebels apparently have.


Back to Jeff and Syria, Jeff says:


"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."


Is it? Or is it more that the US will use any excuse to make sure the 
FSA has hardly any arms? Given the fact that the US has also given 
pretty much nothing else in terms of actual arms (as opposed to night 
goggles, radios and readymeals), I suggest the latter. My understanding 
is that Jeff generally agrees with this.


"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."

Obviously I'm not keen on that either. But of course the only force in 
the region that has been actually fighting - indeed, putting up an epic 
battle - against ISIS has been the FSA, its Islamist allies and Jabhat 
al-Nusra. They need good arms to fight both Assad and ISIS. Of course, 
it is not out of the question that ISIS could capture manpads from the 
FSA if they defeat them in battle. But things then become difficult to 
the point of impossible: as the US says, it can't allow the FSA to have 
manpads (or any other arms) because the FSA fights *together with* JaN, 
so JaN may get the weapons; and it can't allow the FSA to have manpads 
(or any other arms) because the FSA fights *against* ISIS, so ISIS may 
get the weapons; so even against the most terrible continuous air war 
against a population in the world, the victims are never entitled to 
defense no matter what they do. I know this isn't Jeff's opinion, but 
again this is why we need to separate the political from the technical 
discussion.


Of course, as I said, Kiev's air war compared to Assad's is like a flea 
next to an elephant, but the principle that air war is war crime 
remains, IMO. So in conclusion, Manpads, yes, BUKs, no. 


__

Re: [Marxism] Ukrainian responsibility for the mass murder

[Clay Claiborne via Marxism]

==
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 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/malaysia-airlines-flight-mh17-why-planes-fly-over-warzones-9615967.html";>Independent,
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

Re: [Marxism] Ukrainian responsibility for the mass murder

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
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

Re: [Marxism] Ukrainian responsibility for the mass murder

[T via Marxism]

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


What?

Blame those who shot down the plane?

What a silly notion!

They are anti-fascist heroes defending the peoples' motherland from White Guard 
gnats and Trotskyite wreckers in their Imperialist coup-mongering Black Flag 
aircraft.

Nothing can be the fault of the anti-fascist heroes.

T

-Original Message-
>From: Michael Karadjis via Marxism 
>Sent: Jul 19, 2014 1:28 PM
>To: Thomas F Barton 
>Subject: Re: [Marxism] Ukrainian responsibility for the mass murder
>
>==
>Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
>==
>
>
>-Original Message- 
>From: Clay Claiborne via Marxism
>
>I heard commercial air planes had flown that route many times a day 
>before
>this shoot down. In any case they knew as well the government that Putin
>forces had weapons that could shoot them down if they flew within 60km 
>of
>East Ukraine, So if you're going to blame Ukraine, you also have to 
>blame
>MH, KLM, and all other carriers who continued to use this route.
>
>Or you can use normal logic and blame those who shot down the plane.


Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Ukrainian responsibility for the mass murder

[Stephen R. Shalom via Marxism]

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


Ukraine can certainly be criticized for restricting, not closing, the
airspace, but note that their restrictions were the same as those imposed by
Russia (two days later), which borders the dangerous area.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/19/world/europe/downing-of-plane-exposes-defe
cts-of-flight-precautions-over-ukraine.html

...The downing of the passenger plane over eastern Ukraine on Thursday
occurred shortly after the authorities in Russia and Ukraine, reacting to
dangers presented by the conflict around the city of Donetsk, Ukraine,
closed air space up to 32,000 feet along the passenger jet's planned route.
Ukraine made the changes on Monday, the same day a Ukrainian AN-26 military
cargo plane was destroyed by a missile while flying at 21,000 feet. Russia
followed with similar restrictions effective at midnight on Wednesday, hours
before Flight 17 took off from Amsterdam.

The decision by government officials to restrict the airspace, rather than
close it completely, raised unanswered questions.

-Original Message-
From: Marxism [mailto:marxism-boun...@lists.csbs.utah.edu] On Behalf Of
Shane Mage via Marxism
Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2014 12:26 PM
To: Steve Shalom
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Ukrainian responsibility for the mass murder

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


So just answer this on behalf of your principal: Why did you authorize
civilian aircraft to fly, over a war zone in which your air force was
conducting offensive military operations, at an altitude at which your
military aviation was operating? What, in "normal logic," is your excuse,
however pathetic?



Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Ukrainian responsibility for the mass murder

[Michael Karadjis via Marxism]

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


-Original Message- 
From: Clay Claiborne via Marxism


I heard commercial air planes had flown that route many times a day 
before

this shoot down. In any case they knew as well the government that Putin
forces had weapons that could shoot them down if they flew within 60km 
of
East Ukraine, So if you're going to blame Ukraine, you also have to 
blame

MH, KLM, and all other carriers who continued to use this route.

Or you can use normal logic and blame those who shot down the plane.
.

In this case I agree with Shane and others. It simply has nothing to do 
with whose side you're on the Ukraine (I can't see that either side is 
worth dying for, but that's irrelevant). If a government is using aerial 
bombardment of cities and population centres then the people below are 
entitled to defend themselves using anti-aircraft guns, just as the 
Vietnamese did, just as you and I would like the FSA to be able to do to 
resist Assad's aerial genocide, except that the US does everything in 
its power to block this elementary right to self-defense to the Syrians 
(and, of course, to the Palestinians).


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 and the result 
was a horrific mistake. 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 and use them to shoot down passenger planes. 
Obviously I'd like to see Syrian rebel-land flooded with Manpads, and 
for regional Arab states to defy the US diktat on this, so that tons of 
Baathist warplanes could be made to fall out of the sky. But if I took a 
flight in that direction, I'd check that it wasn't flying over Syria. 
And if either the Syrian regime gave clearance to passenger planes to 
fly over, or any miserly airline capitalists flew their planes over 
Syria rather than paying a few dollars to re-route, and a rebel 
anti-aircraft gun accidentally hit a passenger plane, then the regime 
and the airline company definitely would be responsible.


The Ukraine regime's "Anti-Terrorist Operation" air war is of course 
less a thousandth of the unlimited Baathist air war in Syria in 
intensity and bloodiness, but at the end of the day all air war is a war 
crime by definition. 



Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Ukrainian responsibility for the mass murder

[Shane Mage via Marxism]

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



On Jul 19, 2014, at 11:59 AM, Mr. Claiborne, speaking as an unpaid  
flack for the Kiev Authorities, wrote:



This is so pathetic,

I heard commercial air planes had flown that route many times a day  
before this shoot down. In any case they knew as well the government  
that Putin forces had weapons that could shoot them down if they  
flew within 60km of East Ukraine, So if you're going to blame  
Ukraine, you also have to blame MH, KLM, and all other carriers who  
continued to use this route.


Or you can use normal logic and blame those who shot down the plane.


So just answer this on behalf of your principal: Why did you authorize  
civilian aircraft to fly, over a war zone in which your air force was  
conducting offensive military operations, at an altitude at which your  
military aviation was operating? What, in "normal logic," is your  
excuse, however pathetic?












Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Ukrainian responsibility for the mass murder

[h0ost via Marxism]

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


On 07/19/2014 11:59 AM, Clay Claiborne via Marxism wrote:
> ==
> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> ==
> 
> 
> This is so pathetic,
> 
> I heard commercial air planes had flown that route many times a day before
> this shoot down. In any case they knew as well the government that Putin
> forces had weapons that could shoot them down if they flew within 60km of
> East Ukraine, So if you're going to blame Ukraine, you also have to blame
> MH, KLM, and all other carriers who continued to use this route.
> 
> Or you can use normal logic and blame those who shot down the plane.


You got that right, KLM, MH and all other airlines who continued to fly
passenger planes over a war zone do share part of the blame.  Along with
a government that criminally permits civilian air traffic over a war
zone, even after previously declaring that the said airspace is closed.


Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Ukrainian responsibility for the mass murder

[Clay Claiborne via Marxism]

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


This is so pathetic,

I heard commercial air planes had flown that route many times a day before
this shoot down. In any case they knew as well the government that Putin
forces had weapons that could shoot them down if they flew within 60km of
East Ukraine, So if you're going to blame Ukraine, you also have to blame
MH, KLM, and all other carriers who continued to use this route.

Or you can use normal logic and blame those who shot down the plane.

Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Ukrainian responsibility for the mass murder

[Shane Mage via Marxism]

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


The NYTimes this morning published an official Ukrainian government  
statement that constituted an admission of total responsibility for  
the crime.  The official admitted that the government's authorization  
of passenger air travel over a war zone being bombarded by Ukrainian  
government aircraft was made in full knowledge ("we know for sure")  
that insurgent air-defense batteries were capable of reaching above  
10,000 meters and that government aircraft were operating at those  
heights.


Whatever else may be true about the conflict in the Ukraine (and not  
much out of there seems worthy of belief) it is impossible not to see  
the routing of passenger aircraft over a zone in which it was carrying  
out aggressive aerial military operations as a criminal provocation  
designed to make possible, and even likely, exactly such a catastrophe  
as in fact occurred.




' Vitaly Nayda, the head of counterintelligence for the Ukrainian  
State Security Service, said at a news conference...that the rebels  
knew they were aiming at a plane flying above 10,000 meters, or 32,800  
feet. While this is in the range of a passenger jet’s normal cruising  
altitude, he also said that Ukrainian military aircraft sometimes fly  
that high. “There is no doubt that terrorists knew that they had  
launched a missile against a plane that was higher than 10,000  
meters,” Mr. Nayda said, adding, “We know for sure that the terrorists  
have the plan to shoot down every military plane, every military  
plane, even cargo plane, every helicopter, in the air over Donetsk and  
Luhansk regions.” '






Shane Mage

"Thunderbolt steers all things." Herakleitos of Ephesos, fr. 64






Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com