MH17: Ukraine separatist commander admits rebels had Buk missile system - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Killer900;45478403]maybe he was threatened to take back his previous statement[/QUOTE] Again - why would he ever, in sane mind, speak such words to foreign journalist at this point of time.

[QUOTE=karimatrix;45478455]Again - why would he ever, in sane mind, speak such words to foreign journalist at this point of time.[/QUOTE] I plea temporary insanity

[QUOTE=Conscript;45478369]who stalks and rates all my posts, lol.[/QUOTE] Because I rated 4 or 5 posts on one thread, I'm called a stalker and a rating-spammer. For someone who calls news out for lack of evidence, you sure caught on this :rolleyes:

[QUOTE=Thlis;45478441]I am afraid it's doubtful that it's semantics now that they have posted another addition[/QUOTE] How is that addition changing anything, it does not adding up anything amd merely presents information regarding situation from their perspective as one message? "soo we had interview and now person denies detail regarding that said interview" Wow, this is groundbreaking.

[QUOTE=karimatrix;45478479]How is that addition changing anything, it does not adding up anything amd merely presents information regarding situation from their perception as one message?[/QUOTE] Because you tried misconstruing the Guardian article to try to claim is was reporting that they updated it to say he didn't claim that they had Buks when really they were just reporting what Russian media was claiming, and not actually changing their story.

[QUOTE=Thlis;45478493]Because you tried misconstruing the Guardian article to try to claim is was reporting that they updated it to say he didn't claim that they had Buks when really they were just reporting what Russian media was claiming, and not actually changing their story.[/QUOTE] what? i just posted this image [img]http://i59.tinypic.com/2wodkco.png[/img] since when BBC reporter is russian one?

[QUOTE=Gwoodman;45478474]Because I rated 4 or 5 posts on one thread, I'm called a stalker and a rating-spammer. For someone who calls news out for lack of evidence, you sure caught on this :rolleyes:[/QUOTE] I think the latter part of that post might have been lost in translation.

[QUOTE=karimatrix;45478507]what? i just posted this image [img]http://i59.tinypic.com/2wodkco.png[/img] since when BBC reporter is russian one?[/QUOTE] yes please i would like more sources from the country that is actively moving forces into ukraine and from the country that these separatists are fighting so hard to become a part of yes also intentionally twist the words from the guardian some more, i mean it's obvious that you're some kind of russian apologist at this point and i find that funny

[QUOTE=Gwoodman;45478474]Because I rated 4 or 5 posts on one thread, I'm called a stalker and a rating-spammer. For someone who calls news out for lack of evidence, you sure caught on this :rolleyes:[/QUOTE] Heh, it seems you know my opinions better than myself, or you just blindly rate my posts because I never said that. I don't care if the rebels are supplied by Russia. Good on them if it's such the case, pro-Ukrainians don't get to force their views on half the country just because they have the army & state.

[QUOTE=FFStudios;45478556]yes please i would like more sources from the country that is actively moving forces into ukraine and from the country that these separatists are fighting so hard to become a part of yes also intentionally twist the words from the guardian some more, i mean it's obvious that you're some kind of russian apologist at this point and i find that funny[/QUOTE] How am i twisting words by simply posting image you can find on their site? Btw, they mention such info was from interview - where is it? where is video?

[QUOTE=Conscript;45478571]Heh, it seems you know my opinions better than myself, or you just blindly rate my posts because I never said that. I don't care if the rebels are supplied by Russia. Good on them if it's such the case, pro-Ukrainians don't get to force their views on half the country just because they have the army & state.[/QUOTE] Yes, because the Pro-Ukrainians are an oppressive minority and Russia is helping the separatists overthrow them for the majority. [QUOTE=Conscript;45451477] I never said pro-russians were the majority. I've always said Ukraine is divided.[/QUOTE] Wait, I guess the pro-russians aren't the majority. I guess that kind of looks bad. Supporting a minority to take over.

You're pathetic if you're trying to reduce this to minority vs majority,.lmao. You won't find one, if only ever a slight one in a fluid situation and a very heterogeneous state. In such a case, it'd just be one side being numerous enough to oppress the other, not 'democracy'. Ukraine is divided, it's not in turmoil because of some randoms that came over from Russia. There's nothing contradictory about that quote. I have, however, said that pro-russians are a majority in the east and south. Nobody there really approved of maidan. They deserve self-determination from a hostile Ukrainian state.

[QUOTE=Conscript;45478693]You're pathetic if you're trying to reduce this to minority vs majority,.lmao. You won't find one, if only ever a slight one in a fluid situation and a very heterogeneous state. In such a case, it'd just be one side being numerous enough to oppress the other, not 'democracy'. Ukraine is divided, it's not in turmoil because of some randoms that came over from Russia. There's nothing contradictory about that quote. I have, however, said that pro-russians are a majority in the east and south. Nobody there really approved of maidan. They deserve self-determination from a hostile Ukrainian state.[/QUOTE] What do you think of Russia entering Crimea and disarming the Ukrainian troops stationed there with death threats? And how this rebellion only started when Russia provided them with weapons? Are you telling me that you support invasions and civil war because anti-UE preferred integration to Russia and not Europe? You support the rebels, that are probably untrained, with weapons, certain weapons that caused the death of 298 innocent foreigners? What do you think about the Yanukovych's corruption and human rights violation when Kiev said they wanted European integration but the government denied them that? [editline]23rd July 2014[/editline] Remember, there wasn't a pro-Russian rebellion when the Euromaidan was on.

[QUOTE=FFStudios;45478556] yes also intentionally twist the words from the guardian some more, i mean it's obvious that you're some kind of russian apologist at this point and i find that funny[/QUOTE] Well I must say at this point I trust no one anymore, not any western nor any russian / east european news agency. There are a lot of weird accusations and contradictions in any article I have read to this point on and everyone is just trying to stir up hate. Some days ago the western news said, that pro-Russian rebels were transporting the black boxes to russia - yet they appeared and the rebels gave them to EU investigators. Then they accused them of looting and letting the bodies decompose because they simply don't give a shit, - yet they collected passports to help identify the victims and the dutch government asked them to touch nothing. Then we have reports of the rebels not letting more than 5 investigators to the crash site - yet I saw videos with over 5 SUVs filled with Dutch Police forces, Malaysian Airlines Investigators and many more, far more over 20 people investigating the crash site. Also there is a great media coverage in that area with bigger pieces of the plane photographed by several independent journalists. Now I am reading about missing bodies and that the rebels simply "wont turn them in" - yet, what do they have from keeping bodies? Remains might be scattered somewhere around 3 km² around the area of the impact. We are not talking about a regular crash here, it was literally blown into pieces. I am not defending anyone here, I am pretty sure that the pro-russian activists accidently shot down the plane and are highly to blame for this massive tragedy... but it's war, this can happen. It was not their intention to shoot down a commercial airliner. Nobody ever wanted this to happen but yet we try to interpret more and more bad intentions into those people because we always need a bad guy...

[QUOTE=Gwoodman;45478753] What do you think about the Yanukovych's corruption and human rights violation when Kiev said they wanted European integration but the government denied them that? [/QUOTE] How about neo-nazis in the current government. Banning political parties. Authorising shelling of towns and bombings during ceasefires. And you say corruption like it doesn't exist now. The new pres has been accused by Ukrainians and Americans for corruption previously, its just he is preferable because he is west friendly rather than east.

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;45478834]How about neo-nazis in the current government. Banning political parties. Authorising shelling of towns and bombings during ceasefires. And you say corruption like it doesn't exist now. The new pres has been accused by Ukrainians and Americans for corruption previously, its just he is preferable because he is west friendly rather than east.[/QUOTE] I'm sorry, I'm going to ask you on your sources for this statement. And later, I'm going to provide you counter-arguments with sources that disapprove your argument. But further later, you are going to question the validation of the sources provided claiming there isn't enough evidence, but of course, YOUR sources will be validated for some unknown reason. And the backpedaling and change of subject will continue on and on and on until one of us either gets banned or goes offline. So I'd rather not discuss this with YOU.

[QUOTE=Gwoodman;45478753]What do you think of Russia entering Crimea and disarming the Ukrainian troops stationed there with death threats? And how this rebellion only started when Russia provided them with weapons? Are you telling me that you support invasions and civil war because anti-UE preferred integration to Russia and not Europe? You support the rebels, that are probably untrained, with weapons, certain weapons that caused the death of 298 innocent foreigners? What do you think about the Yanukovych's corruption and human rights violation when Kiev said they wanted European integration but the government denied them that?[/QUOTE] Yeah, he supports it. Conscript has managed to become a bigger Western apologist for the Russians and their little rebel friends throughout this crisis than Laserguided ever has been. It's so retarded it's hilarious. "Yanukovych was a good man and not a corrupt pro-Russian kissass to Putin, rebels are just fighting for their freedom here, Russia did nothing wrong when it invaded a sovereign nation's territory and illegally annexed it with not international oversight, the KPU shouldn't have been banned even though it backed Yanukovych and has completely incompatible views with democracy, etc." Same tired and factually-incorrect apologetic rhetoric, same stupid shitposters shitposting.

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;45478235]People will still deny that the separatists did this[/QUOTE] I think the more interesting part is that he said Russia supplied them with the Buk. Surely that makes Russia also take responsibility?

Feel free to debate me Govna. Otherwise, cry more. [QUOTE=Gwoodman;45478753]What do you think of Russia entering Crimea and disarming the Ukrainian troops stationed there with death threats?[/quote] What about it? The Ukrainian police and army in the East and South pretty much disintegrated in the face of pro-Russian movements and seizures. A lot simply refused to take a side or just defected. [quote]And how this rebellion only started when Russia provided them with weapons?[/quote] This rebellion started with RSA seizures in the East and the actions of Crimea prior to accession. For example, when Ivano-Frankivsk banned the Party of Regions and the Communist Party, it responded by banning Svoboda. [quote]Are you telling me that you support invasions and civil war because anti-UE preferred integration to Russia and not Europe?[/quote] I support whatever means necessary to guarantee the self-determination and safety of the pro-Russian east and south of the country, which wants nothing to do with the West or Banderist nationalism. EU integration, frankly, isn't at the core of this divide. It's just a symptom of it, and the spark on a gunpowder keg. [quote]You support the rebels, that are probably untrained, with weapons, certain weapons that caused the death of 298 innocent foreigners?[/quote] That's sooner an argument for letting them set up a state and a professional, standing army. [quote]What do you think about the Yanukovych's corruption and human rights violation when Kiev said they wanted European integration but the government denied them that?[/quote] Yanukovich was corrupt, but that is in no way an argument for punishing the people of the East and South with EU membership, or generally opposing their self-determination. Nor is rioting in the city how democracies decide their future (especially when the rioters come from one side of the country). [quote]Remember, there wasn't a pro-Russian rebellion when the Euromaidan was on.[/QUOTE] It wasn't till Euromaidan was off that the nationalist junta was installed, that the country was moving West. Regardless, there is still examples of parts of the state responding badly to Euromaidan, like the Crimean Autonomous Republic in January and February.

I've read that three times now but it feels like you're avoiding answering the actual questions with questionable arguments that sincerely have no relevance to the real issue I brought up. I give up, it's just shills and trolls.

[QUOTE=Gwoodman;45478966]I've read that three times now but it feels like you're avoiding answering the actual questions with questionable arguments that sincerely have no relevance to the real issue I brought up. I give up, it's just shills and trolls.[/QUOTE] 'I have no arguments so you're a shill' keep shitposting. With what the rebellion started over, in particular, there is no way you can interpret it that way. But there's the door I guess.

[QUOTE=Conscript;45478976]'I have no arguments so you're a shill' keep shitposting.[/QUOTE] Shitposting would imply I haven't brought up any arguments, which I have, and that I'm clearly baiting you into answering me with insults and ending my posts with "lmao". You answered my questions by using events unrelated to the core point. You have bullshit arguments, so I'm calling you out on bullshit arguments, sue me.

I'll try rephrasing them and question them again if you want, I'll be sure to be more specific, IF you want.

You know that Ukraine doing terrible shit doesn't automatically make Russia and its rebels angels right?

[QUOTE=Gwoodman;45478858]I'm sorry, I'm going to ask you on your sources for this statement. And later, I'm going to provide you counter-arguments with sources that disapprove your argument. But further later, you are going to question the validation of the sources provided claiming there isn't enough evidence, but of course, YOUR sources will be validated for some unknown reason. And the backpedaling and change of subject will continue on and on and on until one of us either gets banned or goes offline. So I'd rather not discuss this with YOU.[/QUOTE] You're a funny guy. Heres some education though, take it or leave it. neo-nazis in government: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andriy_Parubiy[/url] - secretary of defence [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ihor_Miroshnychenko[/url] - Deputy head of the Parliament's Committee on Freedom of Speech, famous for this: [quote=clearly a good guy]On a facebook page he argue that Mila Kunis is not Ukrainian, but rather a Jew using a controversial word zhyd.[1][/quote] He was a sports commentator, now hes a high ranking politician. The changed happened after the riots. Go figure. Next up! Banning Communist party. "Its democratic because they're the bad guys, so we can ban them" Next up! Authorising shelling of town: [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28126433[/url] Ukrainian army claimed it was a false flag. Ah yes. Of course it was. Evil Russians. [url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/two-ukrainian-fighter-jets-shot-down-over-rebel-held-area/2014/07/23/fd96f7de-1265-11e4-98ee-daea85133bc9_story.html[/url] Bombers are shot down while in ceasefire zone. "ah yes but they werent bombing at the time .'. ceasefire not broken QED []" Flying bombers over is an obvious act of provocation. Either a move to lure the rebels into firing or to bomb the rebels. In either case a low blow and in either case a deliberate move to agitate the ceasefire. Right. Onto corrupt I've quoted this a few times. [url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/05/29/the-not-very-nice-things-u-s-officials-used-to-say-about-ukraines-new-president/[/url] But hes friendly to the US now though, so like so many other US installed leaders (see iraq and afghanistan) the whole corruption thing can be looked over. What worries me about this is that the loans they are taking requires them to shrink the public sector, the public WILL NOT get a fair price for their assets and the whole ordeal will just lead to less equality and a lower quality of life for the Ukrainian people. Now you have my views and my, in some cases shoddy (see bomber) evidence. You can choose to address it properly or click the box icon below this post and continue doing whatever it is you like doing.

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;45479046]You're a funny guy. Heres some education though, take it or leave it. neo-nazis in government: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andriy_Parubiy[/url] - secretary of defence [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ihor_Miroshnychenko[/url] - Deputy head of the Parliament's Committee on Freedom of Speech, famous for this: He was a sports commentator, now hes a high ranking politician. The changed happened after the riots. Go figure. Next up! Banning Communist party. "Its democratic because they're the bad guys, so we can ban them" Next up! Authorising shelling of town: [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28126433[/url] Ukrainian army claimed it was a false flag. Ah yes. Of course it was. Evil Russians. [url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/two-ukrainian-fighter-jets-shot-down-over-rebel-held-area/2014/07/23/fd96f7de-1265-11e4-98ee-daea85133bc9_story.html[/url] Bombers are shot down while in ceasefire zone. "ah yes but they werent bombing at the time .'. ceasefire not broken QED []" Flying bombers over is an obvious act of provocation. Either a move to lure the rebels into firing or to bomb the rebels. In either case a low blow and in either case a deliberate move to agitate the ceasefire. Right. Onto corrupt I've quoted this a few times. [url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/05/29/the-not-very-nice-things-u-s-officials-used-to-say-about-ukraines-new-president/[/url] But hes friendly to the US now though, so like so many other US installed leaders (see iraq and afghanistan) the whole corruption thing can be looked over. What worries me about this is that the loans they are taking requires them to shrink the public sector, the public WILL NOT get a fair price for their assets and the whole ordeal will just lead to less equality and a lower quality of life for the Ukrainian people. Now you have my views and my, in some cases shoddy (see bomber) evidence. You can choose to address it properly or click the box icon below this post and continue doing whatever it is you like doing.[/QUOTE] "Education", is that what you call giving me wikipedia links and news reports while giving them arguments completely pro-Russian, despite one of them being both sides accusing each other and there being no evidence of who shelled, one that says Ukraine suffered losses claiming they were trying to lure rebels into attacking them, again lacking evidence to back up YOUR OWN CLAIM and not a news reports claim, and the opinions of some american officials on the new president. OK.

[QUOTE=Gwoodman;45479150]"Education", is that what you call giving me wikipedia links and news reports while giving them arguments completely pro-Russian, despite one of them being both sides accusing each other and there being no evidence of who shelled, one that says Ukraine suffered losses claiming they were trying to lure rebels into attacking them, again lacking evidence to back up YOUR OWN CLAIM and not a news reports claim, and the opinions of some american officials on the new president. OK.[/QUOTE] Ah yes the old "wikipedia is not a valid source" Ok I'm sorry. The articles are clearly infiltrated by Putin's own team of hand picked spin doctors, Svoboda is actually a charity organisation which helps house orphans, its just wikipedia is spreading lies. Please actually read the 2 wikipedia links. Those are both members of the Ukrainian parliment and they are both members of Svoboda. As for the shelling. A rebel held town gets shelled, it is only natural to assume the rebels shelled it. I see now. Maybe all those 911 conspiracy false flag things aren't so far fetched after all. I'm not sure where the lack of evidence bit is from. 2 bombers are shot down while in a ceasefire zone. What were they even doing there? What evidence do I need to present you with? Do you want me accompany you to Ukraine while we partake in a fact finding adventure of discovery? I said the Americans and Ukrainians have accused him of corruption. I sent you an article saying who said what about him, it also mentions he was fired for the corruption. I'm not sure what else I could send you. Is your plan to keep refusing sources until I run out? Each of those links I supplied, with the explaination cover the points I made (the bomber one is arguable however since they weren't actually bombing at the time) I'm not sure what else you want.

[QUOTE=Gwoodman;45479002]Shitposting would imply I haven't brought up any arguments, which I have, and that I'm clearly baiting you into answering me with insults and ending my posts with "lmao". You answered my questions by using events unrelated to the core point. You have bullshit arguments, so I'm calling you out on bullshit arguments, sue me.[/QUOTE] Still waiting for a reply. Shitposting (which just asserting my arguments are bullshit qualifies as) is a fast way to ignore.

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;45479237]wall[/QUOTE] Using sarcasm doesn't make your point come across any better, only worse. [QUOTE=mdeceiver79;45479237]Is your plan to keep refusing sources until I run out?[/QUOTE] Yeah, because this hasn't been done by you and the other two multiple times in other threads(And no I'm not going to "quote you on this").

[QUOTE=Gwoodman;45479270]Using sarcasm doesn't make your point come across any better, only worse. Yeah, because this hasn't been done by you and the other two multiple times in other threads(And no I'm not going to "quote you on this").[/QUOTE] "I choose to make a statement and not back it up" The only sources I've disputed are the twitter posts and youtube videos. Both of which are unofficial and similar things in the past have been proven to be false. Ah yes, I also disputed the Ukrainian official, within an hour of the crash, blaming Russia for shooting down the plane, for obvious reasons. But its ok though. We've exhausted our conversation. You refuse to address my points on the basis of not wanting to. We have nothing further to discuss.