
MH17 missile 'brought in from Russia' - jaap_w
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37495067
======
lfx
It is me or title looks very ambiguous? It sounds that missile was launched
from Russian grounds. What a scary way to begin a morning.

~~~
dang
Highly politicized stories aren't a good fit for HN to begin with, but if
anyone can suggest an accurate, neutral title, we can change it.

~~~
supergirl
the title of the link on bbc front page is better imo "MH17 missile 'brought
in from Russia'".

~~~
dang
OK we'll use that for now.

------
chvid
The new bit I suppose is this:

"They also narrowed down the area it was fired from to a field in territory
controlled by Russian-backed rebels."

Little doubt has there been that the weapon used was made in Russia.

~~~
mikeash
Also that the missile was transported from Russia shortly before the
shootdown, and the launcher and remaining missiles were transported back to
Russia. They mean "came from" in a more specific manner than just that it was
made there.

~~~
kobeya
That was from social media images that are not news. It was reported on at the
time. I'm not sure what's new here other than a two years too late rubber
stamp of eyewitness reports.

~~~
mikeash
What's new is that the statement is now based on a great deal of hard evidence
and investigation, rather than a couple of pictures and some internet
commentators.

------
jkot
> _was fired from to a field in territory controlled by Russian-backed
> rebels._

> _"...that came from the Russian Federation," chief Dutch police investigator
> Wilbert Paulissen said_

I think the wording 'territory of the Russian Federation' is not best choice.
Report says it was fired from Ukraine, 10 km from border. It implies that
donbas is already part of russia.

~~~
haberman
They are saying that the missile originated from Russia, not that it was fired
from Russia.

The investigation concludes that the missile was transported from Russia to
the rebel-controlled territory, where it was then fired.

------
acqq
In the indirectly related story (MH), the story of MH370 is also clearer:

[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/28/mh370-pilot-
fl...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/28/mh370-pilot-flight-
simulator-plot-course-southern-indian-ocean)

[http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/mh370-disappearanc...](http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/mh370-disappearance-
that-fuselage-is-in-one-piece-says-expert-a-1107149.html)

------
readhn
If there is solid evidence and especially if there are multiple witnesses then
this should be taken to court!

Im not sure who the defendant should be on the Russian side, the ministry of
defense?

~~~
okket
> If there is solid evidence and especially if there are multiple witnesses
> then this should be taken to court!

Which court?

~~~
ivan_gammel
National courts first, then European Court of Human Rights if they will not
win in national courts.

Based on this report relatives of victims can sue in ECHR all involved
parties, including both Russian Federation (for providing military equipment
to separatists) and Ukraine (for not closing air space for civil flights).

------
Const-me
There’s a video in English, uploaded to YouTube by the Netherlands’ public
prosecution office:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sf6gJ8NDhYA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sf6gJ8NDhYA)

The video summarizes available evidence answering the question why we sure
what happened.

------
andreasley
The official website of the "Openbaar Ministerie" (Dutch Public Prosecution
Service) contains a press release, including some animations and intercepted
calls [1] as well as a page with documents from the presentation [2].

[1] [https://www.om.nl/onderwerpen/mh17-crash/@96068/jit-
flight-m...](https://www.om.nl/onderwerpen/mh17-crash/@96068/jit-flight-
mh17-shot/)

[2]
[https://www.om.nl/onderwerpen/mh17-vliegramp/presentaties/pr...](https://www.om.nl/onderwerpen/mh17-vliegramp/presentaties/presentation-
joint/)

------
vladimir-y
I wonder why US and Ukraine still not made public a photos taken by space
satellites?

~~~
Const-me
Just one word: clouds.

Satellites can't see through them.

There’re satellite images of the launch site taken on 16 of July 2014, and on
21 of July, but unfortunately, not on the 17 of July.

~~~
vladimir-y
I think there should be a chance to track down the trail of a missile event in
case of a cloudy weather, at least partially.

~~~
Const-me
Publically and commercially available imaginary (google earth, DigitalGlobe,
etc.) just couldn’t see anything.

They only sense some visible light, and/or near IR (a.k.a. short-wave
infrared). You can view some specs there:
[https://www.digitalglobe.com/resources/satellite-
information](https://www.digitalglobe.com/resources/satellite-information) The
clouds are completely opaque in those spectrum, so the land below clouds is
completely invisible from those satellites. And the segment of the missile
trail above the clouds is very volatile, there’re strong winds there.

Nothing can be seen on those images. And in the video uploaded by Netherlands’
public prosecution office, they told satellite imaginary between 16 and 21 of
July is unusable, because clouds.

~~~
vladimir-y
I didn't mean publicly and commercially available imaginary, but military,
very well focused on the specific tasks.

~~~
Const-me
Why are you certain military has those thermal images?

As far as I know, for many of their tasks (such as detecting missile launches)
an infrared MASINT is sufficient.

If that’s the case, the system doesn’t produce images at all.

~~~
vladimir-y
I'm not familiar with such kind of stuff, the point is - I'm sure they do have
strong evidences but for some reason those evidences are not yet revealed.

------
kmerroll
To cut to the chase, the study confirms what was fairly obvious: \- Yes, a
Russian missile shot down a commercial aircraft. \- Yes, Ukrainian separatists
(Russian supported) controlled the area.

So what's the outcome? Putin could care less and doesn't answer to any
authority that can apply restraint or collect damages. So what does this
change?

~~~
nazgob
Families of victims can sue. Like with Yukos case, foreign Russian assets can
be arrested to pay for damages. It will probably take many, many years and
maybe one of future Russian governments will decide that it is better to close
that case. There where so many victims that its almost certain that some
families will keep pushing this case forever.

------
jpkeisala
Wasn't this concluded 2 years ago?

~~~
diggan
The article mentions that they knew the missile itself was a Russian one but
not from where on the ground it was fired. The article says that the
investigation team now concluded that the missile was also fired from a
location that was controlled by Russian rebels (at that point).

------
ken47
News like this has nothing to do with startups or the tech scene. Or am I
missing something here?

~~~
DenisM
HN guidelines list appropriate content as ~ "anything of interest to hackers".

If you think this article detracts from the site rather than enrich it, use
the "flag" option.

------
romanovcode
I just don't understand how can pilot be so reckless to fly over known
warzone?

Hey I'm not saying it's their own fault, but please stop telling me that it's
"safe" because it's not. It was a known warzone.

Todays example:

Virgin Atlantic, Air France and Emirates will no longer allow its planes to
fly over Iraq due to concerns about the dangers posed by Islamic militants.

~~~
okket
You need state sponsored military equipment to shoot down a 10km high flying
airplane. You can't do this with your homebuilt rocket launcher.

Up to this incident nobody was thinking that a state could be reckless enough
to target civilian planes. Or lend their military equipment to people reckless
enough. This has changed since then.

~~~
eternalban
old news:

Iran Air was shot down by US Navy:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655)

------
woodcut
The dutch led investigation has been a joke from the start, the previous
report they released was submitted to Russia for screening prior to
publication, they had them remove any references to this being an carried out
by Russian soldiers operating in Eastern Ukraine as all evidence to date
clearly shows.

~~~
woodcut
\--- EDIT

being down voted for what?

None of what i said is remotely controversial.

