MH17 missile owned by russia, that shot down passenger jet over Ukraine.

If you take for example Nuremberg International Tribunal, there were people accused in specific crimes. Before that tribunal took place, there was a long investigation. So, in case of absense of the specific people, what is the sense in this tribunal? I do not see any. In addition, shot down plane is not that case that has to result in tribunal. When US shot down Iranian civil plane in 1988 there was no tribunal. Why? When Ukraine shot down a Russian civilian airplane from Israel to Russia in 2001 over the Black sea, why there was no tribunal?

 

There was no UNSC back then, the ones who fired the missile are back in Moskva or dead.

 

Ok, if ones who fired the missiles are dead or not found, who will stand in front of a jury in tribunal?

 

There was no UNSC back then, the ones who fired the missile are back in Moskva or dead

Its been vetoed....and even if it wasn't, they probably have sanctuary in the Resource Fed....seems all the world's 3rd world shithole find a home at the kremlin doorstep.

 

Russia was the only country among 15 members of the UN Security Council that thought this way ... Very suspicious!

 

As for me, the establishment of the tribunal in MH17 case wouldn't be an obstacle to the investigation. And no one would demand immediate results from the investigators ...

Why not?

That question should be addressed to Tehran and Moscow.

 

Pinochet clearly was a dictator and I have little recollection of him acting “for the greater good of his country”. That said, I struggle to see Putin as any less of a dictator than many leaders, even western ones. Indeed, the late, great Terry Pratchett, in his Discworld novels described the Patrician of Ankh Morpork as a dictator elected every 5 years (I paraphrase). And isn’t that what we have? An illusion of democracy? Every 4/5 years we get to vote for the lesser of “who cares” - honestly, when was the last time a leader was voted into power who actually intended and furthered the lives of ordinary people? Mysteriously, vested interests such as banks, big business and oil always benefit. It saddens me to say, but our leaders are bought and paid for long before we get to the ballot box and serve agendas that are, initially at least, opaque to us. This is why we think that politicians are incompetent, because they don’t do what they proclaim in their manifestos - however, they do the job they are asked to do very well, it’s just not the job we’re aware of.
I don’t think Putin is a “good guy”, but I think he at least is acting on behalf of his country. The fact that the west, or the western media don’t want him to, or criticise him doesn’t make him any less “patriotic”. Russia is under siege. It is only a few years ago that Russia was portrayed as a friend and we were supposedly basking in the glow of the peace dividend - what has changed? And perhaps we should take a moment to consider the Russian point of view. America has over 600 forward deployed bases around the world, many of them encircling Russia - just recall how America responded to nuclear missiles being deployed in Cuba (and remember why the crisis defused - because The USSR backed down to avoid Armageddon). I heard someone interviewed on a podcast, but sadly can’t remember who it was. But the thrust of the comment was, “of course Russia’s aggressive, look how close they’ve placed their country to America’s bases”!

 

Take it from whence it comes.

 

This is what we were made to believe, but it's not true. Khruschev was reacting to the missiles that we had in Turkey. Kennedy promised to remove them, and the Russian ship turned around and went back. We were not told this - I had just come across it recently.

 

Ok, then what would be the aim to have a tribunal on the airplane crash case? Comission that makes investigation is not enough? Or what? For me the request to make a tribunal before the investigation is finished the same as to try to make a court without all the evidences collected.

 

It just proves we live in an age of cliched news management? What the ruling classes, often in concert with the MSM, choose to tell us, nothing is necessarily as they want us to believe.

 

What has changed is that Putin made the West look indecisive and impotent in the middle east region (specifically Syria), then proceeded to do what the West should have done - destroy global jihadists with extreme prejudice - and he'll never be forgiven for it.

Compliments on your post by the way, EEL. Oh, and Pinochet 'acted for the greater good of the country' by destroying the radical Left. I shudder to think what Chile would be like today if he hadn't?

 

The aim of the tribunal would have been the investigation of the MH17 case and a fair trial. Have you read the draft resolution?

 

There was already international investigation running. Which draft resolution?

 

The Russians vetoed.

 

Thanks Jeanette,
I knew it was a response to the Pershings in Turkey (not Soviet aggression). I’d be really interested in your source, if you have it. I recall that the Pershings were quietly removed a while later.

 

The Game is being played. The West is not indecisive, they have a definite agenda of regime change, a playbook that dates back to Mossadeq. They have even been happy for jihadists to be ground troops (with reports of anthem being armed with US weapons). Russia is protecting Assad, by jihadists and by maintaining a significant military presence to contain the western forces from more extreme action. What we have here is a good old-fashioned proxy war - sadly, as always, it’s ordinary people who pay the price; who can blame them for fleeing to Europe to safeguard their families.

 

I've just Wiki'd 'Mossadeq' and he seems to be all about Iran; so how does Syria figure in this?

 

No I have not seen it. What is inside?

 

http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/{65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-CF6E4FF96FF9}/s_2015_562.pdf

 

Could you provide something to support your claim?

Even though it provided its radar data within days or weeks of the shootdown, Russia was excluded from any and all investigations, just as was done with the Skripal affair.

Your claim is inaccurate.

 

LOL. What claim?

 

Your claim that Russia vetoed a UN investigation.

If they did, it would have been because Russia was to be excluded from any such investigation, and I wouldn't blame them. The west is notorious for stacking the deck.

 

Proof: MH17 crash: Russia vetoes UN resolution for international tribunal

Proof?

 

Thank you, I thought that might have been what you were talking about. Did you read the entire article? Russia had been excluded from the proposed investigation, which means that the proceeding would have been a Kangaroo Court organized by the enemies of Russia. Without Russia being able to examine the evidence, it would have likely been a frame.

In fact, as it has played out, they were right. NATO nations led by Holland did exactly that--conducted an investigation that excluded any input from Russia, any role for Russia.

It would be the modern equivalent of a Star Chamber or something from the Inquisition. The defendant is excluded. I don't blame Russia for vetoing the Star Chamber proposal.