3 ms·

>This isn't the BUK missile that somehow "happen" to end up with "insurgents". It didn't "happen", it were Ukrainian BUKs captured by the rebels - June 29, alm

by trhway 7y ago

>This isn't the BUK missile that somehow "happen" to end up with "insurgents". It didn't "happen", it were Ukrainian BUKs captured by the rebels - June 29, almost 3 weeks before MH-17, "Now the Donetsk sky will be protected by BUKs" https://www.vesti.ru/doc.html?id=1741703 https://www.vesti.ru/doc.html?id=1741703 [the publication time is easily verifiable through Internet Archive] - a news that the rebels had captured Ukranian anti-aircraft installation armed with BUKs, second such installation in a few days. Both sides published that news at the time. Similarly a submarine can be hijacked either in real life or, in near future, virtually. Though my bet here is on unmanned underwater drones impossible to identify after attack (and probably self-destruction).

lakis 7y ago
Are you seriously think that somebody can hijack a submarine? What do you think it is? A bicycle? Missiles can be "lost" because the BUK missile is basically a truck. You put diesel in it and you are good to go. Where are you going to "park" the stolen submarine? Into your small private hidden port? Are you an evil super genius multi-billionaire that has secret ports. Real life is not a James Bond movie.
- trhway 7y ago
  A non nuclear submarine can be parked and carried around inside a midsize container/cargo ship for example. An operation for a small well financed, though probably well less than a billion (otherwise it is just cheaper to build a sub yourself) team/organization. >Real life is not a James Bond movie. True. For example James Bond's jetpack was much more inferior to that https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2019/8/4/20753648/jet-powered-hoverboard-english-channel-crossing-franky-zapata-success https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2...
  - bryanrasmussen 7y ago
    Thunderball was in 1965; that technology has advanced somewhat from the slightly futuristic tech of a work of fiction from more than half a century ago is not some great declaration of that fictional world being achievable.
greedo 7y ago
Operating a modern submarine isn't a skill that you pick up after staying at a Holiday Inn. And no, you wouldn't be able to hijack one "virtually" in the near future.

by trhway 7y ago

lakis 7y ago

Are you seriously think that somebody can hijack a submarine? What do you think it is? A bicycle? Missiles can be "lost" because the BUK missile is basically a truck. You put diesel in it and you are good to go. Where are you going to "park" the stolen submarine? Into your small private hidden port? Are you an evil super genius multi-billionaire that has secret ports. Real life is not a James Bond movie.

trhway 7y ago
A non nuclear submarine can be parked and carried around inside a midsize container/cargo ship for example. An operation for a small well financed, though probably well less than a billion (otherwise it is just cheaper to build a sub yourself) team/organization. >Real life is not a James Bond movie. True. For example James Bond's jetpack was much more inferior to that https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2019/8/4/20753648/jet-powered-hoverboard-english-channel-crossing-franky-zapata-success https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2...
- bryanrasmussen 7y ago
  Thunderball was in 1965; that technology has advanced somewhat from the slightly futuristic tech of a work of fiction from more than half a century ago is not some great declaration of that fictional world being achievable.

greedo 7y ago

Operating a modern submarine isn't a skill that you pick up after staying at a Holiday Inn. And no, you wouldn't be able to hijack one "virtually" in the near future.