According to CNN, Russian propaganda is saying

[applegrove]

the Ukranians were trying to shoot Putin's plane out of the sky when Malaysian airplane was hit. This does not bode well. If the Russians don't accept what happened, and temper their actions, it will happen again.

[MohRokTah]

1. That's the RT bullshit story and is coming straight from the Kremlin

Putin is trying to double down.

Ain't gonna fly. Time to send in the drones.

[GeorgeGist]

2. John McCain has a bandwagon ...

looking for players.

[MohRokTah]

6. NATO will almost certainly respond. 154 Dutch were killed in a direct attack on a civilian aircraft.

And if the Netherlands wants a response, every member of NATO is treaty bound to respond. There is no saying no if The Netherlands or any other member state of NATO who had citizens murdered in this strike demand a response. All of NATO must join in.

Drones are a far better choice than boots on the ground. Drone the rebels out of existence. Standard response to terrorists these days and it keeps American pilots and soldiers out of harm's way.

[Cha]

3. Oh yeah, like the Russian rebels and Putin would take responsibility for anything. They aren't

going to start now.

Except didn't the Pro-Russian rebels already let it slip?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025253860

[MohRokTah]

4. Yep, they sure did take credit.

When they were under the mistaken impression they had shot down an An-26.

ITAR-TASS even reported it. You know, Russian news.

[Cha]

7. Tomorrow's The Sun in Britain. A tweet from the BBC

Don't know about this paper but we're suppose to accept what RT has to say so this is what The Sun is saying.. the exact opposite.


BBC News (UK) ✔ @BBCNews
Follow
THE SUN: Putin's missile pic.twitter.com/R2o3fsc3Ja #TomorrowsPapersToday #BBCPapers via @hendopolis
12:20 PM - 17 Jul 2014 221 Retweets 65 favorites

TOD

[MohRokTah]

8. There were British citizens on that aircraft.

The Brits could demand a NATO response.

[Cha]

9. So terribly sad. :(

[Bad Thoughts]

5. Confirmation that CNN pays attention to DU! eom.

[Agschmid]

10. It's bull.

It's been bull in every post today...

Putins plane has four engines, is shorter, and has a narrower wingspan. A Boeing 777 has two engines, is longer, and has a substantially larger wingspan.

Also even RT (yah I know... ugh) says Putin's plane doesn't even fly over the region due to security.

[TwilightGardener]

11. Putin's go-to move is blatant lying. He gets away with it, it works for him.

Remember he denied Russian troops in Crimea, and made a long rambling speech about how the "self-defense" forces bought their uniforms in army surplus stores and used their own guns--and then he went a few weeks later to present many of them with medals as their commander in chief. As long as he denies responsibility, no one will really be held responsible--just these "rebels", who are now pretty much international terrorists. Are these terrorists going to pay out a settlement, the way countries have done in the past when this happens? Of course not.

[Igel]

12. Yeah, that's one version.

Another is that it was a Ukrainian fighter.

When it was pointed out that the rebels downed on plane not far from there, the response was that it was a public service of sorts. Had they not downed that fighter, more planes would have been downed.

Then there's the "there was a terrorist on the plane" from some Duma member. And by "member" I mean "chlen."

Tsaryov's response was the best, as reported. The upshot was that how could anybody doubt their righteousness--to even accuse them of shooting down a civilian aircraft!

Putin's response was classic. It's the Ukrainian government's fault. The government is responsible for everything that happens on its soil. And he told his military to render every assistance in casting light on this. Helpful, if the black box is turned over to them for analysis. "Here's your findings. Now find them." So Soviet. Of course, the real reason for his accusation is that if the government had done the reasonable thing and allowed secession there'd be no hostilities; no hostilities, no downed plane. One could easily say the same thing about his support for them, but you know how it is--the buck stops elsewhere.

The problem with most of the accusations is one of reasonableness. I don't see a reason to think that the rebels intentionally shot down a civilian plane. But all the responses that point fingers at the Ukrainian military really assume that they knew who was on the plane and struck their intended target.

That's unreasonable.

The Russians will have to be made to accept what happened. It conflicts with the official narrative, which many hold to be completely true. It's unthinkable for their guys to have shot down a passenger plane. So they won't think it.

But it's even less acceptable for others to think that they did so. So they'll lie, obfuscate, and if they finally do accept it it'll be out of the limelight for public consumption abroad, followed by a quick, "Next subject" and moving on as though nothing bad had happened.

[BlueCheese]

13. Russia is going backwards.

It's like they think they can go back to the days of the Soviet Union, when they could dominate their neighbors militarily, cook up propaganda for domestic consumption, and basically live in denial.