this post was submitted on 29 Dec 2024
284 points (98.6% liked)

World News

39605 readers
2930 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

The UK has rejected Vladimir Putin’s apology over the Azerbaijan Airlines crash, which killed 38 people and injured 29, and called for a “full and independent” investigation.

The UK Foreign Office criticized Putin’s apology, stating it “fails to recognise that the reckless and irresponsible actions of the Russian State pose an acute and direct threat to the interests and national security of other states.”

The plane, en route from Baku to Grozny, crashed in Kazakhstan amid Russian air defense activity.

Evidence suggests it may have been misidentified and struck by a Russian missile.

top 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 70 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Considering that this is what now, the fourth "misidentified" plane struck by a Russian missile? I think it's less a case of misidentification and more a case of weapons testing.

[–] CheeryLBottom@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago

And really shoddy equipment

[–] VeganCheesecake@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I don't see any evidence for it not being accidental. There isn't really a good reason for them to shoot down random passenger planes, and a lot of reasons for avoiding that. I also don't find it hard to believe that there are problems with equipment quality and training.

Still, absolutely horrific.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

And yet, like I said, this "accident" keeps happening. And only Russia keeps "accidentally" shooting down passenger jets.

[–] VeganCheesecake@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I get the point, though I feel uncomfortable making such accusations without concrete evidence.

Also, it would just be really stupid to be doing that on purpose.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

And yet no other country has "accidentally" shot down passenger jets repeatedly. Only Russia has this sort of "accident."

[–] VeganCheesecake@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_airliner_shootdown_incidents

There's a few, but yeah, the majority of recent ones are Russian/Russian-alligned. I'm not sure there's another battlefield with an equal amount of civilian air traffic and air defense systems, though.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 43 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The plane, en route from Baku to Grozny, crashed in Kazakhstan amid Russian air defense activity.

The lengths people will go to avoid saying "shot down".

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

The number four reactor at Chornobyl NPP ceased operating amid an unplanned disassembly of some of its critical systems.

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

"Officials say that the radiation release at chernobyl was not good, but not terrible"

[–] alaphic@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

👍 sallright

[–] Jumuta@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

what does the UK have to do with this?? they're not a global power like they think they are anymore

[–] copd@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

NATO member with nuclear strike capability who have a "special relationship" with daddy America.

Yeah they're definitely weak

[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 7 points 2 weeks ago

...and permanent member of the UN security council.

[–] AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net 7 points 2 weeks ago

I agree with your characterisation of the UK, but I also think that any country denouncing another's actions has power — it may affect how other countries actions towards Russia if nothing else.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago

Perhaps not, but who knows about Putin's values.

Russians used to respect the UK at least.

And, well, technically, Charles III is the had of the Commonwealth of Nations despite it being just symbolic. That's a third of the population or the world.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 3 points 2 weeks ago

It's not like the US is going to do anything about it. So being a big international superpower basically doesn't count for anything here.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 5 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

Fairly sure was actually shut down on purpose. Russia is like that.

They don't need a reason, they just need a missile, and they certainly have a missile.

[–] viking@infosec.pub 3 points 2 weeks ago

It was a flight on the way to Russia with plenty of Russians on board. I doubt they take pleasure in shooting down their countrymen, if anything.

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 3 points 2 weeks ago

Probably mistook it for a military plane and didn't bother to confirm, same as with MH17.

They in the sense of all Russians? All Russian soldiers? I don't think we should let the current conflict, caused by decisions of authoritarian leadership, lead us into vilifying a whole people.

[–] galanthus@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

What do you mean "they don't need a reason"? Are you insane?

[–] palordrolap@fedia.io 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I assume the qualifier "...that makes sense to anyone else" was implicit.

[–] galanthus@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

This person(and you, presumably) says that a civilian aircraft, belonging to a nation that Russia wants to keep in it's sphere of influence and has no reason to offend was shot down on purpose, despite the fact that any such case is a cause for suspicion and apprehension just because they are evil, basically.

That is what they meant, I'm pretty sure, that there is no point trying to understand what Russia does, it just does stuff because they are evil, so every fact should be interpreted in a way that makes them the most evil.

In any case, why shouldn't their motives make sense to anyone else? They are not aliens, are they?

[–] echodot@feddit.uk -4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Even Russians admit that Russia is an unpredictable entity that is only interested in causing chaos.

I recommend doing some research on it because you clearly don't know what you're talking about, which is pathetic because it's literally the easiest subject matter in the world to be informed on. Does Russia (Putin) do evil things? Yes, all the fucking time. See, violation of Human rights in Ukraine, not counting the invasion of Ukraine itself, the whole Salisbury thing, the use of desperate immigrants as a weapon, kidnapping children, hacking or otherwise manipulating other nations elections, sending their own people into a battlefield with absolutely no equipment, persecution of particular ethnic groups within their own country, assassination of political rivals.

In comparison China is a minor irritation and a copyright troll

[–] xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

But all these things you've listed above had specific, self-evident purposes, regardless of the ethics of the actions.

So that doesn't support your argument that Russia just does random chaotic shit for the sake of it - in fact it does the opposite, suggesting that Russia acts.

As an aside, there was absolutely no reason to be calling the other person "pathetic" for having a differing perspective to you; they were responding politely and in good faith.

[–] galanthus@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

In my previous comment I said that thinking Russia does evil things just because it is evil for no real reason is ridiculous and he just proved my point by doubling down on it and making it seem even more silly.

In any case, I can't help but wonder how a sane adult individual can actually believe that. This is not lord of the rings, and Russia is not Mordor.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk -1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Even MI6 say they believe that it was a deliberate attack.

Weston is like to think that Russia can be in some way understood on our level but it's just not the case.

You can try and discredit that by calling it "evil" and ll using infantilizing language but the fact remains they are just like that, they are chaotic simply to destabilize everyone else. They don't really have an ulterior motive other than destabilization the chaos that they cause is the objective it isn't in aid of anything.

[–] galanthus@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Only their goal isn't simply to destabilise everyone for the sake of it, believe it or not.

And you most certainly can understand it if you try. I don't agree with a lot of things that were done, but I certainly can at least vaguely see the rationale. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it isn't there.

Your approach is very condescending and dehumanising. You must understand, that there are both sides to every conflict, and the other side has some reasons that seem moral to them. Ignoring that is counterproductive.