The manuals, average intelligence, and a few days doing dry runs newer and retrofitted systems even have provisions for dry runs built in.
This guy is without out a doubt pretending that what's required to operate such a system as part of an integrated air defense setup is always required as if there is no standalone mode.
I know for a fact that US defense analysts wrote papers about how easy they were to use in standalone mode back in the mid eighties because I was working for DoD then. It just ain't Effin' Magic they are designed to be as simple to use as possible because the more simple to operate they are the more their average lethality improves. There are fewer screwups with simple to operate systems than with complex systems in a complicated environment and that sort of enviroment dictates the minimum requirements.
Now, if you want to assume I'm just full of crap, fine. There's still the question of why the thousands of veterans in Ukraine who served in the Ukraine or Soviet military would all be veterans who drove trucks, dug ditches, or were Infantry grunts and not in air defense. Air defense was HUGE under the Soviets. Tens of thousands of people have trained on these systems. Not a single guy who's a Separatist from Ukraine though, huh?
So in reality, the degree to which someone needs to be trained to use it is moot point. It doesn't prove anything either way. If it's easy it doesn't clear Russia and Ukraine Separatists are still responsible. If it's difficult it doesn't mean Russia was involved and the Ukraine Separatists are still responsible.
This is all just more of the sort of noise that passes for reporting and distracts attention from the fact that 95% of what they're calling News about this is just repeating press releases and looking for the usual sad, bloody, photos. Turn on the media machine, hit the right hot buttons, and all the people who claim to not trust the media will hop on the bandwagon.
If the US and EU media are all going nuts about something and they all agree, it's to sell something critical to their agenda or to keep something critical to their agenda off the front page, not to get the facts out. The more they quote experts the more likely it is they're quoting experts that are in their pocket the way they trot out "Climate Scientists"
This is another rabbit hole to divert people into.
The murder of 300 people isn’t a false lead or a rabbit hole. Sure the media does what you say but not in this case. A big part of the problem is there is so much corruption it’s overwhelming.
"Bunk."
My understanding, also.
"Business Insider" isn't about business, isn't an insider, and is often completely wrong. Telling the difference between a military transport aircraft and a passenger airliner may take some training and effort, but Russian weapons systems are designed to be operated by drunken conscripts who don't even want to be there.
Take a breath, dude. I know it’s not shaping up well for Putin. Now, how do you explain away the looting by his proxies of the victims? Just bad luck?
That’s right. Military gear is universally designed to be idiot proof.
If the US and EU media are all going nuts about something and they all agree, it's to sell something critical to their agenda or to keep something critical to their agenda off the front page, not to get the facts out. The more they quote experts the more likely it is they're quoting experts that are in their pocket the way they trot out "Climate Scientists..."
I cannot agree with those two paragraphs more. I've been constantly hammering Freepers on the issue of not believe the media, but still take what they are saying as gospel at the same time.
Being in media, I've just watched the media coverage of this and noticed some thing out of normal. One example is lack of censorship of the bloody gruesome photos that would normally accompany such stories. Another is a question that no one apparently wants to ask: "Why would someone WANT to shoot down a civilian airliner full of passengers?"
Or (adjusting tin foil hat for a comfortable fit): Who benefits?
Certainly not the Russians or their proxy agents in Ukraine. But in the PR war, it certainly helps Ukraine, who despite recently singing a deal with the EU was losing, and still has to kiss the Russian ring to get any oil from them (not to mention, pay the money they owe).
It also helps the US by knocking the Southern Invasion off the front page (a little). Not to worry as the part-time occupant at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave will make it all about him .
While I'm at it: did anyone get an explanation on why Reuters originally reported 29 Americans on the manifest? It's just me, but if I ran one of the biggest Euro media services, some heads would roll over getting something like that wrong. I will go this far to say from all reports I have seen in the media and comments from the EXPERTS:
Okay, removing the tin foil hat...
At best, we should say this is some kind of an accident. Be we should all be asking the question of can these systems can be operated remotely. If so, who knows where that could lead.
But to summarize, I must plead with my fellow Real Americans once again to NOT consider the likes of the New York Times and Washington Post valid news sources. There is clearly an agenda being pushed here... by someone.
jimjohn - OUT.