
Originally Posted by
dawg80
Just watched a video by a retired army veteran who says he knows about AA missiles, and he says the damage to the plane is very consistent with an AA missile attack. Here's his reasoning...
the plane's fuselage was completely intact, meaning an internal explosion, a bomb, is unlikely.
the plane lost a wing, which is clear to see in the video of it spiraling towards the ground, again the type of damage a missile would do
and finally, video of the wreckage, that which didn't burn up, clearly shows shrapnel holes, again consistent with the way an AA missile works, as it explodes near the target sending shrapnel ripping thru the aircraft.
Does all of this mean it was a missile attack? No, but the evidence points in that direction.
Next, many pundits are scratching their heads pondering WHY, if true, would Putin order such an assassination of Prigozhin. It doesn't make sense. First, Priggy was leaving Russia, probably never to return on a permanent basis anyway. If Putin wanted ole Prig out of the way, politically, well that was happening. Secondly, if Putin wanted to assassinate Priggy then a much better way would have been to wait until he was in Africa, close to some combat, and have him shot by a hired sniper or something. Would have been a whole lot less scrutiny on Putin's involvement in this.
Now, while the pundits scratch their heads wondering, here's the answer to that question as to WHY? Putin is nuts!