Russia, Ukraine feud over sniper carnage

[Igel]

10. That's what the pro-Yanukovich folk want to think.

All that nice link shows is distrust and that the people shot by snipers were all shot by the same group of snipers.

"Understanding" requires a subject. I can "understand" something that's utterly false. It's a good high-falutin' synonym for "believe" or "think."


That the new admin doesn't want to investigate can be for a lot of reasons. They may already believe they know and think it's a waste of time. Perhaps they simply have more pressing matters--say, getting a government formed and stabilized, dealing with breakouts of violence and self-proclaimed pro-Russian leaders in the East, coping with financial problems. Perhaps they really were behind it. Or perhaps they figure it's a lost cause since most of the people who would have appointed the snipers and probably the snipers themselves are gone. (Remember where the snipers were: Not on the buildings held by the maidentsy but on other buildings, some government-protected. Sure, a sniper could manage to infiltrate, but you'd expect some to be caught and the government protectors to perhaps go to the roof.)


Simplest explanation for why both sides were hit: Snipers weren't careful or wonderfully trained. Miss your target, hit the wrong guy. From a distance confuse two people.

Don't buy that it was Russia's doing. Still think that Yanukovich had the troops, control over the sniper nests, had the fewest injuries sustained to his side, and had the most to gain. Motive, opportunity, means. Only in hindsight, as a result of the way the sniper incidents actually played out, can we retcon motive into the events for the opposition.