6 ms·

> The history of false flags Ukraine has a history of false flags? Do tell.

pabloski 9y ago
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/1359353/Ukraine-admits-it-shot-down-Russian-airliner.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/135...
- ch4s3 9y ago
  That's not a false flag, it's just a refusal to accept responsibility.
  - throwanem 9y ago
    Might be mixing it up with MH 17, which each side claimed the other downed.
    - ch4s3 9y ago
      I assumed as much. And well, it was downed by Russian backed separatists(maybe even "off duty" Russian soldiers) using Russian equipment. I think the Russians just wanted spread a false narrative to sow distrust in factual reporting about the conflict. That is really more of a disinformation campaign than a false flag.
- anthonybsd 9y ago
  How is that an example of false flag? They shot it down (16 years ago, mind you), and eventually owned up to it.
pdkl95 9y ago
History (in general) has numerous examples of false flags. It doesn't matter who the current players are, spies and disinformation exist, and intentionally misleading signaling happens. Accusations therefor requires at least some evidence connecting the accused to an action (or excluding everyone else).
- anthonybsd 9y ago
  Are you familiar with Cui bono? Quite a number of things that Russia does these days fall under that category and are generally accepted as Russia's doing despite any concrete evidence. I.e. killing Putin's critics, sponsorship of far right parties in Europe, supporting an uprising in Eastern Ukraine, etc.
  - pdkl95 9y ago
    > Are you familiar with Cui bono? Of course. It's a very good heuristic for where to start an investigation; the guilty party is often found among the people that benefit. It can also be a plausible motive. However, as evidence it's only circummstanti8al. I shouldn't accuse you of robbing your local bank simply because you could have benefited from the stolen cash. > are generally accepted as Russia's doing despite any concrete evidence A lot of people have been making fallacious claims about Russia (and other places). I suspect that Putin is responsible for some of tho9se claims, but that doesn't mean they all are. Argumentum ad populum is still a fallacy,

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/1359353/Ukraine-admits-it-shot-down-Russian-airliner.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/135...

ch4s3 9y ago
That's not a false flag, it's just a refusal to accept responsibility.
- throwanem 9y ago
  Might be mixing it up with MH 17, which each side claimed the other downed.
  - ch4s3 9y ago
    I assumed as much. And well, it was downed by Russian backed separatists(maybe even "off duty" Russian soldiers) using Russian equipment. I think the Russians just wanted spread a false narrative to sow distrust in factual reporting about the conflict. That is really more of a disinformation campaign than a false flag.
anthonybsd 9y ago
How is that an example of false flag? They shot it down (16 years ago, mind you), and eventually owned up to it.

pdkl95 9y ago

History (in general) has numerous examples of false flags. It doesn't matter who the current players are, spies and disinformation exist, and intentionally misleading signaling happens. Accusations therefor requires at least some evidence connecting the accused to an action (or excluding everyone else).

anthonybsd 9y ago
Are you familiar with Cui bono? Quite a number of things that Russia does these days fall under that category and are generally accepted as Russia's doing despite any concrete evidence. I.e. killing Putin's critics, sponsorship of far right parties in Europe, supporting an uprising in Eastern Ukraine, etc.
- pdkl95 9y ago
  > Are you familiar with Cui bono? Of course. It's a very good heuristic for where to start an investigation; the guilty party is often found among the people that benefit. It can also be a plausible motive. However, as evidence it's only circummstanti8al. I shouldn't accuse you of robbing your local bank simply because you could have benefited from the stolen cash. > are generally accepted as Russia's doing despite any concrete evidence A lot of people have been making fallacious claims about Russia (and other places). I suspect that Putin is responsible for some of tho9se claims, but that doesn't mean they all are. Argumentum ad populum is still a fallacy,