4 ms·

cracks knuckles * old cold-war boogeyman * claims of attacks that leave no physical evidence * only reported by government officials If the tables were turn

cracks knuckles * old cold-war boogeyman * claims of attacks that leave no physical evidence * only reported by government officials If the tables were turned here and the Cubans or Russians were accusing us of a sonic attack we’d be screaming that it’s a disinformation campaign.

duxup 8y ago
>we’d be screaming that it’s a disinformation campaign I think more likely the state department would just deny it and move on.
ptero 8y ago
> If the tables were turned here and the Cubans or Russians were accusing us of a sonic attack we’d be screaming that it’s a disinformation campaign I do not follow Cuban politics (and not much Russian), but Russia nowadays are always accusing USA of some evil -- watch the official 1st channel or read gov't radio transcript: planning an overthrow of their government (via supporting this or that NGO), destabilizing an economy, financing a war and killing Russian citizens (Ukraine, Syria), etc. etc. Much of this is for internal consumption, and generally the reaction in the US from those who can read it and care to is "meh, business as usual". Trying to influence minds, for sure; but this is par for the course for politics.
- owenmarshall 8y ago
  The only difference seems to be that we don’t have state media - our outlets are just as happy to claim Chinese military exercises are “practice bombing operations” against the US, and that a Russian plot exists to destabilize our democracy and hack our voting machines. Our official sources are happy to demur, as they have around claims of sonic attacks - we are still “investigating” and “analyzing data”. We officially keep the claims at arms length. We’ve figured out that a public-private partnership makes better agitprop.
628C6l0 8y ago
But is that really as hypocritical as you seem to suggest? After all we are, for lack of a better phrase, the good guys. It's not unprincipled to give the good guys more benefit of the doubt.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- kenmicklas 8y ago
  You mean cause everyone thinks they're the good guys right? Cause the US is definitely not the good guys.
  - 628C6l0 8y ago
    Are you kidding me? I can't fathom how your last sentence could even conceivably be true.
    - owenmarshall 8y ago
      Ask an Iraqi if we are the good guys. Or an Afghan. Or a Salvadoran, Grenadian, Cambodian,...
      - 628C6l0 8y ago
        I don't see how that's relevant. The mere fact that some people deny that 911 happened doesn't mean 911 didn't happen.
  - wavefunction 8y ago
    There are no good guys.
    - GW150914 8y ago
      There are no good guys. And yet, there are bad guys. Churchill was a bastard, and no kind of “good guy” yet Hitler and the Nazis were the bad guys. C‘est la vie. Stalin was one of the bad guys, and so was Slobodan Milosovic, and so is Dick Cheney, Tony Blair, Pol Pot, etc. Good guy is a tough category to fill, but history is full of inexcusable monsters and we should be careful with our moral relativism.

duxup 8y ago

>we’d be screaming that it’s a disinformation campaign I think more likely the state department would just deny it and move on.

ptero 8y ago

> If the tables were turned here and the Cubans or Russians were accusing us of a sonic attack we’d be screaming that it’s a disinformation campaign I do not follow Cuban politics (and not much Russian), but Russia nowadays are always accusing USA of some evil -- watch the official 1st channel or read gov't radio transcript: planning an overthrow of their government (via supporting this or that NGO), destabilizing an economy, financing a war and killing Russian citizens (Ukraine, Syria), etc. etc. Much of this is for internal consumption, and generally the reaction in the US from those who can read it and care to is "meh, business as usual". Trying to influence minds, for sure; but this is par for the course for politics.

owenmarshall 8y ago
The only difference seems to be that we don’t have state media - our outlets are just as happy to claim Chinese military exercises are “practice bombing operations” against the US, and that a Russian plot exists to destabilize our democracy and hack our voting machines. Our official sources are happy to demur, as they have around claims of sonic attacks - we are still “investigating” and “analyzing data”. We officially keep the claims at arms length. We’ve figured out that a public-private partnership makes better agitprop.

628C6l0 8y ago

But is that really as hypocritical as you seem to suggest? After all we are, for lack of a better phrase, the good guys. It's not unprincipled to give the good guys more benefit of the doubt.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
kenmicklas 8y ago
You mean cause everyone thinks they're the good guys right? Cause the US is definitely not the good guys.
- 628C6l0 8y ago
  Are you kidding me? I can't fathom how your last sentence could even conceivably be true.
  - owenmarshall 8y ago
    Ask an Iraqi if we are the good guys. Or an Afghan. Or a Salvadoran, Grenadian, Cambodian,...
    - 628C6l0 8y ago
      I don't see how that's relevant. The mere fact that some people deny that 911 happened doesn't mean 911 didn't happen.
- wavefunction 8y ago
  There are no good guys.
  - GW150914 8y ago
    There are no good guys. And yet, there are bad guys. Churchill was a bastard, and no kind of “good guy” yet Hitler and the Nazis were the bad guys. C‘est la vie. Stalin was one of the bad guys, and so was Slobodan Milosovic, and so is Dick Cheney, Tony Blair, Pol Pot, etc. Good guy is a tough category to fill, but history is full of inexcusable monsters and we should be careful with our moral relativism.