5 ms·

It s probably not France, the dude translated ffs, I know we re slow but come on, we can read sub spec and traitor cover letters in English if we must. It must

It s probably not France, the dude translated ffs, I know we re slow but come on, we can read sub spec and traitor cover letters in English if we must. It must be more exotic like Turkey or Iran no? And even then... And I cant find a cause we d incarnate for an american traitor: their either want a lot of money, which we wouldnt provide when we already have nuclear subs and a mature military research industry, are very communists which we're not or very far right lunatics which we're not. I think Israel is more likely (underdog in a sea of sharks for some), Iran (unfairly treated), Russia/China (will show those libtards) or an oil giant in the middle east (money) or maybe some south american thing. I mean the guy is an idiot but France, I wouldnt betray any other country for it and Im French... what we dont do ourselves we dont deserve.

tptacek 5y ago
It can't be Iran, since there's no embassy (or "building associated with Iran") in Washington DC for the FBI to signal from. It's not going to be Russia or China, because the FBI's story implies cooperation.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
yyyk 5y ago
The guy is an idiot but I guess he knows something about nuclear submarines. If you're Turkey or Israel or Saudi you don't want nuclear subs, and he must have known that. Nuclear subs don't make sense over diesel+AIP in the Med or the Persian Gulf or Red Sea - these seas are too narrow or too shallow, so nuke subs would be detected much sooner, cost much more, and be far larger. Having longer trips does not cover all these drawbacks for countries that must base in these areas. Nuclear subs are for blue-water navies, not green-water navies. Iran/Russia/China are out for reasons pointed out elsewhere in the comments. UK wouldn't need translation (though the idea of 'translating' a spynote into Chav is IMHO incredibly amusing). South American governments obviously don't have money for this. That leaves us with France or - more exotically - Spain/South Korea/Japan. The latter three don't have nuclear subs, but wouldn't be entirely mad to consider them. However, if the recipient has an existing industry, France is the only remaining logical contender.

tptacek 5y ago

It can't be Iran, since there's no embassy (or "building associated with Iran") in Washington DC for the FBI to signal from. It's not going to be Russia or China, because the FBI's story implies cooperation.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

yyyk 5y ago

The guy is an idiot but I guess he knows something about nuclear submarines. If you're Turkey or Israel or Saudi you don't want nuclear subs, and he must have known that. Nuclear subs don't make sense over diesel+AIP in the Med or the Persian Gulf or Red Sea - these seas are too narrow or too shallow, so nuke subs would be detected much sooner, cost much more, and be far larger. Having longer trips does not cover all these drawbacks for countries that must base in these areas. Nuclear subs are for blue-water navies, not green-water navies. Iran/Russia/China are out for reasons pointed out elsewhere in the comments. UK wouldn't need translation (though the idea of 'translating' a spynote into Chav is IMHO incredibly amusing). South American governments obviously don't have money for this. That leaves us with France or - more exotically - Spain/South Korea/Japan. The latter three don't have nuclear subs, but wouldn't be entirely mad to consider them. However, if the recipient has an existing industry, France is the only remaining logical contender.