6 ms·

"Germany’s defense minister says damage to 2 Baltic data cables appears to be sabotage" - https://apnews.com/article/germany-finland-baltic-data-cables-sabotage

by belter 2y ago

"Germany’s defense minister says damage to 2 Baltic data cables appears to be sabotage" - https://apnews.com/article/germany-finland-baltic-data-cables-sabotage-russia-12082dcc129d04e417d15d3f1b24add7 https://apnews.com/article/germany-finland-baltic-data-cable...

Cthulhu_ 2y ago
English isn't my first language, but isn't "appears to be" inconclusive? It is or it isn't, "appears to be" is still too vague for my liking.
- beezlebroxxxxxx 2y ago
  "Appears to be", in English, generally means "on first look/glance." It runs very close to "I believe such and such." If I asked you for an answer to a math question, then you showed me the answer with how you got there, on a very quick glance I might say: "That appears to be correct." It could mean they've seen more evidence to make that assessment, or are basing that assessment on the same evidence we have. Regardless, "appears to be" is hedging in the absence of certainty.
  - mettamage 2y ago
    I love this about HN culture. HN culture, in general, feels really patient, empathic and knowledgeable :)
  - pdabbadabba 2y ago
    This is right. But I'd add that the fact that the speaker is the German defense minister adds an additional layer of meaning. Ordinarily such a person would not be expected to give such an initial assessment without careful consideration.
    - holowoodman 2y ago
      Correct. To add context from a German source (https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/europa/ostsee-datenkabel-pistorius-100.html https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/europa/ostsee-datenkabel-p...): > Bundesverteidigungsminister Boris Pistorius vermutet im Fall von zwei in der Ostsee beschädigten Kabeln zur Datenübertragung eine vorsätzliche Aktion durch Dritte. Man müsse davon ausgehen, dass es sich um Sabotage handle, sagte er am Rande eines Treffens mit seinen EU-Amtskollegen in Brüssel. Beweise dafür gebe es bislang aber nicht. Er betonte: "Niemand glaubt, dass diese Kabel aus Versehen durchtrennt worden sind." > Federal Minister of Defense Boris Pistorius assumes the case of to damaged baltic sea data cables to be the intentional action of a third party. One should assume it to be sabotage, he said while at a meeting with EU colleagues in Brusseles. Proof, however, is not available yet. He emphasized: "Nobody believes that those cables were cut by accident." So while carefully not saying anything definitive and firm, he very strongly hints in the direction of sabotage.
  - ThinkBeat 2y ago
    In a political and intelligence sense "appears to be" is a rhetorical tool for propaganda purposes, or / and to cover you ass. He could say "We have no evidence of this being sabotage and further speculation is not useful at this point” which is what he says, from one perspective. On the other he is framing a conspiracy theory: "Something happened that appears to be sabotage and sabotage would be done by the enemy. " and the European media has been stuffed full of conspiracy theories during the entire conflicts. Educationally you can look at the Nord Stream pipelines sabotage. Nearly every EU and US source writes in big letters that Russia was behind it. After a while, it became nearly impossible to keep that conspiracy theory alive. Sweden and Denmark ended their investigation into the matter with no conclusion drawn The present narrative is that the sabotage was done by a Ukrainian team with a shoe string budget: A Drunken Evening, a Rented Yacht: The Real Story of the Nord Stream Pipeline Sabotage Private businessmen funded the shoestring operation, which was overseen by a top general; President Zelensky approved the plan, then tried unsuccessfully to call it off https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/nord-stream-pipeline-explosion-real-story-da24839c?mod=hp_lead_pos7 https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/nord-stream-pipeline-explos...
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - petre 2y ago
      I've read the original Zeit article. What a bunch of mumbo jumbo. https://www.zeit.de/politik/2023-09/nord-stream-pipelines-attack-anniversary-english https://www.zeit.de/politik/2023-09/nord-stream-pipelines-at...
- dboreham 2y ago
  It's inconclusive but only a little. There's a spectrum of conclusitivity through "possibly is", "might be", "could be", "very well might", "looks like", "appears to be", "almost certainly is", "is".
  - dialup_sounds 2y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Words_of_estimative_probability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Words_of_estimative_probabilit...
- patmorgan23 2y ago
  In this case the phrase likely means "we think it was sabotage but can't prove it yet"
- Beijinger 2y ago
  Since they likely used the German expression "es scheint", I think your interpretation is correct.
- fracus 2y ago
  I interpret "appears to be" to mean "we certainly know it to be true based on factual evidence but we need to keep an exit door politically".
- brianleb 2y ago
  The sibling comments are very relevant, but I wanted to provide a marginally different perspective. You have to take not only what is being said, but _who is saying it_ into perspective. In this case, this is a government official speaking to the press (i.e. in an official capacity). If they were to say "this was sabotage," that is a definite declaration that the government believes - again, officially and on the record - that an outside party has deliberately done material damage to their country. Given the general situation, it is not a huge leap to come to the interpretation that "this was an attack against our country, and possibly an act of war." No government official would want to be within miles (or kilometers) of that sort of statement unless they have pretty much already internally decided from the top-down to escalate the situation. Almost no single government agent has the authority to escalate the situation in that manner. So what we end up with is "appears to be." This overtly says 'all available evidence points to this being the case, however something else cannot be ruled out.' (As a sibling comment suggests, it can also act as a type of propaganda). So it is not an official government declaration that another nation has damaged them, but they have reasons (probably both apparent and not) to believe what they are saying publicly.
- aguaviva 2y ago
  The phrasing is in any case that of the AP article, not the Defense Minister. What the latter actually said was much stronger and less ambiguous. As detailed in the helpful sibling comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42187127 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42187127
cwassert 2y ago
He just wants more funds for his department.
- dralley 2y ago
  Reflexive cynicism about the military isn't as warranted in 2024 as it might have been a decade ago. And it wasn't really warranted a decade ago either, when Russia was blowing up Czech ammunition depots, airliners full of Dutch people, conducting assassinations in the center of Berlin, and sending "little green men" to Ukraine. It could be an accident, sure, but suspicion of sabotage is not paranoia. And also, like, the German government (and European governments generally) DOES need to spend more on their military. They underinvested for decades and are now stuck needing to catch up very quickly.
  - coldtea 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - dralley 2y ago
      Russia and Russia alone is responsible for "kick-starting" this war. And providing Ukraine with aid so that they don't get steamrolled is not morally wrong. Nor is refusing to do so so that Russia can more quickly get around to torturing and repressing the population a moral right.
      - coldtea 2y ago
        [flagged]
        Terr_ 2y ago
        > Yeah, it's not like a line in the sand, admitted as such by both sides, was broken, one with explicit promises that it wouldn't be. Ah, your oddly-vague wording must of course be referring to how Russia explicitly promised to respect Ukraine's borders [0], a line they are violently crossing as we speak. First with an undeclared guerrilla-war and annexation, and more-recently with a massive "surprise" invasion--after spending several weeks of lying about their buildup and pretending that other countries were just trying to make them look bad. If you are sarcastically suggesting something else... Well, go ahead, share the evidence for whatever-it-is, the kind of documentary evidence which countries ensure is always abundant for any remotely important international promise. (That is in contrast to self-serving lies from the Kremlin, which rely heavily on refusing to explain.) [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum
madaxe_again 2y ago
I suppose in today’s world it’s hard to know what was sabotage and what was an accident, and where the buck stops - particularly in marine matters. Was that anchor drag intentional? Did the operator know their charts were out of date? Did that trawl net really fail and snag like that? We’ll go around in circles until it’s irrelevant.

by belter 2y ago

Cthulhu_ 2y ago

English isn't my first language, but isn't "appears to be" inconclusive? It is or it isn't, "appears to be" is still too vague for my liking.

beezlebroxxxxxx 2y ago
"Appears to be", in English, generally means "on first look/glance." It runs very close to "I believe such and such." If I asked you for an answer to a math question, then you showed me the answer with how you got there, on a very quick glance I might say: "That appears to be correct." It could mean they've seen more evidence to make that assessment, or are basing that assessment on the same evidence we have. Regardless, "appears to be" is hedging in the absence of certainty.
- mettamage 2y ago
  I love this about HN culture. HN culture, in general, feels really patient, empathic and knowledgeable :)
- pdabbadabba 2y ago
  This is right. But I'd add that the fact that the speaker is the German defense minister adds an additional layer of meaning. Ordinarily such a person would not be expected to give such an initial assessment without careful consideration.
  - holowoodman 2y ago
    Correct. To add context from a German source (https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/europa/ostsee-datenkabel-pistorius-100.html https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/europa/ostsee-datenkabel-p...): > Bundesverteidigungsminister Boris Pistorius vermutet im Fall von zwei in der Ostsee beschädigten Kabeln zur Datenübertragung eine vorsätzliche Aktion durch Dritte. Man müsse davon ausgehen, dass es sich um Sabotage handle, sagte er am Rande eines Treffens mit seinen EU-Amtskollegen in Brüssel. Beweise dafür gebe es bislang aber nicht. Er betonte: "Niemand glaubt, dass diese Kabel aus Versehen durchtrennt worden sind." > Federal Minister of Defense Boris Pistorius assumes the case of to damaged baltic sea data cables to be the intentional action of a third party. One should assume it to be sabotage, he said while at a meeting with EU colleagues in Brusseles. Proof, however, is not available yet. He emphasized: "Nobody believes that those cables were cut by accident." So while carefully not saying anything definitive and firm, he very strongly hints in the direction of sabotage.
- ThinkBeat 2y ago
  In a political and intelligence sense "appears to be" is a rhetorical tool for propaganda purposes, or / and to cover you ass. He could say "We have no evidence of this being sabotage and further speculation is not useful at this point” which is what he says, from one perspective. On the other he is framing a conspiracy theory: "Something happened that appears to be sabotage and sabotage would be done by the enemy. " and the European media has been stuffed full of conspiracy theories during the entire conflicts. Educationally you can look at the Nord Stream pipelines sabotage. Nearly every EU and US source writes in big letters that Russia was behind it. After a while, it became nearly impossible to keep that conspiracy theory alive. Sweden and Denmark ended their investigation into the matter with no conclusion drawn The present narrative is that the sabotage was done by a Ukrainian team with a shoe string budget: A Drunken Evening, a Rented Yacht: The Real Story of the Nord Stream Pipeline Sabotage Private businessmen funded the shoestring operation, which was overseen by a top general; President Zelensky approved the plan, then tried unsuccessfully to call it off https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/nord-stream-pipeline-explosion-real-story-da24839c?mod=hp_lead_pos7 https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/nord-stream-pipeline-explos...
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - petre 2y ago
    I've read the original Zeit article. What a bunch of mumbo jumbo. https://www.zeit.de/politik/2023-09/nord-stream-pipelines-attack-anniversary-english https://www.zeit.de/politik/2023-09/nord-stream-pipelines-at...
dboreham 2y ago
It's inconclusive but only a little. There's a spectrum of conclusitivity through "possibly is", "might be", "could be", "very well might", "looks like", "appears to be", "almost certainly is", "is".
- dialup_sounds 2y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Words_of_estimative_probability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Words_of_estimative_probabilit...
patmorgan23 2y ago
In this case the phrase likely means "we think it was sabotage but can't prove it yet"
Beijinger 2y ago
Since they likely used the German expression "es scheint", I think your interpretation is correct.
fracus 2y ago
I interpret "appears to be" to mean "we certainly know it to be true based on factual evidence but we need to keep an exit door politically".
brianleb 2y ago
The sibling comments are very relevant, but I wanted to provide a marginally different perspective. You have to take not only what is being said, but _who is saying it_ into perspective. In this case, this is a government official speaking to the press (i.e. in an official capacity). If they were to say "this was sabotage," that is a definite declaration that the government believes - again, officially and on the record - that an outside party has deliberately done material damage to their country. Given the general situation, it is not a huge leap to come to the interpretation that "this was an attack against our country, and possibly an act of war." No government official would want to be within miles (or kilometers) of that sort of statement unless they have pretty much already internally decided from the top-down to escalate the situation. Almost no single government agent has the authority to escalate the situation in that manner. So what we end up with is "appears to be." This overtly says 'all available evidence points to this being the case, however something else cannot be ruled out.' (As a sibling comment suggests, it can also act as a type of propaganda). So it is not an official government declaration that another nation has damaged them, but they have reasons (probably both apparent and not) to believe what they are saying publicly.
aguaviva 2y ago
The phrasing is in any case that of the AP article, not the Defense Minister. What the latter actually said was much stronger and less ambiguous. As detailed in the helpful sibling comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42187127 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42187127

cwassert 2y ago

He just wants more funds for his department.

dralley 2y ago
Reflexive cynicism about the military isn't as warranted in 2024 as it might have been a decade ago. And it wasn't really warranted a decade ago either, when Russia was blowing up Czech ammunition depots, airliners full of Dutch people, conducting assassinations in the center of Berlin, and sending "little green men" to Ukraine. It could be an accident, sure, but suspicion of sabotage is not paranoia. And also, like, the German government (and European governments generally) DOES need to spend more on their military. They underinvested for decades and are now stuck needing to catch up very quickly.
- coldtea 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - dralley 2y ago
    Russia and Russia alone is responsible for "kick-starting" this war. And providing Ukraine with aid so that they don't get steamrolled is not morally wrong. Nor is refusing to do so so that Russia can more quickly get around to torturing and repressing the population a moral right.
    - coldtea 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - Terr_ 2y ago
        > Yeah, it's not like a line in the sand, admitted as such by both sides, was broken, one with explicit promises that it wouldn't be. Ah, your oddly-vague wording must of course be referring to how Russia explicitly promised to respect Ukraine's borders [0], a line they are violently crossing as we speak. First with an undeclared guerrilla-war and annexation, and more-recently with a massive "surprise" invasion--after spending several weeks of lying about their buildup and pretending that other countries were just trying to make them look bad. If you are sarcastically suggesting something else... Well, go ahead, share the evidence for whatever-it-is, the kind of documentary evidence which countries ensure is always abundant for any remotely important international promise. (That is in contrast to self-serving lies from the Kremlin, which rely heavily on refusing to explain.) [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum

madaxe_again 2y ago

I suppose in today’s world it’s hard to know what was sabotage and what was an accident, and where the buck stops - particularly in marine matters. Was that anchor drag intentional? Did the operator know their charts were out of date? Did that trawl net really fail and snag like that? We’ll go around in circles until it’s irrelevant.