|
| ▲ | vlovich123 a minute ago | parent | next [-] |
| This isn’t a show of power. Sabotage works best when your target doesn’t even realize it was sabotage. Similarly it’s best if you misattribute blame because then you’re fighting the wrong party and looking for ghosts. Russia throwing journalists out of windows or paining with Novachok - that’s a “it’s us, you can’t do anything about it, don’t fuck with us” power signal that benefits from “plausible” deniability - you can’t prove it was us. |
|
| ▲ | DrScientist 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The ideal scenario is everyone suspects it's you but can't prove it. You have both the desired threat, but no concrete biases for an official response. Also an uncertainty limits action - it might be a random event, it could even be a false flag. One of the problem's here is narratives are being spun by multiple actors and it depends on who you believe. |
| |
| ▲ | chmod775 9 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | You don't need a real basis for a response. There's nobody here enforcing any rules. If you wanted you could claim you have evidence, without having any. Doesn't matter. "This better stop or there will be sanctions, and if its not within your power to stop it, tough luck" is a valid response. Whether that's wise is another question. | |
| ▲ | hgomersall 15 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Right, but you absolutely need the suspicion. If it's too deniable, it rather loses efficacy. It seems in this situation it could be any number of actors, which rather dilutes any intended message. | |
| ▲ | spwa4 an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | > The ideal scenario is everyone suspects it's you but can't prove it. Why? EU countries have shown time and time again they won't do anything. I mean for God's sake, Russia was caught sending THREE remote controlled flying bomb on a German airfield, with another one found by a passerby before it was launched. They contained professionally made Russian explosives. There is no doubt who did it. This was not the first, or the 10th time they got caught. I mean Russia murdered someone in the UK with polonium, for God's sake. The idea that the Kremlin is worried in the slightest that you can prove it's them is absurd. They leave their fingerprints knowing there will be no reaction. | | |
| ▲ | brookst an hour ago | parent [-] | | Because being too blatant will galvanize the public and create support for open war. The goal is to ensure all reasonable people know, while keeping enough deniability that Russian-funded right-wing groups can sow doubt about attribution and response policy’s They don’t care whether it can be proven in court or by people paying close attention. They care whether it can’t be denied even by their aligned agents in western countries. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | hnlmorg 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Because otherwise it would be an act of war. At which point they might as well have just fired a rocket into the country. |
|
| ▲ | vintermann 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| If the main point is slowing/frustrating drone production? It would honestly be kind of fair game to sabotage production of drones that would be used against you, even if they're made in a country you're not at war with --- if it wasn't for Russia having a lot of responsibility for that war in the first place (to put it mildly). |
| |
| ▲ | vincnetas an hour ago | parent [-] | | what do you mean "fair game"? by the same logic russia attacking ukraine is also "fair game". "hei cmon im just atacking my neighbor its fair game, what else should i do" | | |
| ▲ | an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | vintermann an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | I mean what I said: if you're being attacked by drones, then no one can fault you for trying to sabotage the production of those drones, even if they're made in a different country than the one which is sending them against you. But, you can and should fault Russia for getting into that position in the first place, that their neighbor is attacking them back with drones. | | |
| ▲ | vincnetas an hour ago | parent [-] | | but why are you attacked by drones thats the million dollar question... |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | grim_io 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Russia is trying to avoid retaliation through stricter sanctions, for example. |
|
| ▲ | ChrisMarshallNY 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| They seem to be very good at "mob tactics." No one can prove anything, for example, but anyone knows that people that piss Putin off, need to stay away from windows in high places. |
| |
| ▲ | vlovich123 a minute ago | parent | next [-] | | That’s because the distinction between the Russian mob and the government is nonexistent | |
| ▲ | nico_h 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The windows are entirely blameless. If a window gets near you, it’s already too late, you’re now just a message “pour encourager les autres”. |
|
|
| ▲ | the_mitsuhiko 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Doubt is always good. |
