|
Kchama posted:There's a lot of 'it didn't' instead of 'it couldn't' in that statement, which leans a lot more heavily towards "calling it incompetent/jammed", instead of this "Oh he's saying it wasn't a spy balloon". If he believes it probably wasn’t a spy balloon, then his statements are still true, but what would he gain from unequivocally saying “it wasn’t a spy ballon at all, let’s go Brandon!”?
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2023 22:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 20:13 |
|
|
Kchama posted:There's a lot of 'it didn't' instead of 'it couldn't' in that statement, which leans a lot more heavily towards "calling it incompetent/jammed", instead of this "Oh he's saying it wasn't a spy balloon". The other thing was China's national response on the matter. If it was not a spy balloon, they wouldn't have taken responsibility for it and treated it accordingly. https://apnews.com/article/china-threatens-us-entities-over-balloon-incident-a9edd8db532f6cda9bace43b94051e7a
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 00:12
|
|
|
eSports Chaebol posted:If he believes it probably wasn’t a spy balloon, then his statements are still true, but what would he gain from unequivocally saying “it wasn’t a spy ballon at all, let’s go Brandon!”? So are we just mind-reading him now?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 00:19
|
|
|
i fly airplanes posted:The other thing was China's national response on the matter. If it was not a spy balloon, they wouldn't have taken responsibility for it and treated it accordingly. Couldn’t you argue the exact opposite? If it were a research balloon they’d have every reason to be indignant, and if it were a spy balloon, it would make more sense to have a muted response.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 00:20
|
|
|
Kchama posted:So are we just mind-reading him now? I would argue that we shouldn’t, which is why I replied a mind-reading post.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 00:21
|
|
|
eSports Chaebol posted:I would argue that we shouldn’t, which is why I replied a mind-reading post. Where was I trying to mind-read him? I was saying that what he said was "it didn't" not that "it couldn't", so trying to claim that he was saying it didn't have the capabilities of a spy balloon and wasn't trying to be one was wrong. EDIT: Hell, the article says they recovered it and found that its sensors didn't collect anything, but that they also found a ton of intel-collecting equipment in it. quote:Milley replied, "I would say it was a spy balloon that we know with high degree of certainty got no intelligence, and didn't transmit any intelligence back to China." So "It failed", not "it didn't have the capability of to spy". The only uncertainty about it would be if it got anything and sent anything, according to him. Kchama fucked around with this message at 00:30 on Sep 19, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 00:24
|
|
|
Kchama posted:Where was I trying to mind-read him? I was saying that what he said was "it didn't" not that "it couldn't", so trying to claim that he was saying it didn't have the capabilities of a spy balloon and wasn't trying to be one was wrong. The bit where you speculated that he meant to convey that it was incompetent/jammed without saying it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 00:29
|
|
|
eSports Chaebol posted:The bit where you speculated that he meant to convey that it was incompetent/jammed without saying it. quote:The balloon had been headed toward Hawaii, but the winds at 60,000 feet apparently took over. "Those winds are very high," Milley said. "The particular motor on that aircraft can't go against those winds at that altitude." This plus quote:Milley replied, "I would say it was a spy balloon that we know with high degree of certainty got no intelligence, and didn't transmit any intelligence back to China." implies him calling it incompetence, rather than not having the function of being a spy balloon. He didn't say 'incompetence/failure' in literal words, so I said it was an implication rather than outright said. So yeah, he was saying it was a spy balloon and he believes it is a spy balloon, so that's why I was really confused as to why you going "But even if he doesn't think it was a spy balloon, why would he say it?!" Nothing indicates he doesn't. Kchama fucked around with this message at 00:37 on Sep 19, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 00:32
|
|
|
Kchama posted:This plus Okay but even in this scenario doesn’t it make sense that if it was a spy balloon not intended to spy on the continental United States, that China deliberately turned it off once they lost control of its course? How are you reading the tea leaves in these remarks that this wasn’t possible but also it can’t be said? Why not just stick to the actual remarks?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 00:41
|
|
|
eSports Chaebol posted:Okay but even in this scenario doesn’t it make sense that if it was a spy balloon not intended to spy on the continental United States, that China deliberately turned it off once they lost control of its course? How are you reading the tea leaves in these remarks that this wasn’t possible but also it can’t be said? Why not just stick to the actual remarks? You're the one adding in stuff that I didn't say. Maybe stop shoving words into my mouth. The issue seems to be that CBS's writer's comments clash with what Miley is saying. It is CBS that asserts that the spy balloon wasn't spying specifically, while Miley instead says that it was headed to Hawaii when it was blown off course. quote:“I would say it was a spy balloon that we know with high degree of certainty got no intelligence and didn't transmit any intelligence back to China,” Milley said. So, he's saying it failed. Perhaps for the same reason that it went off-course would be my personal guess, since he says its motor wasn't rated for the winds it went into. It's possible they lost control which caused it to go too high and fly into too-strong winds. So there wouldn't need to be any "China deliberately didn't turn on its spy equipment", they might have not had the ability to if they even wanted to. He doesn't know what it was suppose to spy on, but that it's a spy balloon that failed to collect or send data. Kchama fucked around with this message at 00:56 on Sep 19, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 00:54
|
|
|
I think the simplest interpretation of him not even unequivocally saying it was a spy balloon, while also saying unequivocally that it didn’t do any spying, is that it wasn’t a spy balloon. I don’t see how that’s “mind reading” any more than any actual other interpretation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 01:12
|
|
|
eSports Chaebol posted:I think the simplest interpretation of him not even unequivocally saying it was a spy balloon, while also saying unequivocally that it didn’t do any spying, is that it wasn’t a spy balloon. I don’t see how that’s “mind reading” any more than any actual other interpretation. …. He said it was a spy balloon though. Like, at no point does he claim otherwise. He says it’s a spy balloon that failed to successfully gather and transmit information home. Not that it wasn’t a spy balloon. I called it ‘mind reading’ because he literally says twice that it’s a spy balloon, so claiming that he doesn’t think it’s a spy balloon is the mind reading. Like I've quoting him saying it several times that it is a spy balloon. Do you have any quote of him saying isn't one? Kchama fucked around with this message at 01:18 on Sep 19, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 01:15
|
|
|
Kchama posted:…. He said it was a spy balloon though. Like, at no point does he claim otherwise. He says it’s a spy balloon that failed to successfully gather and transmit information home. Not that it wasn’t a spy balloon. I called it ‘mind reading’ because he literally says twice that it’s a spy balloon, so claiming that he doesn’t think it’s a spy balloon is the mind reading. "I would say it was a spy balloon that we know with high degree of certainty got no intelligence, and didn't transmit any intelligence back to China."
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 01:19
|
|
|
eSports Chaebol posted:"I would say it was a spy balloon that we know with high degree of certainty got no intelligence, and didn't transmit any intelligence back to China." In this quote, Milley is unambiguously saying it was a spy balloon. I've bolded the text to help you out. The part of the question he's responding to, "Bottom line, it was a spy balloon, but it wasn't spying?" is the "wasn't spying". This suggests it was jammed or otherwise prevented from collecting information, rather than that it was not attempting to do so.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 01:38
|
|
|
I’m really not sure what the confusion is here?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 01:39
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:In this quote, Milley is unambiguously saying it was a spy balloon. I've bolded the text to help you out. The part of the question he's responding to, "Bottom line, it was a spy balloon, but it wasn't spying?" is the "wasn't spying". This suggests it was jammed or otherwise prevented from collecting information, rather than that it was not attempting to do so. Why not just say, “it was a spy balloon?”
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 01:45
|
|
|
eSports Chaebol posted:Why not just say, “it was a spy balloon?” He literally did.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 01:47
|
|
|
ronya posted:nonetheless, Beijing might reasonably prefer for the KMT that expounds the unity of the Zhonghua Minzu and then loses by a landslide, to a party that promotes universal values and other denials of 中国民主制度 Chinese exceptionalist democracy and then still loses anyway Maybe this message would have sounded better if Hou wasn't polling in third place.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 01:49
|
|
|
Timmy Age 6 posted:He literally did. He literally (in the literal sense of literal) did not.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 01:52
|
|
|
eSports Chaebol posted:He literally (in the literal sense of literal) did not. Is this a bit? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 01:58
|
|
|
eSports Chaebol posted:He literally (in the literal sense of literal) did not. I’m not sure you can get more literal than “I would say that it’s a spy balloon.” Just because he goes on to say that it failed to send any intelligence back to China does not mean he is being ambiguous about its status as a spy balloon. Like you're somehow misunderstanding "It's a spy balloon. It failed to do its job" as "It wasn't a spy balloon." If someone pulls a gun on someone else and fails to shoot them, and it later turns out that the gun had jammed and couldn't fire at that time, and the police chief said "I would say that it was a gun that was unable to fire and did not fire any bullets" the police chief is not ambiguously saying it's not a gun. Kchama fucked around with this message at 03:32 on Sep 19, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 03:27
|
|
|
I feel like "failed to send any intelligence" is a bit of a leap when it was apparently off the whole time. As far as i'm aware there isn't an EW system that straight up turns off equipment that isn't EMP (and we uh...definitely would have known if they used EMP). I mean, technically my phone fails to send information when it's turned off, but, Neurolimal fucked around with this message at 03:39 on Sep 19, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 03:37
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:I feel like "failed to send any intelligence" is a bit of a leap when it was apparently off the whole time. As far as i'm aware there isn't an EW system that straight up turns off equipment that isn't EMP (and we uh...definitely would have known if they used hit it with EMP). One can probably charitably assume that it was intended to turn on and transmit, but didn't for whatever reason. Probably not on purpose, since sending out a spy balloon and then intentionally not activating it sounds like a dumb thing to do, and considering the whole thing is that it blew off course... well, I'm trying to give China the benefit of the doubt. This would be more like your phone failed to turn on and send data when it was programmed to. Unless we're calling China dumb, this is much more likely an accident (that it went over the US like it did and didn't activate to capture and send data back).
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 03:42
|
|
|
GoutPatrol posted:Maybe this message would have sounded better if Hou wasn't polling in third place. It's the reverse, isn't it - Hou is polling in third place, so Hou must locate his campaign position on mainland policy even closer to the DPP, as he does here Point is, this can hardly please Beijing even if it is rational for the KMT
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 04:36
|
|
|
eSports Chaebol posted:He literally (in the literal sense of literal) did not. “I would say that it was a spy balloon” is the text here. He literally called it a spy balloon this is not up for debate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 07:08
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:“I would say that it was a spy balloon” is the text here. He literally called it a spy balloon this is not up for debate. It really is. Because "I would say it was" is a hedge based on your own personal opinion, not on outright statement. In this instance it appears as if we have gone from surety of what it was to someone stating their personal opinion of what a thing is. Now does this matter, that's probably a no. It may honestly just be a verbal tic, but there is a little difference between both statements.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 07:26
|
|
|
eSports Chaebol posted:Why not just say, “it was a spy balloon?” Josef bugman posted:It really is. Because "I would say it was" is a hedge based on your own personal opinion, not on outright statement. In this instance it appears as if we have gone from surety of what it was to someone stating their personal opinion of what a thing is. Again, Milley is unambiguously saying it was a spy balloon. The part of the question he's responding to, "Bottom line, it was a spy balloon, but it wasn't spying?" that involves hedging is the "wasn't spying". This suggests it was jammed or otherwise prevented from collecting information, rather than that it was not attempting to do so. This is only possible to confuse if you are ignoring the later parts of the response, or the question it is responding to.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 07:38
|
|
|
Yeah, this wasn't a statement being read. He was responding to a question, asking about it not spying.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 08:19
|
|
|
I think the issue is the start of the article vs the end. end of the article article posted:So, Martin asked, "Bottom line, it was a spy balloon, but it wasn't spying?" start: article posted:Now, seven months later, Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, tells "CBS News Sunday Morning" the balloon wasn't spying. "The intelligence community, their assessment – and it's a high-confidence assessment – [is] that there was no intelligence collection by that balloon," he said. So the article is stupid if you skim the start but the quote at the end is pretty clear in its response. The chronological order of that article is just all over the place.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 14:51
|
|
|
I'm not sure what's unreasonable about the idea that it was a spy balloon but it wasn't turned on over the continental US because China thought that would've been a bridge too far and potentially revealed means and methods?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 16:08
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I'm not sure what's unreasonable about the idea that it was a spy balloon but it wasn't turned on over the continental US because China thought that would've been a bridge too far and potentially revealed means and methods? You gonna have an easier time time traveling back to cold war russia and arguing the us spy planes are indeed spy planes but they're turned off to avoid enhancing geopolitical tension
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 17:50
|
|
|
Staluigi posted:You gonna have an easier time time traveling back to cold war russia and arguing the us spy planes are indeed spy planes but they're turned off to avoid enhancing geopolitical tension I feel like based on my recollection of how it went down that these are completely different situations.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 17:56
|
|
|
I know they are, just good luck seriously reinventing either situation. It was a spy balloon that they lost control of and it made a tidy little incident, and that's that until the next time someone wants to kick up an argument that it must have been a weather balloon made by an incredibly dumb country
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 18:38
|
|
|
I was interested in the discussion on whether the Chair of the Joint Chiefs is able to speak ex cathedra or is a regular person with opinions
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 19:14
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:I was interested in the discussion on whether the Chair of the Joint Chiefs is able to speak ex cathedra or is a regular person with opinions Pretty sure someone at this level of government giving a presser is only saying things that they're authorized to say and that is able to be considered representative of that branch of the government's perspective. They frequently get asked questions where they just repeat the talking point and otherwise avoid the question. It's pretty clear from his statements that the spy balloon was a spy balloon that didn't work, either due to China intentionally disabling it, a malfunction, or due to American  EWAR capabilities.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 19:35
|
|
|
notwithoutmyanus posted:I think the issue is the start of the article vs the end. The article is insanely poorly written, but if you just look at his words alone, 'he said it's not a weather balloon!' is not a credible position. Not saying it is your position at all, since the article writer seems to want to say that he said it but none of the quotes support it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 20:38
|
|
|
This is entirely ignorant and uninformed spitballing, but maybe they know it wasn't transmitting because it wasn't set up to transmit? Like if it was supposed to be unnoticed and hoovering up data, then it's possible it was set up to be physically collected at a separate location and getting blown off course hosed everything up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 22:10
|
|
|
No matter how you cut it the thing was still a spy balloon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 22:13
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:This is entirely ignorant and uninformed spitballing, but maybe they know it wasn't transmitting because it wasn't set up to transmit? Like if it was supposed to be unnoticed and hoovering up data, then it's possible it was set up to be physically collected at a separate location and getting blown off course hosed everything up. The quote covers 3 things the US intelligence community believes: - It was a spy balloon - It didn't collect any intelligence - It didn't transmit any intelligence I'd be utterly shocked if we find out much more about this in the near future. Whatever the reasons are that it didn't collect/transmit any intelligence, the US doesn't want to tip its hand about what it was able to find out about the balloon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 22:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 20:13 |
|
|
Kchama posted:The article is insanely poorly written, but if you just look at his words alone, 'he said it's not a weather balloon!' is not a credible position. Of course, I agree with you on it being entirely untenable to hold such a view. It was just so lovely how it was written - it wasn't even as clear *when* the quote at the end of the article was, because they jump around as is. Acebuckeye13 posted:This is entirely ignorant and uninformed spitballing, but maybe they know it wasn't transmitting because it wasn't set up to transmit? We're talking another country's equipment. I'm sure they were monitoring for any form of signatures/RF emissions whatsoever which would've given away if anything was going on, for everything from hostile reasons to benign things like not wanting to to interrupt (sensitive or routine services). It's not like it wasn't traced. I tend to agree with Blanks - if we are intended to know more, we'll hear about it, if there's some political reason to do so. Otherwise, I think this is about all we're going to get.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2023 22:30
|
|