US says Chinese spy balloon downed in February did not collect information. Yet, Biden was referring to it as a spy balloon just this month.
US says Chinese spy balloon downed in February did not collect information. Yet, Biden was referring to it as a spy balloon just this month.
Craft was shot down by US military off Atlantic coast on president’s orders earlier this year
I'm not understanding the contradiction here. They're saying it was a spy balloon for spying but that it failed at its task. Not sure how true that is, no way for me to tell but there's no inherent paradox here.
1What I understand from the context is that it was a spying device but they jammed the hell out of it while flying over the US then took it down.
0That's my point. The original poster is trying to draw a line between statements that the balloon was a spying device and later statements that it did not collect intelligence while it transited over US territory as evidence that it wasn't a spying device and that the former of those statements is therefore inherently a lie. My take, without assessing the truthfulness of the claims, is that the linked articles do not support such a conclusion. One can claim the device was for spying and that it also didn't collect intelligence without contradiction because the claim is that it failed to collect intelligence, not that it did not intend to do so in the first place.
2
US already admitted earlier that this is in fact a weather balloon, and this is further proof that it was not any sort of a spy balloon. The whole drama was completely made up, and the highest US authorities continue to spread lies months after.
-3That part of the story seems yet to be cited. Going by the article accompanying the post title, there's no such admission. Manufacturing international incidents for political reasons is not a new thing and not new to the US either , but purely on grounds of reading comprehension alone there's no contradiction here and no admission of anything either, as a matter of fact the claim the US is making is supposed to bolster their position by claiming the balloon was unable to spy on them despite best efforts. The veracity of the claim is another matter.
0Umm, source on an official US statement calling it a weather balloon and denying it was a spy balloon? China's alleged failure to collect data due to mitigations and countermeasures doesn't mean it's a weather balloon.
You have no facts to backup "US spreading lies". No evidence whatsoever. You have the US' story, China's story, and millions of photos of a absurdly large apparatus floating across the US that looks nothing like a weather balloon.
0
Can we have a policy here of not rewriting/making up titles? I'm not interested on personal takes before reaching the comments section.
1i kinda agree with /u/u_tamtam, it's standard practice to not change titles when posting articles to link aggregators, so most users (reasonably so) operate off of the assumption that the titles aren't altered, this gets esp confusing, when ppl change the headlines only slightly
imo it's good to have a clear line separating the article (with all its potential biases and misrepresentations) and opinions/commentary of the user, esp when lemmy allows link posts to have an attached text segment 🤷♀️
0The titles in the articles are themselves editorialized and sometimes even misrepresent the content. I think the post title should reflect what was interesting about the article. You are of course free to make your own community with whatever rules you like.
-1
And The Guardian referred to it as a spy balloon right in this very article.
Incidentally, the Pentagon said it did not collect information over the US. Perhaps it was intended to collect information elsewhere.
0Or the most logical explanation that it's a weather balloon that blew off course and that US regime has been cynically lying about.
-2
Can’t say I believe that one bit. With how small transmitters can be these days, why wouldn’t it have one? Sounds to me like damage control. Not a whole lot of details in the article anyway.
0