-3

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. (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 1 year ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml

98 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] u_tamtam@programming.dev 0 points 1 year ago

Can we have a policy here of not rewriting/making up titles? I'm not interested on personal takes before reaching the comments section.

[-] k_o_t@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

i 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 🤷‍♀️

load more comments (7 replies)

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] FlowVoid@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

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.

load more comments (15 replies)

[-] Jimmycrackcrack@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

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.

load more comments (55 replies)

[-] EeeDawg101@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] gary_host_laptop@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

Jesus Christ you people are just lusting for war.

[-] EeeDawg101@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

I don’t want a war with China, that would be awful. I’m just trying to be realistic about it. Seems silly to go through the trouble to make a surveillance craft like that and it not even have the capability to beam back any data.

[-] gary_host_laptop@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

Data was obviously transmitted. Weather data, going by recent cyber attacks, there are a plethora of ways where it's easier to get data.

[-] EeeDawg101@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

I’m just gonna be open minded about it and not jump to conclusions. I could see the US gov making it into a big deal for reasons and I could see it being a balloon to take pics of bases, etc on the ground. Both seem like logical outcomes. I mean it could be a weather balloon but I sorta doubt it based on what I know about weather balloons (I’m an amateur weather nerd). But I could be wrong! I’ll admit that. Gotta keep an open mind.

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments