What Intelligence Agencies Concluded About the Russian Attack on the U.S. Election

[Kiri]

Good point, the guys in charge these days are probably pretty trustworthy. As we all know, people that go into the spy business in the current year are nothing like the people that did so a couple decades ago.



Seriously, anyone that implicitly trusts intelligence agencies is incredibly gullible.

Why have them, then, if you cannot trust them?

[Spectral]

Why have them, then, if you cannot trust them?

The goal of having intelligence agencies isn't to produce trustworthy information for the public. That's never been the goal. It's fine that I can't trust the CIA - what I believe is of little or no consequence. One of their roles is to propagandize.

[Kiri]

The goal of having intelligence agencies isn't to produce trustworthy information for the public. That's never been the goal. It's fine that I can't trust the CIA - what I believe is of little or no consequence. One of their roles is to propagandize.

Sadly, as most of this topic shows, a lot of people seem to think that the IAs are currently only propagandizing and demand the public to be given evidence. I personally would write that off as partisanship. Problem is, Mr. Trump is doing the same thing >>

[Acidbaron]

Good point, the guys in charge these days are probably pretty trustworthy. As we all know, people that go into the spy business in the current year are nothing like the people that did so a couple decades ago.



Seriously, anyone that implicitly trusts intelligence agencies is incredibly gullible.

As long you hold everything and anyone to that standard that's fine. This includes the president elect.

I look at this very simply in who stands to gain from this, so far it seems for this to be false or the at least the public opinion seems to be so in the interest of the Trump camp (although he loses nothing in taking a cautious approach towards it, what makes one wonder if this really is nothing more then a childish outburst of someone pissing on his parade, i do hope it's more then that for your sake and other americans) and the putin camp who seem to be on one side, we also know that Putin's administration has been actively trying to destabilize european countries by funding extreme right with big loans, such as front nationale is included in that list.

I find it very interesting that Trumps word is taken here on face value, merely because he's part of that other political party our where you always opposed to russian sanctions during all previous including previous republican administrations?

In any case, what's the harm in taking a cautious approach towards this, we know they didn't directly influence the voting process so your candidate election is not called into question here.

This all seems a very childish display of american politics.

[Spectral]

Sadly, as most of this topic shows, a lot of people seem to think that the IAs are currently only propagandizing and demand the public to be given evidence. I personally would write that off as partisanship. Problem is, Mr. Trump is doing the same thing >>

I don't think the matter should be litigated publicly, or at least any public discussion of it should come with a boulder of salt.

My baseline assumption is that publicly information from IAs, from Russia, and from Wikileaks is all propaganda intended to sway public opinion in favor of the group releasing the information. I have no meaningful way to sort out what's actually true other than just doing Bayesian analysis on the limited facts that are available.

If Russia's responsible (and I assume they are), they should face an appropriate cyber-counterattack. This does not imply that anyone should trust information disseminated through the American media from American IAs. This is no more trustworthy than a report from RT.

[Shalcker]

Catalonia*
And they certainly don't have a right to unilaterally secede. Much like Crimea doesn't. Because, as @Wells points out, sovereignty is not a matter of local elections.
Should they arrange a relationship where the rest of the nation consents to the referendum we'd have another story. If they don't, there's no legal basis for secession. Much less so for an armed invasion.

Umm, how about Kosovo? They seceded unilaterally ignoring opposition from Serbia, and all it took is vote from their parliament, not even referendum...

And after long process it was ruled that such secession is legal. Get on with times...

[Acidbaron]

The goal of having intelligence agencies isn't to produce trustworthy information for the public. That's never been the goal. It's fine that I can't trust the CIA - what I believe is of little or no consequence. One of their roles is to propagandize.

But you're opposed to the message they produce that being. "Russia is not an ally of the US, and a nation that tries to interfere with domestic events".

Since the election will not be called in question here, since even with the dumb display of your president elect calling out Russia to "do it" on press events during the election is not a direct order or agreement on the level of watergate.

[Spectral]

As long you hold everything and anyone to that standard that's fine. This includes the president elect.

See above - I agree that everyone including Trump should be held to this standard.

This all seems a very childish display of american politics.

I agree with this as well. Trump is (as typical) acting in a matter unbefitting a POTUS-elect. Likewise, I simply do not understand why DNC flacks want to keep calling attention to this - they come off looking pathetic and incompetent.

- - - Updated - - -

But you're opposed to the message they produce that being. "Russia is not an ally of the US, and a nation that tries to interfere with domestic events".

I agree with that core message. I simply don't trust the specifics of claims disseminated by the CIA.

[Acidbaron]

Umm, how about Kosovo? They seceded unilaterally ignoring opposition from Serbia, and all it took is vote from their parliament, not even referendum...

And after long process it was ruled that such secession is legal. Get on with times...

When i read posts like this, i sometimes wonder if parts of history are completely skipped in favor of argumentation. Since there was a whole lot more happening that created that outcome which of neither can be compared to crimea or catalonia.

[Kiri]

I don't think the matter should be litigated publicly, or at least any public discussion of it should come with a boulder of salt.

My baseline assumption is that publicly information from IAs, from Russia, and from Wikileaks is all propaganda intended to sway public opinion in favor of the group releasing the information. I have no meaningful way to sort out what's actually true other than just doing Bayesian analysis on the limited facts that are available.

If Russia's responsible (and I assume they are), they should face an appropriate cyber-counterattack. This does not imply that anyone should trust information disseminated through the American media from American IAs. This is no more trustworthy than a report from RT.

It should not be, no. That is one of the problems that I have with Mr. Trump at the moment - since he comments on so many things via Twitter, he puts a lot of things into the public though they should not be. For example he does not negotiate with Toyota or the like to invest more into America instead of Mexico, he just threatens them on Twitter. The whole Russian hack thing has fallen prey to that, too, since he wants to keep his cozy narrative with Russia going. Therefore, he drags the IAs into the spotlight, knowing full well that they are not allowed to make the evidence public.

[Dextroden]

But you're opposed to the message they produce that being. "Russia is not an ally of the US, and a nation that tries to interfere with domestic events".

Since the election will not be called in question here, since even with the dumb display of your president elect calling out Russia to "do it" on press events during the election is not a direct order or agreement on the level of watergate.

It will go back to the election. That's where it all began.

They're not going to waste all this time blaming everything on Russia to not say something stupid like the election results shouldn't count after.

[Acidbaron]

See above - I agree that everyone including Trump should be held to this standard.

I agree with this as well. Trump is (as typical) acting in a matter unbefitting a POTUS-elect. Likewise, I simply do not understand why DNC flacks want to keep calling attention to this - they come off looking pathetic and incompetent.

- - - Updated - - -


I agree with that core message. I simply don't trust the specifics of claims disseminated by the CIA.

Fair enough, nothing more to add here besides that the nation is divided something caused by political actions from both sides, which is why you see this response. Mind you i fully believe similar things would be taking place if Clinton would have won.

[Shalcker]

When i read posts like this, i sometimes wonder if parts of history are completely skipped in favor of argumentation. Since there was a whole lot more happening that created that outcome which of neither can be compared to crimea or catalonia.

You would have to show how such differences had actually impacted decision on Kosovo case.

Obviously every country is different; principle of self-determination is universal however, and is not tied to local laws of countries from which secession is happening.

[Acidbaron]

You would have to show how such differences had actually impacted decision on Kosovo case.

Obviously every country is different; principle of self-determination is universal however, and is not tied to local laws of countries from which secession is happening.

You made the argument that it is so, i also know your post history so i'm not going to bother but it is on you to deliver on proving how it is the same, since so far you just seem to be throwing around random events. In hope something sticks.

[nextormento]

Umm, how about Kosovo? They seceded unilaterally ignoring opposition from Serbia, and all it took is vote from their parliament, not even referendum...

And after long process it was ruled that such secession is legal. Get on with times...

My country doesn't recognize Kosovo (and neither does Russia, for that matter). And faces no reprisal for doing so. What was ruled is that their declaration did not violate international law per se, and was left at that.
If we're splitting hairs, the reason why Russia is not facing -yet- any court is that neither Ukraine nor Russia have submitted to compulsory jurisdiction to the ICJ, and that there's very little room for binding resolutions in the UN when Russia can veto. Ukraine will get her shit together and bring cases relevant to the central issue, and proceed from there.
I'm not declaring the illegality of their actions, rather that they're operating with no recognized right under any jurisdiction. The sanctions are a reflection of how little the west likes the situation, which is a very legitimate thing to do, and a very normal relationship to have with Russia.
In the case of Catalonia, the state has sufficient powers to dissolve their government if they do something really stupid. They're seeking a more diplomatic approach, as they should.

principle of self-determination is universal however, and is not tied to local laws of countries from which secession is happening.

Catalonia explicitly submitted this right to the state when they approved, massively, and by referendum, the Spanish constitution. Or rather, they recognized Spanish sovereignty over Catalonia, because they never had instituted that right, nor were they ever an independent state, to begin with. It binds on the entire state of Spain to relinquish the sovereignty over Catalonia that every single Spaniard shares.

[Shalcker]

My country doesn't recognize Kosovo (and neither does Russia, for that matter). And faces no reprisal for doing so. What was ruled is that their declaration did not violate international law per se, and was left at that.
If we're splitting hairs, the reason why Russia is not facing -yet- any court is that neither Ukraine nor Russia have submitted to compulsory jurisdiction to the ICJ, and that there's very little room for binding resolutions in the UN when Russia can veto. Ukraine will get her shit together and bring cases relevant to the central issue, and proceed from there.
I'm not declaring the illegality of their actions, rather that they're operating with no recognized right under any jurisdiction. The sanctions are a reflection of how little the west likes the situation, which is a very legitimate thing to do, and a very normal relationship to have with Russia.
In the case of Catalonia, the state has sufficient powers to dissolve their government if they do something really stupid. They're seeking a more diplomatic approach, as they should.

Well, my argument is only that Russian actions in Crimea are not in fact illegal as some posters claim; now being displeased with them or not recognizing outcome is obviously decision that each state can make independently.

And as for bringing case, there is fair amount of evidence that Crimea being assigned to Ukraine was in fact illegal as per law at that moment. Legality of Ukrainian armed intervention and removal of Crimean autonomy (and post of Crimean president) by Ukraine in 90's can also be questionable - as it went against referendum done there.

[nextormento]

Well, my argument is only that Russian actions in Crimea are not in fact illegal as some posters claim; now being displeased with them or not recognizing outcome is obviously decision that each state can make independently.

And as for bringing case, there is fair amount of evidence that Crimea being assigned to Ukraine was in fact illegal as per law at that moment. Legality of Ukrainian armed intervention and removal of Crimean autonomy (and post of Crimean president) by Ukraine in 90's can also be questionable - as it went against referendum done there.

Which I didn't, so I find the response misplaced. And bringing Kosovo (and Catalonia, though that wasn't you) a case of whataboutism for no discernible reason other than to obfuscate the situation.
As you probably know, Russia also recognized Ukraine's sovereignty over Crimea in the 90s. That transfer is not much of an international issue but rather a legacy from the USSR that Russia can resolve internally. But yes, Ukraine needs to get her shit together.

[Shalcker]

Which I didn't, so I find the response misplaced. And bringing Kosovo (and Catalonia, though that wasn't you) a case of whataboutism for no discernible reason other than to obfuscate the situation.
As you probably know, Russia also recognized Ukraine's sovereignty over Crimea in the 90s. That transfer is not much of an international issue but rather a legacy from the USSR that Russia can resolve internally. But yes, Ukraine needs to get her shit together.

Recognition of sovereignty in 90's has little to do with Crimean referendum and secession in 2014.

And, well, this issue was resolved by rejoining it to Russia, obviously.

[nextormento]

Recognition of sovereignty in 90's has little to do with Crimean referendum and secession in 2014.

And, well, this issue was resolved by rejoining it to Russia, obviously.

The recognition has to do with you bringing the transfer of Crimea back then.
You call that resolved, I call it irregular and ongoing. So much for opinions, but they're largely irrelevant: what is being questioned is Russia involvement in what they recognized as foreign soil.

[Shalcker]

The recognition has to do with you bringing the transfer of Crimea back then.

There were dissenting voices against that at the time too.

And either way people of Crimea themselves decided to switch their country, as it is their right. Obviously we've told them we would accept such move after assessing situation, but that was still their own decision.

You call that resolved, I call it irregular and ongoing. So much for opinions, but they're largely irrelevant: what is being questioned is Russia involvement in what they recognized as foreign soil.

Crimea is resolved, the only thing "ongoing" is situation at Donbass - mostly due to Ukrainians refusing to implement their part of agreement with rebels.

Crimea is and will remain for foreseeable future Russian - because noone wants to pay the price at least in the same ballpark as Russian willingness to hold it to change status quo.