Hacker News Reader

Comment by tanseydavid | Hacker News Reader

>> decided not disable it completely...while leaving it functional

It isn't as if someone flipped a switch. This is underwater explosives at considerable depth.

There is nothing self-evident in what you've laid out here but you sure seem to think that it is.

Asserting that you do not find it difficult to reach this conclusion does not make the conclusion you have reached, any less convoluted.

View on HN

His reasoning must be convoluted because his conclusion is false. His argument is like saying that the fact that Lee Harvey Oswald didn't also kill Jackie Kennedy means Oswald must have liked the Kennedys and wanted them to stay in the White House.

It's not. Instead of trying to come up with convoluted analogies for my conclusion to try and paint it as outlandish, maybe go back to talking about off topic stuff like BRICS.

My analogy’s convoluted and contrived logic perfectly captures yours.

It's not even close. You're comparing a time sensitive attack with tons of security to 4 pipes sitting in the ocean. A lone attacker on a short time scale, versus a potential entire state backed demolitions team with tons of operational lead time. Stop with the bad faith arguments.

It is highly unlikely that A) the US with such lead time would fail to blow up all 4 pipes, and B) the US would bother when it had already handled the situation diplomatically.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com