The purpose of a false flag is to drive a certain narrative, so it's always accompanied by incessant media coverage. That is not the case here, the attack is likely for genuine tactical purposes.
Are you sure that false-flag attacks always involve a media blitz?
Just thinking that if I were planning a false flag, and I know that people would recognize it as such because of the media blitz, then I'd look for a workaround. That seems consistent with what we have here.
See GP… the point of a false flag is to drive a narrative. Otherwise you are just damaging yourself for no reason.
I agree. A false-flag attack is all about optics.
But IIUC the GP, they're saying the SATCOM failure isn't widely known, so it wouldn't make sense as a false-flag attack.
That's where GP loses me. Because we are discussing it here, as members of the general public. And the discussion isn't limited to a small nerdy site like HN; it's also being covered by Reuters [0].
[0] https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/satellite-outage-kno...