General / Off-Topic False-Flag-Operations within ED?

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

psyron

Banned
Should "False-Flag-Operations"/"False-Flag-Terrorism" be allowed/possible/exist within Elite Dangerous as part of the story line or within special missions?


First, what is a "False-Flag-Operation"?

A "False-Flag-Operation" is an operation planed by a government/group in which an attack on the own people or on own buildings or military units is orchestrated in a way that make the own population believe that another government/group is behind it. Those kind of operations are mainly orchestrated in democratic systems to get the support of the population for an unpopular war against another nation/faction. The goal of those wars could be the access to new resources and/or general control over new territories:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag


There exist many fictional but also real examples of "False-Flag-Operations".


Let's start with some fictional examples:

1. In Star Wars, Palpatine, Senator from Naboo, makes a conspiracy with the Trade Federation against his own planet. After an initial trade embargo the Trade Federation starts a big invasion of Naboo. This invasion was planned by Palpatine merely to persuade the Republic to vote for a new Chancellor - which he finally becomes himself. After this he creates a "False-Flag-Terror-Attack" on Queen Padmé Amidala which she survives. The "terror attack" is blamed on the separatist movement which Palpatine is funding himself. All this to bring the Republic into war.
To get the whole control over the Republic Palpatine has to get rid of the Jedi Knights. To archive this he creates yet another plot by fighting against a group of Jedis who have become suspicious against Palpatine and who planned to arrest him. He then accuse all Jedis of being traitors and order to eliminate them all by the own soldiers. Under the impression of the "false-terror" and the endless "staged wars" the population and the senate finally accepts that the Republic becomes transformed into an Empire (in the hope the centralized power will put an end to the terror and wars).
Here a nice 10 minutes summary of the quite complex story:
http://vimeo.com/41963839

2. In Star Trek, episode "The Forge"/"Awakening"/"Kir'Shara", the United Earth Embassy "was bombed and badly damaged, killing at least forty-three people – including Admiral Forrest. The bombing was originally blamed on the Syrrannite movement, which the High Command characterized as a terrorist organization. It was later found that the embassy had been bombed by agents of Administrator V'Las, who sought to publicly discredit pacifist movements such as the Syrrannites as part of his plot to launch a preemptive invasion of the Andorian Empire." Yet another example of a "False-Flag-Terror-Operation":
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/United_Earth_Embassy


Now some historical "false-flag-operations":

1. 1933 in Germany Adolf Hitler was close to become very powerful, but there were still many people who were suspicious about Hitler and his followers. This all changed with a single event known today as the "Reichstag-Fire". The German parliament building burned down due to a big fire and Hitler and his followers blamed it on Socialist and Communists. As historians today overall agree on it is very likely that Hitler's followers them self made this "false-flag-operation" to gain power and defeat their inner political enemies. As we know today Adolf Hitler succeeded and Germany became a dictatorship:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire

2. 1962: "Operation Northwoods was a series of false flag proposals that originated within the United States government in 1962, but were rejected by the Kennedy administration.[2] The proposals called for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or other operatives, to commit perceived acts of terrorism in U.S. cities and elsewhere. These acts of terrorism were to be blamed on Cuba in order to create public support for a war against that nation, which had recently become communist under Fidel Castro. Operation Northwoods proposals included hijackings and bombings followed by the introduction of phony evidence that would implicate the Cuban government. It stated:
The desired resultant from the execution of this plan would be to place the United States in the apparent position of suffering defensible grievances from a rash and irresponsible government of Cuba and to develop an international image of a Cuban threat to peace in the Western Hemisphere.":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

3. 1964 in the "Gulf of Tonkin incident" the US accused Vietnam having attacked one of their ships on high sea and shortly after this event the US declared war against Vietnam and invaded it. Today many information points that there has been no attack, that this event was merely a lie, a "false-flag-operation", to have a pretext to start war against Vietnam:
"In the 2003 documentary The Fog of War, the former Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara admitted that the Aug 4 attack never happened.":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_incident

4. 1990 prior to the first Iraq war a girl who pretended to be a nurse "stated that after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait she had witnessed Iraqi soldiers take babies out of incubators in a Kuwaiti hospital, take the incubators, and leave the babies to die." In 1992, it was revealed that she was the daughter of Saud bin Nasir Al-Sabah, the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States. Furthermore, it was revealed that her testimony was organized as part of the Citizens for a Free Kuwait public relations campaign which was run by Hill & Knowlton for the Kuwaiti government. Following this, her testimony has largely come to be regarded as wartime propaganda.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_(testimony)

5. 9/11: Still up to this day a slim majority of the people don' think that 9/11 was a false-flag-attack. Nevertheless it has many similarities with the Reichstag-Fire with similar outcomes - restrictions of civil rights and many wars following this event.
And it has to be pointed out that in the time of an occurred false-flag-attack the majority of the people always are deceived by that false-flag-attack (what is exactly the purpose of such an event) and those who recognize it as what it really is are always discredited as "conspiracy theorists". This doesn't of course mean that the inversion of the argument applies in the case of 9/11, but it only shows that the opinion of the majority is not a measure of quality regarding the evaluation of what the truth behind a potential case of false-flag-event is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDPtiR4EQ2A

6. 2003: Lie about Iraq having weapons of mass destruction followed by a massive invasion resulting in 1 million dead Iraqis. No WMDs have been found till today.

7. 2013: Lie about Syrian government using chemical weapons against its people. Instead the "rebels" did it with the support of the CIA:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbfcceEkn_M


After this little retrospective about what "False-Flag-Operations" look like i would like to bring in some ideas how they could be integrated in ED:

- Accept a secret mission to attack/destroy a colony/space station of the own faction with a big fighter-bomber stolen from an enemy faction (Maybe including a mission to board an enemy ship and to bring it under your control). This event will be televised and will then bring support for a planned war against that enemy faction.
- Accept a mission to steal a spaceship-identification-computer from an enemy spaceship; replace it with your own computer; start a massive attack on unprotected traders. The traders will then think the attack comes from the enemy faction/alliance. In this way you can manipulate/create wars between different factions/alliances.

I have to admit that this idea of "false-flag-operations" might be a bit overloaded for a game like ED. Maybe it would be more appropriate for a game like Civilization.

Nevertheless, your thoughts? :)
 
Last edited:
I think it's a very different question depending on whether the operation is being performed by PCs or NPCs, and whether it's on PCs or NPCs.

NPC-NPC false flags seem like interesting backstory, and NPC-PC and PC-NPC false-flags could be a legitimate technique. For example, say you're recruited by Friends of the Lavian Tree Grub, do a bunch of naughty missions, find out they're just a front for the pre-Stroud Lavian regime, then have to decide whether to support them or become a double agent.

To my mind, the really interesting question is the degree to which players should be allowed/encouraged to sneak around each other. I don't think anyone would support EVE's level of corporate espionage, but for example what do people think about opposing group missions? So for example, your team's mission is to sabotage the creation of a new space station, my mission is to stop you - is it good gameplay if I accomplish my goal by going on the forums and asking to join your team?
 
This looks a bit like thinly disguised conspiracy theory unless I am mistaken. It's not really my personal taste to be honest because I think conspiracy theory is bonkers.

There will be events in the game, injected or otherwise, that may look a bit look like this. Frontier can inject events on a local, governmental, system or galaxy wide basis if they wish to and I am sure that they will involve governments doing a variety of shady things.

The beauty of this game is that the player can to some extent interpret this how he or she wants to. I am sure you can have fun with this.
 
To be given a false-flag mission would mean you will need to be an employee of the government which you can't be - you're an independent pilot who travels the galaxy. Otherwise how could they trust you with such sensitive information ?

Sorry Psyron but it doesn't get my vote for this.


For example, say you're recruited by Friends of the Lavian Tree Grub, do a bunch of naughty missions, find out they're just a front for the pre-Stroud Lavian regime, then have to decide whether to support them or become a double agent.
This kind of thing is perfectly acceptable - A mission chain by one group of people but it turns out to be an undercover group for a different faction. That is something I could believe - 2 factions at odds with each other rather than 1 turning on their own people.
 
Last edited:
You are confusing operations with propaganda. E.g. a false claim about an attack (event) which did not happen, or the claims of the Kuwaiti ambassador's daughter before the first Gulf War, or the claims about WMD in Iraq before the second invasion, fall into the category of propaganda. These are not physical attacks on a government's own people/buildings/military units.

(You are also confusing history with conspiracy theory :smilie:)

Are you proposing that the player takes part in negative PR campaigns on behalf of a faction, or in seditious violent missions? Or something else? Perhaps you could give a mission example for what you're proposing to pin it down?
 
You are confusing operations with propaganda.
That's probably a better way of putting it and more in line with what I was trying to say. There may well be propaganda reports coming out in the news from the various factions which would make sense - each one trying to prove themselves dominant. However, covert missions to kill citizens from the mission giver - can't see it myself in ED, especially as I said given to a random pilot.

An example of a mission may help, like you said Cathy.
 

psyron

Banned
You are confusing operations with propaganda. E.g. a false claim about an attack (event) which did not happen, or the claims of the Kuwaiti ambassador's daughter before the first Gulf War, or the claims about WMD in Iraq before the second invasion, fall into the category of propaganda. These are not physical attacks on a government's own people/buildings/military units.
You are right on this - I mixed real "false-flag"-events with "false-flag"-lies. But both serve the same goal and the line between them is not always very clear, since a real "false-flag"-event always also include a lie and a pure "false-flag"-lie may contain some insignificant real events.
Check for example the "Gulf of Tonkin incident" concerning this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_incident

You are also confusing history with conspiracy theory
That's quite a grave accusation. To think that "false-flag-operations" have no historical counterparts is simply naive and ignorant. Treating those historical facts as "conspiracy theories" is a sign of too much uneducated TV consumption. Simply check wikipedia to resolve your lack of historical knowledge:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag

Are you proposing that the player takes part in negative PR campaigns on behalf of a faction, or in seditious violent missions? Or something else? Perhaps you could give a mission example for what you're proposing to pin it down?
Both would be imaginable. It's of course important that it fits into the gameplay of ED. It's right that ED is not a mission based game but lives from the player's freedom of choice, therefore it would be quite difficult to integrate "false-flag-operations" into that game.

So let's think of an example of how "false-flag-operations" could be included in ED without the need of "missions":
- Let's says there are different player alliances. We know that an attack of one player against stations/ships from a faction (like the Empire) could mean that the whole alliance could suffer in consequence.
- This could make it interesting for other player alliances to provoke or even orchestrate such an attack.
- If it would really be possible to board an enemy ship and to bring it under your control, then we could imagine, that a player from one alliance is boarding a ship from a player of an enemy alliance.
- Afterwards the player could fly an attack with that ship - making the attacked faction believe that the ship is still controlled by the original alliance.

This idea opens of course a bunch of new questions:
- Is it really possible to board an enemy ship?
- Is is possible to make the rest of the universe believe that the ship is still flown by the previous owner?
- How does identification works after all? Maybe a player needs to insert an ID card into a slot of the ships cockpit to start the ship? Maybe that ID card could be captured during an attack and boarding? Maybe the ejected pilot needs to travel back to a space station in order to inactivate his old ID card and getting a new one? But maybe the pilot also has the possibility to self-destruct his ship prior to eject to avoid this to happen ...

Some more thoughts on this?
Please no more comments on whether or not some historical events were indeed real terrorist attacks or "false-flag-events". This question is not part of the main discussion of this topic. Focus on the game for now.
Thanks for this in advance ;)
 
Last edited:
Please no more comments on whether or not some historical events were indeed real terrorist attacks or "false-flag-events". This question is not part of the main discussion of this topic. Focus on the game for now.
Thanks for this in advance ;)
Just a suggestion to facilitate what you ask for - edit your OP to exclude the real world stuff and just leave the fictional examples you gave.
 
One reality - so many different interpretations.
The idea is too convoluted and complicated for gameplay, as I see it at the moment. At least for a PC.
Where is the playability? Where is the risk/reward? Where is the point?
 

psyron

Banned
unrelated opinions really get annoying

Just a suggestion to facilitate what you ask for - edit your OP to exclude the real world stuff and just leave the fictional examples you gave.
Do you have problems with real and historical proofed "false-flag-operations"?
Simply read wikipedia or ask your preferred history teacher if you are still in school:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag

If people have problems with "false-flag-events" they maybe should stop watching MSNBC/BBC and other mainstream TV channels telling them that "conspiracies" are always "conspiracy theories". Little tip from my side: Don't always believe everything they are telling you on TV.

Please back to the main topic concerning "false-flag" within ED ... the unrelated opinions really get annoying ...
 
That's quite a grave accusation. To think that "false-flag-operations" have no historical counterparts is simply naive and ignorant.
Now you are making a simple "All oranges are fruit therefore all fruit are oranges" mistake and a straw man argument rolled into one (that's quite a failure of reasoning and logic). Who said that '"false-flag-operations" have no historical counterparts'?
(rhetorical)

Anyway, it's feasible that player-alliances could get up to all kinds of tricks as you suggest, but I'm not clear on how those could be integrated into the game's npc factions outside a mission structure. It's an interesting topic, but your thinking on it seems confused and symptomatic of your thread, which doesn't know whether its a game proposal/discussion or a meandering polemic. I'll bow out and drop in on the Random Funny Pics thread instead :p
 

psyron

Banned
One reality - so many different interpretations.
The idea is too convoluted and complicated for gameplay, as I see it at the moment. At least for a PC.
Where is the playability? Where is the risk/reward? Where is the point?
You are right ...

The point could be that you should make sure as a pilot that nobody can easily steal and board your ship. Or you should make sure to fly in groups when being in an alliance to avoid those kind of ship-kidnapping and ship-abuses to occur.

I still like the idea somehow, no one else?
Other ideas?
 
Last edited:
I'm right?
Do you mean about it being convoluted and unplayable? I'm glad you agree.
It looks like another one of your threads is coming off the tracks.
 
Do you have problems with real and historical proofed "false-flag-operations"?
I didn't even read the full list as I'd just glanced down it and noticed "5. 9/11: Similar to the Reichstag-Fire, this time 3 buildings. Similar outcome - restrictions of civil rights and many wars following this event:" from you yet again. :rolleyes: This is far from being a proven false flag event!

Anyway, my suggestion was simply so that the thread was more focused on the game, rather than sidetracking onto your little pet hobby of conspiracy theories again. If you choose to ignore the suggestion, that's fine. :smilie:
 
I'm pretty sure you could organize a "False Flag" thingy by yourself within your own group without having it made for you by already extremely busy people?

By the way, did you do the "How old are us pledgers?" poll? Which group did you come under?

Brian :)
 

psyron

Banned
I'm right?
Do you mean about it being convoluted and unplayable? I'm glad you agree.
You are right that the idea is quite complicated.
But i like complex ideas within a game. Problems with this?

It looks like another one of your threads is coming off the tracks.
Only because someone is able to discuss a topic openly and self-critical doesn't mean a "thread is coming off the tracks".
Why people always try to discredit others instead of having a constructive attitude towards others? Am i maybe too old for this forum with my 38 years, he he

Please spare us from those kind of comments and try being constructive, fair and topic-related. Thanks.
 
Why people always try to discredit others instead of having a constructive attitude towards others? Am i maybe too old for this forum with my 38 years, he he

Please spare us from those kind of comments and try being constructive, fair and topic-related. Thanks.
Your putting 9/11 in there is sorta like I did this:

Jeff Ryan: A real example of world building: God created the world in 6 days, had a day of rest. (Obviously evolution is wrong).

Other Dude:Err dude, that's still contended about God in 6 days, in fact most people don't think that's the case with so little evidence.

Jeff Ryan: This isn't about the bible, it was just an example stay on topic.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom