Talk:False flag

Add more examples, change the format, or create a new page exclusively for a list of examples.
I think the page could improve greatly, by having at least a couple sections that mimic the "examples" section that are in the spanish version of this page.

There there is a list of examples like this: 1930 - USA did a false flag operation in vietnam. 1940 - Rusia did a false flag operation on England.

Etc etc....

No NATO or US false flags?
There's so many US & NATO false flags. Why the silence? Silence that verges on censorship? I mean, if an editor adds US/NATO false flags, like:


 * Kermit Roosevelt's CIA used terror-false flag ops to topple Mossadegh's Iranian government. Heck, the CIA admitted it paid Iranians in the 1950's to pose as Communists and stage bombings: https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/041600iran-cia-index.html


 * Gulf of Tonkin. NSA admits it lied about the North Vietnamese firing on  US vessels to facilitate war: https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB132/press20051201.htm

Would these get scrubbed by overly sensitive US editors? I hope not Pounamuknight (talk) 05:30, 28 April 2024 (UTC)


 * You may want to get WP:CONSENSUS on the Talk pages of CIA activities in Iran and Gulf of Tonkin incident for calling them 'false flag attacks'. If a preponderance of reliable sources explicitly refer to them as false flag attacks and agree on this point, we'd be obliged to summarize that agreement in those articles, as well as this one. &#45; LuckyLouie (talk) 13:57, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Those NSA & CIA docs is the closest we'll get to a confession of guilt. Do u really expect the CIA & NSA to explicit reference their manipulations as "false flags?" Pounamuknight (talk) 07:15, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * No, not the agencies themselves. I was referring to 3rd party WP:SECONDARY reliable sources. Historical analysis of those topics would have to explicitly identify the term "false flag" and how it applied. &#45; LuckyLouie (talk) 12:54, 29 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Pounamuknight -- "False flag" would mean that the U.S. arranged for someone else to attack U.S. ships, then blamed it on the Vietnamese, but that did not happen. Instead, relatively brief military confusion was made into a pretext by the LBJ administration... AnonMoos (talk) 03:49, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Read the NSA docs in the link provided. They make clear their was deliberate manipulation of the SIGINT
 * I mean, there's waaaaaaaay more evidence that the Gulf of Tonkin was a false flag than the sketchy "Russian invasion of Ukraine" segment Pounamuknight (talk) 07:33, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * You're kind of missing the main point -- no matter how much relentless lying there was to inflate something which originated as a brief moment of military confusion into a phony major incident, if there was not an attack actually by entity A which was claimed to be by entity B, then there can be no "false flag" in the usual meaning of the phrase. Thoroughly dishonest war propaganda can be immoral and hypocritical, but without certain other necessary accompanying elements, it is not automatically a false flag in itself. AnonMoos (talk) 16:51, 29 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Disproportionate amplification of a pretext is not a false flag. Please read the definition.  Acroterion   (talk)   04:14, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * There's no "disproportionate amplification of a pretext" anywhere in the CIA & NSA docs. Please read them Pounamuknight (talk) 07:37, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @Pounamuknight, a reading of WP:NOR and WP:AGF would be in order. WP:PRIMARY too.  Acroterion   (talk)   16:57, 29 April 2024 (UTC)