I'm just starting to understand what is and is not on-topic here and what is close-able, should be closed, leave-open-able and should be left open, so I'm hoping answers here will give me some more insight and possibly help a bit further to elucidate a consensus view on the differential applicability of "primarily opinion-based" close reason (e.g. what a country "thinks" versus what a specific, articulate person thinks)
I've referenced my currently closed question How does US Army Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton (ret) get to a "Look, you're attacking NATO... and we're going to consider our options to attack" scenario? not because I'm trying to start a conversation about that question here (I've done that here instead and there's already one good answer) but just as an example that triggered me to try to articulate this aspect of Politics SE that so far confounds me.
Question: Why are most "Why did country X...?" & "Why does country X think...?" left open yet if it's an individual it's closed (we can't get into their head)?
- why does think is:question closed:false 189 questions
- why does think is:question closed:true 45 questions
Since I've referenced about a thousand questions and probably several thousand answers here, it's quite a challenge with out a lot of SEDE-fu and natural language understanding expertise to compare questions about what a country thinks and what an individual expert thinks.
But How does US Army Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton (ret) get to a "Look, you're attacking NATO... and we're going to consider our options to attack" scenario? asks about a retired US major general's reference to an (apparently Russian) naval mine field deployed in the Black Sea blockading NATO members' access.
Why are so many questions that have multiple disparate yet well received answers that sometimes even disagree with each other are not considered closable and not likely to receive answers that are primarily opinion-based, and yet mine was?
How are answer authors here in Politics SE be so consistently able to see past public statements by governments of "We did it because" or in many cases a lack thereof and come up with explanations that clearly the community doesn't see as opinions, and yet a question about a major general with both education and battlefield experience's statement about an act of war is closed because it can't be answered without primarily opinion-based answers?
1e.g. In this case I'm using "duck typing" (if it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, then it's a duck) "This looks like, or has similar phrases in the title than that other question that was closed, therefore this should be closed too and I don't need to read further"