What an utter piece of shit.
Oh I get it, but we all know the definition is bullshit
Removed by mod
I think technically they’re more “terrorists” than “rogue nations”
I mean 9/11 was performed by some rich family member.
Are you referring to the coordinators or the person who knew about it but let it happen so he could go back and finish daddy’s war?
Their families were all buddies though.
Makes sense why they invaded some other country then
Why not both? Bin Laden had a $7million a year stipend until just a few years earlier.
Right? W is all like, “good one, Osama, but watch how I strike back!” As they clink glasses and play games with lives.
Frankly I am mad that people are only seeing this now.
Between billionaires and trillion dollar companies, many of them are richer than most nations.
Easiest solution in the world is to treat them to the guillotine
Is this not treason? Like legitimately, technically.
It may be a violation of the Logan Act, which makes it illegal for private citizens to interfere with foreign relations.
The Logan Act deals with private citizens negotiating with foreign governments. Unless he fucked with Starlink at the direct request of the Russian gov’t, I don’t see how the Logan Act applies. EDIT: apparently he did it after speaking with Russian government officials. So never mind, Logan Act is absolutely implicated.
*Foreign governments having a dispute with the United States. I don’t think this qualifies. Unfortunately.
That 76 billion in aid was just for funsies, nothing to do with Russia.
What’s your point? We’re still not in a dispute with Russia. A proxy dispute, maybe, but we’re not in active conflict with them.
I’m on your side! Elon is a fuckwit and Russia is run by a despot but I don’t think the Logan act applies
Dispute like actively sanctioning them? That kind of dispute?
I don’t know the legal definition of dispute but it seems to me a very loose term. Even more so than conflict or otherwise.
Me either but I think a dispute would involve our military directly.
Against Ukraine certainly, but since he’s not a citizen of Ukraine, then no. If these were US forces that he sabotaged, or the US was actually fighting in the war then it would also qualify, but once again that doesn’t apply. It definitely runs counter to US foreign interests, but that’s not enough to qualify (and probably good it doesn’t, a LOT of stuff people regularly do it could be argued would run counter to US foreign interests).
He did this with federal funds. And the US hasn’t declared war since, what, WW2? The Rosenbergs were executed for treason, and we never declared war with USSR.
The Rosenbergs were executed for treason
Espionage, actually.
I don’t know the legal definition of espionage but sure as hell seems like elons loyalty lies outside of the US.
Elon’s loyalty lies with Elon. It’s never been otherwise.
The Rosenbergs were convicted on espionage charges. They were sending classified info to the USSR. That’s different from treason although it’s related. The funding angle is an interesting question though. It still wouldn’t be treason, but it could qualify as… breach of contract maybe? Not sure exactly what the charge is when the government pays you for a service and you don’t fullfill the service in a satisfactory manner.
Would this not be espionage? Or would he have to have been acting under the direction of a state actor?
Espionage would require providing confidential intel to a foreign power. As far as I’m aware he didn’t share any intel, merely disabled the internet service he was providing within key areas. Even then, leaking Unkranian intel to Russia while arguably espionage against Ukraine would likely not qualify. He would need to provide confidential US material to Russia (or another foreign power) for it to be espionage.
He did not actually do it with federal funds. These were donated Starlink terminals and service was paid for by SpaceX.
That’s the whole point, the US government allowed civilian technology to be used in war by a foreign government.
He did this with federal funds
Apparently this was before he got federal funds.
Didn’t he get subsidies for spaceX and Tesla?
Tesla got some preferential loans in 2010, it paid them off by 2013. Now it benefits from buyers of any brand electric car getting subsidies… so, “kind of”?
SpaceX got government contracts for specific services… which could have been inflated or not, but didn’t include Starlink (at least not officially).
This is different from direct subsidies like those given to Boeing, which also gets inflated contracts (see NASA’s SLS), but in addition gets preferential tax discounts and lowered export taxes.
Uh… People from Vietnam, Korea, and Afganistan would like to differ. (not an exclusive list).
“Declared”
Ok! They’d be objectively wrong, but yeah, differ away!
Although a bit irrelevant to the discussion about treason, I had to giggle at the WW2 bit. A simpler statistic would be when the US was not at war.
It’s mostly a semantics game. The US is involved in military conflicts all the time, but those are not officially “wars”, since the US going to war requires Congress to officially declare it. Therefore anytime the US was involved in a military conflict, but Congress did not issue a formal declaration of war, the US was not technically at war. He is correct in that the last time that Congress formally declared war was WW2.
However, all that said, that’s just silly semantic games, everyone understands that if the US deploys military forces against another nations military forces that is in fact war, and on that metric the US has had many wars since WW2.
This reeks of espionage. With a slight hint of war crimes?
This has nothing to do with being Ukrainian, but everything to do with being American, and actively working against American interests and official national and White house policies.
He is actively working against the support USA is providing, and has paid him for, and has ordered him not to sabotage or diminish.
This is treason, which is logical, since Elon Musk is a Trump supporter and they are both traitors and Elon Musk is a pedophile Nazi.
The US government never paid him to provide military service in Ukraine.
Treason is very narrowly defined in US law. The US is not at war with Russia, and the US is not Ukraine, so no, it’s not.
Sedition?
Again. The US government is not the Ukrainian government.
The most painful thing the government could do would be to sanction Musk and his companies for taking actions counter to US foreign policy prerogatives, but then Musk would just pull the plug on Starlink altogether. So nothing will be done.
Seeing as musk could unilaterally act in a fashion contrary to US foreign policy, in the interest of national security the government should take control of the company then.
Obviously that would be an extreme step but… how bad would that get?
That’s basically a variant of eminent domain, but I suspect it would be a hard case to argue. Ukraine chose to use Starlink, and the US governments power to invoke eminent domain is based on the common good provided to the US public via the seized property. It’s arguable whether the US public would see much if any value from the US government running Starlink unless they’re going to start providing free service to US citizens. There’s also the problem that there are plenty of other options that don’t require seizing of property.
The US could just nationalise it. SpaceX is basically running on government money anyway, just fold it into NASA.
NASA is basically being forced by Congress to funnel SLS program money into select contractors against NASA’s own assessments. I don’t think you want any of their hands near SpaceX if you want it to stay operational.
Also no. Americans do not legally owe any loyalty to the Ukrainian government.
as EU members but somehow, they decided to mess with Russia and we, EU citizen, were taken in this sh*.
As an EU citizen, I fully support EU’s “messing” with Russia to support Ukraine, and I thank our NATO allies for keeping us “in this sh*”.
HAHA, nobody would say that, NO ONE except maybe if you have a relative in UA, still…
It’s easy to argue on internet but IRL, this pseudo unconditional support does not exist.
Nope, he wasn’t trying to overthrow the government of country he is a citizen of. He could be considered a non state actor though.
Enemy combatant? I’m running out of words here?
The Ukrainians can certainly call him that.
Notable examples of Non State Actors are: Blackwater(American security company) Wagner (Russian).
Weird “enemy” who’s actively supporting 99% of one’s war efforts.
By that rule of thumb, would the US be an “enemy” for being reluctant to supply latest gen weaponry to Ukraine?
Are you compelled by neurodiversity to be pedantic? Or do you just enjoy it?
How is the difference between “supporting in almost everything” vs. “attacking”, a pedantic one?
Hang on… That’s sabotage. Straight up. That’s a criminal offence no?
Yes. Assisting putler’s genocide against Ukrainian children is a war crime.
Yep, but he’s rich. I fully expect nothing to happen.
Yeah. According to the article, he straight up told the top military brass of the Biden administration right afterwards and they did nothing. No prosecution, no whistle-blowing to the press about a war crime. Nothing.
What do you suggest they do?
Prosecute him, of course! Maybe hit him with sanctions for directly supporting the Russian war effort? Because that’s what stopping an attack on their fleet is.
Prosecute him for what?
Are you dense?
Krolden is asking specifically what crime he should be charged with, implying you would struggle to find one. This certainly isn’t treason against the US because the US is not legally involved in the war. It’s unclear from their post whether they support Ukraine or Russia in the conflict so I’d suggest taking it at face value.
Why can’t you answer the question?
Check his party affiliation
What
For what countries laws? He’s not a Ukrainian citizen
So if you’re not an American you’re free to sabotage the US as much as you want and it’s not a crime?
So if you’re not an American you’re free to sabotage the US as much as you want and it’s not a crime?
Two points.
First, US laws apply on US soil, or to US citizens. If you’re neither, then cooperation and extradition agreements apply, if there are any.
Second, not sure where you got the “sabotage the US” part from:
- the request came from Ukraine
- from the beginning, Musk has been sabotaging Russia by disabling Starlink outside of Ukrainian borders, this was supported by both Ukraine and the US
- the Ukrainian request was for removing part of the sabotage so Ukraine could attack Russia with Ukrainian drones
- it wasn’t a US request, it didn’t involve any US assets, or any US operations
Maybe Ukraine should have asked the US, instead of asking a private non-Ukrainian citizen.
First, US laws apply on US soil, or to US citizens. If you’re neither, then cooperation and extradition agreements apply, if there are any.
Yup, and the US charges non-citzens that are not on their soil all the time. If they can’t get the extradition there’s nothing they can do about it unless the person sets foot on US soil, but that doesn’t stop it from being a criminal offence or from the person being charged.
Second, not sure where you got the “sabotage the US” part from
It was an analogy. The person I was replying to seemed to be saying “It can’t be a criminal offence because Musk isn’t Ukranian” which is nonsense. I assumed they where likely American and used an example of something closer to home to show why that is incorrect.
deleted by creator
First, US laws apply on US soil, or to US citizens. If you’re neither, then cooperation and extradition agreements apply, if there are any.
No, this is demonstrably false in many areas of law.
For example OFAC explicitly targets non US persons and organizations in sanctions enforcement. It is explicitly written into nearly every presidential order authorizing sanctions. I’d be happy to direct you to a few if you like, but you can just pick any from here: https://ofac.treasury.gov
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Yeah but it’s not called treason, treason is to your own country, ofc this is still an illegal offense in Ukraine but I don’t think it’s treason?
The parent comments are talking about sabotage. You added the word treason.
I think he replied to the wrong comment.
Elon is not the president, a leader, the military, nor a government. This parasite should be in a prison or a brig at the very least. This is fucking treason.
He controls 10K satellites, the electric car charging infrastructure, and a massive global communications platform. He’s too big to control. Good thing we hero-worshipped him for years. 🫢 🤭
He doesn’t personally control any of that. Each of those organizations could continue on without him, probably happier to be rid of him.
Yep. It’s always good to remind everyone that he didn’t build anything, nor did he found Tesla.
The boards and probably kick him out and be better off.
But people think he controls that. And, just as with hundred-dollar bills, what we believe gives things power.
Too big? Hold my TCP/IP stack…
He’s the richest man in the world. He could buy his own fucking island and never be arrested. Can one country shut down Twitter, Tesla, or SpaceX?
I’ve heard this a bit. Treason is a crime against your own country, no? How is this treason?
He’s twarthing the war effort of a country the US is supporting. I don’t know if he broke any laws but he’s defenitely on the government’s shitlist now.
he’s definitely on the government’s shitlist now
A billionaire who donates shitloads to both of the corporations masquerading as political parties? On the US government’s shitlist? Oh you sweet summer child…
Please head on back to reddit with that “sweet summer child” bullshit
Reddit doesn’t own GOT memes. Please head on back to anywhere other people aren’t with your “I decide what memes are allowed on Lemmy” bullshit.
Go cry on reddit about it
You go, I like it here when not having to deal with pompous gatekeepers like yourself 🤷
It’s not. His actions can be deplorable without actually being illegal. The Lemmy Bar Association is about as legally competent as my cat.
So if during the occupation of Afghanistan, I fought for the Taliban but only killed Afghan Army soldiers, I could return to the USA without any worries?
Giving comfort to the enemy has a name, what is it again?
US is not at war with Russia so it is not treason.
Jeez, people in this thread are hysterical.
lol Russia seems to think it’s at war with the US
If Russia wants to be at war with the US, they can issue a war declaration.
They haven’t so far, and they know why.
Nato is in war with russia. We train soldier, we send equipment, we give intelligence…If this is not being in a war I dont know…
US is in a proxy war-- totally different to an actual war. Was the Soviet Union at war with the US when the former funded and trained North Vietnam during the Vietnam War?
I think we can all admit, decades later…yes.
Of course people would say that. As much as I dislike Elon, he can’t be charged for treason because the US is not at war. The best that the US and allies could do is break contract with him or isolate him politically. But he’s rich and well connected so I doubt anything will happen to him.
Yes
St Helena.
Can donnie Bin Laden join him in there?
Any system capable of manipulating the outcomes of international conflict needs to become property of the government via eminent domain…especially if that system is used…especially if used by an entrepreneur operating without oversight.
Deactivating US military hardware in the middle of a conflict sounds a lot like an act of treason…
From what I understand he didn’t deactivate it… it was already deactivated and he refused to turn it on.
He had disabled starlink systems over Russian territories - in order to help Ukraine. This included Crimea. Ukraine last year wanted to do a drone-strike on Crimea, so they asked Musk to turn them on. He refused, claiming he was scared of war escalation and that he didn’t want to be involved in offensive war operations.
The way you put it is at the very least a rationale. Obviously it can be debated one way or the other, but it makes more sense than him being overtly pro-Russia. I don’t think he’s so dumb as to make it obvious.
Yeah don’t trust headlines. They create the best possible headline to make as many people as interested as possible… forget about the truth or nuance. During this same period, remember that the US didn’t want to give fighter jets or tanks to Ukraine out of fear of escalation. Musk was essentially following official US military policy.
Don’t trust billionaires to do the right thing.
I agree. No one man should have all that power.
But we’re not really talking about “what ifs” or “ideal worlds”
This is the world we have and this is what happened.
No, I’m saying billionaires should not have that power.
“As Ukrainian submarine drones strapped with explosives approached the Russian fleet, they “lost connectivity and washed ashore harmlessly,” Isaacson writes.”
That’s from the CNN article over this. The drones were in the middle of their approach when they got deactivated.
There’s a reason there’s weird wording in all of these articles. The reason the drones would have gotten “deactivated” as they got close to Crimea is because before they were near Crimea, they were connected to the system. Once they got close, they got disconnected since the satellites over Crimea were disabled. This is because Musk disabled Starlink over Russian territory very early on. Ukrainian officials would have been well aware before any operation. There are even sanctions in place since 2014 that Obama put in that restricts any company from doing business in Crimea.
The articles are wording it in a way that’s meant to imply that he turned something off mid-operation in an attempt to stop a specific attack. This simply isn’t the case.
I’m honestly impressed at the level of blatant twisting of the truth that’s going around on the news. Are journalists lazy? Is this just click-seeking behavior? Or is it deliberate misinformation and misdirection?
Here’s a quote from the article you linked
the Starlink service provided by his company SpaceX was never active over Crimea and that the Ukrainian government made an “emergency request” to him to turn on service.
“There was an emergency request from government authorities to activate Starlink all the way to Sevastopol,” Musk posted on X, the platform formally known as Twitter that he owns. Sevastopol is a port city in Crimea. “The obvious intent being to sink most of the Russian fleet at anchor. If I had agreed to their request, then SpaceX would be explicitly complicit in a major act of war and conflict escalation.”
Here are some articles from 2022
https://interestingengineering.com/culture/musk-denies-blocking-starlink-crimea
SpaceX has disabled Starlink over Russian-controlled regions of Ukraine. As per Business Insider, some have suggested it may have been shut off over certain regions to prevent Russia from exploiting the network.
prompting speculation that it [starlink system] had been shut off in areas controlled by Russia — perhaps to prevent the Kremlin from exploiting the network.
https://news.yahoo.com/elon-musk-blocks-ukraine-using-174508012.html?guccounter=1
Elon Musk denied a Ukrainian request to enable the use of Starlink in Russian-occupied Crimea.
That quote is clear and to the point. He didn’t turn anything off. He refused to turn something on.
https://www.eurasiantimes.com/no-starlink-for-ukraine-elon-musk-makes-a-u-turn-turns-down/
Speaking to political analyst Ian Bremmer from the Eurasia Group, Musk said that Ukraine’s government had urged him to turn on Starlink in Crimea, which Russia invaded and forcibly occupied in 2014
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/07/31/elon-musk-starlink-ukraine-drone-attack-crimea/
Elon Musk ‘refuses to turn on Starlink’ for Crimea drone attack
In September Ukrainian officials told The Economist that Mr Musk had rejected a Ukrainian request to allow Starlink to be used in Crimea, a part of Ukraine which Russia invaded and annexed in 2014, … SpaceX has continued to restrict the use of Starlink in Russian-occupied territory, according to Ukrainian officials
I think Musk is scummy, but I appreciate your response here clearing things up. It makes sense why he wouldn’t re-activate it, but at least it’s not like he shut it off mid-flight. They just went out of the known range.
I still think Musk is scummy, but for other reasons.
Yeah I understand why he wouldn’t wanna get involved. Start facilitating aggressive operations and you’re all of a sudden a legitimate military target. I have doubts Russia would shoot down a SpaceX satellite… but you never know.
We generally don’t expect US companies to actively participate in wars, especially a war that the US isn’t officially involved in.
I think Musk’s decision to offer Starlink access for free to Ukraine is an interesting one. On one hand, they get a bunch of good PR for helping out a country during an aggressive invasion - we’re talking hundreds of millions they essentially donated to Ukraine. On the other hand, any good PR they got has probably been canceled out by now. Which I think is ironic - no good deed goes unpunished.
However, I don’t think Musk helped just for good PR. I think he felt it was a good opportunity to show off the capacities of his system during a globally publicized war. And it seems like it has definitely met expectations - the Ukrainians have come to rely on the system. So other countries are taking notice. China and Russia are both developing similar systems.
So yeah, I’d probably do the same thing if I were him. He’s probably just following the advice of his advisors. I think Musk is scummy too. I don’t like him for a number of reasons, the prime being that it seems he’s putting all his eggs on fascists coming to power in the US.
But this specific news cycle I think is a psyop meant to discredit Musk. Which fuck it, I don’t care really. But I like to know the truth, not propaganda. If I dislike someone, I want to dislike them for actual reasons not lies told to me by a news headline.
Honestly, it’s just that journalists want to make Elon Musk look like the bad guy. And thank you so much for taking the time to write this out so that it is far more obvious what’s happening because it’s just so confusing what they’re saying
except Musk said none of these things did he? His response seemed to be in the other direction.
deleted by creator
You mean Ukrainian military hardware?
A lot of the Ukrainian dishes were purchased by the US military and given to Ukraine, so they are ostensibly both
Its not military hardware
Whose government though? That’s the issue with this thinking. As a person who does not live in the US, I’m not sure I want the US to own everything that can be used in war.
It would obviously be the government of the country of origin.
Starlink was designed, built, and deployed from the United States, by SpaceX (a US company) which is owned by Elon Musk (a US citizen), and launched from US soil. Obviously all that junk and and people are subject to US governance, so when I say this specific stuff should be seized by eminent domain, I mean seized by the US Government.
Other junk in other countries built by other people of similar magnitude and ability to interfere with global conflicts would be subjected to those other governments. I wouldn’t expect the US Government to seize, under eminent domain, foreign owned stuff in other countries.
I know it’s an anathema to most in the US but the government needs to step up and take Starlink and Space X off Musk for a fair price. He’s way too unstable to be trusted with tech that important.
A fair price would be musk in jail for his crimes.
I was gonna say $3.50, but jail works too.
Elon would want $4.20 cos he’s a fucking dolt
How about .420?
Loch Ness Monster 2024
The older I get the more socialist I am. Yeah, take it away from his dumb ass, but don’t keep it ffs. Make it employee owned. Make every business employee owned.
Make it a Co-op with government oversight and maybe security. Its too stategically important to be allowed market level independence.
This is how I feel about Starship. Amazing progress is being made and he’s going to fuck it all up before it ever has a real mission. It’s sad. World’s first fully reusable launch vehicle capable of building real shit in space like colonies and infrastructure and it had to be him that did it.
Did he really do it? I’m pretty sure that was the engineers, which Musk is not.
But he says big words about rockets on Twitter. That means he’s an engineer, right?
What I meant was it had to be him that became the figurehead. I want someone with the drive and passion for space exploration, not someone with the passion for profit. A humble engineer or scientist who exists only to expand their knowledge and with plenty of fascination about the universe, not this dollar store Tony Stark wannabe narcissistic blowhard.
I guess I’m shouting at clouds though, because that’s how the system is set up. People don’t start companies because they want to do something awesome. They start them to make money.
As much as I hate Musk, I doubt something that ambitious would be tried without him or someone like him. Same with starting a fully EV car company when everyone thought we were just but ready for it. Yes the engineers are the ones who do the work, but it takes someone willing to risk a lot of money, and the ability to bring in more money, to make that stuff happen.
Elon didn’t start shit. He bought Tesla.
He bought a small dying company and turned it into the most valuable one they ever existed. He made the Tesla we know today.
He didnt start a fully EV car company, HE BOUGHT ONE.
Quit holding people on high regard based on their cult of personality.
He made the Tesla we know today, the Tesla we know today would not have existed without Musk, it likely would have died a small silicon valley startup that nobody had ever heard of.
Just because I hate him doesn’t mean I won’t give him credit for doing what he did.
I’m pretty sure someone at Tesla or SpaceX put the Twitter idea in his head so he would fuck off and meddle with something else and let them do their actual work instead of dealing with his stupidity, micromanaging and narcissism.
He borrowed a billion from it to buy Twatter. What happens the next time he needs money?
I would love a SpaceX without Elon.
But the thing that made SpaceX what it is now is largely that it is not a government entity.
Removed by mod
Prison, certainly. This is a treasonous act.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
“How am I in this war?” Musk asked Isaacson. “Starlink was not meant to be involved in wars. It was so people can watch Netflix and chill and get online for school and do good peaceful things, not drone strikes.”
That’s a pretty glib way of looking at it.
Elon can’t be trusted with it, but NASA would just stall all progress on it for the next fifty years
All the downvoters should take a good close look at the cockup that is the SLS program
NASA just contracts everything out. I think NASA would be much different if they had something like SpaceX (and was funded properly).
NASA just contracts everything out. I think NASA would be much different if they had something like SpaceX (and was funded properly).
NASA gets so much funding for the SLS, which is so expensive, that NASA itself is saying it’s throwing money away. It’s US Congress routing tax payer funding to disastrously inefficient contractors, not to have an actually functional space program.
Elon is a Russian removed just like the rest of the billionaires.
It seems like privatization is working out great for us 👍
deleted by creator
You’re completely missing the point. Musk actively took part in the war with this, without any oversight.
How so, by providing defensive abilities only from the get go? Sorry your pet “latest thing” Ukraine didn’t get to use American infrastructure to kill and do your bidding.
Fucking charge him with something. This is insane… If it’s not treason, it sure as hell is undermining the billions of dollars in aid were sending Ukraine. We’ve sent 76 billion dollars so far.
Stop trying to tell a private citizen and businessman what he can and can’t do with his own business
Exactly, you can’t have your cake and eat it - if we want to live in a sane and moral world we shouldn’t let private citizens own things that are important, especially not satellite infrastructure
I mean if a person does anything directly affecting a war (for any side) I’d say that person is a wartime volunteer.
Wartime volunteers that have taken up arms are a absolutely viable target for military strikes.
Just saying 🤷♂️
So the US government is a viable target?
Anyone considering striking US likely realizes the fallout from that strategy though
During the cold war, there were plenty of instances of fighting between us and soviet forces, not to mention the huge amount of proxy fighting done. Personally, I’m not interested in drawing up a sequel to the cold war.
I hate to say it, but we are likely already in the sequel.
Why though? There’s been plenty of hot and cold wars, plenty of proxy wars.
This isn’t special in that regard, except now using the propaganda talking points of view a fascist enemy is done without a hint of shame from the stooges who do it.
As I see it, we’re at a turning point. Either we continue a path of escalation, or we back down, either would be feasible given our current position, but that said current position isn’t somewhere we can stay. We either need to accept that sacrificing some global influence is necessary to avoid foreign wars, or that maintaining our current global influence inevitably requires putting soldiers behind our words.
This is a weird take… The war in Ukraine is largely being fought because Russia isn’t going to stop with Ukraine. We’re protecting our allies in Europe, and looking to prevent further escalation, not simply exerting influence on a far-away foreign war.
The escalating party is 100% the aggressing party that’s invading a sovereign nation. That’s Russia, not the United States.
I mean, unless you’re speaking as a Russian citizen? Perhaps I’m misunderstanding your point of view here.
This is the exact attitude I was trying to call out. We are absolutely escalating our participation in this conflict. Trying to strattle the line of participation, where nothing we do is our own fault, and neither are any of the consequences we face. Because I’m not sure how well you did in middle school geography, but the US is, in fact, not a part of Europe. This war has no direct impact on the US beyond the extent we choose to be involved.
Now if you view the benefits of involvement as greater than the risks, fine. That’s a perfectly coherent position. One I don’t agree with, but a rational position nonetheless. But to pretend our involvement is just a force of nature we have no control over? That’s just a bunch of excuses to support involvement without having to openly commit to a position of involvement.
Yes, but go ahead and see what happens
For a lot of reasons, yes
Always has been
deleted by creator
Oh yeah, I don’t mean to say otherwise. It was more a rhetorical question to point out the nature of how these things always end up escalating.
Starlink is not providing an essential service to Ukraine. They do not have the right to expect SpaceX to cooperate with their military effort when SpaceX is a US company under dual-use rules to not unilaterally provide military connectivity to weapons systems to foreign nations.
Ukraine must do military procurement properly and go through the US government to get approval, not whatever this is. They used a civilian service for military purposes, so they are in breach of the terms of use of Starlink and should not be surprised when services degrades at SpaceX’s whims.
The law priorities the health of people, but Starlink isn’t meant for use like this, so this analogy is moot.
Are you sure you meant to respond to me?
If that comment was in error, I can only blame Jerboa for being really broken and unpolished lol
Make sure to save this for the next time that shitbird or one of his moron suckups tries to say he helped Ukraine. Fucker oughtta be treated the same as any Russian collaborator.
No, save this when he eventually sneaks in a putin missile somehow.
If true, my respect for Musk just dropped a … well, none at all. It would be totally in character.
“Starlink was not meant to be involved in wars. It was so people can watch Netflix and chill and get online for school and do good peaceful things, not drone strikes.”
Yes my satellite that is actively being used in a war should be designed only for Netflix and chill.
Exactly. This rule should have made clear from the start (instead of gifting Ukraine access to Starlink at the beginning of the conflict), not taken back later on - and silently, too, with a high cost for the Ukrainian army.
Musk / Starlink is absolutely in the wrong here. But since we’re seeing Musk stray further and further from grace, is this surprising?
From the moment he gutted 80% of twitter staff very soon after a secret meeting with Putin, its all been pretty obvious Musk is a Russian asset. Twitter helped rally international support for Ukraine and he hasnt been subtle in sabotaging it
Musk is whatever his narcissistic personality wants him to be to get the most attention.
I think the implication is compromat.
