Starlink is a great system. The problem is its idiot owner, Musk, who is more worried how the use of Starlink in the Ukraine is going to affect his company stock. You’re in the big leagues now, Elmo. You cant “sort of” commit to a war unless you’re a rich Saudi dilettante, who wants to try his hand at international shiat-stirring.
Musk didn’t allow it. Full stop. It’s not so,e government sanction thing.
Even quotes you reference are from Musk, himself, sharing why he decided so. Musk said he chose not to activate it because he’d be apart of escalating the war…
What against US policy? Escalating the war? We already are sending tons of military equipment, some used in counter offensives.
Post the link and full article you got that from, I’d like to read but many of the links are pay walled.
Here’s what I read from one of the links you referenced, I would think Musk would say it’s against US policy if that’s the reason he chose not to activate Starlink
“There was an emergency request from government authorities to activate Starlink all the way to Sevastopol,” Musk wrote on X, the platform previously known as Twitter.
“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,” Musk wrote.
An excerpt about the raid from American author and journalist Walter Isaacson’s upcoming biography on Musk, titled “Elon Musk,” was published by CNN.
Ukrainian submarine drones loaded with explosives were approaching a Russian naval fleet in the Crimean city of Sevastopol when they lost connection and “washed ashore harmlessly,” according to Isaacson.
Musk was concerned about Russia responding to the naval attack with a nuclear weapon, Isaacson wrote in the book, according to CNN. Ukrainian officials
You can check the list of sanctions imposed on Ukraine/Russia, which regions, types of activity and subjects, along with the exceptions and licenses at:
You may notice that US citizens have been forbidden from providing telecommunications services, including via satellite, in the conflict areas since early 2022, requiring a special license to operate.
Starlink didn’t have such license, and only got a DoD agreement in mid 2023.
In late 2022, Musk would’ve had to break that policy in order to allow the drones to be controlled into the conflict zone.
As for him saying so… I don’t think he’s the type to paint himself as subservient to the government, even if he is; more like the megalomaniac type claiming to have stopped WW3 barehanded, even if he literally did nothing.
It is a little incredulous that somehow only you have figured out the real reason Musk didn’t activate Starlink.
With so many articles coming out, no officials making a statement, hell even a biographer shadowing Musk at the time. Even Musk gives alternate reasons and doesn’t say it, even if it would save him from a lot of bad press.
Great example of people downvoting the truth away. The spectacle of American politics can no longer address material truths, outside of merely referencing good or bad actors.
Elon’s negative image is proof because he used to be widely considered as someone solving the climate crisis through free market capitalism, but the truth is he never changed and has always been this way, and the system he operates in where people need cars is the problem.
It’s also a given that Americans are blind or refuse to acknowledge the effects of their government’s sanctions on the world, the private business interests that benefit, and the way they exploit people like themselves in other countries and use them as pawns.
Starlink is a great system. The problem is its idiot owner, Musk, who is more worried how the use of Starlink in the Ukraine is going to affect his company stock. You’re in the big leagues now, Elmo. You cant “sort of” commit to a war unless you’re a rich Saudi dilettante, who wants to try his hand at international shiat-stirring.
The use of Starlink was restricted by US Government sanctions: no use on Russian territory or assets.
Tough luck, that also means no using it for attacking on Russian territory or assets.
Edit: Here’s a link with sources and dates.
Crimea is Ukraine. Also that’s not how sanctions work at all
Crimea is Stalin’s “present” to the Republic of Ukraine after the ethnic cleansing and genocide of Crimean Tatars by the USSR.
Do you support that genocide?
These sanctions work exactly like that: no service, means no service, not “no service, but sometimes some”.
If you want an exception, you ask the US Government, not some rando running the service.
Removed by mod
You may want to look up the meaning of “tankie”, then re-read my comment, followed by some basic history notions, like the link I’ve provided.
It’s very impressive how someone can be so wrong yet so confident at the same time.
Musk didn’t allow it. Full stop. It’s not so,e government sanction thing.
Even quotes you reference are from Musk, himself, sharing why he decided so. Musk said he chose not to activate it because he’d be apart of escalating the war…
…which was against US Government policy.
Please read all the links before cherry picking only some of them.
What against US policy? Escalating the war? We already are sending tons of military equipment, some used in counter offensives.
Post the link and full article you got that from, I’d like to read but many of the links are pay walled.
Here’s what I read from one of the links you referenced, I would think Musk would say it’s against US policy if that’s the reason he chose not to activate Starlink
You can check the list of sanctions imposed on Ukraine/Russia, which regions, types of activity and subjects, along with the exceptions and licenses at:
https://ofac.treasury.gov/sanctions-programs-and-country-information/ukraine-russia-related-sanctions
You may notice that US citizens have been forbidden from providing telecommunications services, including via satellite, in the conflict areas since early 2022, requiring a special license to operate.
Starlink didn’t have such license, and only got a DoD agreement in mid 2023.
In late 2022, Musk would’ve had to break that policy in order to allow the drones to be controlled into the conflict zone.
As for him saying so… I don’t think he’s the type to paint himself as subservient to the government, even if he is; more like the megalomaniac type claiming to have stopped WW3 barehanded, even if he literally did nothing.
So the only one saying Musk didn’t activate Starlink was because of US sanctions is you, and not even Musk himself.
There’s not article, just you deducing from the US sanctions list.
What’s your point, that I should write an article? 🙄
It is a little incredulous that somehow only you have figured out the real reason Musk didn’t activate Starlink.
With so many articles coming out, no officials making a statement, hell even a biographer shadowing Musk at the time. Even Musk gives alternate reasons and doesn’t say it, even if it would save him from a lot of bad press.
That’s a remarkably interesting link, thanks for sharing.
Great example of people downvoting the truth away. The spectacle of American politics can no longer address material truths, outside of merely referencing good or bad actors.
Elon’s negative image is proof because he used to be widely considered as someone solving the climate crisis through free market capitalism, but the truth is he never changed and has always been this way, and the system he operates in where people need cars is the problem.
It’s also a given that Americans are blind or refuse to acknowledge the effects of their government’s sanctions on the world, the private business interests that benefit, and the way they exploit people like themselves in other countries and use them as pawns.