this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
1689 points (97.2% liked)

politics

19097 readers
4762 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

What an utter piece of shit.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That act literally sabotaged the operation. On purpose.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Except the network was already off, he refused to switch it on for a foreign country's operation without his own country's approval. On purpose.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I don't understand why Ukraine didn't ask the US government for this and instead asked Musk directly. Ofc he wouldn't do it unless pressured by the government.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Was the usage according the network terms of service?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Let's see... he allowed the Ukrainian military to use Starlink but put it in the ToS that they couldn't actually use it in any military operations.

Yes, that sounds very plausible. Very plausible indeed.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's quite possible the internet was intended to be used for communication proposes. For instance, civilian GPS chips shut down themselves if high enough velocity is detected to prevent usage in rockets.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Feel free to present even a shred of evidence that supports this idea. Because as far as I can tell, all you have is "he didn't sabotage it because maybe they violated the TOS" when he admits to sabotaging the operation.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Evidence of what? I don't know what was the agreement between Musk and US military, but I'm sure if Musk violated it he'll be liable for it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

ITAR look it up. Starlink cannot be used in military applications if it's being used in a commercial application. Musk didn't pull the plug on this, lawyers and the laws did. I don't care for the guy either but get your facts straight before believing what CNNs CEOs book tells you.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Do you have any actual evidence that Isaacson, in his authorized biography of Musk, is lying? Wouldn't Musk have something to say about that since he authorized the biography? Has he denied it? He's pretty quick to tweet all sorts of other things.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That tweet you posted to another person is literally that, ITAR. I'm guessing you still haven't even looked into what it is.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Please explain why the DoD negotiated a contract to use Starlink in Ukraine if the Ukrainians couldn't use it in a military capacity.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They specifically used it for civilian applications and communications. ITAR specifically forbids a company to allow their commercial products while they are supplying a service to be used in a military capacity.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Then why did the DoD negotiate a deal with them?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because the DoD is using different panels. They're not using off the shelf stuff. This is normal for the military. Think of it like the hmmvws. Civ hummer is not designed to do anything the military one is. Completely different applicantions.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So you're saying that Ukraine wanted to use civilian Starlink for this operation even though they had the military Starlink?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

They do not have the military starlink, the US military is still developing applications for it. The only widely available access to Starlink is via the commercial access. We've not provided Ukraine with anything cutting edge because we don't want it to fall into russian hands. It's why we're sending them shit from the 80s and 90s.