▲ 1692 ▼ Elon Musk ‘Secretly’ Used Starlink To Foil A Ukrainian Attack On Russian Naval Fleet Over Fear Of Nuclear War: Report (www.mediaite.com) submitted 3 years ago by FlyingSquid@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world 465 comments fedilink hide all child comments What an utter piece of shit.
[–] BeautifulMind@lemmy.world 212 points 3 years ago (3 children) It's cute how if Ukraine fights back that risks nuclear war, but when Russia invades a sovereign country it doesn't permalink fedilink source hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] jarfil@lemmy.world 4 points 3 years ago It's like the rule of money, but with nukes: those who have the money/nukes, make the rules. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ATiredPhilosopher@lemmygrad.ml -4 points 3 years ago (2 children) I'll probably get downvoted to hell but America's done that for hot minute now and also evades any real criticism from the West. And yes, Russia bad and invasion bad, no question but if we're keeping score... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago* Fuck Woodrow Wilson. Wilsonian Doctrine wasn't even close to the worst thing that shitstain caused while president. Worst. President. Ever. permalink fedilink source parent [–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) In what conflict were people criticized for fighting back against the US because it could cause a nuclear war? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ATiredPhilosopher@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) More referring to the invading of countries without criticism, long ass history of doing that in the name of "freedom" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago I don't disagree, but I don't think that fits the specific example here. It isn't so much about an imperial power invading another country, but the country in question fighting back and being discouraged from doing so. permalink fedilink source parent [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -53 points 3 years ago (2 children) Ukraine doesn’t have nukes permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] deadtom@lemmy.world 154 points 3 years ago (2 children) Not anymore. They gave them to Russia under guarantees they wouldt do... pretty much everything they are doing right now. I'm starting to think Russia might not be trustworthy... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] jj4211@lemmy.world 35 points 3 years ago Yeah, in the mid 90s the world was so optimistic about Russia, and frankly reassured about the nukes going to Russia, which was believed to be the more confidently governed nation state. Everyone was still riding high on the cold war seemingly coming to a close. permalink fedilink source parent [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -74 points 3 years ago (3 children) Too bad so sad! Should have been smart like Kim Jong. Keep some nukes and you don’t get invaded. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 27 points 3 years ago (1 child) Russia has set us back centuries on global nuclear disarmament. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -39 points 3 years ago No, I’m pretty sure they haven’t stopped anybody from disarming. But I think everyone should have nukes anyway. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 13 points 3 years ago (2 children) You make a good point. Ukraine should build some of their own nukes. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] kava@lemmy.world -1 points 3 years ago US would never allow this. Ukraine is only useful if it can function as a buffer state for a proxy war. permalink fedilink source parent [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -58 points 3 years ago (1 child) They would have to figure out how to do it and they aren’t smart enough, better if they ask Russia to lend them some in exchange for surrendering all disputed territories. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sergih@feddit.de 18 points 3 years ago (3 children) wtf? bruh is this a Russian shill account? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 7 points 3 years ago Absolutely permalink fedilink source parent [–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago It's gotta be. They praise Musk for stopping a nuclear war but later say they believe every country should have nukes lmao permalink fedilink source parent [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -26 points 3 years ago Sorry for being a realist! permalink fedilink source parent [+] MataVatnik@lemmy.world -17 points 3 years ago You're trolling but I unironically agree permalink fedilink source parent [–] Slotos@feddit.nl 3 points 3 years ago (1 child) That doesn’t address the previous claim in any manner. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] kava@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago* I think he addressed it clearly enough. Russia invading Ukraine has no risk of Ukraine starting a nuclear war. Why? Because Ukraine does not have nukes. A country like Russia, if facing an existential threat, has the capacity and incentive to use nuclear weapons. Why? Because they have nukes. This is why even the US had hesitations last year (same time this Starlink episode happened) about sending certain types of weapons to Ukraine - out of fear of nuclear escalation. Now that Ukraine has drone striked Russian territory a few times it seems obvious because nuclear escalation hasn't happened... but Musk was not alone in thinking this. Remember that US refused to give all sorts of weaponry at first. They didn't want to give fighters jets, tanks, etc. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jarfil@lemmy.world 4 points 3 years ago It's like the rule of money, but with nukes: those who have the money/nukes, make the rules. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ATiredPhilosopher@lemmygrad.ml -4 points 3 years ago (2 children) I'll probably get downvoted to hell but America's done that for hot minute now and also evades any real criticism from the West. And yes, Russia bad and invasion bad, no question but if we're keeping score... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago* Fuck Woodrow Wilson. Wilsonian Doctrine wasn't even close to the worst thing that shitstain caused while president. Worst. President. Ever. permalink fedilink source parent [–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) In what conflict were people criticized for fighting back against the US because it could cause a nuclear war? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ATiredPhilosopher@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) More referring to the invading of countries without criticism, long ass history of doing that in the name of "freedom" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago I don't disagree, but I don't think that fits the specific example here. It isn't so much about an imperial power invading another country, but the country in question fighting back and being discouraged from doing so. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago* Fuck Woodrow Wilson. Wilsonian Doctrine wasn't even close to the worst thing that shitstain caused while president. Worst. President. Ever. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) In what conflict were people criticized for fighting back against the US because it could cause a nuclear war? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ATiredPhilosopher@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) More referring to the invading of countries without criticism, long ass history of doing that in the name of "freedom" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago I don't disagree, but I don't think that fits the specific example here. It isn't so much about an imperial power invading another country, but the country in question fighting back and being discouraged from doing so. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ATiredPhilosopher@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) More referring to the invading of countries without criticism, long ass history of doing that in the name of "freedom" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago I don't disagree, but I don't think that fits the specific example here. It isn't so much about an imperial power invading another country, but the country in question fighting back and being discouraged from doing so. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago I don't disagree, but I don't think that fits the specific example here. It isn't so much about an imperial power invading another country, but the country in question fighting back and being discouraged from doing so. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -53 points 3 years ago (2 children) Ukraine doesn’t have nukes permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] deadtom@lemmy.world 154 points 3 years ago (2 children) Not anymore. They gave them to Russia under guarantees they wouldt do... pretty much everything they are doing right now. I'm starting to think Russia might not be trustworthy... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] jj4211@lemmy.world 35 points 3 years ago Yeah, in the mid 90s the world was so optimistic about Russia, and frankly reassured about the nukes going to Russia, which was believed to be the more confidently governed nation state. Everyone was still riding high on the cold war seemingly coming to a close. permalink fedilink source parent [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -74 points 3 years ago (3 children) Too bad so sad! Should have been smart like Kim Jong. Keep some nukes and you don’t get invaded. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 27 points 3 years ago (1 child) Russia has set us back centuries on global nuclear disarmament. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -39 points 3 years ago No, I’m pretty sure they haven’t stopped anybody from disarming. But I think everyone should have nukes anyway. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 13 points 3 years ago (2 children) You make a good point. Ukraine should build some of their own nukes. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] kava@lemmy.world -1 points 3 years ago US would never allow this. Ukraine is only useful if it can function as a buffer state for a proxy war. permalink fedilink source parent [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -58 points 3 years ago (1 child) They would have to figure out how to do it and they aren’t smart enough, better if they ask Russia to lend them some in exchange for surrendering all disputed territories. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sergih@feddit.de 18 points 3 years ago (3 children) wtf? bruh is this a Russian shill account? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 7 points 3 years ago Absolutely permalink fedilink source parent [–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago It's gotta be. They praise Musk for stopping a nuclear war but later say they believe every country should have nukes lmao permalink fedilink source parent [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -26 points 3 years ago Sorry for being a realist! permalink fedilink source parent [+] MataVatnik@lemmy.world -17 points 3 years ago You're trolling but I unironically agree permalink fedilink source parent [–] Slotos@feddit.nl 3 points 3 years ago (1 child) That doesn’t address the previous claim in any manner. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] kava@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago* I think he addressed it clearly enough. Russia invading Ukraine has no risk of Ukraine starting a nuclear war. Why? Because Ukraine does not have nukes. A country like Russia, if facing an existential threat, has the capacity and incentive to use nuclear weapons. Why? Because they have nukes. This is why even the US had hesitations last year (same time this Starlink episode happened) about sending certain types of weapons to Ukraine - out of fear of nuclear escalation. Now that Ukraine has drone striked Russian territory a few times it seems obvious because nuclear escalation hasn't happened... but Musk was not alone in thinking this. Remember that US refused to give all sorts of weaponry at first. They didn't want to give fighters jets, tanks, etc. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] deadtom@lemmy.world 154 points 3 years ago (2 children) Not anymore. They gave them to Russia under guarantees they wouldt do... pretty much everything they are doing right now. I'm starting to think Russia might not be trustworthy... permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] jj4211@lemmy.world 35 points 3 years ago Yeah, in the mid 90s the world was so optimistic about Russia, and frankly reassured about the nukes going to Russia, which was believed to be the more confidently governed nation state. Everyone was still riding high on the cold war seemingly coming to a close. permalink fedilink source parent [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -74 points 3 years ago (3 children) Too bad so sad! Should have been smart like Kim Jong. Keep some nukes and you don’t get invaded. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 27 points 3 years ago (1 child) Russia has set us back centuries on global nuclear disarmament. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -39 points 3 years ago No, I’m pretty sure they haven’t stopped anybody from disarming. But I think everyone should have nukes anyway. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 13 points 3 years ago (2 children) You make a good point. Ukraine should build some of their own nukes. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] kava@lemmy.world -1 points 3 years ago US would never allow this. Ukraine is only useful if it can function as a buffer state for a proxy war. permalink fedilink source parent [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -58 points 3 years ago (1 child) They would have to figure out how to do it and they aren’t smart enough, better if they ask Russia to lend them some in exchange for surrendering all disputed territories. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sergih@feddit.de 18 points 3 years ago (3 children) wtf? bruh is this a Russian shill account? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 7 points 3 years ago Absolutely permalink fedilink source parent [–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago It's gotta be. They praise Musk for stopping a nuclear war but later say they believe every country should have nukes lmao permalink fedilink source parent [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -26 points 3 years ago Sorry for being a realist! permalink fedilink source parent [+] MataVatnik@lemmy.world -17 points 3 years ago You're trolling but I unironically agree permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 35 points 3 years ago Yeah, in the mid 90s the world was so optimistic about Russia, and frankly reassured about the nukes going to Russia, which was believed to be the more confidently governed nation state. Everyone was still riding high on the cold war seemingly coming to a close. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -74 points 3 years ago (3 children) Too bad so sad! Should have been smart like Kim Jong. Keep some nukes and you don’t get invaded. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 27 points 3 years ago (1 child) Russia has set us back centuries on global nuclear disarmament. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -39 points 3 years ago No, I’m pretty sure they haven’t stopped anybody from disarming. But I think everyone should have nukes anyway. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 13 points 3 years ago (2 children) You make a good point. Ukraine should build some of their own nukes. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] kava@lemmy.world -1 points 3 years ago US would never allow this. Ukraine is only useful if it can function as a buffer state for a proxy war. permalink fedilink source parent [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -58 points 3 years ago (1 child) They would have to figure out how to do it and they aren’t smart enough, better if they ask Russia to lend them some in exchange for surrendering all disputed territories. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sergih@feddit.de 18 points 3 years ago (3 children) wtf? bruh is this a Russian shill account? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 7 points 3 years ago Absolutely permalink fedilink source parent [–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago It's gotta be. They praise Musk for stopping a nuclear war but later say they believe every country should have nukes lmao permalink fedilink source parent [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -26 points 3 years ago Sorry for being a realist! permalink fedilink source parent [+] MataVatnik@lemmy.world -17 points 3 years ago You're trolling but I unironically agree permalink fedilink source parent
[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 27 points 3 years ago (1 child) Russia has set us back centuries on global nuclear disarmament. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -39 points 3 years ago No, I’m pretty sure they haven’t stopped anybody from disarming. But I think everyone should have nukes anyway. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -39 points 3 years ago No, I’m pretty sure they haven’t stopped anybody from disarming. But I think everyone should have nukes anyway. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 13 points 3 years ago (2 children) You make a good point. Ukraine should build some of their own nukes. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] kava@lemmy.world -1 points 3 years ago US would never allow this. Ukraine is only useful if it can function as a buffer state for a proxy war. permalink fedilink source parent [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -58 points 3 years ago (1 child) They would have to figure out how to do it and they aren’t smart enough, better if they ask Russia to lend them some in exchange for surrendering all disputed territories. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sergih@feddit.de 18 points 3 years ago (3 children) wtf? bruh is this a Russian shill account? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 7 points 3 years ago Absolutely permalink fedilink source parent [–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago It's gotta be. They praise Musk for stopping a nuclear war but later say they believe every country should have nukes lmao permalink fedilink source parent [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -26 points 3 years ago Sorry for being a realist! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kava@lemmy.world -1 points 3 years ago US would never allow this. Ukraine is only useful if it can function as a buffer state for a proxy war. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -58 points 3 years ago (1 child) They would have to figure out how to do it and they aren’t smart enough, better if they ask Russia to lend them some in exchange for surrendering all disputed territories. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sergih@feddit.de 18 points 3 years ago (3 children) wtf? bruh is this a Russian shill account? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 7 points 3 years ago Absolutely permalink fedilink source parent [–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago It's gotta be. They praise Musk for stopping a nuclear war but later say they believe every country should have nukes lmao permalink fedilink source parent [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -26 points 3 years ago Sorry for being a realist! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] sergih@feddit.de 18 points 3 years ago (3 children) wtf? bruh is this a Russian shill account? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 7 points 3 years ago Absolutely permalink fedilink source parent [–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago It's gotta be. They praise Musk for stopping a nuclear war but later say they believe every country should have nukes lmao permalink fedilink source parent [+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -26 points 3 years ago Sorry for being a realist! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago It's gotta be. They praise Musk for stopping a nuclear war but later say they believe every country should have nukes lmao permalink fedilink source parent
[+] MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee -26 points 3 years ago Sorry for being a realist! permalink fedilink source parent
[+] MataVatnik@lemmy.world -17 points 3 years ago You're trolling but I unironically agree permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Slotos@feddit.nl 3 points 3 years ago (1 child) That doesn’t address the previous claim in any manner. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] kava@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago* I think he addressed it clearly enough. Russia invading Ukraine has no risk of Ukraine starting a nuclear war. Why? Because Ukraine does not have nukes. A country like Russia, if facing an existential threat, has the capacity and incentive to use nuclear weapons. Why? Because they have nukes. This is why even the US had hesitations last year (same time this Starlink episode happened) about sending certain types of weapons to Ukraine - out of fear of nuclear escalation. Now that Ukraine has drone striked Russian territory a few times it seems obvious because nuclear escalation hasn't happened... but Musk was not alone in thinking this. Remember that US refused to give all sorts of weaponry at first. They didn't want to give fighters jets, tanks, etc. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kava@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago* I think he addressed it clearly enough. Russia invading Ukraine has no risk of Ukraine starting a nuclear war. Why? Because Ukraine does not have nukes. A country like Russia, if facing an existential threat, has the capacity and incentive to use nuclear weapons. Why? Because they have nukes. This is why even the US had hesitations last year (same time this Starlink episode happened) about sending certain types of weapons to Ukraine - out of fear of nuclear escalation. Now that Ukraine has drone striked Russian territory a few times it seems obvious because nuclear escalation hasn't happened... but Musk was not alone in thinking this. Remember that US refused to give all sorts of weaponry at first. They didn't want to give fighters jets, tanks, etc. permalink fedilink source parent