Elon Musk says he withheld Starlink over Crimea to avoid escalation
Elon Musk says he refused to give Kyiv access to his Starlink communications network over Crimea to avoid complicity in a "major act of war".
Kyiv had sent an emergency request to activate Starlink to Sevastopol, home to a major Russian navy port, he said.
His comments came after a book alleged he had switched off Starlink to thwart a drone attack on Russian ships.
A senior Ukrainian official says this enabled Russian attacks and accused him of "committing evil".
Russian naval vessels had since taken part in deadly attacks on civilians, he said.
"By not allowing Ukrainian drones to destroy part of the Russian military (!) fleet via Starlink interference, Elon Musk allowed this fleet to fire Kalibr missiles at Ukrainian cities," he said.
"Why do some people so desperately want to defend war criminals and their desire to commit murder? And do they now realize that they are committing evil and encouraging evil?" he added.
The row follows the release of a biography of the billionaire by Walter Isaacson which alleges that Mr Musk switched off Ukraine's access to Starlink because he feared that an ambush of Russia's naval fleet in Crimea could provoke a nuclear response from the Kremlin.
Ukraine targeted Russian ships in Sevastopol with submarine drones carrying explosives but they lost connection to Starlink and "washed ashore harmlessly", Mr Isaacson wrote.
Starlink terminals connect to SpaceX satellites in orbit and have been crucial for maintaining internet connectivity and communication in Ukraine as the conflict has disrupted the country infrastructure.
Nationalize Starlink and SpaceX
We already had a nationalized SpaceX. We defunded it and gave grants to private companies like uh⊠SpaceX.
While I agree that NASA shouldn't have had any funding cut, supporting a privatized space industry isn't a bad thing on its own.
But giving Elon Musk a defense contract was a fucking stupid idea.
Didnât NASA used to just have companies like Boeing or Lockheed manufacture things?
Private companies been US advantage during the moon race, and allowed them to win against the URSS
But thatâs socialism /s
That's how you get an SLS. Government bureaucracy and pleasing congress isn't great at rocket development.
So, in the classic trolley problem, Elon's choice is to remove the track switch that his company produced so that no one else could use it to make a choice.
"Sorry, guys. Looks like those innocent civilians tied to the tracks are going to have to die so that I am not tangentially and tenuously responsible for your choice to save them in exchange for the deaths of Russian soldiers attacking your sovereign lands and people (cough and lose money from the Kremlin as a result cough)"
There's no "right" answer to the trolley problem. But there are definitely wrong ones.
Musk is the kid in the video that moves all the people to just one of the tracks, gets praised by everyone for thinking outside the box, and then proceeds to run the trolley down that track.
I love Rush
People would rather just have no accountability, you see.
His logic seems to be that Ukraine is to blame for all the bloodshed of the Russian invasion because they didnât roll over and surrender without a fight.
Victim blaming. Classic asshole move.
Did Elon have a stroke at some point that we donât know about? Itâs amazing how consistently he makes a huge ass of himself now.
One of his kids came out as trans, his partner left him and later dated a trans woman, and he got caught trying to give one of his employees a horse for sex, so he decided to join the political side that hates trans people and doesn't hold people accountable for being shit as long as they continue waving the banner.
His midlife crisis needs to get the fuck out of my sight.
He is the Most Divorced Man in the World. And Grimes wasn't even married to him!
Grimes really said "not even if you're the richest man alive" and it's driving him crazy
That I don't think is his logic
Heâs said about that - Ukraine should negotiate with the Russians and give them territory because war is so killy.
That depends on your moral basis.
Fair enough. My moral basis says that using my personal power and authority to undermine deals that I specifically sought to make in the first place, upon which others are dependent for literal survival, in order to backpedal my involvement in their survival attempts which I knew from the beginning was the entire point of the deal, the result of which directly and predictably leads to the deaths of hundreds/thousands of innocents... I consider that a moral failing. How about you?
This is the same bullshit take propagandists and Musk himself are spreading.
Musk sabotaged an active military operation in an effort to save Russian assets and materials, by disabling access to Starlink in that area, to halt the operation. And then refused to undo what he did.
All to protect Russian assets in an illegal undeclared war of annexation where Russia is the aggressor.
Musks actions enabled the death of thousands of civilians in Ukraine and likely will cause far more through his actions which extend how long this illegal invasion will continue.
Musk should be stripped of his US citizenship and booted right back to South Africa. America stands by Ukraine, South Africa tries to pretend they are neutral but the agreements they have with Russia and the opinions of rich fuck South Africans like Musk make it clear they stand with Russia.
And anyone who keeps spreading these press releases with his propagandist take on the subject rather than saying how things actually happened, should be ashamed of themselves and monitored until all this is over.
He should be charged with treason or something similar for doing this during wartime to a US ally. Enough of this narcissistic POS.
Yeah the Logan Act is what they could charge him under.
People always mention Elon doing so and so against a NATO ally and therefore itâs treason without ever mentioning the inverse which is Elon aided a war crime for a country who is a direct enemy of the US, which is the real treasonous crime imo.
Private citizens don't get to make those decisions.
It's time to nationalize Starlink & SpaceX.
Jesus. It says it all.
He is responsible for the deaths of children.
It's okay, he plans to replace them with his own progeny. What's he up to now, 12?
His father is even crazier about this, seriously. His father is very active, creating more muskeets ...
Not much of a story, if he wouldn't be doing it with Elon's stepsister.
Lol...he switched it off as a personal favor to Putin.
It was never turned on in the first place. Read the article, not the clickbait headlines that have circulated (this one is on point though, credit to BBC)
Doubt it. The smart money says that he did it because he does a ton of business with the Chinese and is very nervous about being seen to actively take sides in a way that would cause them to see him as a potential security threat.
Hey guys, look, this guy can read minds!
It's clearly speculation, calm down
You would have a point were I simply speculating, but I'm not.
I am simply stating what the most well-informed and knowledgeable sources are saying.
You would know this if you had sanitized and healthy media consumption habits, but you obviously don't.
Which media sources do you advice ?
I won't name any specific organizations, but the upshot is that you need to consume a variety of news sources from different countries and in different formats. It also pays to get into very specifically focused news organizations.
Ok...
Correct imo
The up arrow is right there, bud
đ
Go away, trumper.
Censorship is terrible. Except when I want to do it and pretend like I'm the best politician. Then it's great.
LOL self-defense is escalation now
Pretty sure putin owns musk.
Musk does what putler tells him to do.
Russia has anti satellite weapons. Why should he risk it for zero reward? At least the defense contractors are getting paid. Elon does it for free.
Yeah, sure. Have you ever heard of 'reactions to actions'? What do you think would happen if Russia were to start targeting foreign satellites? How confident are you that they actually possess the technology to disable around 2000 out of the 4000 Starlink satellites to clear paths above Russia/Ukraine? Or, what do you think Russia is capable of in this regard? and did you really belive musk does this for free and with no ulterior idea? đđđ, but there's no such thing as free. Here's just one example: Link to CNBC article on Pentagon awarding SpaceX a Ukraine contract for Starlink satellite internet https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/01/pentagon-awards-spacex-with-ukraine-contract-for-starlink-satellite-internet.html
Why ISPs need to be neutral. Musk was never elected or appoints be a general. Otis not his place to decide what strikes happen or not. The blood of the people those ships have attacked are now on his hands.
From my understanding, he didn't pull the rug, instead he just never turned on satellites that he never said he would turn on
He did in fact "pull the rug"
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/07/politics/elon-musk-biography-walter-isaacson-ukraine-starlink/index.html
The escalation he was trying to avoid is shelling children. Elon Musk is why I hope hell is real.
Musk is really speed running having his LEO satelites nationalized
Now thereâs a great idea. Especially since he never would have built SoaceX without so much public support via NASA.
Get fucked, you boot licking weasel.
Fuck Musk with a grenade.
"Moral idiocy" is a great way to sum it up
Musk saw a bully go over and punch a kid. So Musk ran over and held the kidâs hands behind him. Because punching back would have just escalated things.
Racist war criminal says what?
Musk didnât survive the emerald mine wars and spend six years at West Point for you to second guess his decisions. /s
I think this quote is where we all need to take a step back. People are essentially blaming him for not empowering one warring party's ability to attack another.
It doesn't matter which side you are on. He doesnt immediately become responsible for everything that the russians do with the soldiers and equipment that weren't killed/destroyed in the attack.
This is also assuming the drone attack would have been successful.
I wouldn't call it interference it was just refusal to play.
The type of attitude used here is a very childish "you are with me or you are against me" take that everyone publicly recognizes as wrong.
I would def prefer a ukrainian victory, but you guys treat musk like he is some sort of chaos god and all knowing entity or something.
No. We are blaming him for preventing Ukraine to defend itself. If you punch me and I punch you to get you off me then that's not me attacking you, it's still you attacking me.
Worse, somebody just punched me and I'm about to punch back, and while I do that you swipe my leg so I lose my footing, saying "but you can't attack them!", causing me to land unluckily and break my wrist. That is what Musk did: He put Ukrainian forces and assets in direct danger over pulling a service he agreed to provide. Noone would blame him had he stayed out of things in the first place, or given notice that he's backing out, or something like that. We'd be calling him a pussy, but that'd be it. But committing and then retracting support at a critical moment? That's treason.
Just because you call it treason doesnt make it treason.
Just as you pointed out, replace defend itself with attack Russia.
Hows it sound then?
Also as was pointed out it was never activated so its not like he deactivated it. Your analogy doesnt stand.
This doesn't work because we all know Russia is the aggressor. It still sounds bad for Elon
Japan aggressed against the US in WW2, the US still attacked the Japanese navy at many points. Stop trying to twist language to make a point that's not necessary to make. Everyone knows Russia started the war, that's irrelevant to whether something is an offensive move in a war.
It was already activated, Musk ordered it shut off during an Ukrainian operation meant to take out those ships. The same ships that have been launching missiles and hitting civilian targets.
Elon Musk secretly ordered his engineers to turn off his companyâs Starlink satellite communications network near the Crimean coast last year to disrupt a Ukrainian sneak attack on the Russian naval fleet, according to an excerpt adapted from Walter Isaacsonâs new biography of the eccentric billionaire titled âElon Musk.â
As Ukrainian submarine drones strapped with explosives approached the Russian fleet, they âlost connectivity and washed ashore harmlessly,â Isaacson writes.
Source:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/07/politics/elon-musk-biography-walter-isaacson-ukraine-starlink/index.html
Is exactly what happened.
He did not act.
I agree with your statement, the fact that Musk can just make decisions like that is an issue. Regardless of whether or not he owns the majority of the company he agreed to provide this service. That means he should have to give ample notice before disabling the service.
Did his company agree to provide this service specifically?
Yes. He donated access points to the Ukrainian military. Militaries tend to use the hardware they have to do military things, Musk knew they weren't planning on using starlink to play fortnite.
And they knew those access points didn't have coverage in Crimea, that's why they asked him to give them access in Crimea.
Musk agreed to provide service In Ukraine. That includes Crimea. It also includes their territorial waters. It also includes the rest of the occupied territories, which they again and again disable service for.
Ukraine certainly didn't know that there was no connectivity around Sevastopol otherwise they wouldn't have sent drones there relying on starlink, now would they.
Also, all in all this isn't his decision to make. He has a contract with the US government to provide service in Ukraine. Lockheed-Martin doesn't get to decide whether or not the US exports F-35 to Poland or not. It is not their place to say "but that would annoy the Russians so we'll disable them".
If you don't want to be a military contractor, don't be a military contractor. If you are a military contractor, submit to democratically legitimised decisions of the fucking government.
The US government buys F-35s and then owns them. The US government is contracting Musk to provide coverage over certain areas of Ukraine.
It's a significant difference. The gov can't later use Starlink to help people in Taiwan, for instance, without a new contract.
What's even more mind boggling is that despite Starlink being so critical to Ukrainian communications, neither the Ukrainian government nor the US entered into a contract with a clause obligating Starlink to maintain service. Musk can just legally turn off Starlink for them with no legal repercussions because they never negotiated something against that into a contract with him. Even if they had to pay a premium rate for Starlink, for a service that critical to the Ukrainian Armed Forces it's worth it
The US government has recently contracted for Starlink satellites. They did it when he first flinched under Russian pressure and threatened to turn them off
My question is, if he was actually worried about being complicit with the war or whatever, why did he provide starlink at all? It was obvious what it was going to be used for. He get cold feet because Ukraine is doing way better then expected?
Article explains that he was worried he was contributing to an escalation that could lead to nuclear strikes, while he still provides ground support services to Ukraine proper
Not arguing this was the right choice, but explaining that's his decision-making process.
Buddy you're in the middle of learning that nuanced takes don't play on Lemmy, because this place is full of radicalized outcasts that don't even read articles.
Yeah, I honestly don't understand why this narrative even needs to be played out.
I don't know what angle there is by making Musk a scapegoat beyond, maybe, Ukraine trying to strengthen its supporting relationship with the US population, but it already has most of the US support anyway.
Musk has his issues, there's no doubt about that, but not wanting to be involved is an ethical stance to take on his part.
No. Russia is 100% in the wrong, continously committing crimes against humanity for no justifiable reason at all.
... that, in the pursuit of taking away Ukrainian freedom and independence.
Hence, to actively disrupt their defense is deeply unethical. He chose to do something rather than nothing, and it directly helps those wishing to make the world a worse place. Disgraceful.
You mean he chose to do nothing rather than something. The starlink access was never turned ON
By musks account. By Walter Isaacson's account the opposite was the case. Considering musks opposition to aiding the victim, it would be on brand.
I don't disagree, but what evidence was produced that we can't see?
I have evidence that you diddle 12 year olds, but noone is allowed to see it. You're a reddit mod so it would be on brand.
See what I mean?
I think we owe the claim some level of skepticism if theres no proof provided.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Elon Musk says he refused to give Kyiv access to his Starlink communications network over Crimea to avoid complicity in a "major act of war".
The row follows the release of a biography of the billionaire by Walter Isaacson which alleges that Mr Musk switched off Ukraine's access to Starlink because he feared that an ambush of Russia's naval fleet in Crimea could provoke a nuclear response from the Kremlin.
Ukraine targeted Russian ships in Sevastopol with submarine drones carrying explosives but they lost connection to Starlink and "washed ashore harmlessly", Mr Isaacson wrote.
SpaceX, in which Mr Musk is the largest shareholder, began providing thousands of Starlink satellite dishes to Ukraine shortly after Russia launched its full-scale assault on its neighbour in February last year.
In the past, Mr Musk has said that while the system had "become the connectivity backbone of Ukraine all the way up to the front lines", "we are not allowing Starlink to be used for long-range drone strikes".
He also offered a personal opinion, calling for a truce and saying that Ukrainians and Russians were dying "to gain and lose small pieces of land" and this was not worth their lives.
The original article contains 558 words, the summary contains 197 words. Saved 65%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
I say it's ukraine's fault to try and rely on a PRIVATE infrastructure for mission critical connectivity. That enabled Elon to in turn disconnect the service whenever he wanted. Maybe not rely on a private infrastructure where it's owner has absolute control over the communication.
Their existing infrastructure was destroyed by an invading nation. What do you expect them to do, put down fiber lines in the middle of a warzone?
I don't know but trusting some random guy with critical communications doesn't look like the smartest thing.. what if elon tomorrow decides to turn off starlink access for the whole of Ukraine? All they can do is complain....
I wouldn't say it's their fault, but it is on them (and possibly all the supporters) this was allowed to happen.
We can point fingers all we want, but the fact remains that Ukraine military relies on some private company ran by an ass, and now they suffer the consequence. This is also not even the first time this ass was giving them hard time.
Name one other business whoâs policies change at the whim of its CEO
All of them?
The CEO can change any policy
Doesn't usually happen though.
Just send Musk to the warfront, without any money or access to the ressources of his empire... As the normal persons that his action ruined the life. Maybe he will understand, even if he is an evil autistic oligarch.
He's definitely not autistic
Are you all believing that UA military would depends that much on internet/Starlink, really? And it's not like it is the only satellite network.
Regarding OP, i don't defend RU but I don't support UA. None of my business if it was not my money which is flushed down in this proxy war and therefore, the money of my children!
Right... Pretending it was not the U.S. gov. that pushed Elon to do this.. A continuous conflict in Ukraine that bleeds Russia is the U.S. agenda.
Whatever it takes for you to decide it's the U.S.'s fault, I guess.
I bet you also think the U.S. won in Iraq and Afghanistan too.
Those two things have absolutely nothing to do with each other, quite a reach.
I bet you can't think
You mean the same US government that was paying Musk specifically to maintain Starlink service in Ukraine? That one?
Did you forget that the Pentagon was subsidizing Starlink? Or did you not know that before writing your very intellectual reply?
Do... do you know how much money the US has given to Ukraine for this effort? A continuous conflict is untenable. The U.S. gov would want the opposite of what you're thinking
I don't agree with the person you're talking to, but the US is doing a lend lease with Ukraine like they did with the UK during WWII.
Actually Musk is friends with Putin, and helps his daddy out. Remember when Twitter spoke out with support for Ukraine. Putin didnât like that so his buddy Musky bought the company and is currently trying to run it into the ground.
It's rather kind of Putin to help the US agenda like that!