Elon Musk says the Request to Turn on Starlink in Crimea Came from the Ukrainian Government in the Middle of the Night "We figured out that this was kind of like a Pearl Harbor like attack...So they really asked us to proactively take part in a major act of war"

submitted by xolotltlalo from twitter.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (20 children)

Elon is a traitor

It's this

And it was widely reported before this current autobiography

You can Google: "starlink Crimea before:2023" to see previous reporting.

Examples

https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/11/20/ukraine-russia-war-internet-musk-starlink-space-x/

https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-blocks-starlink-in-crimea-amid-nuclear-fears-report-2022-10

Elon took the positive decision to take the action to geofence Crimea and the black sea fleet

His protection of the fleet will have caused hundreds of civilian deaths from missiles, untold hunger through blowing up grain ports - they blew up NATO state Romania and tried to start a war with Liberia. Their presence is escalatory and they directly had Elon's seal of protection

Elon brags about his direct phone calls with Putin

https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1579941475613229056

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1579879154463690752

[–]binaryblob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

It was my understanding that the Pentagon took over part of Star Link in order for Elon to not have to meet extra ITAR regulations. That's why the information that Starlink didn't work came as a surprise. Either Elon still had control (contrary to it being under the control of the Pentagon) or the Pentagon fucked up or the tech just doesn't work (highly unlikely). So, who controls Star Link in Ukraine and the Black Sea?

I wonder whether the US government briefs all the billionaires about what to do when Putin calls them, because an unsuspecting billionaire by definition is on a dead list after Putin has called. Either Putin will kill them if they don't cooperate or they will kill them when they stop cooperating or Putin will just make an example out of them and since the US government can't provide protection 24/7 it's just a matter of time. Then again, perhaps Putin is "fair" and only kills people that he knows with certainty that conspired against him. I don't know, but it seems fairly complicated to be a dictator. Putin is a small person. I really don't get why some random person in his vicinity doesn't just kill him. I am not necessarily calling for his death (because of forum regulations), but I just mean that I am surprised it doesn't happen. How does Putin live? Does he ever get outside? Is he just hiding in a bunker? How many people see him on a distance of less than one km? $10,000 Sniper rifles can kill easily at over a mile. So, what's the problem with a JFK-style killing?

I don't consider businessinsider to be a credible source. I am not saying it's straight up misinformation either, but it's just not that credible as a medium.

Elon took the positive decision to take the action to geofence Crimea and the black sea fleet

He claimed this was because of ITAR. There is an analogue with Iron Man which also didn't want his technology to be under the control of a government. I think the story in the media that Star Link is not meant as a weapons platform is a lie. I think it was uniquely designed to be a weapons platform, because of its architecture.

Star Link is like saying the Death Star was designed to be a vacation resort. Many properties of Star Link are exactly what a weapons designer would design if the goal were to build something for the military. This can be easily seen, because his competition does not use as many satellites for global coverage. Star Link is much more expensive than its civilian systems, which means its design must have had war in mind during its design.

Within 4 years after its inception the US Airforce already was involved. That seems awfully quickly, if Musk had no government contacts. I think Elon Musk is just a front for the military industrial complex/government to put weapons systems in space under the cover of "but we are helping poor people in Africa". The possibilities of a system like Starlink are endless. For example, you can build some extremely precise and virtually unjammable version of GPS for missile guidance. You could even add a space laser in some future version and nobody would know it's there until some day they are vaporized from space. It's also possible to use it as a sensor platform capable of tracking every missile launch of your adversaries from space. Since I can think of these options in a minute, it's likely they did too.

In this light, it would not surprise me if it was just a show to hide the fact that Starlink is just a US military asset. The same could be said for SpaceX, because why would an airforce general accept a fucking civilian to have better tech than they do. It doesn't make sense. Even for national security that's undesirable. "Commercial space" is just a lie, because the moment you become better than the military version your technology is acquired one way or another. Any technology that can fuck up the status quo is immediately kept secret (secret patents are a thing). For example, hydrogen cartridges are such a technology. Sometimes they get released again, but of course somewhere there are patents for things that are so far beyond the start-of-the-art that they need to be silenced.

In short, Starlink was designed to be a weapons platform and the ITAR defense is probably a lie.

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

You're suggesting a lot of conspiracy theories.

Here's six fake conspiracy theories that you just shoved in my face.

Normally I'll entertain the saidit chuds when they invent one or two fake conspiracies in their comments. But not this many at once.

Try and invent fewer fake conspiracy theories if you want me to take you seriously

Here's just a handful I identified from a scan read

Each are fake, totally invented conspiracies which come from your brain and have zero evidence

  1. You're theorising a conspiracy in which the pentagon have some level of secret control over starlink

  2. Elon has a secret itar reason for protecting the fleet instead of his publicly announced reason (it crosses Elon's imaginary red lines of escalation)

  3. Starlink was secretly designed as a weapon platform

  4. There's something weirdly fast about a four (!) year turnaround on star shield

  5. Elon is a secret front for the government

  6. Air force generals do not allow civilian aerospace to be better than them and secretly intervene

[–]binaryblob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

I don't have access to next generation classified spy satellites capable of recording the life of every person on Earth, so unfortunately, I don't have evidence for what I believe the most consistent explanation for the data.

You are free to disprove anything I have stated.

If I build a "birth day candle" with the explosive yield of a small nuclear weapon, most people would say I have designed a bomb. It's the same with Starlink. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

An efficient version of Starlink would look differently (feel free to find all its competitors and see whether you can determine which one I mean, so the only logical solution is that Starlink is a weapons platform, because there is no point in large investment without a return.

Any technology better than the military has, has historically been instantly banned. This is a fact. We do not live in a free society.

[–]Site_rly_sux 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

You are free to disprove anything I have stated.

Lol

the only logical solution is that Starlink is a weapons platform

I have no idea what you're suggesting really.

Rod from god?

Are you saying there's a chance I might see a rod from god during my lifetime? Oh please jesus

[–]binaryblob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

A weapons platform that is only a targeting platform or a military communications platform is still a weapons platform.

I don't think it's rod from God. The possibilities for Starlink are much more sophisticated. I have mentioned some, but if you don't have the creativity to fill in the blanks, you shouldn't be in this conversation, because it feels more like a monologue anyway.

[–]Site_rly_sux 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

It feels like creative fiction writing, because it is

[–]binaryblob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

You didn't explain how Starlink uses many thousands of satellites when their competition (capable of higher bandwidth) can do with tens. Is your explanation that SpaceX is retarded? Not saying I disagree, but at least say something.

[–]Site_rly_sux 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

I think you're asking me a question about bandwidth and satellite count? But you're phrasing it as "you didn't explain yet how..."

What data did you use to inform your opinion about bandwidth and satellite count? What observations did you make, that indicated something was amiss here.

Why the fuck are you expecting me to pull some answer out my ass? If you have seen data and made your own observations, then do your own research bro.

I'm not telling you that starlink is or isn't whatever you're imagining. DYOR and let us know how it goes

[–]binaryblob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

I invested for a while in a satellite company and as such I did the research. I know that Starlink sucks from a civilian service economic perspective. I invited you to explain to me how it would not suck (clearly impossible, because I already know it to be false). As such, there can be only one valid conclusion, which is that Starlink has government involvement hidden from the public eye.

Starlink is a great military system; it's a shitty civilian system. How is that so hard to comprehend? I am just looking at it as if I were a foreign military analyst.