• @jarfil
    link
    -20
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    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.

      • @jarfil
        link
        -17
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Crimea is Ukraine

        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?

        that’s not how sanctions work at all

        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.

          • @jarfil
            link
            -11 year ago

            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.

    • @Kittengineer
      link
      31 year ago

      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…

      • @jarfil
        link
        -91 year ago

        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.

        • @Kittengineer
          link
          1
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          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

          • @jarfil
            link
            11 year ago

            What against US policy?

            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.

            • @Kittengineer
              link
              11 year ago

              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.

              • @jarfil
                link
                01 year ago

                What’s your point, that I should write an article? 🙄

                • @Kittengineer
                  link
                  01 year ago

                  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.

                  • @jarfil
                    link
                    -11 year ago

                    Indeed, quite incredible. Maybe I don’t get paid by the click, don’t have an agenda, and don’t blindly follow those who do? Guess only time will tell.

    • @banneryear1868
      link
      11 year ago

      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.