Musk’s Denial of Ukraine’s Starlink Request Prompts Senate Probe

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-09-14/elon-musk-s-denial-of-ukraine-s-starlink-request-prompts-senate-query

by c420 • 3 years ago

24 43 3 years ago

bloomberg.com

archo• 3 years ago

https://archive.is/ctNVZ

ImJamal14• 3 years ago

I don't have a subscription to Blomberg and the archive link isn't working for me, but this seems ridiculous.

Musk and the SpaceX president have been consistently saying they doesn't want Starlink to be used for offensive purposes. If I recall correctly they explicitly made it clear when he gave the dishes to Ukraine what their position was. Even the terms of use say to not use for offensive purposes.

justinclift5• 3 years ago

To be clear, you're saying that taking the opportunity to remove opposition assets when they're attacking you directly is ok, but removing them otherwise (breaking blockades, supply chains, reinforcements, etc) is not on?

ImJamal14• 3 years ago

I'm not saying anything of the sort. I'm saying what Musk's views are.

mola• 3 years ago

Some would say that defending your country against an occupier is a defensive operation....

ImJamal14• 3 years ago

Some might, but Musk doesn't. I don't see why he should be forced to provide a service for an action that the Ukrainians agreed not to use it for.

salawat• 3 years ago

Your Terms of Service do not superscede your host country's foreign policy goals.

This may come as a surprise to some who apparently never took, or slept through civics, but as it so happens, the U.S. Federal Government has absolute, uncontested, and final say in terms of things like foreign policy. You do not get to be selective on that front.

State level anti-BDS laws are worth as much as toilet paper, but if the President has negotiated our support behind an ally, I am not aware of anything that allows you to independently pull back that support as a private citizen.

If this is going to turn into the landmark case, that's cool; but there it is very cut and dry who gets final on things like this. And again, these are very perilous waters to test, as a finding of aiding and abetting a foreign adversary of the United States is literally the only circumstance where the label treason is applicable.

Mr. Musk, you are not the diplomatic arm of the United States. Usurp at your own peril.

ImJamal14• 3 years ago

I'm quite confused as to your post. Are you suggesting that Musk is obligated to promote the US' foreign policy goals? If he never decided to provide Starlinks dishes to the Ukrainians would you think he is obligated to provide them or is it once he provided them he has to do everything the current administration wants?

Do you hold this position with other wars? If Musk provided Starlinks in Afghanistan (pre pullout) would he be obligated to allow the Afghan government use them to attack the Taliban? What if he gave it to the Israeli government. Should he be forced to allow the use in attacking the Palestinians?

omscs99• 3 years ago

Starlink isn’t a charity. If the DoD wants to use their resources, then they should negotiate with them as they would with any other business

rlt• 3 years ago

Your Terms of Service do not superscede your host country's foreign policy goals.

I must have missed the part where the United States government requested Starlink be activated in Crimea.

Elon has explicitly stated if the request came from the US government he would have complied. It did not. It came from the Ukrainian government, which is not his host country. The US government knows how to contact Elon and could have done so if they wanted him to do it. https://youtu.be/tKqJ5-kkUGk?t=332

If Ukraine had asked SpaceX for a Falcon 9 they wanted to crash into the Kremlin should they have given it to them?

stephenr7• 3 years ago

... please explain to all of us, how fighting an invading/occupying force is an "offensive" purpose?

TheLoafOfBread• 3 years ago

It is offensive to Putin, who probably has compromising documents on Musk. Musk is very controversial, so finding something very damaging won't be that hard. Like his unclear connection to Epstein which he was to be subpoenaed for few month ago.

ImJamal14• 3 years ago

I'm not Musk, but I assume it is based on who started each conflict within the war. If Russia moves troops further into Ukraine stopping that push would be defensive. If Ukraine tries to remove Russian troops that would be offensive. Maybe that is arbitrary, but it is what the Ukrainians agreed to.

victortan83• 3 years ago

All these arguments about what Musk should have done are pointless

The important question is, what would the Pentagon have done? Did they explicitly tell Musk to allow Starlink activation in Crimea to allow the attack on Russian fleet? If not, he was absolutely right not to activate Starlink over Crimea

mgiannopoulos4• 3 years ago

The Pentagon had nothing to do with this. The Ukrainians made a request to Musk directly.

hulitu• 3 years ago

Yeah, right.

mgiannopoulos4• 3 years ago

Musk has commented already in public that if the request came from the US Department of Defence, he would comply. The US has an embargo on exporting products/services to Crimea.

inemesitaffia2• 3 years ago

He said Biden

mgiannopoulos4• 3 years ago

Is there a big difference?

Musk’s Denial of Ukraine’s Starlink Request Prompts Senate Probe

Related Stories