War in Ukraine
- Thread starter JDTAY
- Start date
If true, it was faster than I thought.
Prigozhin rumored dead in a private jet when flying from Moscow to St. Petersburg.
His friend Sergey "General Armaggedon" Surovikin was replaced and rumored in house arrest.
Edit. I just read that Prigozhin already died in an aviation accident on 2019-10-13. So it's not the first time this goes in the news. I can believe anything (an accident, an assassination by Kremlin, an assassination by some competitor, a faked death to avoid prosecution, a NATO attack, a rebel group strike...)
Prigozhin rumored dead in a private jet when flying from Moscow to St. Petersburg.
His friend Sergey "General Armaggedon" Surovikin was replaced and rumored in house arrest.
Edit. I just read that Prigozhin already died in an aviation accident on 2019-10-13. So it's not the first time this goes in the news. I can believe anything (an accident, an assassination by Kremlin, an assassination by some competitor, a faked death to avoid prosecution, a NATO attack, a rebel group strike...)
Last edited:
TeDaDeS
Forum Addict!
I did hear that if you work for the Russian government the travel to Crimea is paid, so you get it for free.
I appears to be confirmed. Who knows if later we found out it was staged, but for now it appears to be true.
Now I'm puzzled. Earlier I heard Musk was collaborative with Ukraine, once offering free Starlink support, and later warning to discontinue it, and then the USA bought many terminals for Ukraine and I'm guessing paid for service.
And now a leak says he interrupted service to frustrate an Ukraine attack against the Russian fleet in Sevastopol ?
I'm fine with not wanting your gear used in wars, but why do you change your mind in the middle of an attack ? Because the Russians convince you they'll nuke somewhere ?
I mean that's an argument, but they've been telling that forever. If that's credible and too strong a threat now it was so then...
And saying the planned attack on Sevastopol was like Pearl Harbour is nuts. AFAIK the USA was neutral before Pearl Harbour and hadn't attacked Japan (I'm not trying to justify Hiroshima or Nagasaki).
Russia had attacked Ukraine since 2014 and much more violently and openly in 2022.
Or was just to show off and extort payment or favors from either Ukraine or the USA? ("look what I can do to you if we don't agree").
They don't tell the exact date of the incident (2022), it might be when he said he'd discontinue Starlink service, and maybe the USA government intervened then.
But then the source is a biography to be available next week, in which Musk says (I guess that'd be in 2023) that Starlink is not for war.
But it is being used for war in 2023, isn't it? The CNN video clip sounds inconsistent like Musk is so very powerful, but Starlink is used in war against his will or something. (but then he'd not be that powerful, is he?)
I guess trying to understand other people's minds is an exercise in frustration...
And now a leak says he interrupted service to frustrate an Ukraine attack against the Russian fleet in Sevastopol ?
I'm fine with not wanting your gear used in wars, but why do you change your mind in the middle of an attack ? Because the Russians convince you they'll nuke somewhere ?
I mean that's an argument, but they've been telling that forever. If that's credible and too strong a threat now it was so then...
And saying the planned attack on Sevastopol was like Pearl Harbour is nuts. AFAIK the USA was neutral before Pearl Harbour and hadn't attacked Japan (I'm not trying to justify Hiroshima or Nagasaki).
Russia had attacked Ukraine since 2014 and much more violently and openly in 2022.
Or was just to show off and extort payment or favors from either Ukraine or the USA? ("look what I can do to you if we don't agree").
They don't tell the exact date of the incident (2022), it might be when he said he'd discontinue Starlink service, and maybe the USA government intervened then.
But then the source is a biography to be available next week, in which Musk says (I guess that'd be in 2023) that Starlink is not for war.
But it is being used for war in 2023, isn't it? The CNN video clip sounds inconsistent like Musk is so very powerful, but Starlink is used in war against his will or something. (but then he'd not be that powerful, is he?)
I guess trying to understand other people's minds is an exercise in frustration...
TeDaDeS
Forum Addict!
As far as I remember Elon wants to provide internet to Ukraine but not for the purpose of waging war, especially in disputed territory.
Some news posts from the past:
"SpaceX president Gwynne Sholtwell said that Ukraine’s military will be unable to use the space-based internet to control drones in the region during the country’s war with Russia."
Source:
SpaceX limits Starlink use in Ukraine, company president says
Use of space internet to help defend country from Russia deemed to go against terms of service
www.aol.com
"'There are things that we can do to limit their ability to do that,' she said, referring to Starlink's use with drones. 'There are things that we can do, and have done.'"
Source: https://www.reuters.com/business/ae...internet-drones-company-president-2023-02-09/
Thank you. I missed that.
Some news posts from the past:
"SpaceX president Gwynne Sholtwell said that Ukraine’s military will be unable to use the space-based internet to control drones in the region during the country’s war with Russia."
Source:
SpaceX limits Starlink use in Ukraine, company president says
Use of space internet to help defend country from Russia deemed to go against terms of service
I find this hypocritical. What do they expect the military to do, under invasion, if not offensive operations ? Tilk Tok dance challenges ?
You can't put it on a drone to control it remotely but you can put it on a tank to transmit orders to crew?
I know long range weapons is more or less tabu, and putting a Starlink dish in a drone would give it long range (depending on fuel tank or batteries , etc.).
For example long range by video/sensors remote control even when GPS is jammed, etc.
But at least inside the borders of Ukraine (I believe licences and operation is country by country) it's either you give it to the military or you don't.
And if you don't I wonder how do you stop the military to steal it from the civilians if they want. So it's either you operate in the country or you don't.
That's pretending Starlink knows where the front line is at every minute. Doesn't make much sense. The front line changes, is not terribly well defined and for what it is it may even be secret, or there may be attempts to keep it somewhat secret.
And even if Starlink wouldn't be damned just by drawing the front line, having this criteria amounts to acknowledging the invasion.
Like what ? Having the Ukraine government fill a form to add a village to the coverage area everytime their soldiers plant a flag ?
And having the Russian government fill a form to tell Starlink to remove a recently invaded village from coverage ?
And then having a team inside Starlink deciding on whether the form is correct and what's really allowed territory ?
Or having a team approving a military plan of a foreign nation for each mission ?
If they're trying not to be too involved in the war, they are going to get just the opposite.
But it's similar to the NATO stance of not being in war despite sending weapons, giving training, most likely intelligence and satellite images, and now and then cleaning up debris on NATO land and burying the occasional dead NATO citizen.
So it's likely not Musk's decision. I hope he doesn't start a private military corporation once he's bored with twitter...
TeDaDeS
Forum Addict!
I don't think Elon minds it that much, it's just that there are additional request that explicitly would make the company complicit to the war. Something that can influence his other businesses like Telsa for example.
And I understand, you either don't cooperate at all or you help. But I guess there are neutral partners in everything (like China still selling commercial drones).
I don't know what the Ukranians intended with their coverage request for Sevastopol, but if it is as supposed sinking the Russian fllet, I fail to see how that is a major act of war and conflict escalation and that same fleet sailing off to launch missiles on Ukranian cities is not.
Musk is just playing general Patton, whether he knows it or not.
Musk is just playing general Patton, whether he knows it or not.
TeDaDeS
Forum Addict!
Sevastopol is south-Crimea, I would label it far into disputed area. There would be no good reason to provide internet for Ukrainians in this area. At the time Elon was financing everything by himself, now the military is doing this. So I assume that at the time it was a reason also to not allow these activities. Having Starlink used by the military makes them also valid targets, so I assume that is also not something Elon wanted.
Kyiv, Chernobyl, Kharkiv, Odesa, Izum, Summy, Kherson... they're all disputed areas. Does Starlink work in Kupiansk? Even Lviv got bombed. Putin considers Zelensky an illegitimate leader, a nazi jew, a western puppet and who knows what else, and he tries to push into Ukraine as far as he can.
Just as much as he considers Sevastopol a part of Russia Federation. And Zelensky tries to push into Crimea as far as he can.
UN would consider Crimea part of Ukraine, not Russia.
Then don't provide service in Ukraine. How can you as a private enterprise define Ukraine if you don't ask the UN ? asking Putin ?
A private enterprise can decide where they provide their services, but they most likely need government approval and a private enterprise doesn't get to draw borders, so they're basically working from the assumption SpaceX and USA government are more decisive than the Ukranian government. Ukraine could forbid Starlink service if it doesn't cover all of Ukraine, but Elon's counting that would harm them more than help them.
So they're denying Ukraine government authority because (they think) they can. They're giving themselves authority above world governments. Not very reassuring for democracy.
Starlink is already a valid target. Putin will attack it or not depending on whether he can or how much that harms himself, not Elon, StarX, USA or even Russia.
Going out in a limb one could say they haven't attacked it because they infiltrated it and it's more useful for them if it stays working. Or because Kessler syndrome is more than he can afford. Or because his space force can't source a certain joint or bolt some space weapon needs to be operational. Or because Putin is paranoid on whether he should trust Roscosmos executives. Who knows?
I can understand that USA government is forcing Elon to provide some service or even partial service to Ukraine. But then rationalising it is just assuming guilt.
Just say he's following his government orders and be done with it.
Last edited:
TeDaDeS
Forum Addict!
Crimea has been occupied for multiple years now by Russia and some countries even see it as part of Russia. Some other parts are recently occupied.
The cities you mention are still Ukrainian and Ukrainians live there, they had power outages and lack of internet. The lack of internet was fixed by Starlink.
And Starlink was even planning to roll-out in Ukraine anyway, the invasion only made this process go faster.
Requesting Starlink to operate in Russian territory for the sake of waging war doesn't sound like a reasonable request to me, there is the difference I think: do you see Crimea as Russian or disputed territory. If you see it as 100% Ukrainian it makes sense you don't distinguish but I think most people would disagree with you on that point. Providing internet there is also helping Russians.
Starlink is a privately owned company which wasn't working for the military. So it's not unreasonable to lack the enthusiasm to actively contribute to a war. As the owner of a company you can get lawsuits if you aren't financially responsible with your company.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were 100% justified.
That's an odd criteria. But even if it was a fair criterium, it's not for a private company to decide.
Kherson was occupied. Chernobyl was occupied. Sumy was occupied. Kharkiv was occupied. By your logic they were Russian. Russians likely lived there even before occupation. Ukranians died there, Russians died there, and Ukranians unwilling fled from there or where abducted. Some Russians must have been captured there too.
I guess Ukranians still live in Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk. I'm sure Ukranians live in the occupied parts of Kherson and Zaporzhzhia. Those Ukranians can't possibly get better access to internet by anything SpaceX does, since they can hardly get Starlink terminals.
I don't care what is Russia and what is Ukraine. I'm no one to decide who is Russian or who is Ukranian, or where borders are. I wish this could be settled by fair referendums, but I don't know how those would be possible now or in a foreseeable future, since people in many territories have been forced out and others brought in. And fair choice should not be threatened by fear of who has the stronger army or police. I don't think Russia is a democracy, or any country under martial law is, so neither Ukraine is now.
So the only thing we have left for deciding is international law. Sad as it is.
It could as well have stopped it. It only went faster because the Ukranian government agreed, hopefully. I never heard the Ukranian government say Crimea is Russian after 7 years occupation.
What I think is irrelevant. I don't live there. What most people think is irrelevant. What anyone outside Crimea thinks is irrelevant, maybe except refugees who once lived there. But Musk does not live there either. Why should he decide ?
He says the war is nonsense, front line hardly moves and lots of Russians and Ukranians die for no reason. I 100% agree. But that does not mean he has a right to impose a truce or decide where to service. Just as he can't decide who wins, or how the stupid situation should be solved. It's just not his job.
Starlink is contributing to a war. It just has a weird criterium on how much to contribute.
Being financially responsible means getting the heck out of there. And I'm not sure how much financial responsibility could be enforced in such a nightmarish setting as this. Lots of CEOs get by with very political agendas and/or shitty financial management. And the whole economy is a joke.
So I don't say SpaceX should get out of Ukraine. Or shouldn't.
Elon just thinks he's above law. And unfortunatedly he might be. Time will tell. But that won't make it fair or just or reasonable.
Powerplays are real and sometimes needed. They're just not moral and should not be sold as so.
Last edited:
TeDaDeS
Forum Addict!
That's a mood point. It's literally occupied and physically impossible for a regular Ukrainian to (safely) pass into Crimea to install internet ground stations there.
That's your logic. With that logic the US would still be owned by the natives.
A countries borders exist if others agree to them, hence there is a dispute. Some countries agree on the new borders but most don't.
Musk decided he wasn't going to put any effort into adding coverage of south Crimea to Starlink. He's asked to aid Ukraine in assaults on Crimea and he disagreed, it didn't align with his purpose of providing internet to Ukraine.
Even if you agree infrastructure can be used for anything, good or bad, putting in additional effort to create infrastructure is not always a reasonable request. He might not have been paid to do those things in the first place.
How does one contribute to a war. By merely existing and not trying to stop it? Or deciding you want to help Ukrainians but not their war? Somewhere is a line, but adding features to Starlink with the purpose or attacking Russia sounds like crossing that border.
Me to.
As it should be.
SpaceX is not a country.
I don't think you or I know the exact agreements. But I doubt the Ukranian or USA governments agreed that Crimea is not Ukraine and should have no service. So SpaceX would have been paid for the service in the international recognized Ukranian territories. But that's my guess, I don't have the particular info.
Providing communications to the Ukranian army at a time Ukraine is in war contributes to a war. Where exactly one picks to do so does not change the fact.
What ? I didn't say anything about cakes. And do you miss and "o" or do you mean I should send some cake to you ? Buy or bake your own cake, I'm not sending any to you, sorry.
TeDaDeS
Forum Addict!
Well, they offer internet to Ukraine which is everyone not only the army. But having infrastructure purely used for the army is in my opinion different.
I understand, it's a nice cake you must have. I added something to my post to agree on something with you. And now I feel sad there was an actual chance of getting cake. I'll make a cake tomorrow and you're free to have a piece.
TeDaDeS
Forum Addict!
Someone made a very accurate simulation regarding the Ukraine war. It features a lot of shooting but also washing machines and toilets.
Confuzzled
Very Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2018
- Messages
- 299
I sympathize with your viewpoint.
There isn't a great history for that.
A 'great power' invaded a neighbouring country back in 1864, and annexed a great deal of land. 55 years later, after the successor state to the great power lost a large war, there were several referendums (plebiscites) in the annexed area to see who the then population wanted to be ruled by. As a result of a policy of encouraging migration into the annexed areas by the great power, the result was only a part of the annexed area voted to return to the country from which it was annexed. (This is simplifying a notoriously complicated situation, but there are a lot of parallels with the situation in Ukraine)
You can see that Russia's policy is to move Russian-speaking Russian nationals into the annexed areas of Ukraine, while simultaneously forcibly moving Ukrainian-speaking Ukrainian nationals into Russia, Producing a fair referendum would be difficult. In addition, a lot of the population of Luhansk and Donetsk are Russian-speaking with strong ties to Russia and welcomed the annexation by Russia, as did a proportion of Russian-speakers in Crimea. It isn't a simple situation. The war in Ukraine has both resulted from and obscured some very real disputes between groups within Ukraine that can loosely (and inaccurately) be described as Russian-speakers in South and East, and Ukrainian-speakers everywhere else.
Essentially, if you put facts on the ground, you can appropriate a lot of land from people unable to defend themselves. It doesn't matter how many UN diplomats wring their hands, military force has a power to compel all of its own.
Now I read that a year ago a RAF surveillance plane was almost shot down over the Black Sea by a Russian pilot who allegedly misunderstood orders.
That's in addition to two Polish citizens dead, drone debris on Romania, Russia threatening civilian ships in Bulgarian Black Sea economic zone, an USA unmanned aircraft downed over the Black Sea, etc.
So, being a pacifist as I am I should be happy that despite the many wars the world has right now, there isn't a declared, open war between NATO and Russia yet.
Then, why the hell my curious mind can't stop wondering why a surveillance plane needs a crew of 30 ?
Do they shoot polaroids manually or what ? Do they listen to radio, translate on board, take notes on paper and send them home on Morse code?
That's in addition to two Polish citizens dead, drone debris on Romania, Russia threatening civilian ships in Bulgarian Black Sea economic zone, an USA unmanned aircraft downed over the Black Sea, etc.
So, being a pacifist as I am I should be happy that despite the many wars the world has right now, there isn't a declared, open war between NATO and Russia yet.
Then, why the hell my curious mind can't stop wondering why a surveillance plane needs a crew of 30 ?
Do they shoot polaroids manually or what ? Do they listen to radio, translate on board, take notes on paper and send them home on Morse code?
There's that small village. 77 people lived there before the war. They were all fled before the Russians came. Now the Ukranians took back the place after so long a struggle And they kind of complain that they can't plant their flag because there's no longer anything left to plant it on.
Man, are wars absurd!
Man, are wars absurd!
