this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
891 points (97.2% liked)

Ukraine

8285 readers
608 users here now

News and discussion related to Ukraine

*Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.

*No content depicting extreme violence or gore.

*Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title

*Combat videos containing any footage of a visible human must be flagged NSFW


Donate to support Ukraine's Defense

Donate to support Humanitarian Aid


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] expected_crayon@lemmy.world 197 points 1 year ago (10 children)

Yet he’s taking DoD money for Starlink in Ukraine. At what point do his antics turn from the craziness of a billionaire to espionage and being deemed a Russian asset?

[–] DarkenLM@kbin.social 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It would be hilarious for the US and/or the EU freeze his assets and punch his market influence to the ground if they accuse him of espionage.

[–] Zombiepirate@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Nationalizing the satellites that we paid for as a national security asset sure seems reasonable here, seeing as he likely broke a contract when he disabled them.

Imagine if Lockheed disabled an allied F16's targeting computer during a mission; there would be hell to pay.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Heisme@lemmy.world 111 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

The spin at the end is just fluffy bullshit. Starlink, from the get go, has had bandwidth reserved for military operations albeit US military operation but military operations nonetheless. The real question here is how and why did he know that operation was happening and what other operations has he known about/thwarted/or knowingly or unknowingly passed along information about.

[–] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe the same FSB agents that were driving his paranoia. Assuming they knew about the attack, they could get a bigger win by stopping it and removing Starlink from the equation at the same time, than by stopping the attack with military means.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago

Definitely. He used terms such as "Lenin's mistake" when talking about Ukraine which is rather specific to Russian nationalist ideology. You don't stumble across such a thing by accident.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Heresy_generator@kbin.social 93 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

“How am I in this war?” Musk asks Isaacson. “Starlink was not meant to be involved in wars. It was so people can watch Netflix and chill and get online for school and do good peaceful things, not drone strikes.”

Musk, transparent as ever, makes sure to tell his biographer that it's about peace, man, and has nothing to do with his love of authoritarian regimes.

[–] Sinnz@feddit.de 43 points 1 year ago

Nothing more peaceful than supporting an authoritarian war criminal 🥰

[–] TrismegistusMx@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

“How am I in this war?”

Bitch, you put yourself there!

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 90 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Why are enemies of the United States allowed to own national security infrastructure?

[–] owlinsight@lemm.ee 95 points 1 year ago (2 children)

They are allowed to be president and run for re-election too so I wouldn't hold my breath

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Grant_M@lemmy.ca 56 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Arrest this treasonous scumbag. Slava Ukraini!

[–] AphoticDev@lemmy.dbzer0.com 38 points 1 year ago (8 children)

As much as I despise Musk for being a total piece of shit, this isn't treason. Technically, we aren't even allies with Ukraine. The argument could certainly be made that this works against the interests of the United States, but that alone isn't treason because it isn't a crime for citizens to oppose the US, especially when it's private property the US is being lent. Because at that time, the US hadn't signed a contract with Musk yet.

If he did this again, then it would be a breach of contract, but still wouldn't be treason. People being charged with treason is very rare, because it's a such a high bar to meet.

[–] Grant_M@lemmy.ca 41 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This guy aided the Kremlin. He's helping russians in their genocide of Ukrainian children. Fuck that pile of shit and lock him up.

[–] AphoticDev@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 1 year ago (16 children)

I agree. I'm just saying, he's not guilty of treason.

load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] agent_flounder@lemmy.one 52 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] PseudoSpock@lemmy.dbzer0.com 52 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Isn't it illegal to screw with the military actions of the U.S. ... and its allies?!!?

[–] cantstopthesignal@sh.itjust.works 25 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I don't think what he did was illegal per se, but he is definitely positioning himself against US geopolitical interests, which is a really bad idea if you are a US citizen, living in the United States. If he were to give away any military secrets that pass through star link, which I'm sure Russia will inevitably ask him to do, he will get arrested for espionage. He should tread very carefully.

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 15 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Poor people get arrested. Rich people get to walk free and then get a slap on the wrist.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] _number8_@lemmy.world 52 points 1 year ago (2 children)

this is starting to give comic book villan

[–] Taako_Tuesday@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 year ago

Yeah for real, this straight up sounds like the setup for an Iron Man villain or something

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Zombiepirate@lemmy.world 40 points 1 year ago

Musk was reportedly motivated to foil the attack out of concern that a strike on Crimea would constitute a “mini-Pearl Harbor” and lead to Russia retaliating with nuclear weapons

So glad the blue-checks get to dictate our foreign policy now.

What was all that DoD money for? A suggestion box?

[–] Fapper_McFapper@lemmy.world 39 points 1 year ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] sculd@beehaw.org 31 points 1 year ago

Seriously the US needs to take Starlink away from Musk. Its a national security issue at this point.

[–] skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 27 points 1 year ago
[–] Wollang@sh.itjust.works 27 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Took longer than I thought it would for Musk to do this. Been waiting for it since he threw his little fit about starlink in Ukraine was costing him money.

Then he said he’s talked to Putin directly.

Seriously someone reign this dude in, somehow, before he really fucks shit up.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] acastcandream@beehaw.org 23 points 1 year ago

Mr. Free Speech wants to decide what we can and can’t use our ISP’s for eh?

[–] Krauerking@lemy.lol 22 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Man the old geezers really think they still have absolute control over everything and don't realize the ultra wealthy they have enabled are getting and have been operating far beyond the control of the western governments.

God the fucking narcissism of those in charge to think that they still rule with perfect wisdom. I'm waiting for when these companies that the US built leave and take up residence with new hot authoritarian countries and leave misery poverty in their wake.

Singular rich people should not have this much say.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Furbag@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

As if I needed another reason to hate this piece of shit.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Holy shit! I'm guessing fighting (even in an EW capacity) for a US adversary is actually a criminal offence, or something similar.

Thanks for the original source, OP. It's hard to trust just a headline these days.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

OP linked to a site that regosted half of the original article, so here's the full one:

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/09/07/politics/elon-musk-biography-walter-isaacson-ukraine-starlink/index.html

[–] vandermouche@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago

As an oligarch, he stands with the other Russian oligarch who need and benefit from this war. If the rouble is at an historical low, the ones who have money in other currencies have an historical purchasing power in Russia...

[–] carpelbridgesyndrome@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Defense production act takeover when?

[–] collegefurtrader@discuss.tchncs.de 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

“How am I in this war?” Musk asked Isaacson. “Starlink was not meant to be involved in wars. It was so people can watch Netflix and chill and get online for school and do good peaceful things, not drone strikes.”

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] harcesz@szmer.info 11 points 1 year ago

I just wonder how much it cost Kremlin to stop the sinking of their fleet?

load more comments
view more: next ›