Elon Musk’s financial interests put him in a position of having his own personal foreign policy, but new reporting shows that whether it’s manufacturing in China or the Starlink network being used in Ukraine, Musk’s decisions can run counter to stated US policy.

  • mwguy@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Civilian space assets cannot be used for warfare or they become legitimate targets in a war. When the US commits to defending and replenishing starlink satellites lost in conflict I’ll blame Musk for not enabling his network to be used for warfare.

    • drewdarko@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The Ukraine military was already using starlink. Starlink agreed to provide their service to the Ukraine military as a US military contractor with the US paying the bill.

      So they can do that because they have already done that.

      The US has committed to defending and replenishing Starlink because they’ve been doing that by protecting the antennas and replacing them as they get attacked.

      Again. Starlink already agreed to be used in Ukraine and at the time that Musk interrupted service to the Ukrainian military it had been in use for a long time.

      Musk only interrupted service long enough to prevent the counter attack on Russia. Then agreed to turn it back on after the opportunity for a counter attack had passed.

      Seems pretty obvious that Musk stepped in to help Russia as a traitor to the US.

      • mwguy@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        If Congress declared war or maybe an Authorization for Use of Force (like Iraq/Afghanistan) it would be fair to consider him a traitor. Until then not really.