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.
We are calling him a traitor for having Starlink turned off in Ukraine to protect Russia from a counter attack.
Last I heard, he simply didn’t turn it on when Ukraine asked him to, before the DoD had explicitly contracted him to support Ukraine’s military. The narrative of him throwing a switch mid-attack and laughing maniacally as Ukrainian drones drifted helplessly to shore has been spreading like wildfire but that seems to be based on a quote from one guy who has since walked it back.
Is there some Fediverse equivalent to /r/enoughmuskspam? My feed is starting to get flooded with these five-minute-hates of Elon Musk and it’s wearying.
Nope, Starlink was already in use. Musk used his position as CEO of Starlink to cut off service to Ukraine. But only long enough to interrupt a counter attack on the Russian fleet. Once the opportunity had passed he had it turned back on.
His intentions are obvious.
traitor to whom?
The country he lives in, and the military that paid to have the service of his business to be used … by the military.
At most that is breach of contract. Definitely not traitorous.
That’s because you identify with the US empire, which is not, and never was, on your team. And neither was Musk.
Musk isn’t even against the US empire, he just didn’t want to escalate. The White House regularly does (not) do a thing because they don’t want to escalate. They’re all traitors to the US too, are they?
Treason is not wanting total war, got it.
If Musk really wants to prevent escalation then he should help the US and it’s allies stop Russia from invading other countries as they have been doing for decades.
Russia is starting total war. Musk is helping them continue by preventing efforts to stop Russia.
Wait, you think the country that has by far done the most invasions should be supported to stop *checks notes* an invasion? This is like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse. And apparently by any means necessary too.
I wonder what would have happened if the US’s whole Mediterranean fleet were destroyed thanks to Russian help during one of their “humanitarian interventions”. I wonder if you were also moralizing about the need to start WW3 in those situations?
Just because the US is doing illegal invasions of sovereign nations, doesn’t mean Russia is allowed to.
Yes, Russia should stop invading and get the fuck back to their own country. Whatever you want to whine about someone else doing is irrelevant. Russia invaded and can gtfo or die.
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.
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.
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.