Ukraine

[Meconium]

Same take on the to much news but at some point I believe Russia will bail because it's inevitable.

[neufox47]

Same take on the to much news but at some point I believe Russia will bail because it's inevitable.

Only if Putin falls though right? I don’t see a path for him to withdraw and stay in power.

[Harry]

Putin is like a cockroach, he will stay in power no matter what happens.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Meconium]

Only if Putin falls though right? I don’t see a path for him to withdraw and stay in power.

Isolate Crimea, full drop of the Kerch Bridge and sever the Crimea land corridor.
Above is feasible before winter, if not severed, land corridor can essentially be shut down with artillery.

M26 and M39 for key targets in Crimea. Figure M26 will probably show up shortly, M39 would be the game changer and I believe will also show up.

With Crimea under siege, Putin's dreams are crushed, he will die or be killed because of the failure.

Biden will need to okay the M26/39 to time the success with the elections ramping up.
Abrams and F16’s for show and the M26/39 for the true dirty work.

[MultiVerse]

A year ago this week Ukraine conducted one of the most successful maneuver warfare campaigns in modern history, liberating 6,000 square km in a week. The Russian army was routed and but for running out of ammo and Starlink cut off who knows how much more territory might've been freed.

[Meadow Skipper]

This is, IMHO, really fucked up.
Elon Musk Acknowledges Withholding Satellite Service to Thwart Ukrainian Attack

X-posted to the Elon is a clown thread.

[skinipenem]

This is, IMHO, really fucked up.
Elon Musk Acknowledges Withholding Satellite Service to Thwart Ukrainian Attack

X-posted to the Elon is a clown thread.

Wow. That is fascinating. What an incredible amount of power and influence. Clearly, more complex than described in the nyt.

Sent from my SM-S908U1 using Tapatalk

[oldnew_guy]

I assume most oligarchs (politely called billionaires in the US) exert this sort of influence over governments and geopolitical events (although most of the rest of them are not nearly as loud about it), which is why we should rein them in significantly.

The fact that Musk can just end a military operation with the snap of his fingers is unacceptable, IMO. I do wonder if there is more to meets the eye with regards to who else had influence in this decision (IE - did the US gov concur with this decision?).

Fascinating that this is coming out a year after the fact. We knew he was/is screwing around with access to Starlink and has some, lets say interesting ideas about the conflict.

Does anyone know if the US could use the DPA to force Starlink to provide service?

[From_the_NEK]

Does anyone know if the US could use the DPA to force Starlink to provide service?

Since it isn't a war the US is actually fighting in, I would think the DPA has no jurisdiction here.

[neufox47]

Since it isn't a war the US is actually fighting in, I would think the DPA has no jurisdiction here.

I don’t think the DPA requires the US to be at war or engaged, just for the purposes of “national defense”.

DPA authorities are used to promote the national defense. “National defense” is defined in section 702 of the DPA as programs for military and energy production or construction, military or critical infrastructure assistance to any foreign nation, homeland security, stockpiling, space, and any directly related activity. Such term includes emergency preparedness activities conducted pursuant to title VI of The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act [42 U.S.C. 5195 et seq.] and critical infrastructure protection and restoration.

https://www.fema.gov/disaster/defens...tional_defense

https://www.fema.gov/disaster/defens...onal%20defense.

[J. Barron DeJong]

https://x.com/kasparov63/status/1700...sR_NcRK2VkCfkg

[grinch]

Xi prob threaten to shut off his taps if he didnt shut off UA's taps

Sent from my SM-A536W using TGR Forums mobile app

[MultiVerse]

The simplest explanation for Musk's behavior is that Dmitry Medvede successfully trolled Elon with harbingers of nuclear doom. Musk isn't the only one who fell into the Russian propaganda bubble.

[subtle plague]

The simplest explanation for Musk's behavior is that Dmitry Medvede successful trolled Elon with harbingers of nuclear doom.

Was it Thursday?

[MultiVerse]

Yesterday’s blue check independent thinkers are today’s tankies. Russia & Q Anon for the win.



Conspiracy, convergence. Putin earlier this week, "The Western masters placed an ethnic Jew, a person with Jewish roots, at the head of Ukraine and this is how, in my opinion, they cover up the anti-human essence that is the foundation of the modern Ukrainian state."

[jono]

What's new about the Starlink story? Is it just the NYT catching up to what was being discussed on Twitter last year? Took a year to dig in and get clickable quotes?

Elon was defending geo-fencing Ukraine out of their own territory back when he was pushing a "peace plan" that gave Crimea to Russia, so this seems like old news to me so far.

[MultiVerse]

Both catching up and new info about the mysterious, at the time, sea drones that washed up on Crimean beaches last year. Reportedly, Musk was watching the Ukrainian drones approach Sevastopol in real time on his laptop and decided to cut off the Starlink connection causing the drones to wash ashore. An initial surprise attack would have in al likelihood been much more effective than subsequent strikes for which the Russian navy had time to prepare.


Note: before anyone defends Musk, consider the fact that attacking military assets of a country that invaded you is fair game and not an escalation.

[twat]

Was it Thursday?

No Wednesday.

[californiagrown]

and decided to cut off the Starlink connection

Was the connection cutoff? The article and Musk's statement indicate that he didnt provide extended signal coverage when asked to by the UKR govt, not that he cut off the signal.

There is a big difference there between outright aiding and abetting the russians, vs not aiding and abetting a military strike on russia. Not defending musk either way, but one is a lot worse than the other.

[MultiVerse]

Coverage was turned off as the drones were approaching occupied Crimea, " Throughout the evening and into the night, he personally took charge of the situation. Allowing the use of Starlink for the attack, he concluded, could be a disaster for the world. So he secretly told his engineers to turn off coverage within 100 kilometers of the Crimean coast. As a result, when the Ukrainian drone subs got near the Russian fleet in Sevastopol, they lost connectivity and washed ashore harmlessly."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...ssia-invasion/

[Buster Highmen]

Was the connection cutoff? The article and Musk's statement indicate that he didnt provide extended signal coverage when asked to by the UKR govt, not that he cut off the signal.

There is a big difference there between outright aiding and abetting the russians, vs not aiding and abetting a military strike on russia. Not defending musk either way, but one is a lot worse than the other.

First report I read had that explanation.
Second report I read claimed that Musk intentionally disabled the coverage.

Heisenberg applies.

[MultiVerse]

The truth is not somewhere in the middle. According to Musk's biographer Walter Isaacson who had direct access, Musk himself explained he cut off coverage in real time. You guys might be thinking of a different time when Musk geofenced Starlink coverage during Ukraine's Kharkiv offensive.

[Skistack]

Fuck that guy.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[chaka]

Fuck that guy.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

this. It's incredible to me people can be so apathetic and still buy his cars... "It's a good deal, all CEO's are dicks, who cares?"

[J. Barron DeJong]

The truth is not somewhere in the middle. According to Musk's biographer Walter Isaacson who had direct access, Musk himself explained he cut off coverage in real time. You guys might be thinking of a different time when Musk geofenced Starlink coverage during Ukraine's Kharkiv offensive.

Here is Elon Musk's version of the story about how and why Starlink satellite coverage around Crimea was inactive when the Ukrainian


government wanted to use it to guide a drone attack on the Russian navy:




And here is Walter Isaacson's version:

Although he had readily supported Ukraine, he believed it was reckless for Ukraine to launch an attack on Crimea, which Russia had annexed in 2014....The [Russian] ambassador had explicitly told him that a Ukrainian attack on Crimea would lead to a nuclear response. Musk explained to me in great detail, as I stood behind the bleachers, the Russian laws and doctrines that decreed such a response.
Throughout the evening and into the night, he personally took charge of the situation. Allowing the use of Starlink for the attack, he concluded, could be a disaster for the world. So he secretly told his engineers to turn off coverage within 100 kilometers of the Crimean coast. As a result, when the Ukrainian drone subs got near the Russian fleet in Sevastopol, they lost connectivity and washed ashore harmlessly.

In Musk's version, he was asked to activate coverage around Crimea to support an "obvious" Ukrainian attack. In Isaacson's version, he deactivated coverage that already existed and didn't tell anyone. The attack went forward and failed.
There's a big difference between the two. Isaacson's version seems most likely to be the true one, which means Musk is lying to make himself look better. I'm surprised that more people haven't commented on this difference in their stories.

https://jabberwocking.com/did-elon-m...around-crimea/