Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 12,190
- Location
- London, UK
Yeah, that's for Starshield, not Starlink. The US military can use Starshield for whatever they like, it's controlled by them and paid for by them. I'm not sure why the US government would expect a private company to let a foreign military use it's infrastructure for military purposes based on their foreign policy? How is US foreign policy relevant to Starlink? I could understand if the US had declared war on Russia and wanted to take control of the satellites for their own use due to legitimate national security needs, but expecting a foreign military to be able to do that? It's stupid and doesn't hold up to basic scrutiny. A lot of chips on shoulders about Musk though as we know, trying to pretend it's anything other than because of his personal political views.
Ukraine is an ally of the US and an ally of NATO.
Musk was not on a military contract when he refused the Crimea request; he’d been providing terminals to Ukraine for free in response to Russia’s February 2022 invasion. However, in the months since, the U.S. military has funded and officially contracted with Starlink for continued support. The Pentagon has not disclosed the terms or cost of that contract, citing operational security.
Elon Musk's refusal to have Starlink support Ukraine attack in Crimea raises questions for Pentagon
SpaceX founder Elon Musk’s refusal to allow Ukraine to use Starlink internet services to launch a surprise attack on Russian forces in Crimea last September has raised questions for the Pentagon.

His personal political beliefs and his use of his social media company to influence elections is just a small part of it. He has shown himself to be a massive douche on numerous occasion in the last few years. His erratic behaviour would have me seriously concerned if I were in the US military/government.
His excuse of Russia could launch nukes shows he either isn't rational or it was just an excuse he used and his motives were something else.