Yes, and though people thought it was Hungary that abstained, they are saying it was actually Turkey.
This might be a little tougher than Putin thought...
- Thread starter Nole Lou
- Start date
Though Musk has received widespread acclaim and thanks for responding to requests for Starlink service to Ukraine right as the war was starting, in reality, the vast majority of the 20,000 terminals have received full or partial funding from outside sources, including the US government, the UK and Poland, according to the SpaceX letter to the Pentagon.
SpaceX’s request that the US military foot the bill has rankled top brass at the Pentagon, with one senior defense official telling CNN that SpaceX has “the gall to look like heroes” while having others pay so much and now presenting them with a bill for tens of millions per month.
According to the SpaceX figures shared with the Pentagon, about 85% of the 20,000 terminals in Ukraine were paid – or partially paid – for by countries like the US and Poland or other entities. Those entities also paid for about 30% of the internet connectivity, which SpaceX says costs $4,500 each month per unit for the most advanced service. (Over the weekend, Musk tweeted there are around 25,000 terminals in Ukraine.)
In his July letter to Musk, Ukraine’s commander-in-chief, Gen. Zaluzhniy, praised the Starlink units’ “exceptional utility” and said some 4,000 terminals had been deployed by the military. However, around 500 terminals per month are destroyed in the fighting, Zaluzhniy said, before asking for 6,200 more terminals for the Ukrainian military and intelligence services and 500 per month going forward to offset the losses.
Exclusive: Musk's SpaceX says it can no longer pay for critical satellite services in Ukraine, asks Pentagon to pick up the tab | CNN Politics
Since they first started arriving in Ukraine last spring, the Starlink satellite internet terminals made by Elon Musk's SpaceX have been a vital source of communication for Ukraine's military, allowing it to fight and stay connected even as cellular phone and internet networks have been...
I was meaning the UN Security Council part. Is that actuality a clause?
- Sep 13, 2002
- 99,452
- 208,935
- 113
I don’t think the logic is flawed from a purely intellectual standpoint. It fails when applied to this real world situation.
Those entities also paid for about 30% of the internet connectivity, which SpaceX says costs $4,500 each month per unit for the most advanced service. (Over the weekend, Musk tweeted there are around 25,000 terminals in Ukraine.)
So SpaceX is carrying .7*[4500]*25000 per month and wants Uncle Sam to cover it. That’s 78 million a month (the highest possible, since not all units would necessarily have the most advanced service).
Seems like something genuinely worth 80mil a month on the battlefield and it is still less than a billion for an entire year.
Wonder how the Pentagon’s other communication contracts compare…
So SpaceX is carrying .7*[4500]*25000 per month and wants Uncle Sam to cover it. That’s 78 million a month (the highest possible, since not all units would necessarily have the most advanced service).
Seems like something genuinely worth 80mil a month on the battlefield and it is still less than a billion for an entire year.
Wonder how the Pentagon’s other communication contracts compare…
I'm thinking it's kind of a miracle SpaceX was covering any of it. Certainly an expense the governments of the world should be more than willing to pick up.
It's written as if I'm supposed to be mad at SpaceX for wanting paid...
My guess is they were told that anyone who broke ranks was going to be shot.
With no evidence whatsoever I’ve posted this before. Israel has tried to straddle the fence, and has not provided aid. But, I am positive they’ve been passing along intelligence
I wouldn’t bet a nickel that the dude in the black shirt is still alive a week from now.
Did you read the article? Ukraine is happy to get them and can quickly make use of them. Ukraine undoubtedly has choppers like this in their inventory. They have training in flying and maintaining them. If nothing else they just got a bunch of spare parts for the ones they already have.
To me it’s more of an issue about how they’ve postured themselves and sought to promote the use of their products like they are being altruistic.
500 KIAs and relatively few APVs/tanks. Must have blown up some barracks…. Also no cruise missiles so Russia must be running low after lashing out against civilian targets.
Here is one theory.
"An independent U.S. government human rights and security watchdog is calling on the Biden administration to take immediate steps to remove Russia as a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, after Russia hit civilian areas in Kyiv and other major Ukrainian cities this week with missile strikes.
In a letter to U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken obtained by Foreign Policy, the bipartisan Helsinki Commission urged the United States to initiate a protest of Russia’s standing as a permanent member of the Security Council based on the violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty, which U.S. President Joe Biden has said flies in the face of the U.N. Charter.
Under the long-shot plan, Ukraine would issue credentials to a representative to claim the seat, allowing the United States or another nation to protest Russia’s standing as a Security Council member, which derives from a 1991 deal for Moscow to retain the Soviet Union’s permanent seat after the country collapsed. That could force a vote for Russia’s ability to remain on the Security Council."
https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/10/1...ends-kicking-russia-off-u-n-security-council/
Presume this is going to be recycled by Ukraine?
"Train carrying destroyed Russian equipment and machinery."
"Train carrying destroyed Russian equipment and machinery."
IF true this should hurt Musk's reputation even more.
So about 20 miles. I'm sure they will be dispersed if anything is going to happen because that is in the range of Norwegian MLRS if they still have some and of their artillery - K9 Thunder per Wiki. Does Russia expect this to intimidate Norway....won't happen.
I don’t think they have the bombers to pull that off without getting shot down. If they do and did start carpet bombing cities I think would would see a major ramping up of air support from the west and it would end quickly.
HROT has been documenting ruSSian terrorist acts for months. Glad Europe finally got around to acknowledging same. Took far too long.
@seminole97 your premise that ruSSia is a legitimate “State” is becoming more flimsy and indefensible every day it seems.
@seminole97 your premise that ruSSia is a legitimate “State” is becoming more flimsy and indefensible every day it seems.
OCTOBER 8, 2005
The Hitchens Doctrine
BY TOM GORMANIn his September 14 debate with George Galloway at Baruch College, born-again neocon Christopher Hitchens laid out his four-point argument for why Iraq had surrendered its right to sovereignty. In his opening statement, the Trotskyist-turned-Bush booster contended that the American invasion of Iraq was a justifiable violation of sovereignty. (I speak here of the 2003 US attack on Iraq; Hitchens did not support the 1991 invasion of Iraq, but did offer the circuitous revision that he would not have been invited to the debate “if it wasn’t tolerably well known that I think I was probably mistaken on that occasion,” probably about the most contrition we can expect from his pathological ego.)
According to the Hitchens Doctrine, “a state may be deemed or said to have sacrificed its sovereignty:
Hitchens sums up, “Iraq met all these four conditions repeatedly, and would demonstrate its willingness to repeat them on many occasions.”
There is some ambiguity, on Hitchens part, as to whether all four of his conditions must be met for a state’s sovereignty to be void, or if meeting a single condition would be sufficient. Regardless, let us examine the Hitchens Doctrine point-by-point.
It is ridiculous to expect a company, and Musk to keep footing the bill for this. The West needs to get together and pay for it.
OCTOBER 8, 2005
The Hitchens Doctrine
BY TOM GORMAN
In his September 14 debate with George Galloway at Baruch College, born-again neocon Christopher Hitchens laid out his four-point argument for why Iraq had surrendered its right to sovereignty. In his opening statement, the Trotskyist-turned-Bush booster contended that the American invasion of Iraq was a justifiable violation of sovereignty. (I speak here of the 2003 US attack on Iraq; Hitchens did not support the 1991 invasion of Iraq, but did offer the circuitous revision that he would not have been invited to the debate “if it wasn’t tolerably well known that I think I was probably mistaken on that occasion,” probably about the most contrition we can expect from his pathological ego.)
According to the Hitchens Doctrine, “a state may be deemed or said to have sacrificed its sovereignty:
Hitchens sums up, “Iraq met all these four conditions repeatedly, and would demonstrate its willingness to repeat them on many occasions.”
There is some ambiguity, on Hitchens part, as to whether all four of his conditions must be met for a state’s sovereignty to be void, or if meeting a single condition would be sufficient. Regardless, let us examine the Hitchens Doctrine point-by-point.
Now let’s apply these conditions to the current ruSSo-Nazi state.
Clearly in violation of #1. Three decades of terrorizing neighbors. #2 Uncertain. #3 Genocide and cultural erasure in Ukraine. #4 Members of ruSSia’s genocidal military can clearly be deemed gangsters and terrorists.
Considering Russia is no longer a legitimate state actor, what privileges must be removed from the regime currently occupying Moscow?
Removal and censure from all world organizations including the UN.
Removal of all diplomatic privileges including immunity.
Seizure and forfeiture of all assets tied to the terrorist Putler regime.
This would be a good start.
