[removed]

[removed]

What happens when Putin shoots down a Starlink satellite.

Then just after Musk confirms he gave permission because it needed to be junked?

Russia sees the social influence of the major players in commercial space in the US political narrative, and so tries to pressure that front. Unfortunately for Russia, the US gvnt has seen the value of commercial space assets and has constructed contract structures that include indemnity in conflict operations. The sat operators know this, and the payoffs associated. Don't fall for this scare tactic.

An “appropriate” response might be for the US to partially sponsor the next StarLink launch - with every launch bringing up dozens of new StarLink satellites.

Would be a perfect way to mentally show Putin the finger - shooting down enough StarLinks to make any real impact would require way more satellite-busting rockets than Russia has. “Go on, Putin. Ruin your finances and resources all on your own”…

US has spoken. One stupid mistake

That's assuming Starlink wants to align with the US.

That's a big 'if' at the moment.

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 77%. (I'm a bot)

> With Russia warning that commercial satellites of the U.S. and its allies could become "Legitimate" targets for Moscow if they were involved in the war in Ukraine, the U.S. has responded by saying any attack on its infrastructure will be met with an "Appropriate" response.

> Konstantin Vorontsov, a senior official from Russia's Foreign Ministry, on Wednesday, termed the use of Western commercial satellites to aid the Ukrainian war effort as "An extremely dangerous trend."

> "Any attack on US infrastructure will be met with an appropriate response in an appropriate way," National Security Council spokesman John Kirby told reporters Thursday, in response to the Russian threats on targeting commercial satellites.

Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: satellite^#1 Ukraine^#2 commercial^#3 Russia^#4 Russian^#5

lol

Not at all. The defense production act can compel compliance.

US is not at war.

That requires legal reasons and even COVID was controversial use of it.

Who's to say the control of these satellites could be hijacked anyway? Not like they're on US soil and command structure could be backed up overseas.

Starlink and SpaceX are US companies deeply embedded in US space industry. Their national loyalty is not Musk's decison. Also, the defense production act does not require any declaration of war and was used to deal with covid production needs.

The guy who controls the key, controls the car.

We literally found out it was turned off in Ukraine (disputed territory) on his whim.

Like I said the engagement of the defence production act on this, which would by itself be unprecedented. Doesn't guarantee any control of the system at all.

Source?

If he wants to defy US law over use of US assets in a war, there are ways to remove him from control of the company. I'm sure the treasury can cut him a check for the book value of the assets ( not the stock lol). It was done in WW2 in some cases with right wing nuts who had companies or left wing nuts running unions who though it meant they could have their own foreign policy.

One could argue that any kind of strike on a satellite even if it's not a western one could call for a response, all the debris would put western satellites in danger and jeopardize future ventures.

They're satellites not factories.

Sheesh.

You're jumping to the conclusion that that are deemed US war assets already too.

They are controlled from ground stations and by engineers located in the US. Anyway, Musk has lawyers who can explain his actual role to him, before or after the government takes some overt action.

Homeboy, read up on the American space industry. Elon Musk requires security clearance to be CEO of SpaceX. You're literally not allowed to work on space technology without the approval of the DoD. Everyone has to have clearance, everyone has to be a US citizen. Musk had to get a license form the FTC for Starlike, he has to get approved by the FAA for launches. SpaceX's biggest (and really only notable client) is the DoD.

SpaceX has no choice in the matter. They can be compelled to do anything the DoD asks. It's the nature of the business. We don't just let companies build rockets, which are basically ICBM's, whilly nilly.

One thing that comes to mind actually is the debris such an event would cause. Are starlink satellites low enough and it would avoid any high potential for a cascading effect? I've always read the long term problem with targeting satellites is the potential of kessler syndrome.

I mean, They are non military so of course Russia sees them as legitimate targets.

[removed]

The United States will knock Russia back to the Sputnik era of satellites or worse should the Russians be stupid enough to attack our satellites.

Here's how the kremlin works with public "information".

1. They don't intend to attack anything: They threaten with attacking something.
2. They intend to attack something: They don't talk about it
3. They are about to attack something: "It's a training exercise"

Just keep that in mind with all these headlines trying to get you worried. If the kremlin says that they may do something provoking, they won't.

It's the silence that you should be worried about. When they're not talking about something that is within their possibilities to attack.

Why give away your game plan? It makes no sense.