This is false / misleading. Ukraine's use of Starshield runs on normal Starlink infrastructure and is administered by SpaceX. From the WSJ: https://archive.is/1pzLc
> What is Starshield?
> Starshield is SpaceX’s more secure satellite service for governments. It has two variants: a custom-built satellite network SpaceX launched for the Pentagon; and a lower-tier, military-grade service that connects to commercial Starlink satellites. The more basic service offers encryption features, and allows the equipment to travel at faster speeds than those on a commercial Starlink account.
> What service does Ukraine use?
> Ukraine is using the more basic Starshield service, which uses Starlink’s equipment. Ukraine’s weapons—attack drones, interceptors and uncrewed boats—need to travel at high speeds to intercept Russian Shahed-type drones, bomb the Russian army’s logistics and stall Russia’s invasion force. Many of those drone missions are now failing because of the speed limit imposed by SpaceX, according to the Ukrainian military.
I don’t get your comment. It is either willfully ignorant, naive, or intentionally misleading. The comment has to be one of those three given the actual facts.
It's neither. I don't agree with Musk's politics. But I do see where this explanation is plausible. When a US military grade service is made available to non-allied countries (Ukraine is not a part of NATO), there are always end user restrictions that the US Government will maintain control over. This is not something left to Musk. Someone from the department of state or department of defense (well, war at the moment) will control it. Those restrictions are subject to executive orders and changes in US law. This is why countries that don't align with the US (e.g. India) don't want to buy advanced US tech. It is better to have a sub-optimal system without end user restrictions instead of a cutting edge one with too many of them.
Trump calling Musk to not do it is just reality theater. Someone from the executive chain of command ordered this.
Remember the Iran fiasco has diesel prices being sky high. There's an election around the corner and Russian oil is needed to stabilize the prices. It is Ukraine's right to strike Russian oil assets, but if they're using US military tech, US interests will control how it is used.
FWIW, the WSJ is reporting that Trump called Musk to ask him to lift restrictions on "a military grade version of Starlink", which is rather incredible - an admission by the commander-in-chief that a civilian is controlling US military infrastructure.
Of course from Europe/Ukraine's POV, it doesn't make much difference whether it was Musk or Trump/US military that did it. What matters is that a former ally and NATO partner can not be trusted, and eliminating American technological and defense dependence is therefore critical for regional security.
The USA became a full-fledged oligarchy right around the time conservatives pushed "Citizens United" on us. We were already headed that way for a while, but it really sealed the deal.
I think you're missing something really simple: IF you can touch the hardware, you own it. It doesn't matter the hostname on the satellite, Elon is culpable.
That’s not how it works. It’s like saying Lockheed operates the F35 but it doesn’t. Starshield provides the tech. US military has operational control - and you will be committing a crime if you so do anything without permission.
Except that the owner of starshield has the presidents ear and favor, he asked the commander in chief of the military to change things. There is control in theory and control in practice, not always the same thing.
This is false / misleading. Ukraine's use of Starshield runs on normal Starlink infrastructure and is administered by SpaceX. From the WSJ: https://archive.is/1pzLc
> What is Starshield?
> Starshield is SpaceX’s more secure satellite service for governments. It has two variants: a custom-built satellite network SpaceX launched for the Pentagon; and a lower-tier, military-grade service that connects to commercial Starlink satellites. The more basic service offers encryption features, and allows the equipment to travel at faster speeds than those on a commercial Starlink account.
> What service does Ukraine use?
> Ukraine is using the more basic Starshield service, which uses Starlink’s equipment. Ukraine’s weapons—attack drones, interceptors and uncrewed boats—need to travel at high speeds to intercept Russian Shahed-type drones, bomb the Russian army’s logistics and stall Russia’s invasion force. Many of those drone missions are now failing because of the speed limit imposed by SpaceX, according to the Ukrainian military.
There have been multiple reports that this was Musk's initiative.
https://www.wsj.com/world/ukraine-starlink-elon-musk-trump-d...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2026/10/16/musk-appro...
From anonymous source...
Yes, that is how reporting works. You have anonymous sources that you verify, but don't out, because they would suffer reprisals otherwise.
Journalism 101, c'mon.
I don’t get your comment. It is either willfully ignorant, naive, or intentionally misleading. The comment has to be one of those three given the actual facts.
I believe they were repeating what Musk originally claimed. Of course believing anything that Musk says increasing seems naive.
It's neither. I don't agree with Musk's politics. But I do see where this explanation is plausible. When a US military grade service is made available to non-allied countries (Ukraine is not a part of NATO), there are always end user restrictions that the US Government will maintain control over. This is not something left to Musk. Someone from the department of state or department of defense (well, war at the moment) will control it. Those restrictions are subject to executive orders and changes in US law. This is why countries that don't align with the US (e.g. India) don't want to buy advanced US tech. It is better to have a sub-optimal system without end user restrictions instead of a cutting edge one with too many of them.
Trump calling Musk to not do it is just reality theater. Someone from the executive chain of command ordered this.
Remember the Iran fiasco has diesel prices being sky high. There's an election around the corner and Russian oil is needed to stabilize the prices. It is Ukraine's right to strike Russian oil assets, but if they're using US military tech, US interests will control how it is used.
FWIW, the WSJ is reporting that Trump called Musk to ask him to lift restrictions on "a military grade version of Starlink", which is rather incredible - an admission by the commander-in-chief that a civilian is controlling US military infrastructure.
https://www.wsj.com/world/trump-called-musk-and-asked-him-to...
Of course from Europe/Ukraine's POV, it doesn't make much difference whether it was Musk or Trump/US military that did it. What matters is that a former ally and NATO partner can not be trusted, and eliminating American technological and defense dependence is therefore critical for regional security.
Ukraine is not a part of NATO.
No, but there is more to Europe than Ukraine, and the US has turned against all of Europe.
Except Trump would probably be praising Lukashenko, and admiring his ass, if he was aware of his existence.
These days, the walls between billionaires, Fox hosts and the Military seem paper thin, if there are any.
The USA became a full-fledged oligarchy right around the time conservatives pushed "Citizens United" on us. We were already headed that way for a while, but it really sealed the deal.
I think you're missing something really simple: IF you can touch the hardware, you own it. It doesn't matter the hostname on the satellite, Elon is culpable.
That’s not how it works. It’s like saying Lockheed operates the F35 but it doesn’t. Starshield provides the tech. US military has operational control - and you will be committing a crime if you so do anything without permission.
Then how could Musk limit Starshield capabilities if the US military has control?
Except that the owner of starshield has the presidents ear and favor, he asked the commander in chief of the military to change things. There is control in theory and control in practice, not always the same thing.
3 replies →
also, if you contribute $100Ms to the president you can do just about anything
we are to accept that nepotism is what makes america great again