U.S. billionaire Elon Musk has agreed to sell a portion of Starlink assets to the U.S. Department of Defense, removing himself from decision-making regarding geofencing Ukraine’s access to the satellite internet service

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] 520@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Don't underestimate what they can do. We've already seen one particularly moronic specimen try to seize power in the Capitol Riots and almost succeed. Imagine if it was led by someone competent who could put armed mercenaries in the crowd

[–] wanderingmagus@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Sounds like it's time to "set condition 1SQ" on some civilians who think they can get away with that. Literally and unironically, I welcome the order to fucking launch. Or do it smaller scale and send a few flying razors through windows like with the Iranian general, except through penthouse windows and estates. Then keep going with all their relations and relatives and acquaintences. Hooyah. That's one battle stations missile I wouldn't mind rigging ship for.

[–] FfaerieOxide@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So we should ...appease them?

[–] 520@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You do realise there are a million different approaches in between 'total appeasement' and 'total seizure', yes?

We do with them what they do with the rest of the population; give them just about enough that it doesn't look like a raw deal to people outside this deal, in exchange for taking away their power to destabilise countries. Meanwhile, set up an execution plan for if they step out of line.

Individually, they can still be a danger (see Donald Trump) but you do not want to see these people coordinate.

[–] FfaerieOxide@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago

But I like 'total seizure'. I don't like these people and I want their stuff taken. Why should I compromise by giving them anything?