4 ms·

So if Apple gave Ukraine free iPhones but didn't unlock them so they could be used as a part in drones, that would be evil right? I am pro-Ukraine, but civilia

So if Apple gave Ukraine free iPhones but didn't unlock them so they could be used as a part in drones, that would be evil right? I am pro-Ukraine, but civilian companies shouldn't be roped into armed conflicts. The DoD can buy and operate a satellite communication service from SpaceX and run it how they see fit.

reaperman 3y ago
> civilian companies shouldn't be roped into armed conflicts Do you think that in the most general sense, or do you mean they shouldn't be roped into this (Ukraine) conflict? Historically, civilian companies have always been leveraged by nations to re-tool and produce the vast majority of war materiel during a crisis[0] [1]: > The B-29 project was the largest and most expensive project undertaken during World War Two. It was even more expensive than the Manhattan Project. The American Automobile Industry was instrumental in supplying airframe components and engines for the B-29. Below are the automobile companies and their suppliers known to have participated in the building of the most complex aircraft to date. There are many more examples. 0: https://usautoindustryworldwartwo.com https://usautoindustryworldwartwo.com 1: https://usautoindustryworldwartwo.com/b-29-usautoindustry.htm https://usautoindustryworldwartwo.com/b-29-usautoindustry.ht...
- megaman821 3y ago
  If the US declares war, then it is justified to use civilian resources. Outside of that it is too ripe for abuse. It just makes it easier to slip into forever "wars" and never think about the tradeoffs.
  - mdeeks 3y ago
    Probably at this point this is the closest the US can get to declaring war with another major nuclear power. Declaring actual war would probably escalate to a horrific end with nuclear weapons. The US is explicitly and very loudly supplying a massive amount of weapons to Ukraine for the purpose of killing Russian soldiers and equipment. It feels like a technicality that our troops aren't the ones pulling the triggers. I'm not weighing in on either side of this argument since I'm undecided, but I think this is what war looks like between nuclear nations.
  - salawat 3y ago
    IBM famously equipped the Nazi's to be able to operate their concentration camp infrastructure with ruthless, industrial-scale efficiency. Chemical manufacturers knowingly shipped Zyklon B to the Nazi's and to concentration camps as direct buyers as well. Unfortunately, my new acquaintence, you are laboring under the presumption that militaries/governments build, manufacture, and operate "government owned infra" to do what they do that can be cleanly seperated from "civillian infra". This is not the case. It's why arguments that "private companies working on behalf of the government to do things the government wouldn't be able to do" should be seen as what they are. A bunch of bullocks. The Government is Us, and We are the Government. "It's a private company" style arguments only hold validity to specifically if you put on blinders to the fact a "Company" is a construct granted legitimacy by it's host State. Break the rules, or make things overly problematic to your host state, and watch how fast the landscape changes.
    - aaomidi 3y ago
      The government literally has bombed its own citizens because they dared to rise up against them. Look at the MOVE protests in Philly. The government is not “us”. That’s a fairytale they tell you in AP government classes. If the government “was us”, we’d have actually addressed many of the problems plaguing us today. Our input to the government is picking from a candidate from a bunch of actual fascists and proto fascists. Whenever they don’t like our pick, the very rare time someone has been outside of that choice pool, a bunch of unheard of systems come into place to nullify our choice. Princeton did a multi year study into this: https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746 https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746
      - salawat 3y ago
        Doesn't obviate my point. Even if the Government bombs "us"... Who made the bombs? Brewed the explosives? Manufactured the fasteners? Built the loading equipment? Staffed the Armed Forces? We did. We do. We will continue to. Collective action on our part is indistinguishable from Government. It just so happens when you try to spawn a new one that doesn't have enough popular support, the response by the incumbent is to crush, delegitimize, and exemplify the consequences of so doing through the treatments applied to the uprisers. If you would oust the king, you damn well better be fully committed, and better well win. Because for them, to let you succeed or exist is a matter of existential importance.
- thefz 3y ago
  > Historically, civilian companies have always been leveraged by nations to re-tool and produce the vast majority of war materiel during a crisis[0] Leveraged by nations, not on their own will.
- bakuninsbart 3y ago
  Nobody would bat an eye if they were compelled by the DoD to cooperate. But enabling Ukraine to launch drone attacks on Russia via satellite would make them very clearly a part of the Ukrainian war apparatus, and I think it is quite understandable why a private company wouldn't want to face that heat.
Dig1t 3y ago
Exactly. Additionally, the US is NOT at war. Congress has the power to declare war and it has not done so. No civilian should be forced to help kill people and start wars on the other side of the globe if they don’t want to. The US government has the ability to print as much money as they want and build their own satellite constellation, or rent/buy them.
thefz 3y ago
> I am pro-Ukraine, but civilian companies shouldn't be roped into armed conflicts. A million times this, and America should stop playing world cop.
- barelysapient 3y ago
  I'm curious how you see the supply of equipment and training to Ukraine: Do you consider this part of America playing the cop or something else?
  - mikecoles 3y ago
    As an American, I see the politicians and those in the pocket of 'defense' contractors playing the role of corrupt villain.
  - lp0_on_fire 3y ago
    Yes. In my opinion this is uncomfortably close to us playing Team America: World Police. We are injecting ourselves into a situation where there outcome is unpredictable and there is no clear game plan or win conditions defined such that we can exit the conflict without the entire area collapsing. Reading between the lines, and sometimes said out loud by the ruling class, it's clear that they want regime change in Russia and they're hoping that this forces the issue. Now I'm not going to shed a tear for Putin if he has to flee Moscow and we find him in a hole in the desert with a long beard, but the US track record for _successful_ regime change isn't exactly stellar. The middle east is still a mess, Korea is still divided, Vietnam was a colossal failure, and there are more examples in Latin/Central America than I care to cite. IMO "Equipment" is a very tame and benign term for the deadly munitions we're supplying being used directly against an hostile nuclear power. It's not like we're only sending medical supplies and other errands of mercy. It just seem very risky to me to assume that the Putin is forever just going to ignore the fact that his soldiers are getting blow up by American weapons.
    - _kbh_ 3y ago
      > IMO "Equipment" is a very tame and benign term for the deadly munitions we're supplying being used directly against an hostile nuclear power. It's not like we're only sending medical supplies and other errands of mercy. It just seem very risky to me to assume that the Putin is forever just going to ignore the fact that his soldiers are getting blow up by American weapons. Russia has been doing what they can regarding foreign equipment to Ukraine. It’s not much because all they can do is not much. Short of ending his country by attacking NATO there’s not much more they can do.
yokoprime 3y ago
This is not the same. At all. A foreign government asked them to take down the unlocked and fully functional units to gain defensive advantage. It’s a direct and targeted intervention on Russias behalf at the cost of downtime for all users worldwide. It removes any veil of non-partisanship from Starlink. What would you say if Elon did the same to sabotage a US special forces raid?

reaperman 3y ago

> civilian companies shouldn't be roped into armed conflicts Do you think that in the most general sense, or do you mean they shouldn't be roped into this (Ukraine) conflict? Historically, civilian companies have always been leveraged by nations to re-tool and produce the vast majority of war materiel during a crisis[0] [1]: > The B-29 project was the largest and most expensive project undertaken during World War Two. It was even more expensive than the Manhattan Project. The American Automobile Industry was instrumental in supplying airframe components and engines for the B-29. Below are the automobile companies and their suppliers known to have participated in the building of the most complex aircraft to date. There are many more examples. 0: https://usautoindustryworldwartwo.com https://usautoindustryworldwartwo.com 1: https://usautoindustryworldwartwo.com/b-29-usautoindustry.htm https://usautoindustryworldwartwo.com/b-29-usautoindustry.ht...

megaman821 3y ago
If the US declares war, then it is justified to use civilian resources. Outside of that it is too ripe for abuse. It just makes it easier to slip into forever "wars" and never think about the tradeoffs.
- mdeeks 3y ago
  Probably at this point this is the closest the US can get to declaring war with another major nuclear power. Declaring actual war would probably escalate to a horrific end with nuclear weapons. The US is explicitly and very loudly supplying a massive amount of weapons to Ukraine for the purpose of killing Russian soldiers and equipment. It feels like a technicality that our troops aren't the ones pulling the triggers. I'm not weighing in on either side of this argument since I'm undecided, but I think this is what war looks like between nuclear nations.
- salawat 3y ago
  IBM famously equipped the Nazi's to be able to operate their concentration camp infrastructure with ruthless, industrial-scale efficiency. Chemical manufacturers knowingly shipped Zyklon B to the Nazi's and to concentration camps as direct buyers as well. Unfortunately, my new acquaintence, you are laboring under the presumption that militaries/governments build, manufacture, and operate "government owned infra" to do what they do that can be cleanly seperated from "civillian infra". This is not the case. It's why arguments that "private companies working on behalf of the government to do things the government wouldn't be able to do" should be seen as what they are. A bunch of bullocks. The Government is Us, and We are the Government. "It's a private company" style arguments only hold validity to specifically if you put on blinders to the fact a "Company" is a construct granted legitimacy by it's host State. Break the rules, or make things overly problematic to your host state, and watch how fast the landscape changes.
  - aaomidi 3y ago
    The government literally has bombed its own citizens because they dared to rise up against them. Look at the MOVE protests in Philly. The government is not “us”. That’s a fairytale they tell you in AP government classes. If the government “was us”, we’d have actually addressed many of the problems plaguing us today. Our input to the government is picking from a candidate from a bunch of actual fascists and proto fascists. Whenever they don’t like our pick, the very rare time someone has been outside of that choice pool, a bunch of unheard of systems come into place to nullify our choice. Princeton did a multi year study into this: https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746 https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746
    - salawat 3y ago
      Doesn't obviate my point. Even if the Government bombs "us"... Who made the bombs? Brewed the explosives? Manufactured the fasteners? Built the loading equipment? Staffed the Armed Forces? We did. We do. We will continue to. Collective action on our part is indistinguishable from Government. It just so happens when you try to spawn a new one that doesn't have enough popular support, the response by the incumbent is to crush, delegitimize, and exemplify the consequences of so doing through the treatments applied to the uprisers. If you would oust the king, you damn well better be fully committed, and better well win. Because for them, to let you succeed or exist is a matter of existential importance.
thefz 3y ago
> Historically, civilian companies have always been leveraged by nations to re-tool and produce the vast majority of war materiel during a crisis[0] Leveraged by nations, not on their own will.
bakuninsbart 3y ago
Nobody would bat an eye if they were compelled by the DoD to cooperate. But enabling Ukraine to launch drone attacks on Russia via satellite would make them very clearly a part of the Ukrainian war apparatus, and I think it is quite understandable why a private company wouldn't want to face that heat.

Dig1t 3y ago

Exactly. Additionally, the US is NOT at war. Congress has the power to declare war and it has not done so. No civilian should be forced to help kill people and start wars on the other side of the globe if they don’t want to. The US government has the ability to print as much money as they want and build their own satellite constellation, or rent/buy them.

thefz 3y ago

> I am pro-Ukraine, but civilian companies shouldn't be roped into armed conflicts. A million times this, and America should stop playing world cop.

barelysapient 3y ago
I'm curious how you see the supply of equipment and training to Ukraine: Do you consider this part of America playing the cop or something else?
- mikecoles 3y ago
  As an American, I see the politicians and those in the pocket of 'defense' contractors playing the role of corrupt villain.
- lp0_on_fire 3y ago
  Yes. In my opinion this is uncomfortably close to us playing Team America: World Police. We are injecting ourselves into a situation where there outcome is unpredictable and there is no clear game plan or win conditions defined such that we can exit the conflict without the entire area collapsing. Reading between the lines, and sometimes said out loud by the ruling class, it's clear that they want regime change in Russia and they're hoping that this forces the issue. Now I'm not going to shed a tear for Putin if he has to flee Moscow and we find him in a hole in the desert with a long beard, but the US track record for _successful_ regime change isn't exactly stellar. The middle east is still a mess, Korea is still divided, Vietnam was a colossal failure, and there are more examples in Latin/Central America than I care to cite. IMO "Equipment" is a very tame and benign term for the deadly munitions we're supplying being used directly against an hostile nuclear power. It's not like we're only sending medical supplies and other errands of mercy. It just seem very risky to me to assume that the Putin is forever just going to ignore the fact that his soldiers are getting blow up by American weapons.
  - _kbh_ 3y ago
    > IMO "Equipment" is a very tame and benign term for the deadly munitions we're supplying being used directly against an hostile nuclear power. It's not like we're only sending medical supplies and other errands of mercy. It just seem very risky to me to assume that the Putin is forever just going to ignore the fact that his soldiers are getting blow up by American weapons. Russia has been doing what they can regarding foreign equipment to Ukraine. It’s not much because all they can do is not much. Short of ending his country by attacking NATO there’s not much more they can do.

yokoprime 3y ago

This is not the same. At all. A foreign government asked them to take down the unlocked and fully functional units to gain defensive advantage. It’s a direct and targeted intervention on Russias behalf at the cost of downtime for all users worldwide. It removes any veil of non-partisanship from Starlink. What would you say if Elon did the same to sabotage a US special forces raid?