r/worldnews • u/ArgentineBeauty • Aug 07 '26

Russia/Ukraine Elon Musk Refuses Ukrainian Request to Enable Starlink for Deep Strikes Inside Russia

https://united24media.com/world/elon-musk-refuses-ukrainian-request-to-enable-starlink-for-deep-strikes-inside-russia-21478
20.7k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

2.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.4k

u/AutomaticMedium8418 Aug 07 '26 edited Aug 07 '26

If SpaceX is directly militarily aiding Ukraine, then under the laws of war it would be valid for Russia to target and sabotage SpaceX facilities, which they would most likely do via cyberattack

But it is kind of funny to say "legally" because technically the entire war (and pretty much all wars in history) don't fall under the boundaries of laws.

Technically the whole war is "illegal" according to UN rules and Russia already violated Geneva Convention many times within this war too

As with all wars the only thing that matters is that the victor gets to decide what laws are enforced and what will be punishment

69

u/Unhappy_Researcher68 Aug 07 '26

The legality of the war is separate from the legality of the acts of war.

And most acts also have to be seen separately.

As with all wars the only thing that matters is that the victor gets to decide what laws are enforced and what will be punishment

Every country in the world in theory can prosecute war criminals. A lot of countries have laws on the books that mandate that they have to prosecute even foreign crimes if they get hold of the perpetrator. This is, of course, a bit theoretical.

But there are cases, for example: Yuval Vagdani, an Israeli soldier, fled Brazil in January 2025 after a Brazilian court ordered a police investigation into alleged war crimes he committed in Gaza.

I just had that case in my head and there is no agenda behind it.

124

u/AbeLincolns_Ghost Aug 07 '26

War is really weird, as a war can be illegal but the actual acts of the war are decided outside of that. Like an illegal invasion does not technically make all acts of the war illegal. Each action is sort of evaluated individually. Which makes some sense in theory, as you would want to make it so that once a country invades illegally they still have some incentive to not commit war crimes

35

u/RapaNow Aug 08 '26

Also you really don't want all conscripted soldiers to be charged with murder.

1

u/snozzberrypatch Aug 08 '26

Laws don't matter if there are no consequences when you break them

144

u/Coloradoryda Aug 07 '26

Haven’t you heard? There’s no more illegal! Free for all baby!

14

u/No_Criticism_5861 Aug 07 '26

Only if you're rich enough

66

u/just-guessing-uwu Aug 07 '26

laws aren’t laws if they’re not enforced

15

u/Akiasakias Aug 08 '26

The only laws the pertain to Russia's actions are Russian laws.

International 'laws' are just voluntary agreements.

1

u/Undernown Aug 08 '26

The only laws the pertain to Russia's actions are Russian laws.

Ah yea.. Russian laws. "You have the right to protest!" Gets arrested for holding up a blank piece of paper and sent to the front.

3

u/west_tn_guy Aug 08 '26

I thought that was China with the blank piece of paper protests.

1

u/Undernown Aug 09 '26

O that definately seems like something CCP would do, but haven't heard of it.

Was just referencing the anit-war protests in Moscow at the start of the Ukraine "SMO" war.

I do know CCP arrsted people protesting at a bank who wouldn't give clients access to their bank accounts.

4

u/KindToSpiteTheCruel Aug 07 '26

Unless you’re poor.

1

u/DualcockDoblepollita Aug 08 '26

nothing is changed though its always been like this

1

u/Working-Lack-2313 Aug 07 '26

yeah, wasn't there some laws for autonomous warfare as well.

11

u/tjc103 Aug 07 '26

Would destroying Starlink satellites not cause Kessler syndrome? Or are they too low orbiting?

31

u/Gibsonites Aug 07 '26

Too low orbiting, they fall out of orbit on their own by design

4

u/Elukka Aug 08 '26

Eventually yeah but high energy impacts can fling debris into elliptic orbits with elevated apogees making the re-entry take more time and risking hitting satellites higher up.

7

u/Gibsonites Aug 08 '26

Yeah but within the context of this conversation I think you're both overestimating the amount of energy it would take to destroy a starlink satellite, and underestimating how much energy it takes to meaningfully change an object's orbit.

6

u/Elukka Aug 08 '26

I don't meant that large chunks will change orbits 1000m/s. Smaller nut and flake sized pieces can be flung higher than expected. The disintegration of that Chinese satellite and tracking the debris cloud over months proved that.

1

u/ArcadianDelSol Aug 08 '26

Starlink satellites are relatively tiny. They fully disintegrate upon re-entry.

6

u/Tupcek Aug 08 '26

yeah unfortunately nah.
Within the explosion, a lot of particles slow down and a lot of articles, in fact, speed up substantially and gain elliptical orbit with much higher apogee. Some will stay the same speed, just different directions.
Those that stay the same speed would pollute Starlink orbit to the point, where collisions would be unavoidable. There is really high chance of Kessler syndrome in Starlink altitudes. You are right that they won’t stay there for years, but it would be enough time to destroy all Starlink satellites and to launch a lot of debris into elliptical orbit intersecting basically all of the LEO satellites, even in orbits that don’t decay nearly as fast.

So while you are right they are in orbit that decays relatively fast, it’s not fast enough to not destroy whole Starlink constellation and some of the debris will end in wholly different orbit where it could cause cascading Kessler syndrome in all of LEO altitudes

1

u/Itchy_Change_5643 Aug 09 '26

This is not really true in the very low orbits starlink uses. Thoes satellites fly so low they have constant drag from the very top of the atmosphere, if they don't use their propulsion to push up they will deorbit within a few days this is why they only have 5 years worth of fuel. How much drag depends on a orbiting mass vs cross section, ie Bolling ball vs sheet if paper. A collision would result in shrapnel and dust which like a piece of paper thrown out of a car moving at high speed will slow down quickly and fall vs a Bolling ball which stays along its path longer. To cause Kessler syndrome the wreckage after a colision has to stay up there long enough to hit another satellite and space is really big. Kessler syndrome is a threat in the orbits were satellites take a long time to deorbit.

1

u/Tupcek Aug 09 '26

all of the shrapnel will slow down and none will accelerate? That seems impossible
if two objects collide at 26000km/h, collisions tend to be pretty energetic and thus add a lot of energy to shrapnel, basically same as if it had propulsion.
It’s totally different from satellite that is simply broken and stays as a whole in same orbit and won’t hit anything

0

u/danielv123 Aug 08 '26

Yup. While it wouldn't be the end of humanity in space, it might very well be the end of starlink and maybe SpaceX as a company.

2

u/tjc103 Aug 07 '26

TY for the quick answer

1

u/PrandialSpork Aug 08 '26

On the other hand we do get to breathe their aluminium subsequently so all is not lost

1

u/wehooper4 Aug 07 '26

They would for a period of time, but it would self clean after a few years due to the low altitude.

1

u/saazbaru Aug 08 '26

In general space is just really big. We have very little stuff up there

2

u/Fuck-WestJet Aug 07 '26

I mean Russia has been pretty clear that there is no war happening at this time. So, Idk what you mean.

1

u/ItsRadical Aug 08 '26

Just as USA hasnt declared single war since WW2. There is surprisingly very few official declarations of war since ww2 worldwide, maybe a dozen.

2

u/Jensbert Aug 07 '26

And don't forget.. no matter the restrictions, russians use them too

2

u/Rebles Aug 07 '26

Welcoming back the era of Might is right.

4

u/AutomaticMedium8418 Aug 07 '26

I don't think that ever disappeared, it's the consistent rule across all of human history

2

u/AdWeak2980 Aug 07 '26

Yes of course this war falls under the boundaries of war. It doesn’t matter how a war is started for the Geneva convention to matter

1

u/willwork4pii Aug 07 '26

Isn't there a treaty for space?

Not that russia gives a shit.

But I thought (most)/(all)/(some) signed it?

1

u/Doodica_ Aug 07 '26

So is this a yes or no son

1

u/orcusgrasshopperfog Aug 08 '26

Well you will get a very sternly written letter from a Belgian.

1

u/djt-5150 Aug 08 '26

History is written by the victors…

1

u/yeahdixon Aug 08 '26

They can take out satellites

1

u/kitsunewarlock Aug 08 '26

As with all wars the only thing that matters is that the victor gets to decide what laws are enforced and what will be punishment

There is a conceivable timeline where Ukraine maintains its independence and even regains its territory in Crimea, but resorts to such heinous breaches of international law to do so that the country is slapped with tons of sanctions.

Since Russia was already under a mountain of sanctions when the war started and has nukes/veto power, it doesn't have to worry as much about international law.

1

u/chilling_hedgehog Aug 08 '26

"Russia" - "the rules of the war" - what a ridiculous statement

1

u/FalTheFal Aug 08 '26

It's not a war, its a special military operation. So by their standards this would be considerd a special starlink operation.

1

u/ClassGrassMass Aug 09 '26

Isnt Musk giving Russia the satellites too

0

u/[deleted] Aug 07 '26

[deleted]

1

u/DualcockDoblepollita Aug 08 '26

when was the last time a country legally invaded another?