▲ | throwaway290 10 months ago | ||||||||||||||||
Whether to provide Crimea with Starlink or not depends on who sits there. Similar reason why all Crimeans got under sanctions immediately after annexation. Not just Starlink but every other Western company respecting sanctions stopped doing business with Crimea. Same with Donetsk and Luhansk. No one cares if it's "legally" Ukraine. People care about the "effectively". Legally always depends on who you ask. Some will tell you that Taiwan is part of PRC for example. Maybe at least half of the world will. However Taiwan is not under sanctions because effectively it isn't under PRC. > Indeed, it looks like you're shooting into the wind here I am just trying to reduce you some confusion by explaining some basics. Starlink was not yet in Ukraine when Crimea was annexed and the world mostly sat and just watched it happen. Therefore the musk-man could not "cut out crimea". There's nothing to argue about. Just don't spread misinfo please, there's enough of it. | |||||||||||||||||
▲ | aguaviva 10 months ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||
No one cares if it's "legally" Ukraine. That's objectively just not true at all. Legally always depends on who you ask. Also not true at all. Of course, you can always find people who say something wildly at odds with the overwhelming international consensus, and in any case completely lacking in any intrinsic substance. But that doesn't mean what they're saying is even potentially valid, and that the matter "depends" on what they say. See also: "Nothing is true" - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42244709 Therefore the musk-man could not "cut out crimea". I never said anything about Musk or Starlink. If you think I did, then we're definitely talking past each other. | |||||||||||||||||
|