> cutting off Ukraine’s coverage at keys times?

The only 'key times' were Ukrainian military usage of Starlink inside Russia. Ukraine was given Starlink to use to defend Ukraine, not attack Russia.

> Or Russian usage?

Which was explicitly identified and cut off.

> No need to discuss the DOGE bit

Exactly. Nobody can defend fraud and abuse. Since your main issue is that the savings weren't as big as expected it sounds like you know that.

▲

lostlogin a day ago | parent [-]

> The only 'key times' were Ukrainian military usage of Starlink inside Russia. Ukraine was given Starlink to use to defend Ukraine, not attack Russia.

Fighting without hurting the enemy? What’s the point? The approach of the Trump administration is just letting Ukraine bleed out.

Russian starlink usage has only just been cut off, how many years did that take?

> Nobody can defend fraud and abuse

This administration is anti-fraud and anti-abuse?

▲

nailer a day ago | parent [-]

> Fighting without hurting the enemy?

No. Nobody said that except you.

> What’s the point?

Getting Russia out of the Ukraine.

> Russian starlink usage has only just been cut off

No. Russians have tried to use Starlink in late 2023 early 2024, there were no direct or indirect sales and terminals were disabled on a blacklist basis. They moved from a blacklist to a whitelist in February this year.

> This administration is anti-fraud and anti-abuse

In some ways, yes. I won't defend "Trump coin" but it's pretty clear with things like USAID, Minnesota child care center scams, and the California hospice scam the democrats were in favour of and participated in fraud and abuse.

	▲	nailer 21 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> the Ukraine. Correcting self: Ukraine.