this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
1690 points (97.2% liked)

politics

31245 readers
2262 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

What an utter piece of shit.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 69 points 3 years ago (5 children)

He did this with federal funds. And the US hasn’t declared war since, what, WW2? The Rosenbergs were executed for treason, and we never declared war with USSR.

[–] Jordan117@lemmy.world 50 points 3 years ago (1 children)

The Rosenbergs were executed for treason

Espionage, actually.

[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 children)

I don't know the legal definition of espionage but sure as hell seems like elons loyalty lies outside of the US.

[–] PostmodernPythia@lemmy.world 1 points 3 years ago

Elon’s loyalty lies with Elon. It’s never been otherwise.

[–] orclev@lemmy.world 23 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 children)

The Rosenbergs were convicted on espionage charges. They were sending classified info to the USSR. That's different from treason although it's related. The funding angle is an interesting question though. It still wouldn't be treason, but it could qualify as... breach of contract maybe? Not sure exactly what the charge is when the government pays you for a service and you don't fullfill the service in a satisfactory manner.

[–] 4am@lemm.ee 6 points 3 years ago (1 children)

Would this not be espionage? Or would he have to have been acting under the direction of a state actor?

[–] orclev@lemmy.world 7 points 3 years ago (1 children)

Espionage would require providing confidential intel to a foreign power. As far as I'm aware he didn't share any intel, merely disabled the internet service he was providing within key areas. Even then, leaking Unkranian intel to Russia while arguably espionage against Ukraine would likely not qualify. He would need to provide confidential US material to Russia (or another foreign power) for it to be espionage.

[–] Questy@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago (1 children)

Espionage can also encompass acts of sabotage, there are ways this could qualify if it was American forces affected. It's also a glaring example of why many countries maintain state share in major defence companies. No idiot scrolling conspiracy theories on Twitter should be able to not only breach operational security, which he clearly was since he knew the operation was underway, but also sabotage it.

[–] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee -3 points 3 years ago

This was not sabotage, Ukraine was violating the terms of service of Starlink.

[–] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee 2 points 3 years ago

He did not actually do it with federal funds. These were donated Starlink terminals and service was paid for by SpaceX.

That's the whole point, the US government allowed civilian technology to be used in war by a foreign government.

[–] jarfil@lemmy.world 1 points 3 years ago (1 children)

He did this with federal funds

Apparently this was before he got federal funds.

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago (1 children)

Didn’t he get subsidies for spaceX and Tesla?

[–] jarfil@lemmy.world 1 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)

Tesla got some preferential loans in 2010, it paid them off by 2013. Now it benefits from buyers of any brand electric car getting subsidies... so, "kind of"?

SpaceX got government contracts for specific services... which could have been inflated or not, but didn't include Starlink (at least not officially).

This is different from direct subsidies like those given to Boeing, which also gets inflated contracts (see NASA's SLS), but in addition gets preferential tax discounts and lowered export taxes.