I had to look it up on a map, but that is the opposite of a strategically valuable artery. Its basically a road to nowhere over the Dniester estuary. Crosses where I circled in red. The M15, which is the yellow road north of it has much, much more actual traffic from what I can see. The two routes basically meet on either side of that estuary. Honestly just looks like it was the easiest bridge that the Russians could find to attack, so they could claim a tit-for-tat. At least that is my "10 minute expert" take.
This explains why SpaceX has condemned the use of Starlink terminals in drone attacks. The previous article did a poor job articulating the situation. I suspected Ukraine was using the actual terminal as a weapon but I didn't quite understand how so. Now that I know they are essentially attaching a bomb to the terminal then attaching it to a motor boat, I can see why they are upset. At this point, it becomes a weapon and subjected to ITAR. If they do not protest and stop the attempt of using it as a weapon, other companies and even countries can sue claiming its a violation of ITAR and force the halt of all domestic sales and international sales.
Ukraine using Starlink for offensive capability was reported and well known since March of last year. What changed? https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...-drone-unit-target-and-destroy-russian-tanks/ JON BRODKIN - 3/21/2022, 2:24 PM Starlink helps Ukraine’s elite drone unit target and destroy Russian tanks "If we use a drone with thermal vision at night, [it] must connect through Starlink."
The precision of Russian combined arms operations is astounding. Dismounted infantry operating like clockwork with armored units.
So, that's what changed. Expert military Musk recently came to believe his technology is a great WW3-enabler. I'm sure with such a great and independent mind, he came to this concern not at all due to the bombardment of tweets and other propaganda bs around him. Paul Pelosi scratching his head.
Well, that's not true for starter. His product enabled drone attacks since at least March of last year. He also announced a military branding of the same technology last year. My concern is the amount of power held by one individual in controlling war technology. This person gives off the impression of having too much control and that raises concerns for me. Despite this, I believe he did not remove the capability without first consulting with both the Ukrainian and US governments. They likely reached some agreement, but the individual is driven by the desire to appear powerful and in control, rather than acknowledging any agreement. This is the root of my problem with a person who is so ego-centric having such a significant impact on war technology.
So you complain that Biden is doing just enough to drag out the war but not win it or lose it. But then Elon does the same thing and you love it. And he thinks doing more would start WW3 so you treat it as fact.
I would hope we don't have to explain the difference to you between the president of the United States, and the president of twitter.
The president of Twitter has the power to dramatically affect the war. Why wouldn’t they be comparable influential actors in the Ukrainian war?
Even if Russia wasn't involved (highly unlikely), they've done it so often that no one would believe their consistent denials. They deserve to be a pariah state, though it's not really a long term solution...
