Because we were trying to win those wars. We were trying to defeat the enemy. Your argument though is that Putin is willing to make peace and come to some sort of accomodation with Ukraine and NATO. That's not what we were trying to do in WWII. Also to note we did end up negotiating with Vietnam and as we've discussed with Afghanistan we ended up withdrawing our forces out of both places. Are you seeing any evidence of Russia withdrawing forces? And is he doing that? You're arguing from speculation as though these are facts. You might end up being right but current evidence isn't showing anything but that Putin, and Ukraine, want to continue fighting.
Ok. The government nationalized space development. We called it NASA. Now that we have largely privatized and allow private companies to commercial space, the same companies who are making leaps and bounds of progress ignored for 20 years, you want to turn them back over to NASA? I don't understand your logic. Do you think the scientist and engineers who work for SpaceX will stick around to work with NASA when Musk can simply relocate to Mexico and run the same operation?
You can make peace and still want to destroy the enemy at the same time. Thats literally the playbook. Jake sullivan says in every interview that the peace treaty will be a reflection of the situation on the battlefield. I think Chinas economy is much much worst than what it looks on paper and RU is really being squeezed right now. Putin can spin anything as a victory to his people but zelensky cant do the same which im worried more about. Are Ukrainians ready to give up on Crimea? Ive seen youtube blogs from the front lines and most Ukrainians are under the assumption that they will take back every inch of land. To be honest with you im more worried about UKR accepting peace than i am with RU. Again yes maybe youre right and Putin doesnt want peace. This is a message board and its made to discuss. We're not in some cult like MAGA.
You make peace when you feel the cost of war is too much to sustain. That is either becaue you realize you can’t reach the goals you want in the battlefield (the Korea War Armistice), you can’t sustain the support of your people to continue the war (Vietnam), or you’re facing a defeat and want to preserve what you have left of your country (WWI Armistice). Right now Russia isn’t acting as though any of those conditions are met. In rhetoric they still act like they can take all of Ukraine, there is no major dissension in Russia and even though drone strikes are being made in Russia there is no actual danger of Russia being invaded. Now there is a good argument that pragmatically Russia should stop fighting and look to make peace so they can rebuild their economy and integrate back in the World but pragmatically they never should’ve started the war. As far as Ukraine is concerned they were invaded. They have no interest in peace unless it’s humiliating capitulation to Russia. At the moment it doesn’t look like Ukraine is going to lose the whole country to Russia and the Ukrainian people are strongly behind the effort. This war isn’t about Zelensky pushing it but the Ukrainian people are very willing to keep on Fighting it.
You think the US would allow SpaceX to move to Mexico? Lol…No… We’ve been launching advanced satellites continually BTW….
The suggestion was for the US government to steal SpaceX from its shareholders, not move SpaceX to Mexico. Most of the high tech launched into space has been DoD, which doesn't translate well into the real economy. FSO development is currently underway. Once fleets are deployed into orbit, there will be high returns for the economy, potentially making bandwidth very affordable for the entire planet, not just for your entitled neighborhood.
Really? Russia isnt acting as if those conditions are met? Is that why they're using 1970s T72 ? Is that why theres massive shortage for heavy equipment on the front lines? Is that why alot of their soldiers havnt been paid? What are you talking about seriously? Russia is in god awful shape and their economy is eump. I just dont understand how so many of you folks can describe the state of Russia so perfectly by literally reading news reports. Nobody knows anything
OMG next thing you might start saying we should take some of the economic motivation (profit) away from US support for forever wars.
I guess the leap from nationalizing starlink, which is owned by SpaceX, to moving to Mexico (as you quipped) was lost on me. I don’t see how nationalizing Starlink would lead to what you suggested. Most of the stuff launched into the space by the DOD isn’t for “the real economy”, that’s the telecommunication satellites from the private/public telecom companies.
And do you know something more than anyone else here? We all have the same set of facts here and you're arguing a lot of speculation that somehow Putin actualy wants peace and that everyone who doesn't agree with you knows nothing. Do you have actual evidence out of Russia that supports your argument? I'm not seeing anything where Russia appears serious about making peace.
Just thinking the niceties of making robust markets with properly aligned incentives probably take a back seat to battlefield readiness. If there is warmaking tech that is better than what the US military has, I want them to get it before someone else does. And I sure don't want a private citizen controlling this primo military advantage.
The simple fact is that as long as there are humans there will be wars. Sticking your hand in the sand won't somehow change that fact.
The United States already has the top tech in orbit. All SpaceX is doing is refining the efficiencies. Government, ie: NASA, have done a **** job over the decades. After Apollo 11, NASA turned into a bureaucratic organization instead of being on the cutting edge of tech. This is what you are suggesting we go back to. Reusable rocketry is what turned SpaceX and the industry from a 0 to a 1. Starlink is more akin to tin cans with radios and thrusters. There is nothing sexy about Starlink. The beauty is the ultra low cost to build the radios (satellites as you would call them) and the cost to launch. It is estimated that each starlink satellite cost less than 500k to build and launch, per unit. Contrast to some of the other satellites, like SES are paying close to 140 million per unit to build and launch. SpaceX can put up 280x the volume in 2 months, where as SES takes a couple years to put up the same volume. SpaceX has the vehicle capacity to easily put up 100 satellites a week. (If) Once Starship works, the total cost of build and deployment of satellites will drop in half. As I stated before, Starlink is not ITAR compliant. It is legally not allowed to be used for war. If something is to be used for war, it must be ITAR compliant. Now if Ukraine says they are ok with Starlink to operate in their space as a commercial unit and people donate thousands of land antennas to soldiers, Starlink will turn a blind eye as long as the US has their back. Starlink is in the process of deploying their network for commercial use (ie: not war) across the globe and allocated some resource's for the Ukraine effort. Once Starshield was developed, this whole SpaceX nonsense has gone quiet. Cheap reusable rocketry is the 'primo military advantage'. Nobody is stopping anyone else from doing it. We haven't even come up with the best ideas for the payloads on these cheap reusable rocketry....and it surely isn't starlink.
What if Starlink turns into Skynet that AI uses to take over the world. We are doomed. Someone needs to tell Elon to stop the madness before it is too late
