>Ukraine could say which one are not theirs

Ukraine has no way of knowing that a random dish that it is not paying for is being used by Russia, or by Ukrainian forces on the front lines after being donated by an Australian.

Of course it can. It can show regional dishes in the digital battleground management software that every unit is using and let local units flag suspect dishes.

... and Ukraine could bomb those they didn't operate.

Providing such strike intelligence data might land Starlink even more squarely in the "military supplier"-basket - making it subject to stricter export regulations.

I think Musk may be more worried about Russian nukes than export controls.

Personally, I think Russian nukes and their missiles are likely to be a Potempkin force, but I have no special intelligence to back that up, it's just based on what I see of Russian corruption and them accidentally sinking one of their own subs and separately setting their only aircraft carrier on fire about one year after their largest drydock sank and dropped a crane onto the deck. And that was before one of their missile silos exploded.

You don't need special knowledge to know Russia hasn't been maintaining the tritium in all their nukes, or even a majority of them

That's my bet too, but I'm not confident enough to say that I could "know" that.

US nukes used floppy disks until very recently, but are quite functional.

That's why they were functional, though.

US nuclear forces have extremely strict procurement and change control processes. You don't just swap out an 8" floppy drive for a 3.5" drive in a missile silo; the change has to be considered, components procured, a migration strategy defined, and the change implemented.

... more importantly, if it's working without issue, why change it?

They're also not going to be using the latest-and-greatest tech at any point. Why should they? It's much better to use older tech that's well-proven, tested, and for which replacements don't rely on foreign industry.

8" floppy drives may be old, but they worked. We may not make them in the US, but the tech is so old that I'm sure it was cheap and easy to buy and store enough to last multiple human lifetimes.

Hell, the F-14's last flight with the Navy was in 2006. As far as I know, it still used one of the very first truly modern digital computers to control the wing sweep angle. It worked. Why change it, and risk it not working the same way?

OP claimed Russia has a Potenkin force, because it is not shiny enough. My point is their nukes and subs, are quite modern compared to US force.

I didn't say it wasn't shiny, I said it sunk, caught fire, and exploded.

This is different in a very important way.

So?

one nuke in orbit, will disrupt satellite service, duration dependent on design.

Yes, but Starlink is designed to be cheap and rapidly replaced anyway.

One nuke in space would also be a continental scale EMP, which is why, despite my expectation that the Russian stuff is probably more paint than metal, it's still not a good idea to bet the farm (everyone's farm) on that.

it isnt only about EMPing satellites, it can also be about persistent inhibition of RF propagation with radionucliide chaf, as a deliberate feature.

I meant EMPing the ground from orbit. I'm not convinced that radionucleotide chaff will do anything persistent in orbit; bombs have been detonated there before (hence why we know about HAEMP), the extra radiation belts don't last long.

in that case, the effect was hypothesized, later observed and understood. a deliberated RF denial involving munitions salted for the purpose is quite do-able. w/o specifics, an enduring denial munition may be engineered, however the perp would also have to endure the effect, as well as any response from the rest of the planet.

Musk admitted meeting Putin before cutting off Starlink incident. There is no doubt Putin sold him "I will nuke low orbit and destroy your toy if you cross me" lie.

Met as in travelled to Russia? Or at some conference?

Re-checked. Spoke, not met.

[Elon Musk Told Pentagon He Spoke to Russia's Putin] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-08-21/musk-told...

[Putin called SpaceX founder Elon Musk an “outstanding person,” days after Musk acknowledged he blocked off internet access from his Starlink satellites during a Ukrainian raid last year.] https://thehill.com/policy/international/4200236-putin-calls...

But how does this benefit musk? For this reason, you will not see this. Musk's moral compass has no needle.

Musk should ban Ukraine from using starlink, same for any country at war.

Ukraine did not choose to be at war. Venturing a comparison that may fit your mental model below, bear with me: Is invading south-americans on the southern border a reason to also deny Starlink to the US of A?

Well some Ukrainian supporters seem to want that.

Precisely none of them do, nor did they ever.

The "terminate every SpaceX contract crowd among them definitely do"

Oh with "that" you mean something about SpaceX, not the war itself (which some people, not you, do often state).

Nevermind.