Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Friday, October 23, 2026

Americans did not give him the right to make national security policy

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Ukraine lost access to Elon's Starlink satellites, so Jon Stewart called Starlink customer service

[image or embed]

-- The Daily Show (@thedailyshow.com) 5:29 PM · Oct 20, 2026

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

More: Some may object as follows: Musk owns Starlink. Doesn't he have the right to do what he wants with a business he owns?

No.

Yes, America has a market economy. And to make this economy work, we need to respect property rights. But we are, first and foremost, a democracy. And in a democracy, the rights of private property don't and never have included the right to act against the nation's interest " where democratically elected representatives of the people, not business owners, should decide what is in the nation's interest. Capitalism is not an excuse for treason.

Let's look at a hypothetical case. Taiwan's air force flies F16s made by Lockheed Martin. Imagine that for some reason " perhaps as part of a business deal with China " Lockheed Martin suddenly moved to degrade Taiwan's military capability by cutting off access to spare parts, upgrades, munitions, computer networks and more. Would anyone consider such action acceptable, a legitimate exercise of property rights? Surely not. There would be immediate demands that Lockheed Martin reverse its actions " and if it refused, the federal government would step in to temporarily take control of the company.

This has actually happened in the past.

U.S. mobilization during World War II relied overwhelmingly on private contractors. But these contractors weren't free to do as they pleased. Among other things, the federal government was anxious to avoid labor conflict that might impede the war effort. So the National War Labor Board negotiated mandatory settlements between management and workers.

Some businessmen didn't want to go along. In particular, Sewell Avery, the chairman of Montgomery Ward, simply refused to comply with the terms of collective bargaining agreements that had been hammered out with the United Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union.

At the time, Montgomery Ward was both a major retailer and a major manufacturer, whose production of tractors, auto parts and more were important parts of the war effort. But Avery placed a higher priority on resisting unionization than on defeating the Nazis.

So in April 1944 FDR ordered the Army National Guard to seize Montgomery Ward's main plant in Chicago. National Guard troops literally had to carry Avery out of his office.

Later that year the federal government also seized a number of other Montgomery Ward facilities.

It's important to realize that none of these actions were attempts to impose long-term government control of the economy. There was never an intent to permanently nationalize Montgomery Ward. But the principle was clear: private individuals do not have the right to undermine national security. And if temporary nationalization is the only way to stop them from doing so, so be it.

#1 | Posted by qcp at 2026-10-23 09:18 AM | Reply

Let's look at a hypothetical case.

#1 | Posted by qcp at 2026-10-23 09:18 AM | Reply

Starlink isn't an F-16 and isn't subject to the same export regulations. You're confusing Starlink with Starshield.

#2 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2026-10-23 09:46 AM | Reply

Starshield = ITAR
Starlink = EAR

Using Starlink, even for defensive military applications, makes you subject to Starlink's TOS.

#3 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2026-10-23 09:48 AM | Reply

#3

why do you think people care about this distinction you value so much?

what's the real purpose of krugmans statement?

if you're a Democrat, this should be easy

#4 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-10-23 10:55 AM | Reply

Of course, it should. The moment it started polluting LEO with thousands of satellites it should have been taken from him.

#5 | Posted by jpw at 2026-10-23 12:10 PM | Reply

Exactly who held a gun to Zelenskyy's head and forced him to use Starlink?

#6 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2026-10-23 02:21 PM | Reply

There is no other viable option.

#7 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2026-10-23 02:32 PM | Reply

Who's gonna take it away from him?

Not Trump.

End of story.

#8 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-10-23 02:35 PM | Reply

Exactly who held a gun to Zelenskyy's head and forced him to use Starlink?

Putin.

#9 | Posted by qcp at 2026-10-23 02:36 PM | Reply

There is no other viable option.

#7 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2026-10-23 02:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

Exactly.

And the solution came with terms.

#10 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2026-10-23 02:39 PM | Reply

Exactly who held a gun to Zelenskyy's head and forced him to use Starlink?
#6 | Posted by lfthndthrds

Follow-up question:
Exactly who held a gun to Zelenskyy's head and forced him to fight back when Russia invaded?

#11 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-10-23 02:41 PM | Reply

Exactly.
And the solution came with terms.

#10 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2026-10-23 02:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

To use it defensively, which they do. To use it defensively against incoming turbine delta wing drones you have to intercept and rundown something going 300mph. SpaceX after allowing it simply decided no, you can't use it that way, even though you never violated the terms of it.

#12 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2026-10-23 02:43 PM | Reply

Shield AI, a US company operating in Ukraine, launched their own constellation (because they have that kind of money), and use it for offensive operations supporting V-Bat drones hunting Buk systems, etc.

#13 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2026-10-23 02:44 PM | Reply

Exactly who held a gun to Zelenskyy's head and forced him to use Starlink?

#6 | Posted by lfthndthrds

Who's holding a gun to your head to make you be such a knob gobbling pathetic cuck little b*&^%?

#14 | Posted by jpw at 2026-10-23 04:39 PM | Reply

Does anyone really believe any slow-down or disruption of Star Link Service would have happened if any Preside9nt besides Trump was in office?

#15 | Posted by danni at 2026-10-23 04:56 PM | Reply

OP tldr build your own ne3twork

#16 | Posted by john_savage2 at 2026-10-23 05:57 PM | Reply

"Ukraine is building its own sovereign satellite communications and Earth-observation networks to reduce reliance on foreign systems like SpaceX's Starlink."

"Nokia and ICEYE Satcom Partnership: Ukraine's Ministry of Defense signed a letter of intent with Finnish telecom company Nokia and radar satellite maker ICEYE to develop an independent, high-performance satellite communications network. Full-scale communications satellite launches under this collaboration are expected to begin around 2028"

"Ukraine launched its first technology-demonstrator communications satellite, UASAT-NANO, on October 1, 2026."

"Ukrainian alliance New Energy of Ukraine partnered with France's Promthe to deploy a small Earth-observation satellite constellation for high-frequency intelligence and monitoring."

"Ukrainian firm Stetman signed a licensing agreement with Swiss company Requtech to manufacture satellite terminals domestically as an alternative to Starlink."

#17 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2026-10-23 06:13 PM | Reply

The following HTML tags are allowed in comments: a href, b, i, p, br, ul, ol, li and blockquote. Others will be stripped out. Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Anyone can join this site and make comments. To post this comment, you must sign it with your Drudge Retort username. If you can't remember your username or password, use the lost password form to request it.
Username:
Password:

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy

Drudge Retort