After Russia brutally suppressed their independence, then sent 10 million of them off to die to protect Russians. Which you keep wilfully ignoring.

Ukrainians didn't want to be under Russian rule. It's wild the mental gymnastics you're doing to excuse Russia allying with Hitler himself to steal foreign land. So I'll say again, the fact those regions were mistreated under Poland does mean it's okay to invade them and colonise them.

Like you can find examples of time were colonial countries """liberated""" foreign nations in much the same way, putting them under a different boot and treating them marginally better than the last guy. But if a colonial apologist gave you that argument you would (rightly) not accept it, would you?

Yeah, it sure can do it in a way nobody else can, the most wasteful way. But I appreciate you shifting the goalposts from Ukraine because being used in war is a reason why it is a bad ISP. See, if a war breaks out and a power can destroy them, we're talking global breakdown of internet via starlink. If a war breaks out on the other side of the world a traditional isp keeps working.

Then there's also the piss poor service, the poor number of total connections, the lack of redundancy, the cost, the ecological damage of launching rockets every week so that someone is the middle of nowhere can jack it with high speed internet, being disabled when a nazi feels like it...

Dude… nationalize just means the US takes ownership of the company. They keep all the employees they keep all the customers. It runs like normal under new ownership. The taxpayers now own it. it’s a great idea.

You see too long we have been using public funding and allowing rich people to privatize the gains. It’s time to privatize those games and take back what we invested in as US citizens. We will still offer you eurocucks Internet since apparently it is more important than having a moral fiber in your body

Jacobin is a late 18th early 19th political spectrum. It is not relevant to this situation.

A strawman is when somebody mischaracterize an argument, calling someone a tankie is not that.

I don't like Elon, fuck him. My point is that what you're asking for is setting a precedent we never had. We've always had complimentary system between the private and public sectors, most countries are like this as well. Nationalizing companies without a genuine justification is going to cause shock waves throughout the economy. Why would investors spend capital in the country if the government can snatch up their business the moment they're deemed important? If that's the only thing needed to nationalize companies, what's stopping idiots in government like Trump from just weaponizing it by nationalizing any company that competes with his own businesses, political opponents, or his crony friends? Not to mention, where is confidence that our incompetent government is going to manage these companies better than they can manage themselves? These are all really big questions.

There's a reason why nationalization is left as a temporary last resort measure to rescue economic sectors from collapse. You could make an argument that this would apply for a publicly traded company like Boeing that's quickly heading towards collapse. Considering how they're only commercial plane manufacturer, that means they're our entire industry. The company's stability is a matter of national security. But SpaceX? None of this applies.

SpaceX is a private business that's stable, reliable, and competitive. They're doing exactly what they're supposed to. It's easy to say that we should just nationalize companies without thinking about the consequences. I'm in favor of things like universal healthcare, public transit systems, and more power to our research agencies. But these things have to come to fruition through stronger regulations and government alternatives, not nationalization. If there are cases where a company has to be nationalized and there are no alternatives, then they should be bought out.

I don't think what I'm saying is controversial.

That's not putting eggs in a basket, that's just wasteful government as always. The same government that you guys want to take control of SpaceX lol.

If the government actually nationalized SpaceX, the precedent would be insane. You’d be telling every private company working in defense, infrastructure, or tech that if they become too essential, the government might just take it. Doesn’t matter how much risk or capital they fronted.

SpaceX isn’t just launching rockets for fun—it’s practically a branch of the U.S. space program at this point. GPS, Starlink for military comms, launching classified payloads, putting astronauts in orbit. If we nationalize that over a political pissing match between Trump and Musk, we’re basically saying innovation is conditional on obedience.

And let’s be honest—once you do this to SpaceX, you open the door to doing it to AWS, Tesla’s energy grid systems, Google’s AI infrastructure. Any private company that gets too important suddenly becomes “too critical to stay private.” That’s a fast track to killing private innovation in sectors where we need it most.

If Trump’s threatening funding, and Musk is threatening to walk, and the public’s response is “just take the company,” then we’ve officially politicized the tech-industrial base. That’s not governance, that’s dysfunction.

Nationalizing SpaceX would be a Cold War move in a modern economy. It might feel good in the moment, but long-term, it's a terrible idea.

how can you be so casually apathetic about saddling our soldiers sailors airmen and spaceforce with the products of a horse drug addled asshole?

nytimes.com

(www.nytimes.com)

What kind of prick tells these people VOLUNTEERING TO DEFEND YOUR COUNTRY "hey man, the ketamine kid is the only way!" - how are you comfortable or confident in the products produced when he's tripping balls in the oval office?

meh. this is a pointless argument, I'm never going to convince these elon fanboys their hero is a prick

I don’t think what I’m saying is controversial.

no, it's simply business as usual, nothing ever changes, nothing ever improves, and fuck you america, that's the way it has to be because reasons.

I strongly suspect NASA can manage spaceX better than the ketamine kid. Why don't you give a fuck about those astronauts who have to put their faith in his hardware? why don't you give a fuck about the kids who are growing up in an age where that drug addled prick is put up as an icon of success?

Do you really think soldiers sailors and airmen (and spacemonkeys) should have to rely on that HORSE DRUG ADDICTED PRICK for their mission critical infrastructure?

If you do, fuck right off, you're either a musk fanboy or stockholder.

Either way, get bent.

sure thing bud. I'm not going to waste my afternoon going through your shitstream to point out how you're wrong, I simply have better things to do with my life. in fact, gonna block you now, QOL plus

These last few years they've had very little successes, but the point is it should stay competitive and not be automatically handed to these doofuses. Even the USSR maintained a competitive rocketry sector.

These things only exist and are as good as they are because they’re not government owned and run.

Look at NASA compared to SpaceX to see why this would be an absolutely terrible move. Government is where projects like these go to die, while making every politician and contractor involved filthy rich.

I'm sorry were you talking to me? Because nothing in your response had anything to do with what I actually said.

I never claimed to like Elon. I don’t.
I never expressed support for this administration’s policies. I don’t.

My argument is about the moral, ethical, and historically dangerous precedent of nationalizing a private company.

That drug-addled sycophant stood before the most powerful political body on Earth wearing a baseball cap and a T-shirt while the Vice President of the United States told President Zelensky to put on a suit.

Unbelievable.

Where the hell do you get off making wild, baseless assumptions about things you barely understand? What exactly prevents you from engaging in civil discourse like an adult, instead of spouting off like you did in that comment?

Fine if we’re slinging assumptions now, here’s mine:
You strike me as a fedora-wearing, vape-huffing, woman-hating neckbeard. Am I wrong? Don’t care. That’s the image your words paint.

So how come NASA was doing all these things before SpaceX even existed? SpaceX never put anyone on the moon. NASA did.

I am not saying that I don't agree with you. But this country is still not even close to considering nationalizing its own telecommunication infrastructure. Much less a privately held space company and a service of communication satellites. A large chunk of America believes that a for-profit business model for every good and service possible in life is the best course of action.