Satellite internet functionality via Starshield — the military version of the SpaceX service — was being at least partially restored Thursday morning, according to a source in the Ukrainian Defense Ministry.

Ukraine has resumed strikes on Russian oil refineries after President Volodymyr Zelenskyy angrily accused the United States of betraying Kyiv with a “dangerous” withdrawal of support critical to its defense against Russia.

Ukraine held off on attacks for three days after Donald Trump’s unilateral “energy ceasefire” announcement, but accused Russia of repeatedly attacking its power grid. Zelenskyy voiced mounting frustration over the Kremlin’s failure to abide by the truce, and what he sees as U.S. attempts to pressure Kyiv after gaps in intelligence sharing on Russian attacks and restrictions on the Starlink internet service.

Satellite internet functionality via Starshield — the military version of the SpaceX service — was being at least partially restored Thursday, according to a source in the Ukrainian Defense Ministry, who spoke on the condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the topic.

In an interview with the Financial Times, published Thursday, Zelenskyy indicated his patience had already been exhausted.

  • chaogomu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    4 days ago

    Yes, but surgical strikes that leave the population alive are more effective.

    Bomb the people into submission was a plan cooked up after the first world war, and was pretty stupid then as well.

    The firebombing of Germany, Japan, the UK, etc. didn’t make the population less willing to fight, quite the opposite, but the defeat of a countries military, did in fact make the populations surrender.

    Populations will put up with a lot when under constant attack, when their loved ones are dying in the street, but when they’re merely inconvenienced, and then their team loses, well, that breaks moral.

    Also, decapitation works wonders, take out the leaders who are pushing for more war, and suddenly there’s no push for more war.

    • FishFace@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Yes… But there was a notable exception with Japan. And I’m not saying obliteration is strategically better than targeted strikes achieving the same in terms of military targets.

      • Talcosis@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were important strategic targets. Hiroshima was a heavily industrialized factory city as well as a major logistics and supply hub. Nagasaki was…an industrialized city producing war materials with a major port and was a major shipping hub.

        Both bombs served specific strategic purposes in destroying the Japanese war effort. It wasn’t just “let go blow up some japs lol”.

        • FishFace@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          True, but it was something of a balancing act between multiple motivations. The USA talked up the strategic importance of the targets, but they also wanted to create a psychological impact.