Mathias Eick retweeted
I pulled the public orbital elements on all three satellites in the viral "SpaceX froze a NATO spy satellite so Russia could intercept it" brief and ran the numbers myself. The data shows two ordinary things happened. The explosive story welded onto them isn't supported, and in specific, checkable places it's flatly false.
WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED (public Space-Track elements, SGP4):
1) A Russian inspector satellite, COSMOS 2612, made a close co-orbital approach to the commercial radar satellite ICEYE-X36. It closed to tens of meters at ~0 m/s on 16-18 Oct, then withdrew. Same orbital plane (incl 97.85°), and it actively maneuvered to get there. This is a real, notable Russian proximity operation. It required ZERO SpaceX involvement, because Russia tracks and maneuvers with its own sensors.
2) A Starlink (STARLINK-35856) had a routine conjunction with ICEYE-X36, ~0.45 km on 16 Oct 23:54 UTC. Real, but ordinary. Starlink sits in a totally different plane (incl 70° vs 98°), so this was a ~15 km/s crossing that lasts seconds. Every object in LEO gets these constantly.
That's the whole factual content. Everything else is refuted by the data or isn't an orbital measurement at all.
WHAT THE DATA REFUTES:
❌ "Intercept / immobilized / kill." All three satellites are on orbit and intact right now (elements epoch 25-26 Oct). ICEYE-X36 is alive and tracked. Cosmos 2612 withdrew to ~490 km and is still drifting away. A close approach that ends in withdrawal is an inspection, not a kinetic intercept.
❌ "X36 dodged a Russian approach in June, so it had to be frozen this time." Neither half happened. Cosmos 2612 never came within 50 km of X36 until 16 Oct. In June they were thousands of km apart. And X36 shows no June maneuver: smooth drag decay, with weekly averages falling from 546.1 to 545.0 km and a largest single step of -433 m (noise). A real 0.5 km avoidance burn would be a clean -500 m step. There is none.
❌ "SpaceX pinned/froze X36 in place." X36 never maneuvers, period. Over 165 days it deviates from its natural decay curve by no more than 278 m and holds inclination to 0.022°. There was nothing to "pin." It's a passively decaying microsat. For contrast, Cosmos 2612 shows a 47.8 km altitude burn in a single day. That is what a real maneuver looks like in the data.
❌ "SpaceX inflated the danger 5x, claiming the real distance was 1.9-2.0 km." Independent public elements give ~0.45 km for the Starlink pass, consistent with the ~0.4 km figure cited, not 1.9-2.0 km. That "5x safer" claim needs SpaceX's private ephemerides that no one outside SpaceX can see, and the public data points the opposite way.
CREDIT WHERE DUE: the brief's raw archive numbers are real. The TLE update gaps and the conjunction time match my own pull. But multi-hour public TLE gaps are routine for every LEO object, and SpaceX having good space tracking is public knowledge used for collision avoidance. Neither is evidence of collusion.
WHAT ORBITAL DATA CAN'T SETTLE: "coordination" with Russia, collision-alert intent, Starlink throttling, the 23% figure, Iran, finances. Those are assertions, not measurements. The brief's "99.9% probability" is that inference restated as a number, and several of its load-bearing inputs (the June evasion, the 5x inflation, "X36 could maneuver") are false, so it's garbage in.
Orbital data can't prove a negative on intent. I can't prove no one coordinated. What I can show is that the data provides no evidence for it and contradicts the specific mechanisms claimed.
Bottom line: a real Russian satellite inspection, which was already public and known, plus a routine Starlink flyby. Two unrelated events, one narrative bolted on top.
All checks from public Space-Track two-line elements via SGP4. Happy to share the numbers.
WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED (public Space-Track elements, SGP4):
1) A Russian inspector satellite, COSMOS 2612, made a close co-orbital approach to the commercial radar satellite ICEYE-X36. It closed to tens of meters at ~0 m/s on 16-18 Oct, then withdrew. Same orbital plane (incl 97.85°), and it actively maneuvered to get there. This is a real, notable Russian proximity operation. It required ZERO SpaceX involvement, because Russia tracks and maneuvers with its own sensors.
2) A Starlink (STARLINK-35856) had a routine conjunction with ICEYE-X36, ~0.45 km on 16 Oct 23:54 UTC. Real, but ordinary. Starlink sits in a totally different plane (incl 70° vs 98°), so this was a ~15 km/s crossing that lasts seconds. Every object in LEO gets these constantly.
That's the whole factual content. Everything else is refuted by the data or isn't an orbital measurement at all.
WHAT THE DATA REFUTES:
❌ "Intercept / immobilized / kill." All three satellites are on orbit and intact right now (elements epoch 25-26 Oct). ICEYE-X36 is alive and tracked. Cosmos 2612 withdrew to ~490 km and is still drifting away. A close approach that ends in withdrawal is an inspection, not a kinetic intercept.
❌ "X36 dodged a Russian approach in June, so it had to be frozen this time." Neither half happened. Cosmos 2612 never came within 50 km of X36 until 16 Oct. In June they were thousands of km apart. And X36 shows no June maneuver: smooth drag decay, with weekly averages falling from 546.1 to 545.0 km and a largest single step of -433 m (noise). A real 0.5 km avoidance burn would be a clean -500 m step. There is none.
❌ "SpaceX pinned/froze X36 in place." X36 never maneuvers, period. Over 165 days it deviates from its natural decay curve by no more than 278 m and holds inclination to 0.022°. There was nothing to "pin." It's a passively decaying microsat. For contrast, Cosmos 2612 shows a 47.8 km altitude burn in a single day. That is what a real maneuver looks like in the data.
❌ "SpaceX inflated the danger 5x, claiming the real distance was 1.9-2.0 km." Independent public elements give ~0.45 km for the Starlink pass, consistent with the ~0.4 km figure cited, not 1.9-2.0 km. That "5x safer" claim needs SpaceX's private ephemerides that no one outside SpaceX can see, and the public data points the opposite way.
CREDIT WHERE DUE: the brief's raw archive numbers are real. The TLE update gaps and the conjunction time match my own pull. But multi-hour public TLE gaps are routine for every LEO object, and SpaceX having good space tracking is public knowledge used for collision avoidance. Neither is evidence of collusion.
WHAT ORBITAL DATA CAN'T SETTLE: "coordination" with Russia, collision-alert intent, Starlink throttling, the 23% figure, Iran, finances. Those are assertions, not measurements. The brief's "99.9% probability" is that inference restated as a number, and several of its load-bearing inputs (the June evasion, the 5x inflation, "X36 could maneuver") are false, so it's garbage in.
Orbital data can't prove a negative on intent. I can't prove no one coordinated. What I can show is that the data provides no evidence for it and contradicts the specific mechanisms claimed.
Bottom line: a real Russian satellite inspection, which was already public and known, plus a routine Starlink flyby. Two unrelated events, one narrative bolted on top.
All checks from public Space-Track two-line elements via SGP4. Happy to share the numbers.
SpaceX Blocked A U.S. And NATO Satellite to Assist a Russian Intercept After Crippling Ukraine's Air Defenses
The Math Proves the Reality that Musk doesn't want you to see.
On Oct 13-14, SpaceX restricted Starshield/Starlink during a 39-missile Russian attack, cutting pts by 23% and stranding U.S. personnel in Kyiv. Forty-eight hours later (Oct 15), SpaceX blocked U.S.-licensed NRO, Space Force, and NATO radar satellite ICEYE-X36 in orbit so Russia's COSMOS 2612 weapon could intercept it (99.89%-99.98% posterior)
Our Model Demonstrates that the Russian intercept of the US/NATO ICEYE X-36 satellite (contemporaneous with the throttling of Starlink) would not have been possible, and almost certainly not been attempted, without SpaceX resources. At a material opportunity cost, Russia sprinted its COSMOS satellite to intercept ICEYE X36. Based on a previous attempt in June during which X36 maneuvered to evade COSMOS, Russia knew that this would be successful only if X36 could not maneuver. On October 15, SpaceX fixed X36 in place by issuing a collision alert for a sub-kilometer approach with its Starlink 35856 when SpaceX's own data shows that the actual distance was 4.8-5.0x as great. SpaceX issued no warning to COSMOS despite the fact that its sprint was far more threatening than the stable X36 orbit. SpaceX did not maneuver its Starlink 35856 satellite to clear the supposed collision risk. How, absent coordination with SpaceX, could Russia have known that SpaceX would take actions that (a) misrepresented the danger posed by X36, and (b) resulted in the fixing of X36 thereby enabling COSMOS's successful intercept? Thus, SpaceX was directly involved in simultaneously compromising Ukraine’s defensive and offensive capabilities. The conjunction of these two events makes innocent explanations untenable.
The Pentagon Capture & Iran Round Two Trap: Pentagon CTO Emil Michael who cashed out $7M–$35M from Musk’s inner-circle SpaceX vehicles (M8/Gigafund 0.1 and M6/Valor M33 II) and KQ Partners / xAI (selling xAIfor $5M–$25M three days before taking over CDAO/OSCand 21 days before SpaceX bought xAI, while keeping M8, M6, M9, M10 & Nomadic open) and Pete Hegseth purged rival Anthropic in two hours, surrendered combat command over US drones used to attack Iran to Starlink’s "Terms of Service," and on October 2 named Musk Co-Director of Project Meridian to design the Pentagon's "Future of Warfighting" just as America enters Iran Round Twowith depleted Patriot/THAAD magazines and Russia feeding U.S. warship/aircraft locations to Tehran.
SpaceX’s actions in Ukraine raise serious questions about its alignment with US security interests and its reliability as a cornerstone of US defense. These questions are particularly troubling given the effectively irreplaceable position SpaceX has been granted by the Hegseth/Emil Michael Pentagon.
$SPCX $TSLA
Our full quantitative analysis below w/ @streetwiseprof
8
50
269
20,684
Mathias Eick retweeted
❗️Oleshky: Ceasefire Begins as Ukraine Fulfills Its Commitments
A ceasefire came into effect today at 3:00 a.m. Kyiv time (4:00 a.m. Moscow time) in designated areas related to the humanitarian mission.
☝️This is part of a humanitarian mission being carried out with the ion of U.S. First Lady Melania Trump (@FLOTUS), in cooperation with Yana Lantratova, Russia’s Commissioner for Human Rights.
As head of the Ukrainian negotiating team, I confirm that the Ukrainian side is honoring its commitments. The agreements were reached during negotiations with Yana Lantratova, head of the Russian negotiating team.
‼️I will continue to keep the public informed of developments, with the safety of civilians in Oleshky and compliance with the agreed arrangements remaining our top priorities.
A ceasefire came into effect today at 3:00 a.m. Kyiv time (4:00 a.m. Moscow time) in designated areas related to the humanitarian mission.
☝️This is part of a humanitarian mission being carried out with the ion of U.S. First Lady Melania Trump (@FLOTUS), in cooperation with Yana Lantratova, Russia’s Commissioner for Human Rights.
As head of the Ukrainian negotiating team, I confirm that the Ukrainian side is honoring its commitments. The agreements were reached during negotiations with Yana Lantratova, head of the Russian negotiating team.
‼️I will continue to keep the public informed of developments, with the safety of civilians in Oleshky and compliance with the agreed arrangements remaining our top priorities.
22
155
506
26,704
Mathias Eick retweeted
Another note for SpaceX attorneys and PR: There was no need to issue an alert at all. Your own internal data showed a safe 2km pass. But you issued a 400m collision alert anyway. Why? Because the alert itself is the weapon. Issuing it triggered FCC Cond 16, legally freezing ICEYE so it couldn't dodge. STARLINK-35856 didn't use its auto-evasion. It just parked there and kept the false alarm blaring while Russia sprinted in. It wasn't an accident.
SpaceX Blocked A U.S. And NATO Satellite to Assist a Russian Intercept After Crippling Ukraine's Air Defenses
The Math Proves the Reality that Musk doesn't want you to see.
On Oct 13-14, SpaceX restricted Starshield/Starlink during a 39-missile Russian attack, cutting pts by 23% and stranding U.S. personnel in Kyiv. Forty-eight hours later (Oct 15), SpaceX blocked U.S.-licensed NRO, Space Force, and NATO radar satellite ICEYE-X36 in orbit so Russia's COSMOS 2612 weapon could intercept it (99.89%-99.98% posterior)
Our Model Demonstrates that the Russian intercept of the US/NATO ICEYE X-36 satellite (contemporaneous with the throttling of Starlink) would not have been possible, and almost certainly not been attempted, without SpaceX resources. At a material opportunity cost, Russia sprinted its COSMOS satellite to intercept ICEYE X36. Based on a previous attempt in June during which X36 maneuvered to evade COSMOS, Russia knew that this would be successful only if X36 could not maneuver. On October 15, SpaceX fixed X36 in place by issuing a collision alert for a sub-kilometer approach with its Starlink 35856 when SpaceX's own data shows that the actual distance was 4.8-5.0x as great. SpaceX issued no warning to COSMOS despite the fact that its sprint was far more threatening than the stable X36 orbit. SpaceX did not maneuver its Starlink 35856 satellite to clear the supposed collision risk. How, absent coordination with SpaceX, could Russia have known that SpaceX would take actions that (a) misrepresented the danger posed by X36, and (b) resulted in the fixing of X36 thereby enabling COSMOS's successful intercept? Thus, SpaceX was directly involved in simultaneously compromising Ukraine’s defensive and offensive capabilities. The conjunction of these two events makes innocent explanations untenable.
The Pentagon Capture & Iran Round Two Trap: Pentagon CTO Emil Michael who cashed out $7M–$35M from Musk’s inner-circle SpaceX vehicles (M8/Gigafund 0.1 and M6/Valor M33 II) and KQ Partners / xAI (selling xAIfor $5M–$25M three days before taking over CDAO/OSCand 21 days before SpaceX bought xAI, while keeping M8, M6, M9, M10 & Nomadic open) and Pete Hegseth purged rival Anthropic in two hours, surrendered combat command over US drones used to attack Iran to Starlink’s "Terms of Service," and on October 2 named Musk Co-Director of Project Meridian to design the Pentagon's "Future of Warfighting" just as America enters Iran Round Twowith depleted Patriot/THAAD magazines and Russia feeding U.S. warship/aircraft locations to Tehran.
SpaceX’s actions in Ukraine raise serious questions about its alignment with US security interests and its reliability as a cornerstone of US defense. These questions are particularly troubling given the effectively irreplaceable position SpaceX has been granted by the Hegseth/Emil Michael Pentagon.
$SPCX $TSLA
Our full quantitative analysis below w/ @streetwiseprof
39
755
2,894
122,413
Mathias Eick retweeted
BREAKING: TRUMP BETRAYAL! Zelensky reveals he offered the U.S. THREE OPTIONS to halt Ukrainian strikes on Russian refineries — but Trump accepted NONE.
President Volodymyr Zelensky just provided stark evidence of Donald Trump’s betrayal of America’s commitment to defend Ukraine on of its sovereign territory.
Trump has been pressuring Zelensky to unilaterally stop taking out Russia’s oil refining infrastructure, but the Ukrainian leader said in an interview with the Kyiv Post that the United States has met none of the three conditions he says his country requires before agreeing to a stop to its successful campaign to cripple Russia’s revenue-generating energy businesses. Therefore, the strikes continue.
Here are the conditions that Zelensky said that Trump can choose from to convince Ukraine to impose a ban on blowing up Putin’s petroleum refineries:
Option one: an “energy truce,” where Russia stops hitting Ukraine’s power infrastructure. “That is fair,” Zelensky said, and it’s hard to argue with that. Expecting Ukraine to stop hitting Russia, while its opponent continues to bomb away, makes no sense at all.
Option two: enable Starlink coverage over Russia so Ukraine can show the U.S. where Russian ballistic missile launchers are and destroy them. Zelensky noted that Trump’s team has said Elon Musk doesn’t want to. Who the f@#k cares what Elon Musk wants? If Musk continues to be an obstacle, the U.S. should nationalize Starlink on security grounds and turn Ukraine’s spigot back on.
Option three: if Starlink is off the table, give Ukraine missiles for its Patriot systems, something that “doesn’t depend on Musk or Putin.” Given the fact that the American military has blown through a significant portion of its arsenal in the misbegotten Iran war, this last option might be the toughest for Trump to fulfill.
“Ukraine had received none of the three proposed forms of support,” he said. “That is why the reaction is what it is. We are fighting for our lives.”
Zelensky also argued the refinery strikes can’t move global prices much, since Russia accounts for only 2% of global diesel exports and the other 98% comes from elsewhere.
Zelensky smartly warned against lifting sanctions on Russia before negotiations, saying they were imposed in response to aggression, “not as a price for the mere opportunity to talk.” He said lifting them early would leave Ukraine without leverage and that rebuilding support for new sanctions after more than 20 packages would be hard, a warning that lands after Trump waived sanctions and tariffs on Russia. “I do not want us to find ourselves without any leverage,” he said.
Meanwhile, the U.S. delegation went to St. Petersburg after talks in Oslo and then gave Kyiv a briefing. Now a broad meeting between Ukraine, the U.S., the EU and NATO is planned in Brussels this week. As long as Trump is in Vladimir Putin’s pocket, however, the prospect for successful negotiations is slim to none.
Of course, the Kyiv Post is only reporting Zelensky’s point of view. The White House has not responded yet to his comments. But one of his points is hard to dodge: Ukraine is being asked to hold back while the other side keeps firing. Only a fool like Donald Trump would expect any invaded country to agree to a deal like that.
Please like and share if you think Russia should end the war by withdrawing its forces from Ukrainian territories!
President Volodymyr Zelensky just provided stark evidence of Donald Trump’s betrayal of America’s commitment to defend Ukraine on of its sovereign territory.
Trump has been pressuring Zelensky to unilaterally stop taking out Russia’s oil refining infrastructure, but the Ukrainian leader said in an interview with the Kyiv Post that the United States has met none of the three conditions he says his country requires before agreeing to a stop to its successful campaign to cripple Russia’s revenue-generating energy businesses. Therefore, the strikes continue.
Here are the conditions that Zelensky said that Trump can choose from to convince Ukraine to impose a ban on blowing up Putin’s petroleum refineries:
Option one: an “energy truce,” where Russia stops hitting Ukraine’s power infrastructure. “That is fair,” Zelensky said, and it’s hard to argue with that. Expecting Ukraine to stop hitting Russia, while its opponent continues to bomb away, makes no sense at all.
Option two: enable Starlink coverage over Russia so Ukraine can show the U.S. where Russian ballistic missile launchers are and destroy them. Zelensky noted that Trump’s team has said Elon Musk doesn’t want to. Who the f@#k cares what Elon Musk wants? If Musk continues to be an obstacle, the U.S. should nationalize Starlink on security grounds and turn Ukraine’s spigot back on.
Option three: if Starlink is off the table, give Ukraine missiles for its Patriot systems, something that “doesn’t depend on Musk or Putin.” Given the fact that the American military has blown through a significant portion of its arsenal in the misbegotten Iran war, this last option might be the toughest for Trump to fulfill.
“Ukraine had received none of the three proposed forms of support,” he said. “That is why the reaction is what it is. We are fighting for our lives.”
Zelensky also argued the refinery strikes can’t move global prices much, since Russia accounts for only 2% of global diesel exports and the other 98% comes from elsewhere.
Zelensky smartly warned against lifting sanctions on Russia before negotiations, saying they were imposed in response to aggression, “not as a price for the mere opportunity to talk.” He said lifting them early would leave Ukraine without leverage and that rebuilding support for new sanctions after more than 20 packages would be hard, a warning that lands after Trump waived sanctions and tariffs on Russia. “I do not want us to find ourselves without any leverage,” he said.
Meanwhile, the U.S. delegation went to St. Petersburg after talks in Oslo and then gave Kyiv a briefing. Now a broad meeting between Ukraine, the U.S., the EU and NATO is planned in Brussels this week. As long as Trump is in Vladimir Putin’s pocket, however, the prospect for successful negotiations is slim to none.
Of course, the Kyiv Post is only reporting Zelensky’s point of view. The White House has not responded yet to his comments. But one of his points is hard to dodge: Ukraine is being asked to hold back while the other side keeps firing. Only a fool like Donald Trump would expect any invaded country to agree to a deal like that.
Please like and share if you think Russia should end the war by withdrawing its forces from Ukrainian territories!
88
2,116
4,836
99,833
Oh dear....
Fox News is putting Nicki Minaj up telling people to vote red.
Let’s break that down.
Can Nicki Minaj vote? No.
She’s not a U.S. citizen.
Can Nicki Minaj’s husband vote? No, he’s a registered sex offender.
Can Nicki Minaj’s brother vote? No, he’s serving 25 years to life for child sexual assault.
She seems like the perfect spokesperson for MAGA republicans.
0
0
0
48
Oh dear...
SpaceX has effectively just lost the 🇮🇳 India market, which accounts for 20% of the world’s population, for good.
India represents a market 4.2 times the size of the 🇺🇸 United States.
To make matters worse, there is a growing resistance of allowing Starlink/Starshield services in many other parts of the world, where alternatives are already being developed like in 🇪🇺Europe or 🇨🇦 Canada to mention just two.
It is therefore likely that SpaceX will be unable to establish Starlink services across large parts of the globe. Worse, the same may hold true for SpaceX’s launch services and its data center offerings, whether on Earth or in orbit because its all about lost trust.
A significant volume of capital is now flowing toward other launch providers and start-ups, because what is at stake is national sovereignty, security, and the avoidance of dependence on the political views of a single individual: Elon Musk.
Elon Musk has failed to grasp that his actions regarding Starlink and Starshield in 🇺🇦 Ukraine have undermined global trust in all of SpaceX’s services and that will have a last impact on its business.
Once trust is lost, the business is lost as well. $SPCX
0
0
0
43
Mathias Eick retweeted
Matthias Warnig. Kennt ihr noch?
Genau, das war der Mann, der uns Nord Stream eingebrockt hat.
Jetzt erfahren wir: Er hat auch die Welt gerettet. ☝️
So jedenfalls erzählen es Warnig und zwei amerikanische Geschäftsfreunde der Financial Times.
2022 sollen sie gemeinsam verhindert haben, jetzt kommt's:
dass Putin sich mit der Atombombe das Leben nimmt und die Welt gleich mit reinzieht.
Danach hätten sie fast noch den Frieden in der Ukraine verhandelt. Das alles ist so absurd, dass man es nicht erfinden könnte. Und genau deshalb sollte man es kennen.
Alles begann am 4. Oktober 2022 in Zürich im Flughafen-Hilton: ein leerer Speisesaal, ein Tisch ganz hinten.
Der erste Retter: Matthias Warnig, Ex-Stasi-Offizier, später Chef der Nord Stream 2 AG. Putin nennt er „meinen Freund“.
Der zweite: Bob Foresman, Investmentbanker.
Warnig kennt er aus der Dresdner Bank, deren Moskauer Investmentsparte er Anfang der 2000er leitete. 2016 reichte er eine Einladung des Kremls an Trump weiter, beim Wirtschaftsforum in St. Petersburg zu sprechen.
Der dritte im Bunde ist Richard Conn, New Yorker Wirtschaftsanwalt. Mit 19 jobbte er auf einem sowjetischen Kreuzfahrtschiff, der KGB wollte ihn anwerben und prophezeite ihm, er könne eines Tages US-Präsident werden. Conn lehnte höflich ab. Am Morgen des Treffens singt er unter der Dusche „It's the End of the World as We Know It“.
Am Tisch erzählt Warnig den beiden Amerikanern von seiner Freundschaft mit Putin. Von der Invasion habe ihm sein Freund vorher nichts gesagt. Warnig ist gerade aus Moskau zurück und beschreibt Putin als einen Mann, den zwei Jahre Corona-Isolation schwer gezeichnet hätten. Conn fühlt sich an Hitlers Bunker erinnert und fürchtet, Putin könnte den Atomkrieg als eine Art Selbstmord betrachten.
Also soll Warnig Putin eine Botschaft überbringen, die nach Darstellung der drei aus dem Nationalen Sicherheitsrat der USA stammt: Washington wolle Russland nicht zerstören und Putin nicht stürzen. Warnig kommt mit Putins Antwort zurück. Er habe keine andere Wahl gehabt als den Krieg, sei aber sehr offen für Verhandlungen.
Bei einem späteren Treffen fragt Conn Warnig, ob die atomare Gefahr noch bestehe. Warnig: „Alles gut.“ Conn fährt nach Hause, im Radio läuft „Let It Snow“, und er ist nach eigenen Worten nie glücklicher gewesen.
Dann schreiben die drei einen Friedensplan. Russland behält die Krim, einen Landkorridor und Teile des Donbas, die Ukraine bekommt Schutz durch NATO-Staaten. In der Pause gehen schwimmen. Im Februar 2023 meldet Warnig, Putin habe das Papier Zeile für Zeile gelesen und sei im Grunde einverstanden.
Nur zwei Probleme gibt es.
Das erste heißt Ukraine. Selenskyj und Jermak bekommen das Papier über einen ukrainischen Filmproduzenten zugespielt, der lange in Russland gearbeitet hat und Selenskyj gut kennt.
Die beiden wollen sich die Dokumente kaum ansehen. Klar ist aber: keine Zugeständnisse bei den Grenzen.
Das zweite Problem heißt Washington. Putin lässt Juri Uschakow beim Sicherheitsberater Jake Sullivan nachfragen, ob die drei überhaupt ein Mandat haben. Laut Putin sagt Sullivan: nein, braucht es nicht. Damit ist die Rettung der Welt beendet.
Und jetzt wird es erst richtig interessant. Frühere US-Beamte sagen der FT, Uschakow habe den Kanal gegenüber Washington nie erwähnt. Wenn das stimmt, hat nicht Sullivan den Frieden versenkt. Dann hat der Kreml drei eifrige Amateure eine Weile spielen lassen und ihnen zum Schluss eine Ausrede mitgegeben.
Der zuständige Mann im Nationalen Sicherheitsrat, Eric Green, bringt es sinngemäß auf den Punkt: Wenn Putin wirklich einen Deal gewollt hätte, hätte er viele Wege gehabt. Über einen ehemaligen DDR-Spion und einen New Yorker Anwalt wäre der verkehrteste.
Und Warnig? Behauptet heute, er habe nie gesagt, dass Putin nuklear eskalieren könnte.
Bleibt eine Seifenoper ohne Happy End, in der sich die drei Helden die Stichworte selbst gegeben haben. Und ein Name, der hängen bleiben sollte: Uschakow. Derselbe Mann, der gestern im russischen Fernsehen bedauerte, dass Washington Kyjiw nicht einfach die Bedingungen diktieren kann.
Wetten, dass wir die Legende vom ausgeschlagenen Frieden bald wieder bei Wagenknecht und Co. hören? Dann wisst ihr, woher sie kommt. Und warum sie nicht stimmt.
Pedro hat sich die Geschichte vorgenommen und herrlich zerlegt.
Danke @mfphhh für diesen Thread! 🙏
Genau, das war der Mann, der uns Nord Stream eingebrockt hat.
Jetzt erfahren wir: Er hat auch die Welt gerettet. ☝️
So jedenfalls erzählen es Warnig und zwei amerikanische Geschäftsfreunde der Financial Times.
2022 sollen sie gemeinsam verhindert haben, jetzt kommt's:
dass Putin sich mit der Atombombe das Leben nimmt und die Welt gleich mit reinzieht.
Danach hätten sie fast noch den Frieden in der Ukraine verhandelt. Das alles ist so absurd, dass man es nicht erfinden könnte. Und genau deshalb sollte man es kennen.
Alles begann am 4. Oktober 2022 in Zürich im Flughafen-Hilton: ein leerer Speisesaal, ein Tisch ganz hinten.
Der erste Retter: Matthias Warnig, Ex-Stasi-Offizier, später Chef der Nord Stream 2 AG. Putin nennt er „meinen Freund“.
Der zweite: Bob Foresman, Investmentbanker.
Warnig kennt er aus der Dresdner Bank, deren Moskauer Investmentsparte er Anfang der 2000er leitete. 2016 reichte er eine Einladung des Kremls an Trump weiter, beim Wirtschaftsforum in St. Petersburg zu sprechen.
Der dritte im Bunde ist Richard Conn, New Yorker Wirtschaftsanwalt. Mit 19 jobbte er auf einem sowjetischen Kreuzfahrtschiff, der KGB wollte ihn anwerben und prophezeite ihm, er könne eines Tages US-Präsident werden. Conn lehnte höflich ab. Am Morgen des Treffens singt er unter der Dusche „It's the End of the World as We Know It“.
Am Tisch erzählt Warnig den beiden Amerikanern von seiner Freundschaft mit Putin. Von der Invasion habe ihm sein Freund vorher nichts gesagt. Warnig ist gerade aus Moskau zurück und beschreibt Putin als einen Mann, den zwei Jahre Corona-Isolation schwer gezeichnet hätten. Conn fühlt sich an Hitlers Bunker erinnert und fürchtet, Putin könnte den Atomkrieg als eine Art Selbstmord betrachten.
Also soll Warnig Putin eine Botschaft überbringen, die nach Darstellung der drei aus dem Nationalen Sicherheitsrat der USA stammt: Washington wolle Russland nicht zerstören und Putin nicht stürzen. Warnig kommt mit Putins Antwort zurück. Er habe keine andere Wahl gehabt als den Krieg, sei aber sehr offen für Verhandlungen.
Bei einem späteren Treffen fragt Conn Warnig, ob die atomare Gefahr noch bestehe. Warnig: „Alles gut.“ Conn fährt nach Hause, im Radio läuft „Let It Snow“, und er ist nach eigenen Worten nie glücklicher gewesen.
Dann schreiben die drei einen Friedensplan. Russland behält die Krim, einen Landkorridor und Teile des Donbas, die Ukraine bekommt Schutz durch NATO-Staaten. In der Pause gehen schwimmen. Im Februar 2023 meldet Warnig, Putin habe das Papier Zeile für Zeile gelesen und sei im Grunde einverstanden.
Nur zwei Probleme gibt es.
Das erste heißt Ukraine. Selenskyj und Jermak bekommen das Papier über einen ukrainischen Filmproduzenten zugespielt, der lange in Russland gearbeitet hat und Selenskyj gut kennt.
Die beiden wollen sich die Dokumente kaum ansehen. Klar ist aber: keine Zugeständnisse bei den Grenzen.
Das zweite Problem heißt Washington. Putin lässt Juri Uschakow beim Sicherheitsberater Jake Sullivan nachfragen, ob die drei überhaupt ein Mandat haben. Laut Putin sagt Sullivan: nein, braucht es nicht. Damit ist die Rettung der Welt beendet.
Und jetzt wird es erst richtig interessant. Frühere US-Beamte sagen der FT, Uschakow habe den Kanal gegenüber Washington nie erwähnt. Wenn das stimmt, hat nicht Sullivan den Frieden versenkt. Dann hat der Kreml drei eifrige Amateure eine Weile spielen lassen und ihnen zum Schluss eine Ausrede mitgegeben.
Der zuständige Mann im Nationalen Sicherheitsrat, Eric Green, bringt es sinngemäß auf den Punkt: Wenn Putin wirklich einen Deal gewollt hätte, hätte er viele Wege gehabt. Über einen ehemaligen DDR-Spion und einen New Yorker Anwalt wäre der verkehrteste.
Und Warnig? Behauptet heute, er habe nie gesagt, dass Putin nuklear eskalieren könnte.
Bleibt eine Seifenoper ohne Happy End, in der sich die drei Helden die Stichworte selbst gegeben haben. Und ein Name, der hängen bleiben sollte: Uschakow. Derselbe Mann, der gestern im russischen Fernsehen bedauerte, dass Washington Kyjiw nicht einfach die Bedingungen diktieren kann.
Wetten, dass wir die Legende vom ausgeschlagenen Frieden bald wieder bei Wagenknecht und Co. hören? Dann wisst ihr, woher sie kommt. Und warum sie nicht stimmt.
Pedro hat sich die Geschichte vorgenommen und herrlich zerlegt.
Danke @mfphhh für diesen Thread! 🙏
Track 0,0 Verhandlungen🧵
Die FT-Story über die Heldengeschichte von Matthias Warnig, der seinen depressiven Freund Putin von Suizid per Atomkrieg abhielt und dann fast den FRIEDEN verhandelt hätte,
zerschmilzt in buntem Lametta und lustigen Widersprüchen der Protagonisten:
1/19
11
76
191
3,579
Mathias Eick retweeted
Elon Musk has spent more money on American elections in the last two years than George Soros has in his entire life.
853
7,249
27,230
753,660
Oh dear...
Breaking news: Anthropic discloses $80 billion loss as the artificial intelligence company prepares to go public. wapo.st/4jCqBCR
0
0
0
73
Mathias Eick retweeted
Mendel's narrative that Ukraine has "rejected" easy peace deals or bears responsibility for the war’s continuation and destruction is disinformation. Here's why:
1. The Istanbul Talks (April 2022)
Claim:
Ukraine was offered a favorable deal in Istanbul to keep its territory (minus Crimea/Donbas) in exchange for neutrality and army reduction, but Zelenskyy unilaterally declined.
Rebuttal:
Demilitarization as a Trap: Russia’s Istanbul demand for a drastically reduced Ukrainian military (capping forces at levels that would leave Ukraine defenseless) was designed to make future invasion effortless. Accepting demilitarization without ironclad security guarantees was an invitation to total conquest down the road.
The Guarantee Catch: Russia demanded a veto over any future collective security response if Ukraine were attacked again. Under Moscow's terms, if Russia invaded a second time, Russia itself would have to agree before any external power could legally intervene to assist Ukraine.
Bucha and Russian War Crimes: The Istanbul talks collapsed primarily due to the discovery of mass atrocities in Bucha, Irpin, and Izium as Russian troops retreated from Kyiv. Russian war crimes demonstrated that "agreements" with Moscow meant surrendering Ukrainian citizens to occupation, torture, and mass graves.
No Real Russian Commitment: Russia never offered a binding, full withdrawal from Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, or Kharkiv during those early talks; Moscow was attempting to consolidate military control while stalling for time after its initial push on Kyiv failed.
2. Late 2022 & The Kherson Liberation
Claim:
After Russian forces withdrew from Kherson city, Ukraine refused a potential ceasefire brokered or suggested by the US to continue the war.
Rebuttal:
Operational Momentum: In late 2022, Ukraine had just scored major strategic victories in Kharkiv and Kherson. Accepting a premature ceasefire would have allowed a severely weakened, retreating Russian military time to entrench, dig extensive defensive lines (which they later did with the Surovikin Line), rearm, and forcibly draft hundreds of thousands of mobilized troops.
Freezing the Conflict Benefits the Aggressor: A ceasefire without Russian withdrawal simply converts temporary frontline positions into de facto borders. Ukraine’s experience from 2014 to 2022 (Minsk I & II) proved that a frozen conflict only gives Russia time to prepare its next offense.
US Policy Alignment: The claim that Zelenskyy single-handedly "persuaded" the US to force Ukraine to fight ignores the fundamental principle repeatedly articulated by international law and Western coalition strategy: "Nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine."
3. Early 2023 "Back-Channel Deal"
Claim:
A deal was on the table to return to pre-February 2022 borders in exchange for neutrality and recognizing Crimea as Russian, but Ukrainian leadership turned it down.
Rebuttal:
Unsubstantiated Fantasy: There is zero official evidence that Vladimir Putin ever agreed to abandon Russia's illegally annexed "four new regions" (Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk, Luhansk), which Moscow formally incorporated into the Russian Constitution in September 2022.
Constitutional Reality in Moscow: Following Russia’s formal annexation decree in late 2022, Putin repeatedly insisted that the "new territorial realities" were non-negotiable. Reverting to pre-2022 lines was explicitly ruled out by the Kremlin's public and private declarations.
Rewarding Aggression: Surrendering Crimea formally would validate Russia's aggressive land grabs, violate international law regarding territorial integrity, and leave the Black Sea permanent security threat unaddressed.
4. The July 2024 Energy Ceasefire & Kursk
Claim:
Ukraine disrupted an energy ceasefire mediated via the Middle East by launching the Kursk operation.
Rebuttal:
Asymmetric Warfare and Strategic Initiative: The Kursk offensive was a tactical and strategic necessity designed to relieve pressure on the Eastern front in Donetsk, force Russia to reallocate troops to its own border, create a territorial bargaining chip, and demonstrate that Russia’s border was vulnerable.
Russian Destruction of Energy Grids: Russia began its systematic campaign to destroy Ukraine’s energy infrastructure in the fall of 2022—long before Kursk. Moscow’s attacks on civilian infrastructure were designed to freeze the civilian population into submission, not to negotiate a genuine energy truce in good faith.
Leverage for Peace: A state defending itself against an existential threat cannot rely on unratified, informal promises while its eastern territory is being taken day by day.
5. Blaming the Victim for Destruction and "Degradation"
Claim:
Because Ukraine did not accept Russia's terms, Ukrainian leadership is responsible for the destruction of the country, casualties, and degradation of the state.
Rebuttal:
Shifting Moral and Legal Guilt: Every dead Ukrainian, ruined power plant, and displaced refugee is the direct legal and moral responsibility of the aggressor - the Russian Federation - which launched an illegal, unprovoked full-scale war of conquest. Blaming Ukraine for defending its territory is classical victim-blaming.
Capitulation vs. Survival: Capitulation does not stop human suffering; it merely converts battlefield fighting into mass repression, occupation terror, forced Russification, conscription of Ukrainians into the Russian military, and the elimination of the Ukrainian nation-state.
Summary
The premise of Mendel's narrative rests on the false assumption that Vladimir Putin was acting as a rational actor offering genuine peace in good faith.
Throughout the conflict, Russia’s fundamental goal has remained unchanged: the total political control or subjugation of Ukraine. Ceasefire proposals offered by Moscow under terms of demilitarization and territorial concession are not paths to peace; they are operational pauses designed to secure Russian gains and set up the next phase of conquest. Defending sovereignty against an existential threat is not a choice made out of stubbornness - it is a necessity for survival.
1. The Istanbul Talks (April 2022)
Claim:
Ukraine was offered a favorable deal in Istanbul to keep its territory (minus Crimea/Donbas) in exchange for neutrality and army reduction, but Zelenskyy unilaterally declined.
Rebuttal:
Demilitarization as a Trap: Russia’s Istanbul demand for a drastically reduced Ukrainian military (capping forces at levels that would leave Ukraine defenseless) was designed to make future invasion effortless. Accepting demilitarization without ironclad security guarantees was an invitation to total conquest down the road.
The Guarantee Catch: Russia demanded a veto over any future collective security response if Ukraine were attacked again. Under Moscow's terms, if Russia invaded a second time, Russia itself would have to agree before any external power could legally intervene to assist Ukraine.
Bucha and Russian War Crimes: The Istanbul talks collapsed primarily due to the discovery of mass atrocities in Bucha, Irpin, and Izium as Russian troops retreated from Kyiv. Russian war crimes demonstrated that "agreements" with Moscow meant surrendering Ukrainian citizens to occupation, torture, and mass graves.
No Real Russian Commitment: Russia never offered a binding, full withdrawal from Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, or Kharkiv during those early talks; Moscow was attempting to consolidate military control while stalling for time after its initial push on Kyiv failed.
2. Late 2022 & The Kherson Liberation
Claim:
After Russian forces withdrew from Kherson city, Ukraine refused a potential ceasefire brokered or suggested by the US to continue the war.
Rebuttal:
Operational Momentum: In late 2022, Ukraine had just scored major strategic victories in Kharkiv and Kherson. Accepting a premature ceasefire would have allowed a severely weakened, retreating Russian military time to entrench, dig extensive defensive lines (which they later did with the Surovikin Line), rearm, and forcibly draft hundreds of thousands of mobilized troops.
Freezing the Conflict Benefits the Aggressor: A ceasefire without Russian withdrawal simply converts temporary frontline positions into de facto borders. Ukraine’s experience from 2014 to 2022 (Minsk I & II) proved that a frozen conflict only gives Russia time to prepare its next offense.
US Policy Alignment: The claim that Zelenskyy single-handedly "persuaded" the US to force Ukraine to fight ignores the fundamental principle repeatedly articulated by international law and Western coalition strategy: "Nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine."
3. Early 2023 "Back-Channel Deal"
Claim:
A deal was on the table to return to pre-February 2022 borders in exchange for neutrality and recognizing Crimea as Russian, but Ukrainian leadership turned it down.
Rebuttal:
Unsubstantiated Fantasy: There is zero official evidence that Vladimir Putin ever agreed to abandon Russia's illegally annexed "four new regions" (Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk, Luhansk), which Moscow formally incorporated into the Russian Constitution in September 2022.
Constitutional Reality in Moscow: Following Russia’s formal annexation decree in late 2022, Putin repeatedly insisted that the "new territorial realities" were non-negotiable. Reverting to pre-2022 lines was explicitly ruled out by the Kremlin's public and private declarations.
Rewarding Aggression: Surrendering Crimea formally would validate Russia's aggressive land grabs, violate international law regarding territorial integrity, and leave the Black Sea permanent security threat unaddressed.
4. The July 2024 Energy Ceasefire & Kursk
Claim:
Ukraine disrupted an energy ceasefire mediated via the Middle East by launching the Kursk operation.
Rebuttal:
Asymmetric Warfare and Strategic Initiative: The Kursk offensive was a tactical and strategic necessity designed to relieve pressure on the Eastern front in Donetsk, force Russia to reallocate troops to its own border, create a territorial bargaining chip, and demonstrate that Russia’s border was vulnerable.
Russian Destruction of Energy Grids: Russia began its systematic campaign to destroy Ukraine’s energy infrastructure in the fall of 2022—long before Kursk. Moscow’s attacks on civilian infrastructure were designed to freeze the civilian population into submission, not to negotiate a genuine energy truce in good faith.
Leverage for Peace: A state defending itself against an existential threat cannot rely on unratified, informal promises while its eastern territory is being taken day by day.
5. Blaming the Victim for Destruction and "Degradation"
Claim:
Because Ukraine did not accept Russia's terms, Ukrainian leadership is responsible for the destruction of the country, casualties, and degradation of the state.
Rebuttal:
Shifting Moral and Legal Guilt: Every dead Ukrainian, ruined power plant, and displaced refugee is the direct legal and moral responsibility of the aggressor - the Russian Federation - which launched an illegal, unprovoked full-scale war of conquest. Blaming Ukraine for defending its territory is classical victim-blaming.
Capitulation vs. Survival: Capitulation does not stop human suffering; it merely converts battlefield fighting into mass repression, occupation terror, forced Russification, conscription of Ukrainians into the Russian military, and the elimination of the Ukrainian nation-state.
Summary
The premise of Mendel's narrative rests on the false assumption that Vladimir Putin was acting as a rational actor offering genuine peace in good faith.
Throughout the conflict, Russia’s fundamental goal has remained unchanged: the total political control or subjugation of Ukraine. Ceasefire proposals offered by Moscow under terms of demilitarization and territorial concession are not paths to peace; they are operational pauses designed to secure Russian gains and set up the next phase of conquest. Defending sovereignty against an existential threat is not a choice made out of stubbornness - it is a necessity for survival.
Let’s go through the peace deals Zelenskyy rejected.
• Istanbul agreement, 2022
Ukraine needed to refuse NATO accession, reduce the army, Russia would withdraw from the Kyiv reg., possibly from the Kharkiv, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia regions. At that point the scale of imited and the number of dead was far lower. In April 2022 Zelenskyy declined the deal.
• End of 2022
Russian forces withdrew from part of the Kherson region. Zelenskyy traveled to meet Biden and, acc. to my sources, later confirmed by Mr. Blinken in the New York Times, persuaded the WH to continue the war. The precise terms of any proposed deal remain unknown, but sources indicate there was readiness to declare at least a ceasefire.
• Beginning of 2023
Through unofficial channels between the United States and Russia, an understanding took shape: Putin agreed to withdraw to the borders that existed before the full-scale invasion—freeing nearly everything conquered that year—in exchange for Ukraine’s refusal of NATO accession and recognition of Crimea as Russian. Zelenskyy and Yermak refused. Since then nearly a million people have been killed or wounded, several million have become refugees, parts of the Kharkiv, Sumy, and Dnipropetrovsk regions have been occupied, more of Zaporizhzhia has been taken, Kherson lies in ruins, the Chernihiv and Sumy regions face constant shelling, Kyiv itself has become almost a front-line city, the energy system has been destroyed, businesses cannot operate, exports have stalled, and the country is degrading.
• July 2024
An arrangement that began with an energy ceasefire, modeled on the Istanbul understandings and mediated through the Middle East. While negotiations were under way, Zelenskyy also planned the Kursk operation, which ultimately disrupted all the arrangements.
• March 2025
After the Oval Office clash between Trump and Zelenskyy, European leaders gathered in London in early March. The British government stated that a number of options were on the table and that Ukraine had to choose. As always, nothing came of it.
Whether Putin was prepared each time to implement any agreements remains unknown, yet on several occasions he carried out what he had promised. Does this remove his responsibility for the deaths, the horrors, and the destruction in Ukraine? No.
But the country is degrading, the state apparatus is degrading, and corruption finishes what Putin’s missiles, drones, and bombs did not destroy. Inhumanity has effectively become a state strategy and a national ideology promoted at every turn.
Ukraine simply cannot win this way—there are neither economic, nor demographic, nor any other grounds for it. Therefore, if Zelenskyy does not agree to a deal with realistic terms now, Ukraine will be forced to capitulate. And that is deeply alarming, because it can actually cost the country its independence and sovereignty.Community noteIn April 2022, talks failed after Russia demanded a veto over Ukraine's security guarantees. In Sept 2022, Russia annexed 4 Ukrainian regions, refusing pre-2022 borders. The Aug 2024 Qatar talks only covered a partial energy strike halt, which Russia postponed.
nytimes.com/interactive/20…
understandingwar.org/research/russi…
42
345
1,175
35,303
Mathias Eick retweeted
Russian skeleton and bobsleigh athlete has become part of the Russian army.
This is Kirill Gusev.
As recently as last season, he took part in all-Russian bobsleigh competitions.
Now he is a Russian serviceman. In one of the photos, he proudly shows a patch with the inscription or money.” On his social media, he actively posts materials related to his affiliation with the terrorist army that is currently committing genocide against Ukrainians. It is this army that is responsible for the daily shelling of our cities and for the civilian casualties, including small children.
In a few days, an extraordinary congress of the International Bobsleigh and Skeleton Federation (IBSF) will take place, and at the initiative of the IBSF Executive Committee, the issue of returning Russian athletes to international competitions without restrictions will be considered.
They propose to remove the neutrality verification criteria, which included checks for affiliation with Russian military structures, support for the war, and other factors. This is being done deliberately so that Kirill and others like him, accomplices in Russia’s crimes, can freely participate in international competitions and use our sport to spread Russian propaganda, normalize the actions of their government, and strengthen Putin’s regime.
For us, it is obvious that the situation has not changed in any way since 2022, and Russian sport continues to be a powerful tool of the Russian propaganda machine.
Russian athletes must be suspended from international sport.
And it seems that the IBSF @IBSFsliding needs to be reminded of this.
Ban Russia.
This is Kirill Gusev.
As recently as last season, he took part in all-Russian bobsleigh competitions.
Now he is a Russian serviceman. In one of the photos, he proudly shows a patch with the inscription or money.” On his social media, he actively posts materials related to his affiliation with the terrorist army that is currently committing genocide against Ukrainians. It is this army that is responsible for the daily shelling of our cities and for the civilian casualties, including small children.
In a few days, an extraordinary congress of the International Bobsleigh and Skeleton Federation (IBSF) will take place, and at the initiative of the IBSF Executive Committee, the issue of returning Russian athletes to international competitions without restrictions will be considered.
They propose to remove the neutrality verification criteria, which included checks for affiliation with Russian military structures, support for the war, and other factors. This is being done deliberately so that Kirill and others like him, accomplices in Russia’s crimes, can freely participate in international competitions and use our sport to spread Russian propaganda, normalize the actions of their government, and strengthen Putin’s regime.
For us, it is obvious that the situation has not changed in any way since 2022, and Russian sport continues to be a powerful tool of the Russian propaganda machine.
Russian athletes must be suspended from international sport.
And it seems that the IBSF @IBSFsliding needs to be reminded of this.
Ban Russia.
19
193
641
6,751
Mathias Eick retweeted
🇧🇷 #Brazil's President Luiz Inacio #Lula da Silva won an unprecedented fourth term on Sunday, the country's electoral court said.
The shock result defied polls to put the brakes on a wave of right-wing election victories across #LatinAmerica.
Watch to learn more ⤵️
The shock result defied polls to put the brakes on a wave of right-wing election victories across #LatinAmerica.
Watch to learn more ⤵️
23
58
191
7,520
Oh dear...
SpaceX Blocked A U.S. And NATO Satellite to Assist a Russian Intercept After Crippling Ukraine's Air Defenses
The Math Proves the Reality that Musk doesn't want you to see.
On Oct 13-14, SpaceX restricted Starshield/Starlink during a 39-missile Russian attack, cutting pts by 23% and stranding U.S. personnel in Kyiv. Forty-eight hours later (Oct 15), SpaceX blocked U.S.-licensed NRO, Space Force, and NATO radar satellite ICEYE-X36 in orbit so Russia's COSMOS 2612 weapon could intercept it (99.89%-99.98% posterior)
Our Model Demonstrates that the Russian intercept of the US/NATO ICEYE X-36 satellite (contemporaneous with the throttling of Starlink) would not have been possible, and almost certainly not been attempted, without SpaceX resources. At a material opportunity cost, Russia sprinted its COSMOS satellite to intercept ICEYE X36. Based on a previous attempt in June during which X36 maneuvered to evade COSMOS, Russia knew that this would be successful only if X36 could not maneuver. On October 15, SpaceX fixed X36 in place by issuing a collision alert for a sub-kilometer approach with its Starlink 35856 when SpaceX's own data shows that the actual distance was 4.8-5.0x as great. SpaceX issued no warning to COSMOS despite the fact that its sprint was far more threatening than the stable X36 orbit. SpaceX did not maneuver its Starlink 35856 satellite to clear the supposed collision risk. How, absent coordination with SpaceX, could Russia have known that SpaceX would take actions that (a) misrepresented the danger posed by X36, and (b) resulted in the fixing of X36 thereby enabling COSMOS's successful intercept? Thus, SpaceX was directly involved in simultaneously compromising Ukraine’s defensive and offensive capabilities. The conjunction of these two events makes innocent explanations untenable.
The Pentagon Capture & Iran Round Two Trap: Pentagon CTO Emil Michael who cashed out $7M–$35M from Musk’s inner-circle SpaceX vehicles (M8/Gigafund 0.1 and M6/Valor M33 II) and KQ Partners / xAI (selling xAIfor $5M–$25M three days before taking over CDAO/OSCand 21 days before SpaceX bought xAI, while keeping M8, M6, M9, M10 & Nomadic open) and Pete Hegseth purged rival Anthropic in two hours, surrendered combat command over US drones used to attack Iran to Starlink’s "Terms of Service," and on October 2 named Musk Co-Director of Project Meridian to design the Pentagon's "Future of Warfighting" just as America enters Iran Round Twowith depleted Patriot/THAAD magazines and Russia feeding U.S. warship/aircraft locations to Tehran.
SpaceX’s actions in Ukraine raise serious questions about its alignment with US security interests and its reliability as a cornerstone of US defense. These questions are particularly troubling given the effectively irreplaceable position SpaceX has been granted by the Hegseth/Emil Michael Pentagon.
$SPCX $TSLA
Our full quantitative analysis below w/ @streetwiseprof
1
0
0
73
Mathias Eick retweeted
Wenn man viel Wert darauf legt, die „andere Seite“ zu hören, wie das Johannes Varwick vorgibt zu tun, sollte man auch zuhören.
1. Die Verhandlungen von Istanbul scheiterten an der fehlenden russischen Bereitschaft zu zentralen Zugeständnissen - insbesondere beim Territorium der Ukraine, Truppenabzug, „erlaubte“ Größe des ukrainischen Militärs und Sicherheitsgarantien für die Ukraine.
2. Im Herbst 2022 ließ Putin vier ukrainische Oblaste annektieren und erklärte sie verfassungsrechtlich zu russischem Territorium. Damit verunmöglichte er Friedenslösung grundsätzlich - zumal Russland diese Gebiete nicht einmal vollständig kontrollierte.
3. Der Kreml hat seitdem immer wieder deutlich gemacht, dass er an zentralen Kriegszielen festhält. Putin verlangte sogar als Voraussetzung für einen Waffenstillstand und Verhandlungen den ukrainischen Rückzug aus allen vier beanspruchten Gebieten sowie den Verzicht auf einen NATO-Beitritt. Die Ukraine sollte also auch Gebiete räumen, die Russland gar nicht erobert hatte.
4. Einen bedingungslosen Waffenstillstand mit dem Einfrieren der Frontlinie hat Moskau wiederholt abgelehnt. Stattdessen fordert der Kreml die Beseitigung der sogenannten „Grundursachen“ des Krieges – womit er seine weitreichenden territorialen und sicherheitspolitischen Forderungen meint.
Diese „Gelegenheiten für einen Verhandlungsfrieden“ hat es nie gegeben.
1. Die Verhandlungen von Istanbul scheiterten an der fehlenden russischen Bereitschaft zu zentralen Zugeständnissen - insbesondere beim Territorium der Ukraine, Truppenabzug, „erlaubte“ Größe des ukrainischen Militärs und Sicherheitsgarantien für die Ukraine.
2. Im Herbst 2022 ließ Putin vier ukrainische Oblaste annektieren und erklärte sie verfassungsrechtlich zu russischem Territorium. Damit verunmöglichte er Friedenslösung grundsätzlich - zumal Russland diese Gebiete nicht einmal vollständig kontrollierte.
3. Der Kreml hat seitdem immer wieder deutlich gemacht, dass er an zentralen Kriegszielen festhält. Putin verlangte sogar als Voraussetzung für einen Waffenstillstand und Verhandlungen den ukrainischen Rückzug aus allen vier beanspruchten Gebieten sowie den Verzicht auf einen NATO-Beitritt. Die Ukraine sollte also auch Gebiete räumen, die Russland gar nicht erobert hatte.
4. Einen bedingungslosen Waffenstillstand mit dem Einfrieren der Frontlinie hat Moskau wiederholt abgelehnt. Stattdessen fordert der Kreml die Beseitigung der sogenannten „Grundursachen“ des Krieges – womit er seine weitreichenden territorialen und sicherheitspolitischen Forderungen meint.
Diese „Gelegenheiten für einen Verhandlungsfrieden“ hat es nie gegeben.
Mehr Kujat wagen: „Die Tragik der Ukraine besteht darin, dass sie immer wieder Gelegenheiten für einen Verhandlungsfrieden verstreichen ließ, zum Teil auch deshalb, weil ihr suggeriert wurde, sie könne die strategische Lage dank westlicher Unterstützung zu ihren Gunsten wenden.“
Danke @OvertonMagazin dass ihr solche Stimmen zu Wort kommen lasst und die klaffende Lücke füllt, die FAZ, ARD, ZDF und so beklagenswert aufreißen.
overton-magazin.de/top-story/ukra…
11
23
105
1,455
Mathias Eick retweeted
Einzig entscheidend ist der nachfolgende Satz aus dem Artikel von @berlinerzeitung: „[…] Putins Haltung ist nur über Warnigs Schilderung überliefert, eine unabhängig bestätigte Moskauer Position gibt es nicht, und der vollständige Text des vertraulichen Dokuments wurde nicht veröffentlicht.“
Witzig, dass über Vorgänge aus dem Jahr 2023 berichtet wird, als handelte es sich um kürzlich entdeckte geheime Depeschen aus dem Jahr 1813 (👀 @BecirovicMuamer).
Washington und Moskau verfügten 2023 nachweislich über direkte Kommunikationskanäle, über welche die „atomare Kommunikation“ im Herbst 2022 verlief (@FT berichtete). Wenn Putin tatsächlich zu derart weitreichenden Zugeständnissen bereit gewesen wäre, hätte er diese jederzeit auf offiziellem Wege unterbreiten können.
Stattdessen wird aus der Schilderung eines nachweislich langjährigen Putin-Vertrauten und jahrzehntelangen Stasi-Agenten ein angeblich ausgeschlagenes und inhaltlich geradezu absurdes Friedensangebot konstruiert.
Eine bemerkenswert dünne Grundlage für die Behauptung, @ZelenskyyUa habe eine historische Friedenschance verspielt. Besonders - um nicht zu sagen, einzig - interessant ist freilich der Zeitpunkt der Veröffentlichung.
Zufälle gibt‘s…
Witzig, dass über Vorgänge aus dem Jahr 2023 berichtet wird, als handelte es sich um kürzlich entdeckte geheime Depeschen aus dem Jahr 1813 (👀 @BecirovicMuamer).
Washington und Moskau verfügten 2023 nachweislich über direkte Kommunikationskanäle, über welche die „atomare Kommunikation“ im Herbst 2022 verlief (@FT berichtete). Wenn Putin tatsächlich zu derart weitreichenden Zugeständnissen bereit gewesen wäre, hätte er diese jederzeit auf offiziellem Wege unterbreiten können.
Stattdessen wird aus der Schilderung eines nachweislich langjährigen Putin-Vertrauten und jahrzehntelangen Stasi-Agenten ein angeblich ausgeschlagenes und inhaltlich geradezu absurdes Friedensangebot konstruiert.
Eine bemerkenswert dünne Grundlage für die Behauptung, @ZelenskyyUa habe eine historische Friedenschance verspielt. Besonders - um nicht zu sagen, einzig - interessant ist freilich der Zeitpunkt der Veröffentlichung.
Zufälle gibt‘s…
Laut Financial Times bot Putin Anfang 2023 einen weitgehenden Truppenabzug an. Selenskyj lehnte ab. Ein ukrainischer Abgeordneter liefert nun brisante Details. berliner-zeitung.de/article/ukrain…
24
81
361
15,333
Oh mon dieu...
Ho purée !!! Nous sommes cernés !
A l'est comme à l'ouest, le discours est le même !!
Le milliardaire orthodoxe poutinien tente de convaincre sa communauté Z, aux capacités intellectuelles limitées, de l'unicité de l'empire russe, dont dépend "la paix dans le monde".
Il a nauté avait été investie d'une "grande mission", car elle était née dans ce qu'il appelle le "centre du monde".
"C'est nous maintenant, nous protégeons le monde de l'arrivée du mal, sur nos épaules, la paix dans le monde entier, nous avons une grande responsabilité".
OMG !!! 😱😱😅😅
0
0
0
46
Mathias Eick retweeted
I've always admired Dr. Fiona Hill. Her talk at the House of Lords presents a very sober view of the war in Ukraine and Putin's motivations.
Russia is already waging a campaign against the West. This includes sabotage, arson, and other attacks carried out by the GRU and its assets in the West.
Putin's motives may have less to do with NATO enlargement than with a deeply held belief that Ukraine belongs to Russia and his wider ambitions to dominate Europe. He has been promoting this revanchist view of history for years and appears to imagine himself becoming Vladimir the Great. He is willing to murder hundreds of thousands to achieve his goals.
We need to prepare and we cannot let Ukraine fall.
Worth a watch.
youtu.be/cndhY051Mc4
Russia is already waging a campaign against the West. This includes sabotage, arson, and other attacks carried out by the GRU and its assets in the West.
Putin's motives may have less to do with NATO enlargement than with a deeply held belief that Ukraine belongs to Russia and his wider ambitions to dominate Europe. He has been promoting this revanchist view of history for years and appears to imagine himself becoming Vladimir the Great. He is willing to murder hundreds of thousands to achieve his goals.
We need to prepare and we cannot let Ukraine fall.
Worth a watch.
youtu.be/cndhY051Mc4
9
91
196
4,312
Mathias Eick retweeted
Quando un cinese capisce la situazione russa meglio di tutti i cosiddetti esperti dei talk show:
«Guardando la situazione attuale, questa operazione della Russia è come avere in mano una mano di partenza perfetta e riuscire a giocarsela fino a mandare tutto a puttane.
Se non avesse invaso l’Ucraina, oggi, nel grande poker globale dell’intelligenza artificiale, oltre agli Stati Uniti e alla Cina, con ogni probabilità ci sarebbe stata anche la Russia.
Per sviluppare l’IA e addestrare modelli di grandi dimensioni, la logica di fondo è: consumare una quantità enorme di elettricità, raffreddare tutto e mettere insieme tonnellate di hardware. Negli ultimi due anni, i responsabili dei data center di tutto il mondo si lamentano delle bollette della luce e dei costi dei sistemi di raffreddamento. E la Russia? È come se Dio stesso le avesse servito tutto su un piatto d’argento: in Siberia basta aprire la finestra per avere un condizionatore naturale di prima classe. Nel Paese ci sono acqua, energia nucleare e gas a basso costo. Non a caso, quando si faceva mining di criptovalute, tutti sceglievano la Siberia.
Inoltre, i russi sono forti in matematica e negli algoritmi. Nelle competizioni internazionali di programmazione e su Kaggle, nel campo del machine learning, i russi fanno regolarmente a pezzi la concorrenza. E, al di fuori degli Stati Uniti e della Cina, la Russia è uno dei pochi Paesi ad aver sviluppato un proprio ecosistema digitale completo: per le ricerche c’è Yandex, per i social network VK, oltre a Telegram. E adesso c’è Nebius, la nuova stella emergente nel settore della potenza di calcolo, le cui azioni sono schizzate alle stelle sulla borsa americana. Il suo nucleo è costituito proprio dagli stessi russi che lavoravano in Yandex.
Se, dopo la pandemia, la Russia avesse messo a disposizione terreni, aria fredda ed elettricità a basso costo, per poi invitare la Cina — quella macchina da guerra delle infrastrutture — a contribuire alla costruzione di linee ad alta tensione, stabilimenti e reti in fibra ottica, attirando anche capitali europei per costruire fabbriche di server, i russi avrebbero potuto trasformarsi nella più grande «fabbrica di supercalcolo» dell’Eurasia. Mentre Stati Uniti e Cina si affrontavano come divinità, la Russia avrebbe potuto stare in mezzo e riscuotere pedaggi da entrambe le parti.
E invece com’è andata a finire? Putin si è dato una pacca sulla coscia e ha deciso: no, io devo conquistare quei due pezzetti di terra.
La mente di Putin è rimasta definitivamente intrappolata nel vecchio sogno zarista ottocentesco dell’«espansione dei confini». Che importanza ha avere uno sbocco sul mare o una zona cuscinetto militare? Anche se fossero davvero necessari, esistono mille modi per ottenerli. Ma siamo nel XXI secolo! La lotta per il dominio mondiale oggi si gioca sulle catene di approvvigionamento dei semiconduttori, sugli algoritmi più avanzati e sulla conquista dei migliori talenti nel settore high-tech. E tu vai a impantanarti nel Donbass per un paio di pezzi di terra fangosa e qualche acciaieria abbandonata, ipotecando in cambio il futuro dell’intero Paese.
Non appena sono risuonati i primi spari, tutto è crollato. I programmatori e gli ingegneri più brillanti sono scappati in una sola notte. Il nucleo tecnologico di Yandex ha dovuto sottoporsi a una brutale amputazione per non affondare: ha reciso i legami con la madrepatria per potersi ricostruire in Europa sotto il nome di Nebius. Putin ha terrorizzato le persone più lungimiranti del Paese, trasformandole in rifugiati e fondatori di startup all’estero.
Alla vigilia dell’esplosione dell’intelligenza artificiale, il mondo intero corre freneticamente per aumentare la propria capacità di calcolo e cerca disperatamente un biglietto per la nuova rivoluzione industriale. E il capo della Russia trascina decine di migliaia di persone a sprofondare nel fango, combattendo una guerra di posizione nello stile della Prima guerra mondiale, cento anni dopo».
«Guardando la situazione attuale, questa operazione della Russia è come avere in mano una mano di partenza perfetta e riuscire a giocarsela fino a mandare tutto a puttane.
Se non avesse invaso l’Ucraina, oggi, nel grande poker globale dell’intelligenza artificiale, oltre agli Stati Uniti e alla Cina, con ogni probabilità ci sarebbe stata anche la Russia.
Per sviluppare l’IA e addestrare modelli di grandi dimensioni, la logica di fondo è: consumare una quantità enorme di elettricità, raffreddare tutto e mettere insieme tonnellate di hardware. Negli ultimi due anni, i responsabili dei data center di tutto il mondo si lamentano delle bollette della luce e dei costi dei sistemi di raffreddamento. E la Russia? È come se Dio stesso le avesse servito tutto su un piatto d’argento: in Siberia basta aprire la finestra per avere un condizionatore naturale di prima classe. Nel Paese ci sono acqua, energia nucleare e gas a basso costo. Non a caso, quando si faceva mining di criptovalute, tutti sceglievano la Siberia.
Inoltre, i russi sono forti in matematica e negli algoritmi. Nelle competizioni internazionali di programmazione e su Kaggle, nel campo del machine learning, i russi fanno regolarmente a pezzi la concorrenza. E, al di fuori degli Stati Uniti e della Cina, la Russia è uno dei pochi Paesi ad aver sviluppato un proprio ecosistema digitale completo: per le ricerche c’è Yandex, per i social network VK, oltre a Telegram. E adesso c’è Nebius, la nuova stella emergente nel settore della potenza di calcolo, le cui azioni sono schizzate alle stelle sulla borsa americana. Il suo nucleo è costituito proprio dagli stessi russi che lavoravano in Yandex.
Se, dopo la pandemia, la Russia avesse messo a disposizione terreni, aria fredda ed elettricità a basso costo, per poi invitare la Cina — quella macchina da guerra delle infrastrutture — a contribuire alla costruzione di linee ad alta tensione, stabilimenti e reti in fibra ottica, attirando anche capitali europei per costruire fabbriche di server, i russi avrebbero potuto trasformarsi nella più grande «fabbrica di supercalcolo» dell’Eurasia. Mentre Stati Uniti e Cina si affrontavano come divinità, la Russia avrebbe potuto stare in mezzo e riscuotere pedaggi da entrambe le parti.
E invece com’è andata a finire? Putin si è dato una pacca sulla coscia e ha deciso: no, io devo conquistare quei due pezzetti di terra.
La mente di Putin è rimasta definitivamente intrappolata nel vecchio sogno zarista ottocentesco dell’«espansione dei confini». Che importanza ha avere uno sbocco sul mare o una zona cuscinetto militare? Anche se fossero davvero necessari, esistono mille modi per ottenerli. Ma siamo nel XXI secolo! La lotta per il dominio mondiale oggi si gioca sulle catene di approvvigionamento dei semiconduttori, sugli algoritmi più avanzati e sulla conquista dei migliori talenti nel settore high-tech. E tu vai a impantanarti nel Donbass per un paio di pezzi di terra fangosa e qualche acciaieria abbandonata, ipotecando in cambio il futuro dell’intero Paese.
Non appena sono risuonati i primi spari, tutto è crollato. I programmatori e gli ingegneri più brillanti sono scappati in una sola notte. Il nucleo tecnologico di Yandex ha dovuto sottoporsi a una brutale amputazione per non affondare: ha reciso i legami con la madrepatria per potersi ricostruire in Europa sotto il nome di Nebius. Putin ha terrorizzato le persone più lungimiranti del Paese, trasformandole in rifugiati e fondatori di startup all’estero.
Alla vigilia dell’esplosione dell’intelligenza artificiale, il mondo intero corre freneticamente per aumentare la propria capacità di calcolo e cerca disperatamente un biglietto per la nuova rivoluzione industriale. E il capo della Russia trascina decine di migliaia di persone a sprofondare nel fango, combattendo una guerra di posizione nello stile della Prima guerra mondiale, cento anni dopo».
站在今天看，俄罗斯这波操作，属于手握着一把天胡的牌打得稀烂。
如果不出兵乌克兰，今天全球AI的牌桌上，除了中美，大概率真得坐着一个俄罗斯。
搞AI、跑大模型，底层逻辑就是“吃电、散热、堆机器”。这两年全世界的数据中心老板都在为电费和机房降温发愁。俄罗斯属于老天爷喂到饭：西伯利亚开窗就是纯天然顶级空调；境内水电、核电、天然气很便宜，当年挖矿的都选西伯利亚。
另外俄罗斯人的数学和算法也强，各大国际编程竞赛，Kaggle机器学习竞赛常被俄国人屠榜。全世界除了中美，俄罗斯也搞出了自己完整的互联网生态：搜东西有Yandex，社交有VK，还有Telegram。现在在美股被炒上天的算力黑马Nebius，核心班底就是原先Yandex那帮俄罗斯人。
如果疫情后俄罗斯出地皮、出冷气、出便宜电，再拉着中国这种基建狂魔帮忙拉高压电网、建厂房、铺光纤，欧美资本开服务器工厂。俄国人完全可以成为欧亚大陆最大的“超级算力工厂”，中美神仙打架，它在中间两头收过路费。
结果呢？普京一拍大腿：不行，我得去抢那几块地。
普京的脑子，彻底停留在了19世纪沙皇俄国那种“开疆拓土”的旧梦里。什么有没有出海口啊，有没有所谓的军事缓冲带啊，就算抢方法也多的是，这可这是21世纪啊！现在的世界霸权争夺，抢的是半导体供应链，抢的是先进算法，抢的是高精尖人才。你去顿巴斯抢了几片烂泥地、几座废弃钢铁厂，代价却是把整个国家的未来都押了上去。
枪声一响，一切全崩了。稍微有点本事的程序员、算法工程师，连夜跑路。Yandex核心技术团队，宁可巨亏，惨烈的断尾求生、割裂母国，也要跑到欧洲重组成Nebius。普京把最懂未来的人，全逼成了难民和海外创业者。
在人工智能技术爆发的黎明前夜，全世界都在疯狂狂飙算力、抢占新工业革命的门票；而俄罗斯的老大，却带着几十万人，在泥潭里打着一百年前的一战式堑壕战。
再说一遍，普京不行，国内崇拜普京的那帮人也不行
117
920
3,928
218,100
Oh dear....
Correct.
Using Starlink, a civilian commercial service, for offensive drone strikes to kill people has never been allowed, nor should it be.
Starshield, a different system, is controlled by the US government. What they decide to do is up to them.
Ukraine military violated Starlink terms of service and used it for offensive drone strikes to kill people. That loophole was closed last week.
Starlink remains critical to the defense of Ukraine, as it is the only system that cannot be jammed or blown up, at least for now. Were Starlink to be turned off, the Ukrainian front line would collapse immediately. This is NOT a threat, it is simply a statement of fact.
Starlink was also crucial to preventing Russia from overrunning Ukraine in the early days of the war, as all other means of communication were destroyed or jammed by Russia.
SpaceX has done more to defend Ukraine than any private company on Earth BY FAR.
That said, I have nothing but UTTER CONTEMPT for the virtue-signaling evil warmongers who push for endless slaughter and offer no realistic solution to the conflict. May you burn in hell.
End of story.
0
0
0
38