He is on the forefront in many aspects, more so than Putin it must be said.

I wonder how a Russia led by Malofeev would look.

https://tsargrad.tv/slovo/davajte-vykljuchim-starlink_1833589

August 22, 2026, 11:00 AM

Let’s turn off Starlink.

Ukraine has requested US permission to use Starlink satellites over Russian territory for stable communications and targeting. Donald Trump and Elon Musk have not yet supported this idea. But Musk is easy to pressure, and Trump could be significantly weakened by the November elections. And we’ll get drone strikes that traditional electronic warfare methods are powerless against.

“Will Peace Come Soon?”

Former Ukrainian Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov wrote on social media about the importance of the Starlink communications satellite network for Ukraine and how Musk’s company helped his country by disabling Starlink for Russians. Elon Musk modestly responded:

I’m trying to do the right thing. I hope peace comes soon.

That’s a lie. [Musk’s sympathies are with the Nazis. He is the epitome of technofascism] . For peace to come, Starlink must be turned off for everyone, especially the Ukrainian Armed Forces. This will not only deprive the enemy of fast communications but also blind their surveillance and decision-making systems. What follows is a battle on equal terms, meaning a hopeless one for the enemy.

Starlink isn’t just communications. Musk’s Starlink and Peter Thiel’s Palantir collaborate closely on military and defense systems. Together, they form a technological “communications and data processing” network for the US and allied militaries (primarily the Ukrainian Armed Forces). Starlink provides continuous, secure, and high-speed communications on the battlefield, while Palantir’s software platforms (such as the Gotham intelligence and analysis tool) process massive amounts of data from drones, satellites, and sensors. [Palantir assists not only Ukraine but also the Zionazis in Israel and their war on humanity in Palestine, Lebanon and elsewhere. They are part of the axis of evil]

Starlink’s satellite internet transmits information with minimal latency, which Palantir software instantly converts into ready-to-use intelligence and strike coordinates, forming a so-called digital kill chain.

A kill chain for Russian targets.

As we noted earlier, there are three vulnerable components of the Starlink network: terminals, transoceanic cables, and, most importantly, satellites.

Economy

Russian Academy of Sciences Academician Sergei Yuryevich Glazyev, listing potential conflict scenarios, writes about the “advisability of using effective weapons to neutralize the enemy’s advantages in information technology and communications systems”:

This could include cutting communications channels on land and on the seabed, disrupting data centers, destroying enemy reconnaissance and command aircraft within our strike zone, regardless of their nationality, and disabling communications satellites, including the notorious Starlink constellation, which forms the backbone of the enemy’s telecommunications network. Without communication with American and British target controllers, planners, and analysts, the Ukrainian Armed Forces would be blinded and lose the ability to systematically conduct combat operations.

Starlink is owned by SpaceX, a company traditionally associated with Elon Musk. Musk doesn’t control SpaceX entirely—he owns 80% of the voting shares, but only 42% of the share capital. Shares worth between $17 billion and $77 billion are held by Nvidia, the Saudi Public Investment Fund, Gigafund, Fidelity, and, of course, the ubiquitous Alphabet, better known for its Google brand. Smaller shareholders include Microsoft and Amazon. In other words, the entire technocratic elite has invested in the war against Russia.

Threats

If Starlink ceased to exist right now, the world wouldn’t end.

Communication will be cut off for aircraft users. But there will be no accidents – the piloting systems are not connected to Starlink.

Marine transport will face serious problems, but everyone has backup communication channels, including classic radios, not to mention navigation equipment.

Some countries using Starlink for basic digitalization in areas where laying fiber optic cables is economically impossible (usually because they could be stolen) will experience problems. Nigeria, Rwanda, Kenya, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, and other “advanced” countries that have chosen a Western-style development path will suffer.

But ultimately, this will benefit both them and the entire world.

If Starlink succeeds in saturating orbit with third-generation satellites capable of transmitting data at 1 terabit per second, it will make dozens of countries hostage to this convenience. It’s not for nothing that Musk constantly emphasizes that the cost of the “last mile” of fiber-optic cable installations significantly exceeds the cost of deploying ground stations and Starlink satellites. This is the cheapest solution—and, like most cheapest ones, a mistake.

Excessive reliance on satellite internet for critical systems will inevitably make the owner of this internet the master of the country. They will gain access to all key data. They will gain control over government administration, military plans and developments, and medicine. Sovereignty is impossible without communications independent of foreigners.

Musk left his native Africa practically as a refugee, fleeing the revanchism of black people. And now he has taken his revenge by gaining control over the digital industries of several African countries.

But we’ll save Africa later. Right now, we need to strike Starlink for basic self-defense.

Options

There are several ways to affect the satellite constellation.

1. Electromagnetic and radio frequency (EMF) damage. This seems like an ideal option, but it hasn’t been tested in practice.

The Volna Kupol Garant system could be used: a specialized electronic warfare system costing approximately $1.5 million per unit, deployed on trailers with special antennas. It’s designed to direct a powerful high-frequency signal directly at a passing Starlink satellite, temporarily “jamming” it. According to the developers, a single system is capable of disrupting communications within a radius of up to 20 square kilometers. The question of why this isn’t being done remains open.

The Tobol and Tirada-2 systems (as well as the ambitious Alabuga electromagnetic weapon project) were also previously announced with huge budgets: stationary and mobile strategic-level systems designed for electronic jamming of satellite communications over large areas. Unfortunately, we haven’t seen them in real combat against enemy communications, or their use hasn’t been publicized.

2. Kinetic anti-satellite weapons—anti-missile systems (A-235 Nudol, S-500 Prometheus)—are perfectly capable of intercepting objects in low Earth orbit, as demonstrated in tests. But wasting one expensive anti-missile on one cheap satellite is an insane luxury.

3. Creation of “fragment clouds”: the ejection of hundreds of thousands of metal balls from orbital platforms. At orbital speeds, a collision with such an element is guaranteed to destroy or disable the satellite’s solar panels and electronics. The Kessler effect will trigger—an avalanche-like destruction of everything at that altitude. Most of the impacts will hit the solar panels. Their debris will also become our weapon, finishing off the group.

4. And finally, unconventional weapons, for which we will be heavily criticized at the UN: detonating a nuclear weapon in space, a powerful electromagnetic pulse, or artificial radiation belts capable of instantly frying the electronics of hundreds and thousands of satellites in low orbits. Only the first option in this set is fully prepared.

At the same time, we have the Rassvet low-orbit communications system (Project Bureau 1440) at practically the same altitude as the Starlinks. This guarantees the enemy’s safety. We can no longer strike Musk’s brainchild without paying for it.

But it is still the best option. That’s what it means to “do the right thing.”

The legal consequences of such a decision are irrelevant. Even the 1967 Outer Space Treaty prohibits the deployment of weapons of mass destruction (nuclear, chemical, etc.) in outer space, but does not prohibit other types of anti-satellite weapons—kinetic (ramming, impact projectiles), lasers, and electronic warfare. But most importantly, all such treaties have long since been obliterated by NATO’s illegal eastward expansion and its actions there.

* * *

The destruction of Starlink is not victory in the war. A Russian soldier is capable of fighting better than anyone else in any, even the most adverse, conditions, and it is Russian soldiers who are up against us. But without Starlink, the bloodshed will end much more quickly.

**

A counterattack on Europe, the brains behind the Ukraine war, is desperately needed.

London is the main culprit, supplying deadly drones and missiles to Ukraine which destroy civilians and civilian infrastructure.

2:10 PM

The Ukrainian Armed Forces struck an Ozon warehouse for the first time. “It’s a war of attrition.” What’s next? Expert analysis

Western shareholders didn’t save the situation either.

Kyiv attacked Ozon in Chapayevsk. For some, this was a very unexpected attack vector, but for others, it was entirely logical.

Several dozen enemy drones were shot down and suppressed. There was damage to one industrial facility. A hit was also recorded on an Ozon logistics complex, Samara Region Governor Vyacheslav Fedorishchev announced this morning.

[BlackRock an example of the West attacking the West]

The presence of BlackRock, and banks from Belgium and Norway among its [Ozon – Ed.] shareholders didn’t save the situation. Let’s also recall the strikes on the berths in Novorossiysk and Tuapse. On the oil refineries. Among the owners and shareholders of these berths and oil refineries are companies from the EU, the US, and the UK. But it didn’t help. The logic of the British overseers of the Ukrainian Armed Forces is simple. Anything that harms Russia must be done. Even if it harms Western shareholders, writes political scientist Vadim Trukhachev.

Did Ozon fail to learn from the Wildberries experience? Where will it go from here?

A fire, the evacuation of 500 people, injuries. The warehouse is closed indefinitely. Moreover, the enemy is indeed staggering its strikes on various targets, as is evident from the situation that has developed in the DPR [Donetsk People’s Republic] over the past week – “a war of attrition.” [But of course, the country that has the most territory and resources generally wins. Ukraine is going to lose. But they fight on because Nazis are fanatics]

The Ukrainians struck an Ozon warehouse for the first time last night. Before this, we saw them methodically destroy Wildberries warehouses, and in the DPR, they methodically destroyed almost all the major Galaktika supermarkets in a week. <…> The enemy has switched to a so-called total war of attrition, squeezing out our oil refineries over a long period of time. The enemy was trying to immobilize our movement on the front lines and the vehicles directly involved in trade logistics, right? In other words, to sow hunger.

This is the assessment given by military expert and DPR reserve officer Alexander Matyushin in a conversation with Tsargrad.

After their efforts failed, they naturally switched their attention to the marketplace system, striking Wildberries, and now Ozon. The expert believes that Yandex’s logistics centers and others could also be targeted. Is Ozon prepared for enemy strikes?

Well, judging by the fact that the drone hit Ozon’s logistics base, it didn’t take the WB experience into account, hoping to escape unscathed. <…> According to publicly available information, Ozon’s warehouses aren’t as large in area and, accordingly, in terms of the quantity of goods, as Wildberries. Consequently, losses from strikes will be lower. But, of course, Ozon’s management should think about defense against drones, the expert notes.

Overall, of course, we should expect, Matyushin believes, that despite our massive strikes on Ukraine, the enemy will fight back with all its might, and the Ukrainians will, with all their might and until the very end, directly strike our logistics bases. It doesn’t matter whether it’s Wildberries, Ozon, Yandex.Market, SDEK, Russian Post, or something else, targeting oil refineries, critical infrastructure, etc.

“They’re blowing people up, targeting people deliberately.”

Our enemy is, of course, the West [and that includes the US], which moderates the attacks on Russia, initiates, supports, organizes, and facilitates them, political scientist Yuri Kot reminded in an interview with Perviy Russkiy:

Why did they only strike Ozon now? They’ve hit before, but not so obviously. <…> First, they tried to take down Wildberries, and, in principle, they continue to do so deliberately, since it’s a fairly significant financial institution in terms of capacity, along with Ozon. One could say it’s one of the most powerful in Russia in terms of financial turnover.

The expert noted that their goal is to create maximum discomfort in civil society:

On the one hand, they’re blowing people up, targeting people deliberately. They want to create as much intolerance as possible in Russian society, so that it will demand an end to this war under any conditions. But it must be said that Russian society is mature and understands that a pause on the front lines will not solve the problem.

Especially since we now have a huge historical chance to resolve the age-old problem of division by returning the southern part of the Russian people to their homeland.

But here the West has clearly calculated that if society is maximally consolidated, “we can fight indefinitely, because we have the resources and technology for it.” So they’ve decided now, with their foot already poised over the precipice of the Ukrainian regime’s collapse, to escalate the situation, and they will continue to do so:

British missiles are already flying at us, and even though they’re pretending it’s not them, ie. it’s none of their business, it’s the absolute truth. They’re even admitting that we’re ready to fight, as they say, by supporting Ukraine, to fight Russia with every possible means: terrorism, missiles, and so on. The situation will continue until Russia slams its fist on the table and overturns this chessboard on which they’re trying to play us. We have the capabilities to do so.

The political scientist notes that they will obviously continue to attack and escalate the situation – with terrorist attacks, missiles, and drones. They will increase production and capacity on the Ukrainian side, regardless of where the front line is, be it near Kyiv or Lviv.

The attack on Ozon after the WB, Kot noted, was natural. He believes there could be other attacks on other key enterprises. And our task is to be prepared for this:

I predict this situation will continue in the next six months to a year. <…> They are seriously escalating against the backdrop of the upcoming elections in Russia. <…> Let’s hope that this escalation will ultimately move toward increasing the number of contract soldiers in order to quickly put an end to this [infection]. <…> On the other hand, <…> We have technical means, hypersonic weapons, and, ultimately, nuclear weapons, capable of subduing any enemy. The only thing is that, in my opinion, attacking Ukraine with nuclear weapons is not entirely productive. [Correct, it could spin out of control] If we’re going to strike, then strike at the decision-making center. <…> London could very well be targeted, to immediately, as they say, cut off the Hydra’s head.

There’s only one prediction: sooner or later, if this situation continues, the need will arise to increase the escalation curve, leading to a nuclear strike, the expert concluded. [Not necessarily. A major strike with Oreshniks could discourage them]

“Destroy the illusion of peaceful life within Russia”

Komsomolskaya Pravda war correspondent Alexander Kots recalled that back in July, Zelenskyy’s advisor Mykhailo Podolyak admitted to the world that their only objective was essentially “destroying the illusion of peaceful life within Russia.” To inflict “an instant psychological and economic knockout blow on millions of residents.” Not on the army, but on millions of civilians.

Why? So that discontent with the war, as he put it, “will increase among citizens.” So that the lines for refunds from the burned-out checkpoints will turn into lines with banners. To create “protest sentiment.” Simply put, a Maidan. This, of course, is in addition to the economic damage. [That is an illusion. A Maidan in Russia is impossible because they KNOW their enemy is the West, not Russia itself!]

Was it possible to prepare in advance and minimize the damage? That same July, Kots wrote:

Nets, of course, won’t save anything. <…> A metal frame, like the one at the UAE oil refinery in the third month of the war with Iran, will most likely violate fire safety regulations. There obviously won’t be enough air defense for everyone. Civilians won’t be allowed to use their mobile task forces tomorrow, but something should have been done yesterday. <…> Perhaps—I hesitate to say it—they should decentralize well-known large logistics centers. This doesn’t just apply to marketplaces.