Here we go again-Ukraine once again pt2

[Commander Wallace]

Originally Posted by Otto Harkaman

Is there any news evidence that the US has authorized Ukrainian in using HIMARS, ATACMS and similar against Russian targets inside Russia? (Asking AI:chatgpt4)

Recent news indicates that the United States has not authorized Ukraine to use HIMARS, ATACMS, or similar weapons to strike deep into Russian territory. While the U.S. has provided Ukraine with advanced weaponry such as HIMARS and ATACMS, the authorization for their use is restricted to within Ukrainian borders or areas immediately involved in the conflict. This policy aims to avoid escalating the conflict by preventing strikes deep within Russian territory​ (Yahoo)​​ (IISS)​.

The U.S. has permitted the use of HIMARS and GMLRS (Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System) to target Russian positions that directly threaten Ukrainian territory, particularly in regions like Kharkiv Oblast​ (Yahoo)​.

However, long-range ATACMS missiles are not included in this authorization and are intended for use within Ukraine's sovereign territory only​ (Euromaidan Press)​.

There have been reports of ATACMS being used by Ukraine, but these instances are within the context of their current conflict zones and not for strikes deep into Russian territory​ (Military.com)​.

This approach aligns with the U.S. strategy of supporting Ukraine's defense while minimizing the risk of a broader escalation involving NATO and Russia.

I rarely comment on Strategy or the use of weapons. However, I think it was a colossal mistake on the part of the U.S to limit the use of weapons we give to the Ukraine in defense of their homeland. Russia initiated and wanted this war. Russia doesn't observe any limitations in the bombing and killing of the Innocent. Ukraine shouldn't be hamstrung in how they orchestrate the defense of their homeland. The only thing Russia understand is getting a bloody nose. We in the U.S should help in those efforts.

Russia certainly did the same in Vietnam and also in the Korean war where Russia's own pilots fought directly against our people and flew MiG's against our F-86 sabre jets. Russia will sign it's own death warrant if it wants a wider war with the U.S and or against NATO as a whole.

To be fair, I understand the U.S not wanting a wider conflict but as Mick Jagger says, you can't always get what you want but you get what you need. In the case of Russia, you get what you deserve and asked for.

[mapuc]

Markus

[mapuc]

Markus

[Otto Harkaman]

Originally Posted by Commander Wallace

I rarely comment on Strategy or the use of weapons. However, I think it was a colossal mistake on the part of the U.S to limit the use of weapons we give to the Ukraine in defense of their homeland. Russia initiated and wanted this war. Russia doesn't observe any limitations in the bombing and killing of the Innocent. Ukraine shouldn't be hamstrung in how they orchestrate the defense of their homeland. The only thing Russia understand is getting a bloody nose. We in the U.S should help in those efforts.

Russia certainly did the same in Vietnam and also in the Korean war where Russia's own pilots fought directly against our people and flew MiG's against our F-86 sabre jets. Russia will sign it's own death warrant if it wants a wider war with the U.S and or against NATO as a whole.

To be fair, I understand the U.S not wanting a wider conflict but as Mick Jagger says, you can't always get what you want but you get what you need. In the case of Russia, you get what you deserve and asked for.

I don't know if after 2 years and 4 months anybody is still trying to achieve a swift end to the war. It seems like they are willing to broaden it?

It could be the case like the South East Asia conflict that the different departments in the United States Government are fighting different wars in the same place hindering and confusing the situation.

[Skybird]

The US must balance its - limited - ressources versus its needs regarding China. American weapon production also meets its limits, regarding production output.

The latter problem is shared in Europe, just that in Europe the deficits in military productivity are even much worse, and the willingness NOT to adress this in full is quite big in some key player countries, namely Germany, which refuses Macron's talk of European independence in military production (whether he really means it is somehtign different, when the French say "Europe" they implicitly mean "France first"...) and prefers to just crawl back under the American umbrella, hoping that Trump or Biden will play nice with NATO.

Russia on the other hand has raced at exactly the opposite direction: it has switched to full war production, and to such a total degree where it needs the war to continue at any cost, if the economy should not instantly collapse.

Two sides, the one searching desperately a way to peace, the other as desperately depending on avoiding peace and continuing the war to prevail.

Interesting situation, to put it this way. As usual, my expectations of the future of this are utmost grim.


Also, a shortage of key ressources caps Western ammunition production.

[Commander Wallace]

Originally Posted by Otto Harkaman

I don't know if after 2 years and 4 months anybody is still trying to achieve a swift end to the war. It seems like they are willing to broaden it?

It could be the case like the South East Asia conflict that the different departments in the United States Government are fighting different wars in the same place hindering and confusing the situation.

It does seem that way or maybe people are wising up that you can't fight a War with your hands tied.

[mapuc]

Originally Posted by Skybird

The US must balance its - limited - ressources versus its needs regarding China. American weapon production also meets its limits, regarding production output.

The latter problem is shared in Europe, just that in Europe the deficits in military productivity are even much worse, and the willingness NOT to adress this in full is quite big in some key player countries, namely Germany, which refuses Macron's talk of European independence in military production (whether he really means it is somehtign different, when the French say "Europe" they implicitly mean "France first"...) and prefers to just crawl back under the American umbrella, hoping that Trump or Biden will play nice with NATO.

Russia on the other hand has raced at exactly the opposite direction: it has switched to full war production, and to such a total degree where it needs the war to continue at any cost, if the economy should not instantly collapse.

Two sides, the one searching desperately a way to peace, the other as desperately depending on avoiding peace and continuing the war to prevail.

Interesting situation, to put it this way. As usual, my expectations of the future of this are utmost grim.


Also, a shortage of key ressources caps Western ammunition production.

What will our coming history books tell the kids in the future about this war ?
That Russia outnumbered NATO 10/20 to 1 in ammo production and 5/10 to 1 in weapon production, but was outnumbered 10 to 1 in drones.

Markus

[Otto Harkaman]

Originally Posted by Commander Wallace

It does seem that way or maybe people are wising up that you can't fight a War with your hands tied.

Well whether all of us agree or not we are on a slippery slope to somewhere

[mapuc]

Markus

[Jimbuna]

[Jimbuna]

Putin warns Russia could provide weapons to strike West

Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned that Moscow could arm countries with a view to attacking Western targets.

Mr Putin made the statement while criticising the West's delivery of long-range weapons to Ukraine.

Several countries including the United States have given Ukraine the green light to strike targets inside Russia.

Such action could lead to “very serious problems", Mr Putin told foreign reporters.

"If someone thinks it is possible to supply such weapons to a war zone to attack our territory and create problems for us, why don't we have the right to supply weapons of the same class to regions of the world where there will be strikes on sensitive facilities of those countries?" the Russian president said.

"That is, the response can be asymmetric. We will think about it."

He did not specify which countries Moscow could supply weapons to.

Mr Putin singled out Germany, which recently told Ukraine it was free to hit targets inside Russia with long-range German-made weapons.

"When they say that there will be more missiles which will hit targets on Russian territory, this definitively destroys Russian-German relations," Mr Putin said.

US President Joe Biden has given Ukraine permission to use American-supplied weapons to strike targets in Russia, but only near the Kharkiv region. The White House has said Ukraine cannot use long-range ATACMS missiles on Russian soil.

Ukraine has used US weapons to strike inside Russia in recent days, a US senator and a Western official told the Associated Press on Wednesday.

Fierce fighting has been raging north-east of Kharkiv since a new Russian push across Ukraine's northern border. Kharkiv, Ukraine's second city, is just 30km (18 miles) from the border.

UK Foreign Secretary Lord Cameron has said it is up to Ukraine to decide how to use British weapons and insisted it has the right to strike targets on Russian territory.

Ukraine says North Korean missiles are being used inside Ukrainian territory, and Western intelligence agencies say Russia has been using Iranian-made drones in the conflict.

Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

Mr Putin was speaking to foreign journalists at the annual St Petersburg International Economic Forum.

He also warned that the West was wrong to assume that Moscow would never use nuclear weapons.

"For some reason, the West believes that Russia will never use it," Mr Putin said when asked by Reuters about the risk of nuclear escalation over Ukraine.

"We have a nuclear doctrine, look what it says. If someone's actions threaten our sovereignty and territorial integrity, we consider it possible for us to use all means at our disposal.

"This should not be taken lightly, superficially."

Mr Putin also dismissed the idea that Russia has plans to attack Nato territory.

"You should not make Russia out to be the enemy. You're only hurting yourself with this, you know?" Mr Putin said.

"They thought that Russia wanted to attack Nato. Have you gone completely crazy? That is as thick as this table.

Who came up with this? It is just complete nonsense, you know? Total rubbish."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn44r9zjnpjo

[Dargo]

Originally Posted by mapuc

What will our coming history books tell the kids in the future about this war ?
That Russia outnumbered NATO 10/20 to 1 in ammo production and 5/10 to 1 in weapon production, but was outnumbered 10 to 1 in drones.

Markus

History books will read that Putin was a loser and that Russia could not win a war with a very small country. It can outnumber in anything, but it can not occupy any large important areas it does not have the will like Ukraine has to win this.

[mapuc]

Originally Posted by Dargo

History books will read that Putin was a loser and that Russia could not win a war with a very small country. It can outnumber in anything, but it can not occupy any large important areas it does not have the will like Ukraine has to win this.

May you be right in your prediction

Don't know how the eastern Europe would look like if Russia would win the war and what the history books would tell our coming pupils about it.

One thing I'm sure of, is this:
The war ended a year after the US/NATO withdraw their support to Ukraine, after Russia had bombed several keypoints in eastern Europe, belonging to NATO. NATO had the motto: "Better escape-than fighting badly"
(This would never happen)

Markus

[ET2SN]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

Putin warns Russia could provide weapons to strike West
He did not specify which countries Moscow could supply weapons to.

Well, there's Belarus and then there's... um, Belarus..
Last time I checked, Belarus was in no hurry to #### off Poland so, what could go wrong?

[Oubaas]

Originally Posted by ET2SN

Well, there's Belarus and then there's... um, Belarus..
Last time I checked, Belarus was in no hurry to #### off Poland so, what could go wrong?

The Houthis, New Caledonia, the IRA, Iran, Syria, Iraq, Cuba, Nicaragua, quite a few places in Africa, Hezbollah, lots of possibilities.

And everyone thinks bombs, missiles, and artillery shells when they hear "weapons". What if he starts handing out vials of amplified smallpox, or some highly contagious bacteria that have been genetically engineered to produce cobra venom as a by-product of their cellular metabolism?

I see a bad moon rising.