By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Ryuu96 on 15 May 2024
Edit Thread
shavenferret said:
Ryuu96 said:

Two U.S. officials, when asked for comment, confirmed that the Biden administration's policy has not changed. "The assistance is for the defense and not for offensive operations in Russian territory," said one of the officials, who was granted anonymity to discuss sensitive issues.

The Russians are "smart now," Ustinova said, "because they know there is a restriction for Ukrainians to shoot at the Russian territory. And we saw all of their military equipment sitting one or two kilometers from the border [near Kharkiv] and there was nothing we could do."

The U.K. government this month lifted a similar restriction on the use of British weapons inside Russia, an announcement made by British Foreign Secretary David Cameron during a visit to Kyiv. "Just as Russia is striking inside Ukraine, you can quite understand why Ukraine feels the need to make sure it's defending itself," he said.

U.S. officials increasingly believe Putin's plans to mobilize new military units, coupled with additional ammunition from Beijing and dwindling Western support for Kyiv, could land him a win in Ukraine — and sooner than expected.

It might not be the win that Putin originally wanted, which was a total takeover of Ukraine. But by the end of this year, he may be able to use his gains to negotiate favorable terms for Moscow, three officials familiar with Western intelligence say.

Ukraine has for months launched strikes inside Russia using its own small drones to attack oil facilities. But officials in Kyiv insist they need the more powerful U.S. missiles to break through Russian air defenses along the border.

"Everybody knew the Russians near Kharkiv [were] bringing the manpower, everybody knew they were bringing a lot of artillery, so what they're aiming at doing now is they're going to turn Kharkiv into the second Mariupol, or Aleppo," Ustinova said.

"We keep coming back to the same problem — that it's Russia telling us what we should be doing," she said. "You're giving us a stick but you will not let us use it."

It would be nice if things were opened up, but eventually Ukraine will be producing enough drones so that smaller targets like tanks and artillery will be available to strike. It seems like they can really only go after oil depots and whatnot in Russia at the moment. However, they are making more and more drones bc this is what has kept ukraine in the war 

Eh, they can make a lot of drones but drones are easy to shoot down so they have to be sent to less well-guarded areas such as oil fields, refineries, etc. They will probably waste hundreds of drones trying to destroy military grouping areas, on the other hand if HIMARS could shoot across the border, it would be able to cause serious damage to Russian military groupings.

BFR said:

Guys, my only thought on the harsh restriction the US has imposed on Ukraine not being allowed to use US weapons to attack true Russian soil is the nuclear threat.

By this measure, Russia may consider an attack on its soil by Ukraine utilizing US weapons, as an indirect attack by the US against Mother Russia, thus justifying a Russian nuclear response against Ukraine. This communication may have already taken place between Russia and the US using back channels. If this is true, then it would explain why the US has been insisting on this restriction all along.

I'm sorry BFR but if we fight a war being constantly afraid of Russia, unable to even take a fraction of the bravery that Ukraine is exhibiting then Russia will win this war. Ukraine is desperately clinging on, we shouldn't make it harder for them when we have the ability not to. If Ukraine is asking for it then Ukraine themselves are willing to risk Russia's mythical response which has always amounted to nothing.

What more can Russia do to Ukraine that it hasn't done already?

Russia has threatened consequences multiple times, threatened redlines multiple times.

  • They threatened us if we got involved, they did nothing.
  • They threatened us if we sent ATGMS, they did nothing.
  • They threatened us if we sent MBTs, they did nothing.
  • They threatened us if we sent long-range missiles, they did nothing.
  • They threatened us if Finland/Sweden joined NATO, they did nothing.

In addition, multiple countries have publicly said that Ukraine can use their weapons on Russian soil, the UK most recently has publicly said that Ukraine can use Storm Shadow on Russia, now I'll give you that we haven't seen that done yet so it could be UK saying one thing in public but enforcing another in private so until I see it then I'm going to remain sceptical.

You can literally find dozens of nuclear threats Russia has made against the West over the years, in particular they've made a lot towards the UK, Lol.

The United States would not be attacking Russia, Ukraine would, Russia has no moral right to moan about that, especially when Russian proxy forces such as Wagner have attacked American troops in the past, when Russia aids enemies of America around the world which attack American troops, I consider that a bigger deal than America giving Ukraine some weapons and Ukraine choosing what it wants to do with them.

  • Russia said that Crimea was Russian, it has been bombed multiple times by western weaponry.
  • Ukraine has bombed Russia multiple times using its own weapons.
  • Ukraine's Russian Volunteer Legion were once caught using American military vehicles in Russia and Russia did nothing.

If Russia nukes Ukraine then NATO have said they would get involved in the war.