Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Culverin t1_iy2y35v wrote

The US and allies should be supplying Ukraine with longer range munitions to delete every Russian piece of kit in Crimea

Limiting the Ukrainians to artillery duels of similar ranges to the Russians is just dragging this out and costing the lives of Ukrainian soldiers and innocent women and children.

Give them the gear to end this sooner. Let's stop half-assing the help.

136

Matthiey t1_iy4m597 wrote

Look, the US needs to get rid of obsolete or near obsolete inventory, not to mention that that inventory needs to be replaced by Lockheed Martin and friends as well as lining a couple Senators' pockets on buying shares from them. Do you REALLY think that having a short war is in ANYONE's interest save for the Ukrainians?

The help is not half-assed. It's full ass to milk this situation for all it is worth.

8

Culverin t1_iy4ntmn wrote

That's a bit too simplistic. It's not just about replenishing inventory levels.
Ukraine is also free advertising for the might of the American military industrial complex. The more it can flex on the Russians, the better it looks.

For context, Poland previously had 20 HIMARS on order.

Now they want 500 units.

https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2022/05/27/poland-eyes-500-us-himars-launchers-to-boost-its-artillery-forces/

That's not rockets, that's the actual vehicle launch system.

How throw in the parts and service, the supply vehicle and the rocket reloads,

and now Poland sees how much ammo is needed for a sustained fight?

You're thinking medium amount of milking it. Ukraine only has 16 HIMARS at this point.

This Poland result is the big picture of milking it.

27

Jebus_UK t1_iy52j0i wrote

Plus you know....at about 20 billion for a war that destroys one of the USAs biggest threats or at least sets it back 20 years with zero US casualties, well it's a bargain. I mean it needs to happen don't get me wrong but it suits the US and NATO to have a perma weakened Russia.

12

Matthiey t1_iy4og0t wrote

As of last week, it's actually 20 HIMARS but, yes, this has been the best PR event for US military engineering firms.

7

grchelp2018 t1_iy4ykdu wrote

Poland is buying big because they hate russia. As soon as russia acted out, they were going to place a big order. Are countries far removed from the russian threats suddenly increasing their US mil purchases?

5

imjesusbitch t1_iy5gsxz wrote

Ya that article was from May and the US waited until June to send HIMARS to Ukraine. Not really the best example. Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia all ordered some shortly after seeing them in action in Ukraine. Though I'm not sure if they were planning to get them before the war.

1

digginghistoryup t1_iy656lo wrote

Didn’t Poland decide to buy South Korea mobile rocket launchers instead because they are readily available?

2

arnicticon t1_iy4s7un wrote

Peace is maintained by superior weaponry. That's sorta how things have always worked.

7

All_Work_All_Play t1_iy4tv75 wrote

Superior weaponry and rational actors on both sides of the table. The latter is missing, at least on Russia's side. Well, they're also missing weaponry too...

5

[deleted] t1_iy3c5dm wrote

[deleted]

−8

Culverin t1_iy3d1h0 wrote

Ukraine has already been hitting targets in Russia. Just not with western kit.

They have also been highly disciplined with the gear provided by the USA. Unless I'm mistaken, they have not lost a single HIMARS unit in the months they have been there or we'd see that all over Russian media.

They have been shown to follow instructions.

Possible provocation is just based on Russian perception which is totally arbitrary anyways.

28

Gix_Neidhaart t1_iy3lq77 wrote

Thats a lie, i have seen atleast 30+ confirmed destruction of himars from absolutley 101% trustworthy russian sources on twitter

22

Nightfire50 t1_iy3nbic wrote

in a third floor window?

12

Markus-752 t1_iy3p3po wrote

Yes, you can clearly see the two shots in the back of the hatch of the HIMARS. They are clearly just to end it's suffering before it hits the ground since it did indeed fall out that 3rd story window.

Oh and apparently it had novichok instead of Oil in its engine which clearly indicates a suicide. Simply tragic.

9

Alexander_Granite t1_iy5y05c wrote

Russia’s ability to shoot down or capture the longer range missiles is also a concern for the US.

0

Kastrenzo t1_iy3o256 wrote

Belgorod has already been struck multiple times. Ukrainian gunships flew into Russia and blew the shit out of oil and gas facilities there

And Russia just ate it.

9

Swampberry t1_iy415ef wrote

The issue is that if it becomes a clear NATO led attack on Russia it can very easily lead to nuclear doomsday. It has to be Ukrainians running it, and I don't think Ukraine has many long range missile capabilities already.

−17

fury420 t1_iy5435c wrote

It seems worth pointing out that Russian pilots flying Russian jets have literally shot down hundreds of US/NATO aircraft and it didn't lead to nuclear doomsday. (Korean war)

−2

ritz139 t1_iy345uw wrote

Ukrainian soldiers and lives aren't very important.

The important thing is killing Russians while making sure they don't feel justified using nukes.

−68

Culverin t1_iy358xs wrote

That's been the justification not the send Ukraine ATACMS,

But if we're going to be honest, if Ukraine was told "our continued support of you is contingent these ATACMS don't get used on Russian territory proper", they would quite likely follow that directive.

Ukraine has already been hitting targets in Russia, just not with western long-range weapons. It's been drone attacks and sabotage.

​

Let's just unlock the Ukrainians so they can at least hit every spot within their borders including Crimea.

​

Sevastopol naval base? and all the ships and supplies there?

22

ritz139 t1_iy3e4iq wrote

That wouldn't do .

That will force Russia hands to do an all out mobilization, and potentially NATO soldiers to be mobbed since Ukrainian bodies might run out.

As long as Russia can't advance, everything is fine, as without ceasefire, we will continue to throttle them long term.

−14

OceanIsVerySalty t1_iy3ndut wrote

That’s not particularly plausible.

You’re assuming a lot: that Russians will cooperate with a full mobilization. That Ukraine, a country of 43 million people, will somehow “run out of bodies.” That other countries won’t step up their responses long before that occurs. That if that somehow does occur, that NATO would then decide that that’s the time to put boots on the ground.

13

ritz139 t1_iy62btx wrote

i see.

so why isn't biden & nato stepping up?

interesting if you think in an all out war between russia and ukraine it isn't a possibility ukraine run out of soldiers first

−1