Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Culverin t1_iy358xs wrote

Reply to comment by ritz139 in US eyes long-range rockets for Ukraine as arms supplies dwindle by likeiamnoone

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