I’m not saying we aren’t heavily influencing their battle strategy and tactics, but having direct veto power seems less proxy war-ish.
I’d say “No thanks *wink wink*, we don’t want veto power. But since you’ve proven yourselves capable, here is some longer range weaponry. Just keep us updated *wink wink* on how you decide to use it along with the battlefield intelligence we share.”
Russia is finished. Even if Putin wants to use tactical nukes, it won’t solve their logistical problems; they can’t hold Ukraine.
They won’t negotiate with Putin. Have already officially said as much. I think it’s their way of unofficially fast tracking into NATO.
The knock on effect of this push is now they can target logistic centers, ammo depots, and airfields deeper and deeper into Russia held territory. I can’t remember if it was around Lyman or Kherson but there’s an important airbase that the ukranian forces are soon going to be able to target with artillery.
Claymores? Ukraine isn’t full of campers, they are a run n gun type of country, send them overkill and dead silence.
Those MRAPS are death traps against armored vehicles but they’re much better than HMMWVs for a quick advance against infantry conscripts.
Ukraine is desperate to get the us ATACMS system and offered to hand over a targets list to the US for approval so they can hit military and logistics targets in Crimea. According to the tapper link last night, the Iranian drones are being launched from there and Ukraine wants to take it out. The ATACMS has a range of 185 miles compared to the HIMARS range of 60 miles If any of this is wrong blame the Jake Tapper show and not RockHardEnis39
Sorry, I didn’t mean literally getting launched from there but more so fired from the Iranian government from some place. I realized it was a dumb question.