Ukraine may soon be cleared to use Western weapons to strike deep into Russia. It’s what the beleaguered nation needs to turn the tide of the invasion, but it has, thus far, been strictly forbidden. Why? Not since September 11, 2001, has the US government seen the results of an enemy determined to bring America to its knees. Only then did the US military go after the terrorist group responsible with a vengeance. But time passes, and memories fade.
Though Gaining Ground, Ukraine Needs the Tools to Win
Ukraine has shown a determination in the ground war to eject the invading enemy – but Russia has devastated the length and breadth of Ukraine with its fighter-bomber, ballistic missile, drone, and cruise missile attacks. The issue is Ukraine’s ability to use the long-range missiles the West has provided to strike deep into Russia to destroy the Kremlin’s ammunition depots, and training and staging areas, which have consistently resupplied the Russian invasion. “Ukrainian officials have repeatedly called on allies to greenlight the use of Western-provided long-range weapons to strike targets deep inside Russian territory. So far, the US has allowed Kyiv to use American-provided weapons only in a limited area inside Russia’s border with Ukraine,” the Associated Press explained.
In recent months, the intensity of Moscow’s air and ground assaults on Ukraine’s ground forces has increased, jeopardizing any momentum Kyiv’s army can muster. Concern is building that a sustained Russian battering of Ukraine’s civilians and soldiers will wear down the Ukrainians. The increased intensity by the Russians has magnified the urgency for the US and the West to rethink the prohibition on Ukraine from using long-range missiles to strike deep inside Russia. As The New York Times reported, “A deadly uptick of Russian guided glide bombs slamming into Ukrainian cities — as many as 800 in a single week this summer — has injected new urgency into a long-running debate over whether Ukraine should be allowed to launch missiles supplied by the West at military targets deep in Russian territory.”
The reluctance of the US, the UK, and France to allow Ukraine to prosecute the war with Russia the way it should be fought is perplexing. Russian President Vladimir Putin has persistently threatened to escalate hostility to encompass NATO countries, but those threats have been hollow. Nonetheless, the West and predominantly the US have, from the first days of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, been fearful of the conflict escalating. In a recent report by The Wall Street Journal, trepidation regarding any widening of the Ukraine-Russia conflict took an odd turn. As the WSJ explained:
Ukraine has shown a determination in the ground war to eject the invading enemy – but Russia has devastated the length and breadth of Ukraine with its fighter-bomber, ballistic missile, drone, and cruise missile attacks. The issue is Ukraine’s ability to use the long-range missiles the West has provided to strike deep into Russia to destroy the Kremlin’s ammunition depots, and training and staging areas, which have consistently resupplied the Russian invasion. “Ukrainian officials have repeatedly called on allies to greenlight the use of Western-provided long-range weapons to strike targets deep inside Russian territory. So far, the US has allowed Kyiv to use American-provided weapons only in a limited area inside Russia’s border with Ukraine,” the Associated Press explained.
In recent months, the intensity of Moscow’s air and ground assaults on Ukraine’s ground forces has increased, jeopardizing any momentum Kyiv’s army can muster. Concern is building that a sustained Russian battering of Ukraine’s civilians and soldiers will wear down the Ukrainians. The increased intensity by the Russians has magnified the urgency for the US and the West to rethink the prohibition on Ukraine from using long-range missiles to strike deep inside Russia. As The New York Times reported, “A deadly uptick of Russian guided glide bombs slamming into Ukrainian cities — as many as 800 in a single week this summer — has injected new urgency into a long-running debate over whether Ukraine should be allowed to launch missiles supplied by the West at military targets deep in Russian territory.”
The reluctance of the US, the UK, and France to allow Ukraine to prosecute the war with Russia the way it should be fought is perplexing. Russian President Vladimir Putin has persistently threatened to escalate hostility to encompass NATO countries, but those threats have been hollow. Nonetheless, the West and predominantly the US have, from the first days of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, been fearful of the conflict escalating. In a recent report by The Wall Street Journal, trepidation regarding any widening of the Ukraine-Russia conflict took an odd turn. As the WSJ explained:
“Officials are concerned in particular that Russian President Vladimir Putin could retaliate by arming the Yemen-based Houthi rebels, who are engaged in a long-running campaign to attack ships in the Red Sea. Putin has warned the US and its allies that permitting Ukraine to use Western-made long-range missiles against Russia would mean the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s countries were ‘at war’ with Russia.”
The Iran-backed Houthi terrorists are already being supplied with drones and a variety of ballistic and cruise missiles by Iran. It’s a little incredible to believe the Russians would send munitions to the Houthis when, in desperation, Moscow is receiving short-range missiles and drones from Iran to fight in Ukraine. But the tide may be turning on the US naysayers.
Decision on Using Long-Range Missile May Be Changing
In a recent interview on Fox News, retired four-star US Army general Jack Keane revealed a brightening picture for Ukraine. “The good news here is, the Brits have already made a decision. They haven’t publicly announced it that they are going to remove the restrictions on Ukraine using their Storm Shadow Cruise Missiles, and it looks like the United States is moving in the same direction, to remove the restrictions imposed on ATACMS,” Keane said. Liberty Nation News reported that “The ATACMS or Army Tactical Missile System, with a range of 186 miles, can hit deeper into Russia and Russian-held areas of Ukraine.”
Keane’s optimism is encouraging. Still, Major General Patrick Ryder, the DOD press secretary, said during a press briefing that “there has been no change to our policy” when asked by a reporter if the US would be loosening restrictions. Reports from the five-sided building say that Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin III is one of the officials who does not favor Ukraine using ATACMS or Storm Shadow Cruise Missiles.
Curiously, the US Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, in his remarks to the press following meetings in Ukraine, seemed more open to permitting the use of longer-range munitions to strike deeper into Russia. “[W]e have adjusted and adapted as needs have changed, as the battlefield has changed, and I have no doubt that we’ll continue to do that as this evolves,” Blinken offered on the long-range strike issue. If the US is going to permit Ukraine to use more effective strikes deeper into Russia, waiting to make the decision will not improve Kyiv’s combat capability. Ukrainian progress in beating back its enemy has been hurt by being unable to reach into Russia and destroy warfighting capability before it arrives in Ukraine. A long-range strike capability would help immensely.
Dave is a retired U.S. Air Force Pilot with over 180 combat missions in Vietnam. He is the former Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, Comptroller and has served in executive positions in the private sector aerospace and defense industry. This article was first published HERE
8 comments:
Bad move, if he really wanted the decimation to stop then he'd be advocating for peace. It's a loosing battle you old fullah but you won't admit that. The USA thought Russia would be weak and the time was ripe and to provoke a war with them would be just the ticket.
Is he asking for strikes into the USA? Because that's what they'll get or the annihilation of Kiev. So far Russia has been restrained.
I wish they'd just wrap it up. Russia isn't up for the taking knuckle head.
Anyone who claims that it is US policy to provoke Moscow and bring about a showdown between Russia and the West/NATO on European soil must be thinking, "My case rests. Here it is, straight from the horse's mouth."
So TJS, we are meant to take your comment seriously when it seems you enjoy playing the man rather than the argument!
Right on, Barend.
No JohnS. Just tired of the BS about the Ukraine.
You should read some history. Dates back to Kissinger and friends with the Dissolution of the Soviet Union boxing day '91
Gorbachev had just resigned the day before and Boris Yeltsin became President of Russia.
Kissinger was right in there doing their underhanded deals.
In any case what are you doing? Only the same. Going after the man.
Listen to Scott Ritter talking to judge Napolitano, where he explains how the west was 72 minutes away from Nukes flying last Saturday. Worst situation than the Cuban missile crises.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypk75F1jB0A&list=TLPQMTYwOTIwMjRO4h_HDq1o1A&index=2
Scott Ritter is always right on the mark. He has a great perspective and knows what he's talking about.
Thanks anonymous at 2:22.
As I suspected Scott Ritter only confirms what I say with the precise detail which outlines
the extreme severity of the situation.
He explains how close to annihilation we came on Saturday because of American polliticians trying to call the shots. Boris Johnson also is commanding an audience of imbeciles and nincompoops.
I suggest anyone reading this thread who doesn't already fully understand the consequences or implications of this strategy which is purported by Dave Patterson should educate themselves by taking the time to listen to what Scott Ritter says on the link provided by anonymous at 2:22
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.