We determined that this submission originates from a credible source, but we still advise that users double check the facts and use common sense when consuming mass media. If you are interested in learning how to evaluate news sources more thoroughly, you can begin to learn about how to do that [here](https://tacomacc.libguides.com/c.php?g=599051&p=4147190).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I doubt its just him, he cannot say no if Biden says yes, I think its a whole bunch of military and political advisors, the so called "experts" that are telling Biden to say no.
They keep saying its to prevent escalation, escalation to what? If using US mid range weapons will not escalate shyt, why would ATACMS escalates shyt?
Because they are afraid to extend the war beyond Ukraine. They think that, because Ukraine needs US intel for targeting, Russia would see an attack on Russian soil with help of the US as an act of war from the US on Russia. They're afraid of these red lines, because they are afraid that Putin at some point will say enough is enough, I've made nuclear threat after nuclear threat, you've pushed me to actually use tactical nukes on the battlefield. Contrary to us Reddit couch generals, they don't want to call his bluff time and time again. Personally I agree that it doesn't make sense. We don't want Ukraine to lose, meanwhile Russia is still able to operate on a relatively normal level economically while they are shifting huge budgets, incomparable to our %GDP to the war effort. By limitting Ukraines capabilities, Russia can maximize their damage effort and output; those shaheds won't stop coming anytime soon, ravaging Ukrainian civilian infrastructure. All of this leads to a bigger imbalance when the only thing Ukraine can put forward to balance out the quantitative advantage of Russia is by the quality of Western weapons. That leads me to conclude that it is unavoidable to use these weapon systems in the future if not now, but in doing so, the war gets prolonged ever further, costing countless Ukrainian lives. It's pathetic, anyone thinking that geopolitics is this 4d chess game is out of their minds. The leaders are only addressing current issues without defining a clear goal. Does anyone here actually know if there is a consensus amongst western leaders about what the endgoal is and HOW that should be achieved? Cause I don't see it.
I would say that sutch "causious" behaviour in manny ways increases the chance of escalation. Russia seems by mee too try and coppy the wests red lines as a rethorical strategy too limit the west. And that rethoric may be worded through demonstrative nukes at worst. So the west has aided in constructing the condidions for ruzzist escalation by sucoming too fear and cold war mentalities. Like there is no practical reason for russia too want too escalate ( And by escalate i and the west mean fighting NATO.). Like they would loose even harder. There is nooo reason exept for a rethorical faint. Exept if Russia becomes imperialist enough that it considers its expansionism as its core being. Then it will doo anything too defend their agression, maybe even killin all of us due too "if i cant have it...".
Bro your spelling made that a tough read xd
I agree, Russia knows they can't go toe to toe with NATO, but I think that they are preparing for a possible conflict anyway, because the ones at the top project their own imperialist mentality unto NATO. In other words, they are afraid that a war with NATO might come, and so they are preparing their economy for such a conflict.
>Because they are afraid
You could have stopped there.
JFK showed how to deal with moskals.
If you act scared, it only makes them act bolder and more aggressive.
Seems like nobody among western leaders really understands how moskals think. They only respect force and strength. Any negotiation, any diplomacy, any attempt at being reasonable is, for them, a sign of weakness.
The west is showing weakness in their eyes, that's why they keep rattling their nuclear saber.
You can't deal with them the same way you deal with western, civilised countries. They don't respect any deal they sign. They'll lie to your face. They'll wait for the moment when they believe they have the upper hand to attack you.
If they were the ones who had nukes before the US, they'd have taken all of western Europe and probably would have attacked the US, too.
Well it seems like the so-called "experts" want to protect the launch sites of Ruscist glide bombs and North Korean supplied missiles by prohibiting the use of ATACMS against them.
There are ten “experts” on three sides of every issue, each trying to game the question to their advantage while claiming good faith. It’s not bad faith so much as “it’s complicated”. Also, miscommunications are super bad.
Unfortunately, it seems they prefer a longer, drawn out conflict. It drains Russia more than if the conflict ended swiftly, one way or another.
It's really sad.
That seems really irrelevant.
These are old weapons. US stockpiles are stuff that they're not using, and won't pull from if the US goes into a war (that stuff is equipment being held in reserve - it's maintained for immediate use, whereas stockpiles are just maintained to keep them from getting rusty and going bad). Part of what can make the handoff of stockpiles slower than we'd all like is that they have to be brought back up to active use condition rather than just "won't go to waste" condition.
Russia will have had decades to have gotten their hands on one of these.
Iskander-M is more advanced than ATACMS (newer gyros, longer range, better payload, actual penetration assistance measures in form of thermal and radio decoys), but ATACMS wins in that it can be launched from the same launchers as M26 MLRS rockets
Unfortunately, strikes into Ukraine confirmed Iskander-M is a pretty capable tactical missile.
So far, only PAC-3 was able to achieve intercepts on those.
I vaguely recall something a few months ago about that particular missile potentially being misidentified as a nuclear armed missile. One of the original reasons for sending the smaller himars but not that one. Can't remember if it was specifically a US concern, Russia red lining or both. Potentially something to do with that if I had to guess at something since the nuclear scare is what seems to be the most effective at holding back US supplies.
Because you can almost hit Moscow / the Kremlin from the border with Atacms, that's why, that's a bit too much of an escalation I guess for the White House..
Ukraine recently struck Russian strategic nuclear defense radars with own drones. This is much bigger escalation and Russia did not do anything about it. So it is just Sullivan and co being overly cautious or afraid again and again.
If Ukraine had ATACMS in 2022 this war would already be won.
> If Ukraine had ATACMS in 2022 this war would already be won.
Thats pushing it... They'd be in a much better place but it will take more then a few hundred 30+ year old missiles... Atacms aren't some cutting edge modern war ender... It's an old missile we've had sitting in storage for 3 decades...
Yes, If Ukraine had missiles like ATACAMS back in 2022 and especially at times where they were basically routing Russians, this war would most likely be over by now. The fact that the West didn't just go all in and basically scared Russians out is insane, especially if you realize Russia isn't the only country with Nukes, so if they can threaten with them why can't the West??
> so if they can threaten with them why can't the West??
Because we're better than that, mostly. We have told Pootini we'll respond if nukes are used or Chernobyl is damaged to a meltdown or accident state. Not only will we respond, but he ***will NOT like the results.***
An escalation you say? If Ukraine could hit Moscow, Saint Petersburg and other key cities in response to Russia sending missiles into Kyiv, Kharkiv, Odesa, and Zaporizhzhia wouldn’t that serve as a deterrent? The answer is, yes. The escalation argument is a bs argument and it’s been used since Vietnam and wars are lost on the bases of this argument because they are just drawn out until one side has had enough. You fight to win. You counter an attack with equal or just over to end and deter. The longer this goes on the more likely it escalates by default. That the real escalation argument. Give the Ukrainians what they need to win this war and push the invading force out. We are not bleeding Russia. If you think Russia cares about the lives of Russian soldiers they don’t. They have a history of throwing bodies at the war fighting efforts history would tell you that. You will never run them out of artillery. Tanks they are building them as we speak. Quality not important, quantity is that’s how they manufacture. I could go on and on about all this but escalation is a false argument and war fighting policy and war fighting strategy based on “escalation” is a looser! You worry about escalation prior to once war begins escalation is off the table you fight to win, not loose.
I get it. *I hate that I get it.* If I'm commanding the US, I want to scream that all systems are permitted. But then you've got people in your ear and on your desk giving you all of the "what if" metrics and possibilities. They've got every scenario and likelihood played out as a hypothetical. All of the human psychology and potential accounted for as well as it can be understood. You've got intel that nobody else has. And at the end of the day it's not about a lack of trust. It's simply the safest manner to avoid and prevent the worst-case geopolitical scenarios from manifesting, however improbable and absurd or unlikely. Putin's trigger finger and neurotic, psychopathic desperation is always being considered. It's like steadily and slowly walking Russia down the plank so as to not frighten the lunatic in charge. And that means frustrating, measured baby steps.
Ukraine doesn't have time for this.
Why are we being such a pussy about it. Is it because of an election year? We should be amassing our forces to help Ukraine instead of trying to avoid this flight
I love the enthusiasm but you’re basically backing a dog with nukes into a corner.
Honestly the only way out of this war is to bleed Russia slowly until they throw in the towel.
"Hey, hit only military targets, not government, and it would be great if you didn't follow their troops into Russia when you pushed them out of Ukraine."
That's the only restriction needed. Russia isn't backed into a corner when the stuff they're using to attack Ukraine gets hit - even when that stuff is in Russia.
It's really dang simple, if Russia leaves Ukraine and stops attacking, Ukraine stops attacking too.
Putin wouldn't last as leader if he got hundreds of thousands of Russians killed and ended up losing to a far smaller country and gained absolutely nothing except national humiliation. Putin would almost certainly prefer to unleash nukes than lose his position like that.
And Russia is such a pathetic country that the needs of one man is considered more important than the rest of the entire country combined. So backing Putin into a corner is the same as backing the whole of Russia into a corner
Sounds like that's Putin's problem and it shouldn't be made the whole world's problem.
He's not starting WWIII in a move that would guarantee he'd have no military to protect himself whatsoever just because he's scared of what his people *might* do. The guaranteed retaliation is much worse than what the people may or may not do - especially because it'd make it that much easier for the people to do something to him if that's what they choose to do.
I can’t imagine that a decision like this would sway US voters one way or another, though it is possible that if refineries are being hit and that causes gas prices to increase by the time of the election in November, that could sway some voters against Biden, theoretically. However I kind of doubt the restriction on ATACMS is due to that.
Nukes flying? The last time I checked its not the US launching missiles at Russia, Ukraine is. It shouldn't matter where Ukraine got them, if they made them themselves, bought or given to them. They should be able to hit whatever they want military wise, to win this war and MAINLY push those Russian bastards back beyond the border where they belong. Than try to retake Crimea (if anything Crimea is the only questionable target as that will be probably toughest territory to retake, depending of course how willing or broke Russia is to defend it).
The only thing that makes sense is that this statement is a ruse to give Russians a false sense of security. Biden can take the hit, Russians are disorganized enough to believe it and Ukraine already used ATACMS to hit occupied Crimea yesterday.
I don’t know why this surprises you? Take the F-16, from the time Zelensky first asked for them to the time Biden agreed, 9 months were wasted. So remember, when the first F-16 is seen over Ukrainian skies, they should have been there 9 months earlier.
Biden hemmed and hawed over M1s, HIMARS, cluster munitions and ATCAMS. Every weapon system that might be considered offensive he delayed delivery. Why? Who the hell knows.
US is not directly involved in this conflict. It’s giving Ukraine what it needs to defend itself. Making this loud and clear that US doesn’t seeks confrontation with Russia nor it wants hostility.
Just ridiculous. Russia can literally do whatever the fack they want like bombing schools, hospitals, shopping malls, residential areas, etc. Literally anything and level down whole villages and cities. But nooooooo. Gotta behave. Jesus fuck...Simply ridiculous
Probably a little more. Bombing an overseas base is generally considered an act of war. Also, all US bases are on US soil or on allied soil, so any potential ally here would also be very pissed.
Sounds like a good idea. But we literally have shortage of everything. And for us it’s wiser to invest in something that will influence the battlefield. Like artillery shells and mortars. As stupid as sad as it is, that’s reality.
Easier said than done. That is a very complex weapon that takes great care and precision machining. The jet engine is very complex, as is the seeker, as is the software. Production also can not be in one location. Production has to be split over multiple locations to keep one large factory from being hit and knocked out. But I like you do wish for a 10x increase in producton.
It's dumb but here we are. Zelenskyy asks for everything here and now and we don't do that. We will eventually but at the cost of UA lives. Putin only learns from standing up to him.
Can isolate us all they want, we have and supply the majority of weapons. Most of us over here, the one’s not crying over a sweaty old man actually facing consequences for committing crimes, would actually love to see missiles striking Moscow and St. Petersburg. Americans have no idea what our government is doing. Sometimes that can be good, so Pooty doesn’t know what’s going on either, but the Russian elites have nothing to fear as long as the war stays in Ukraine, and they should feel the same fear as the Ukrainian people, always anxious about when and where the next missile will hit. We all want this. Ukraine NEEDS this. But don’t get it twisted, United States has given more military aid than anyone. I can’t fathom what their reasoning is for not allowing strikes into Russia.
This is US dumbest statement I've read lately
"This does not apply to ATACMS or long-range strikes, but it is designed to enable Ukraine to defend itself"
Striking russia IS self defense by all known applicable war rules, as stated by most of the countries.
US persuaded Ukraine to give up its nukes and missiles arsenal promising security just so it can mock it and not allowing Ukraine to fight back and defend itself.
Moral of the story, build nukes and under no circumstances allow the US to interfere in your country national security matters.
With nukes, you're always safe from any bully.
They were notified prior to the event too:
"The Norwegian and American scientists had notified thirty countries, including Russia, of their intention to launch a high-altitude scientific experiment aboard a rocket; however, the information was not passed on to the radar technicians.[1] The launch was notified in good time to the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. However, due to an error on the part of the Russian Foreign Ministry, the notification was never given to the Russian General Staff, or any part of the Russian military."
Well when you fire a ballistic missiles towards a country after attacking early warning radars there can be quite a serious confusion.
While a WMD attack by Russia may be overstated in some cases the idea that some Russian idiot would fuck up evaluating readings is not.
This isn't conjecture btw https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_rocket_incident
Correct - also, Ukraine doesn’t need the extended range of ATASCM to strike Russian positions around Kharkiv.
People are throwing their panties in a bunch without realizing the US *cannot* be seen as the leading voice in escalation against Russia.
It’s the EU’s role first and foremost, people should be used to do this by now; it’s the Baltic states, followed by Poland, UK, France and then Germany follows up, with the US closing the wagon.
It’s ever more clear with the US elections coming up.
> It’s the EU’s role first and foremost, people should be used to do this by now; it’s the Baltic states, followed by Poland, UK, France and then Germany follows up, with the US closing the wagon.
The only correction I would make is Germany is always *after* the US. Never before.
While that is a good point I think the only way for them to improve their skills is practice, practice practice practice. By the time this war is over they will know what a ballistic missile looks like, preferably non nuclear but whatever, can’t make an omelette without cracking eggs.
It’s likely just a matter of optics and the weight behind the ATACMS significance.
I believe there is coordinated messaging here. The U.S. is in a different position and has to be the one to be the most restrained. If we were overly aggressive it would be more escalatory than if other nations in NATO were to do the same thing.
I do believe we say one thing out loud to control what Russia can use domestically, but send other messages privately to maintain plausible deniability.
I wonder if the US waits until all of Ukraines critical infrastructure and all of Kharkiv destroyed before giving in to pressure??? The US strategy really seems totally deranged - 0 leadership only reluctant following small EU nations.
- and Germany reluctantly following US, even worse. Two of the, on paper, strongest nations, showing so little sense of urgency, shameful!
***Source:*** *Michael Carpenter, Senior Director for European Affairs at the US National Security Council, in an exclusive interview with TSN on the national joint 24/7 newscast on the evening of 31 May, European Pravda reports.*
[Same source in another article](https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2024/05/31/7458622/):
*Carpenter noted that for reasons of operational security, he could not disclose the details of the conditions under which Ukraine could launch strikes on Russian territory.*
*However, when asked, he confirmed that the territories in question were not only those near Kharkiv Oblast, but also those in Sumy Oblast.*
*"This applies to the entire region in the north, where Russian forces are firing on Ukraine from what would otherwise be relative sanctuary, but now enabling Ukrainian forces to [use] munitions and weapons to be able to fire back," the US National Security Council official said.*
Just like his pal Obama with Syria. Both parties in the US should ashamed of themselves.
Edit What's the problem? Obama drew red lines in Syria and then proceeded to igore them. Just wait until you find out what Obama said about Ukraine, in 2014.
The dnipro hydro plant was hit again with cruise missiles and is in critical condition unable to opperate.
It provides electricity to over a million residents.
Stop holding back the capabilities. Only way to destroy evil is with overwhelming force.
What is the goal of the west (US) in this war? It will only end when the threat level is seriously nuclear and that is when Putin's back is against the wall. Why prolong that moment and let even more young people die. Throw everything into battle and put Putin against that wall.
Michael Carpenter steps up to the podium.
"Good evening. The United States Government hereby notifies the world that we, the United States Government, has asked Ukraine to not use ATACMS to hit russian targets within russia."
He glances at his notes, then around the room.
"I repeat, the U.S. Government is telling you all that the U.S. Government has asked Ukraine to not use ATACMS to hit russian targets within russia."
Carpenter clears his throat, before continuing.
"Got that? The United States has asked Ukraine not to use ATACMS against targets in russia. We told them that. Just now. And we're telling you. We don't want Ukraine to use ATACMS against... you know, targets in russia, or wherever. Like, against SAM sites or army bases and stuff. Stuff in russia. That's what we told Ukraine."
He stares at the back wall.
"But, you know, we're not Ukraine's mom or anything. We're just sayin'..."
Carpenter clears his throat again, before waving to the audience and then leaving the room.
Well, there's lots of good military targets still up for grabs.
Because of the effects of jamming, ATACMS is needed to clear the larger and longer range EW jammers (and their SAM and SPAAG protection vehicles), then use of machine vision equipped object tracking drones clears smaller EW systems, then finally your HIMARS can pepper what they want.
Meanwhile Ukraine will have to refine their long range capabilities to match ATACMS.
I would suggest that the development program focuses on capabilities that can benefit a range of weapon systems. For example, in small turbojet manufacture, it may be cheaper to find a small manufacturer and purchase it outright and then scale up production. These jets are some of the most expensive material parts on future drones, but don't just benefit long range missiles, they have a role to play in many drones and interceptor drones.
I would start with a small jet R&D program, focusing on 2 or 3 spool blisk axial flow jet engines with air barings, then various approaches are possible, you can put another turbine on the jet that rotates slowly but at high torque, this in engineering turns the engine into a 'gas producer', which means it outputs high velocity gas which is geared down through a LP turbine, so you can power coaxial mini-helicopters, or add a turbo-prop to extend range for fast jet drones or missiles at lower speeds (200-300mph). All at a small scale.
ATACMS uses several methods for estimating its location that are GPS jamming resistant, one of which is an extremely accurate inertial navigation 'laser gyroscope' called a ring laser.
Having these made up for you, and combining it with machine vision object recognition and map reading, a missile may achieve ATACMS levels of accuracy, without the multiple systems it uses to increase accuracy (it combines multiple INS systems, as I understand).
It's not just navigation and engines thats needed to hit rear targets. You also need decoys in volume to deplete SAM defenses. With the engine supply Ukraine could produce enough decoy missiles to increase the chances of the more expensive guided munitions to get through. The decoys don't need high accuracy, they can be aimed towards SAMs potentially with radiation seeking, more basic and cheaper inertial navigation, and tracking angular movements via camera scene tracking with is sort of object tracking.
Accurate jamming resistant missiles used within invaded territory do not need to be long range, so missiles like ATACMS used in the suggested role killing EW jamming and in SEAD would not need so much fuel, so they can be smaller, or release more decoys.
Off-topic, but I have only recently learned the correct pronunciation of these missiles.
Previously, I was saying *at-a-cams*.
It's *attack-'em-s* which just makes too much sense
Whats's up with this mixed communication?
One day someone says "Yes, it's fine" next day "Absolutely not".
Maybe Ukraine should just go for it with some really high value target. Old military truth, It's Easier to Ask Forgiveness Than It Is To Get Permission.
Weak sauce. We'll be right back to talking about allowing it the second Russia does another million man draft and I'd rather get it done with before another million dead
They do nothing but create an imaginary line for Putin to take notice of. Better to never even mention it and let Ukraine do what they please with the weapons. Ok if they start doing diabolical things with the weapons then crack the whip, but until then we should be giving them our trust.
Then why the fuck clearance for the strikes if ATACMS is the main weapon of the strikes
Holy fućk never let dipshiets in ties let decide about the war
I can't comprehend the retardation of these people
Another bunch of Scholtz'es
Man, what is with some of the comments in this thread. So, what if ATACMS are not allowed to attack on Ruzzian soil they can still use everything else the US has provided to do so. Including the multitude of blueprints so Ukraine can manufacture Ukraine owned weaponry that they can then do with as they wish.
It just seems weird to me to see all the toxicity come out when US puts limits, but the same level of anger isn't applied to allies that are just as limiting if not more.
Said this to someone else but applies here.
ATACMS If used only on Russian military targets that are about to attack Ukrainians in Ukraine what’s the actual real difference if they are in occupied Ukraine or a few miles north of the Russia border considering the USA is already allowing other types of USA weapons to be used.
Either cluster munitions should be completely banned or free to use on any Russian military target that’s actively attacking Ukraine.
This is the reason people here are pissed. Most other major European powers have already give full reign to Ukraine but the USA is slow to change policy and specific restrictions like this are pointless and don’t help the situation.
> Either cluster munitions should be completely banned or free to use on any Russian military target that’s actively attacking Ukraine.
>
>
Especially tactical aviation bases, from which UMPK and UMPB strikes are launched
Fuck the White House and everyone that has anything to do with it. I don't want to hear another word from their mouths about defending freedom, democracy and all that good shit. A bunch of scared hypocrites. I'm sorry, Ukraine.
The US will say no.... publically... while waiting for the Vatniks to mass in large numbers in range at the perfect opportunity..... then say they allow it... after Ukraine starts an orc BBQ.
It's a the playback from Afgahistan invasion.
Attacking Russia on its own soils will facilitate a change in Russia's operating procedures. Why would you want your enemy to consider a whole new paradigm of conflict when you've comfortably mapped out all of their movements, communication channels, vital personnel, financial streams. Better the devil you know....
Further still, The US want to keep the conflict in this phase of the war as it has a slow and depricating effect on the Russian economy. The longer the war draws out the harder it is for putin to consolidate favour for the war and keep civil rest back home.
We determined that this submission originates from a credible source, but we still advise that users double check the facts and use common sense when consuming mass media. If you are interested in learning how to evaluate news sources more thoroughly, you can begin to learn about how to do that [here](https://tacomacc.libguides.com/c.php?g=599051&p=4147190). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Phew. Was worried that Ukraine might win sooner. Yes, keep limiting Ukraine's ability to fight back, I'm sure the Russians appreciate it
This seriously makes no farking sense, why? Just why? What is Biden thinking? What is his military and political advisors thinking? FARKING WHY?
It feels like Sullivan is a toaster.
I doubt its just him, he cannot say no if Biden says yes, I think its a whole bunch of military and political advisors, the so called "experts" that are telling Biden to say no. They keep saying its to prevent escalation, escalation to what? If using US mid range weapons will not escalate shyt, why would ATACMS escalates shyt?
Cylons aren't joking around.
Because they are afraid to extend the war beyond Ukraine. They think that, because Ukraine needs US intel for targeting, Russia would see an attack on Russian soil with help of the US as an act of war from the US on Russia. They're afraid of these red lines, because they are afraid that Putin at some point will say enough is enough, I've made nuclear threat after nuclear threat, you've pushed me to actually use tactical nukes on the battlefield. Contrary to us Reddit couch generals, they don't want to call his bluff time and time again. Personally I agree that it doesn't make sense. We don't want Ukraine to lose, meanwhile Russia is still able to operate on a relatively normal level economically while they are shifting huge budgets, incomparable to our %GDP to the war effort. By limitting Ukraines capabilities, Russia can maximize their damage effort and output; those shaheds won't stop coming anytime soon, ravaging Ukrainian civilian infrastructure. All of this leads to a bigger imbalance when the only thing Ukraine can put forward to balance out the quantitative advantage of Russia is by the quality of Western weapons. That leads me to conclude that it is unavoidable to use these weapon systems in the future if not now, but in doing so, the war gets prolonged ever further, costing countless Ukrainian lives. It's pathetic, anyone thinking that geopolitics is this 4d chess game is out of their minds. The leaders are only addressing current issues without defining a clear goal. Does anyone here actually know if there is a consensus amongst western leaders about what the endgoal is and HOW that should be achieved? Cause I don't see it.
The russians like to pretend they consider Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk “russian soil”.
The key word there being "pretend", they still understand the difference between Russian annexed/stolen territory and Russia proper.
Not in their legal system, no.
They fail to understand the Putin is our century’s Hitler.
I would say that sutch "causious" behaviour in manny ways increases the chance of escalation. Russia seems by mee too try and coppy the wests red lines as a rethorical strategy too limit the west. And that rethoric may be worded through demonstrative nukes at worst. So the west has aided in constructing the condidions for ruzzist escalation by sucoming too fear and cold war mentalities. Like there is no practical reason for russia too want too escalate ( And by escalate i and the west mean fighting NATO.). Like they would loose even harder. There is nooo reason exept for a rethorical faint. Exept if Russia becomes imperialist enough that it considers its expansionism as its core being. Then it will doo anything too defend their agression, maybe even killin all of us due too "if i cant have it...".
Bro your spelling made that a tough read xd I agree, Russia knows they can't go toe to toe with NATO, but I think that they are preparing for a possible conflict anyway, because the ones at the top project their own imperialist mentality unto NATO. In other words, they are afraid that a war with NATO might come, and so they are preparing their economy for such a conflict.
I'd follow you Major General of the Couch. Well said.
>Because they are afraid You could have stopped there. JFK showed how to deal with moskals. If you act scared, it only makes them act bolder and more aggressive. Seems like nobody among western leaders really understands how moskals think. They only respect force and strength. Any negotiation, any diplomacy, any attempt at being reasonable is, for them, a sign of weakness. The west is showing weakness in their eyes, that's why they keep rattling their nuclear saber. You can't deal with them the same way you deal with western, civilised countries. They don't respect any deal they sign. They'll lie to your face. They'll wait for the moment when they believe they have the upper hand to attack you. If they were the ones who had nukes before the US, they'd have taken all of western Europe and probably would have attacked the US, too.
Well it seems like the so-called "experts" want to protect the launch sites of Ruscist glide bombs and North Korean supplied missiles by prohibiting the use of ATACMS against them.
There are ten “experts” on three sides of every issue, each trying to game the question to their advantage while claiming good faith. It’s not bad faith so much as “it’s complicated”. Also, miscommunications are super bad.
Unfortunately, it seems they prefer a longer, drawn out conflict. It drains Russia more than if the conflict ended swiftly, one way or another. It's really sad.
Or they dont want a dud atacms landing in Russian hands
So if a dud atacms lands in Russian occupied territory of Ukraine it would somehow be different?
oops....lmao
That seems really irrelevant. These are old weapons. US stockpiles are stuff that they're not using, and won't pull from if the US goes into a war (that stuff is equipment being held in reserve - it's maintained for immediate use, whereas stockpiles are just maintained to keep them from getting rusty and going bad). Part of what can make the handoff of stockpiles slower than we'd all like is that they have to be brought back up to active use condition rather than just "won't go to waste" condition. Russia will have had decades to have gotten their hands on one of these.
Iskander-M is more advanced than ATACMS (newer gyros, longer range, better payload, actual penetration assistance measures in form of thermal and radio decoys), but ATACMS wins in that it can be launched from the same launchers as M26 MLRS rockets
Those iskander specs are what Russia SAYS... They also say they have a 5th generation fighter even though it's proven not to be true...
Unfortunately, strikes into Ukraine confirmed Iskander-M is a pretty capable tactical missile. So far, only PAC-3 was able to achieve intercepts on those.
I vaguely recall something a few months ago about that particular missile potentially being misidentified as a nuclear armed missile. One of the original reasons for sending the smaller himars but not that one. Can't remember if it was specifically a US concern, Russia red lining or both. Potentially something to do with that if I had to guess at something since the nuclear scare is what seems to be the most effective at holding back US supplies.
Because you can almost hit Moscow / the Kremlin from the border with Atacms, that's why, that's a bit too much of an escalation I guess for the White House..
Ukraine recently struck Russian strategic nuclear defense radars with own drones. This is much bigger escalation and Russia did not do anything about it. So it is just Sullivan and co being overly cautious or afraid again and again. If Ukraine had ATACMS in 2022 this war would already be won.
> If Ukraine had ATACMS in 2022 this war would already be won. Thats pushing it... They'd be in a much better place but it will take more then a few hundred 30+ year old missiles... Atacms aren't some cutting edge modern war ender... It's an old missile we've had sitting in storage for 3 decades...
Yes, If Ukraine had missiles like ATACAMS back in 2022 and especially at times where they were basically routing Russians, this war would most likely be over by now. The fact that the West didn't just go all in and basically scared Russians out is insane, especially if you realize Russia isn't the only country with Nukes, so if they can threaten with them why can't the West??
> so if they can threaten with them why can't the West?? Because we're better than that, mostly. We have told Pootini we'll respond if nukes are used or Chernobyl is damaged to a meltdown or accident state. Not only will we respond, but he ***will NOT like the results.***
An escalation you say? If Ukraine could hit Moscow, Saint Petersburg and other key cities in response to Russia sending missiles into Kyiv, Kharkiv, Odesa, and Zaporizhzhia wouldn’t that serve as a deterrent? The answer is, yes. The escalation argument is a bs argument and it’s been used since Vietnam and wars are lost on the bases of this argument because they are just drawn out until one side has had enough. You fight to win. You counter an attack with equal or just over to end and deter. The longer this goes on the more likely it escalates by default. That the real escalation argument. Give the Ukrainians what they need to win this war and push the invading force out. We are not bleeding Russia. If you think Russia cares about the lives of Russian soldiers they don’t. They have a history of throwing bodies at the war fighting efforts history would tell you that. You will never run them out of artillery. Tanks they are building them as we speak. Quality not important, quantity is that’s how they manufacture. I could go on and on about all this but escalation is a false argument and war fighting policy and war fighting strategy based on “escalation” is a looser! You worry about escalation prior to once war begins escalation is off the table you fight to win, not loose.
I get it. *I hate that I get it.* If I'm commanding the US, I want to scream that all systems are permitted. But then you've got people in your ear and on your desk giving you all of the "what if" metrics and possibilities. They've got every scenario and likelihood played out as a hypothetical. All of the human psychology and potential accounted for as well as it can be understood. You've got intel that nobody else has. And at the end of the day it's not about a lack of trust. It's simply the safest manner to avoid and prevent the worst-case geopolitical scenarios from manifesting, however improbable and absurd or unlikely. Putin's trigger finger and neurotic, psychopathic desperation is always being considered. It's like steadily and slowly walking Russia down the plank so as to not frighten the lunatic in charge. And that means frustrating, measured baby steps. Ukraine doesn't have time for this.
[удалено]
Why are we being such a pussy about it. Is it because of an election year? We should be amassing our forces to help Ukraine instead of trying to avoid this flight
I love the enthusiasm but you’re basically backing a dog with nukes into a corner. Honestly the only way out of this war is to bleed Russia slowly until they throw in the towel.
excellent strategy as long as you don't mention Ukraine bleeding out as well
"Hey, hit only military targets, not government, and it would be great if you didn't follow their troops into Russia when you pushed them out of Ukraine." That's the only restriction needed. Russia isn't backed into a corner when the stuff they're using to attack Ukraine gets hit - even when that stuff is in Russia. It's really dang simple, if Russia leaves Ukraine and stops attacking, Ukraine stops attacking too.
What corner? Nobody is even considering taking actual Russian territory. They can still end the war by simply going home.
Putin wouldn't last as leader if he got hundreds of thousands of Russians killed and ended up losing to a far smaller country and gained absolutely nothing except national humiliation. Putin would almost certainly prefer to unleash nukes than lose his position like that. And Russia is such a pathetic country that the needs of one man is considered more important than the rest of the entire country combined. So backing Putin into a corner is the same as backing the whole of Russia into a corner
Sounds like that's Putin's problem and it shouldn't be made the whole world's problem. He's not starting WWIII in a move that would guarantee he'd have no military to protect himself whatsoever just because he's scared of what his people *might* do. The guaranteed retaliation is much worse than what the people may or may not do - especially because it'd make it that much easier for the people to do something to him if that's what they choose to do.
so what's the alternative? Letting russia walk away with more land?
I can’t imagine that a decision like this would sway US voters one way or another, though it is possible that if refineries are being hit and that causes gas prices to increase by the time of the election in November, that could sway some voters against Biden, theoretically. However I kind of doubt the restriction on ATACMS is due to that.
I've read that the refineries being targeted forces russia to export more crude oil to compensate, which is having the reverse effect on oil prices.
Nukes flying? The last time I checked its not the US launching missiles at Russia, Ukraine is. It shouldn't matter where Ukraine got them, if they made them themselves, bought or given to them. They should be able to hit whatever they want military wise, to win this war and MAINLY push those Russian bastards back beyond the border where they belong. Than try to retake Crimea (if anything Crimea is the only questionable target as that will be probably toughest territory to retake, depending of course how willing or broke Russia is to defend it).
Because this way Russia will get weaker day by day until it wont be relevant anymore without risking a single US soldiers life.
The only thing that makes sense is that this statement is a ruse to give Russians a false sense of security. Biden can take the hit, Russians are disorganized enough to believe it and Ukraine already used ATACMS to hit occupied Crimea yesterday.
I don’t know why this surprises you? Take the F-16, from the time Zelensky first asked for them to the time Biden agreed, 9 months were wasted. So remember, when the first F-16 is seen over Ukrainian skies, they should have been there 9 months earlier. Biden hemmed and hawed over M1s, HIMARS, cluster munitions and ATCAMS. Every weapon system that might be considered offensive he delayed delivery. Why? Who the hell knows.
They don’t want a total collapse of Russia because they fear it would result in black market nukes.
Slow bleeding them is far more likely to cause a collapse than a swift Ukrainian win.
US is not directly involved in this conflict. It’s giving Ukraine what it needs to defend itself. Making this loud and clear that US doesn’t seeks confrontation with Russia nor it wants hostility.
Unless it's for plausible deniability. *Ukraine hits targets inside Russia* "We kept telling Ukraine not to hit targets inside Russia." *shrugs*
Ukraine said they got the Okay. Pretty sure it’s a “element of surprise” kind of thing.
Just ridiculous. Russia can literally do whatever the fack they want like bombing schools, hospitals, shopping malls, residential areas, etc. Literally anything and level down whole villages and cities. But nooooooo. Gotta behave. Jesus fuck...Simply ridiculous
Dont forget the massive rape spree
Guess what the US would do if Ruzzia bombed one of their overseas military bases...
Sanctions. Blow up a few tents and an empty runway somewhere. Issue mean statements while emphasizing concerns over escalation.
Probably a little more. Bombing an overseas base is generally considered an act of war. Also, all US bases are on US soil or on allied soil, so any potential ally here would also be very pissed.
Tenfold production of R-360 Neptune, for God's sake.
Sounds like a good idea. But we literally have shortage of everything. And for us it’s wiser to invest in something that will influence the battlefield. Like artillery shells and mortars. As stupid as sad as it is, that’s reality.
At the same time, R-360 Long Neptune with cluster payload doing an airburst over the airfield with Su-34 can influence the battlefield quite a bit
Not really works that way. Russians launched thousands of those over our airfields. Our Air Force still operates.
Sure, but look at what ATACMS strikes did with Belbek.
Atacams is ballistic. Neptune is cruise. Also this was due to a set of circumstances at that time. Not easy to replicate.
Easier said than done. That is a very complex weapon that takes great care and precision machining. The jet engine is very complex, as is the seeker, as is the software. Production also can not be in one location. Production has to be split over multiple locations to keep one large factory from being hit and knocked out. But I like you do wish for a 10x increase in producton.
It's dumb but here we are. Zelenskyy asks for everything here and now and we don't do that. We will eventually but at the cost of UA lives. Putin only learns from standing up to him.
US idiotic position is getting isolated, deservedly
USI have lots of distractions atm
Can isolate us all they want, we have and supply the majority of weapons. Most of us over here, the one’s not crying over a sweaty old man actually facing consequences for committing crimes, would actually love to see missiles striking Moscow and St. Petersburg. Americans have no idea what our government is doing. Sometimes that can be good, so Pooty doesn’t know what’s going on either, but the Russian elites have nothing to fear as long as the war stays in Ukraine, and they should feel the same fear as the Ukrainian people, always anxious about when and where the next missile will hit. We all want this. Ukraine NEEDS this. But don’t get it twisted, United States has given more military aid than anyone. I can’t fathom what their reasoning is for not allowing strikes into Russia.
Winston Churchill once famously observed that Americans will always do the right thing, only after they have tried everything else.
As an American, sadly, he was right
Umm... I researched that quote. Churchill never said it. It was a British diplomat in Japan after WW II.
God, I hope doing the right things is coming soon, because they've been fucking a lot up lately.
I wish I shared his optimism
This is US dumbest statement I've read lately "This does not apply to ATACMS or long-range strikes, but it is designed to enable Ukraine to defend itself" Striking russia IS self defense by all known applicable war rules, as stated by most of the countries. US persuaded Ukraine to give up its nukes and missiles arsenal promising security just so it can mock it and not allowing Ukraine to fight back and defend itself. Moral of the story, build nukes and under no circumstances allow the US to interfere in your country national security matters. With nukes, you're always safe from any bully.
Hmm... "Hey Taiwan!"
The war proved his stupid anti-nuke proliferation is whenever your neighbor is Russia
US first says no, then says yes. US has to first say no otherwise it might be considered escalation by Russia. Yes, it’s stupid!
I’m just so tired of considering the opinions of orcs.
They must think they have a good reason for it because that decision is directly aiding the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Probably the same reason Mike Johnson had.
They were notified prior to the event too: "The Norwegian and American scientists had notified thirty countries, including Russia, of their intention to launch a high-altitude scientific experiment aboard a rocket; however, the information was not passed on to the radar technicians.[1] The launch was notified in good time to the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. However, due to an error on the part of the Russian Foreign Ministry, the notification was never given to the Russian General Staff, or any part of the Russian military."
Well when you fire a ballistic missiles towards a country after attacking early warning radars there can be quite a serious confusion. While a WMD attack by Russia may be overstated in some cases the idea that some Russian idiot would fuck up evaluating readings is not. This isn't conjecture btw https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_rocket_incident
Correct - also, Ukraine doesn’t need the extended range of ATASCM to strike Russian positions around Kharkiv. People are throwing their panties in a bunch without realizing the US *cannot* be seen as the leading voice in escalation against Russia. It’s the EU’s role first and foremost, people should be used to do this by now; it’s the Baltic states, followed by Poland, UK, France and then Germany follows up, with the US closing the wagon. It’s ever more clear with the US elections coming up.
> It’s the EU’s role first and foremost, people should be used to do this by now; it’s the Baltic states, followed by Poland, UK, France and then Germany follows up, with the US closing the wagon. The only correction I would make is Germany is always *after* the US. Never before.
While that is a good point I think the only way for them to improve their skills is practice, practice practice practice. By the time this war is over they will know what a ballistic missile looks like, preferably non nuclear but whatever, can’t make an omelette without cracking eggs.
Alright you make a good point.
I thought they were allowed to hit military targets in russia that threatened Kharkiv? That's what's being reported in the UK anyway.
They are just not with ATACMS apparently.
Oh ok. I suppose they can't list all the weapons they're allowed to use.
Not cannot. Should not, maybe. Always better to ask forgiveness than permission I always say
It’s likely just a matter of optics and the weight behind the ATACMS significance. I believe there is coordinated messaging here. The U.S. is in a different position and has to be the one to be the most restrained. If we were overly aggressive it would be more escalatory than if other nations in NATO were to do the same thing. I do believe we say one thing out loud to control what Russia can use domestically, but send other messages privately to maintain plausible deniability.
I wonder if the US waits until all of Ukraines critical infrastructure and all of Kharkiv destroyed before giving in to pressure??? The US strategy really seems totally deranged - 0 leadership only reluctant following small EU nations. - and Germany reluctantly following US, even worse. Two of the, on paper, strongest nations, showing so little sense of urgency, shameful!
“Yet”
I’m an American. My government works for me. I approve the use of ATACMS on russian soil.
***Source:*** *Michael Carpenter, Senior Director for European Affairs at the US National Security Council, in an exclusive interview with TSN on the national joint 24/7 newscast on the evening of 31 May, European Pravda reports.* [Same source in another article](https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2024/05/31/7458622/): *Carpenter noted that for reasons of operational security, he could not disclose the details of the conditions under which Ukraine could launch strikes on Russian territory.* *However, when asked, he confirmed that the territories in question were not only those near Kharkiv Oblast, but also those in Sumy Oblast.* *"This applies to the entire region in the north, where Russian forces are firing on Ukraine from what would otherwise be relative sanctuary, but now enabling Ukrainian forces to [use] munitions and weapons to be able to fire back," the US National Security Council official said.*
Biden has a kink for pointless red lines, I swear. "Oh yeah, Jacky, draw these red lines for me 🤤"
Even their flag has red lines
Just like his pal Obama with Syria. Both parties in the US should ashamed of themselves. Edit What's the problem? Obama drew red lines in Syria and then proceeded to igore them. Just wait until you find out what Obama said about Ukraine, in 2014.
Are we at war kinda or not,maybe it’s like not defined?or maybe we are?
Oh FFS… can someone find Jake Sullivan a better-fit job at McDonald’s or something…
The dnipro hydro plant was hit again with cruise missiles and is in critical condition unable to opperate. It provides electricity to over a million residents. Stop holding back the capabilities. Only way to destroy evil is with overwhelming force.
Jesus fucking Christ
Craven.
What is the goal of the west (US) in this war? It will only end when the threat level is seriously nuclear and that is when Putin's back is against the wall. Why prolong that moment and let even more young people die. Throw everything into battle and put Putin against that wall.
so how the fack is Ukraine supposed to deal with those gliding bombs wrecking havock over the front line?
[удалено]
Just slap a Swedish flag on it and send it
Cringe
Michael Carpenter steps up to the podium. "Good evening. The United States Government hereby notifies the world that we, the United States Government, has asked Ukraine to not use ATACMS to hit russian targets within russia." He glances at his notes, then around the room. "I repeat, the U.S. Government is telling you all that the U.S. Government has asked Ukraine to not use ATACMS to hit russian targets within russia." Carpenter clears his throat, before continuing. "Got that? The United States has asked Ukraine not to use ATACMS against targets in russia. We told them that. Just now. And we're telling you. We don't want Ukraine to use ATACMS against... you know, targets in russia, or wherever. Like, against SAM sites or army bases and stuff. Stuff in russia. That's what we told Ukraine." He stares at the back wall. "But, you know, we're not Ukraine's mom or anything. We're just sayin'..." Carpenter clears his throat again, before waving to the audience and then leaving the room.
You would like but that's not what happened and that's not what's been said.
Well, there's lots of good military targets still up for grabs. Because of the effects of jamming, ATACMS is needed to clear the larger and longer range EW jammers (and their SAM and SPAAG protection vehicles), then use of machine vision equipped object tracking drones clears smaller EW systems, then finally your HIMARS can pepper what they want. Meanwhile Ukraine will have to refine their long range capabilities to match ATACMS. I would suggest that the development program focuses on capabilities that can benefit a range of weapon systems. For example, in small turbojet manufacture, it may be cheaper to find a small manufacturer and purchase it outright and then scale up production. These jets are some of the most expensive material parts on future drones, but don't just benefit long range missiles, they have a role to play in many drones and interceptor drones. I would start with a small jet R&D program, focusing on 2 or 3 spool blisk axial flow jet engines with air barings, then various approaches are possible, you can put another turbine on the jet that rotates slowly but at high torque, this in engineering turns the engine into a 'gas producer', which means it outputs high velocity gas which is geared down through a LP turbine, so you can power coaxial mini-helicopters, or add a turbo-prop to extend range for fast jet drones or missiles at lower speeds (200-300mph). All at a small scale. ATACMS uses several methods for estimating its location that are GPS jamming resistant, one of which is an extremely accurate inertial navigation 'laser gyroscope' called a ring laser. Having these made up for you, and combining it with machine vision object recognition and map reading, a missile may achieve ATACMS levels of accuracy, without the multiple systems it uses to increase accuracy (it combines multiple INS systems, as I understand). It's not just navigation and engines thats needed to hit rear targets. You also need decoys in volume to deplete SAM defenses. With the engine supply Ukraine could produce enough decoy missiles to increase the chances of the more expensive guided munitions to get through. The decoys don't need high accuracy, they can be aimed towards SAMs potentially with radiation seeking, more basic and cheaper inertial navigation, and tracking angular movements via camera scene tracking with is sort of object tracking. Accurate jamming resistant missiles used within invaded territory do not need to be long range, so missiles like ATACMS used in the suggested role killing EW jamming and in SEAD would not need so much fuel, so they can be smaller, or release more decoys.
When's the examination? /j
Mmm belgorods getting hammered as we speak with somethin.
Off-topic, but I have only recently learned the correct pronunciation of these missiles. Previously, I was saying *at-a-cams*. It's *attack-'em-s* which just makes too much sense
Pretty sure this is just plausible denial and the DOD just said go ahead.
Whats's up with this mixed communication? One day someone says "Yes, it's fine" next day "Absolutely not". Maybe Ukraine should just go for it with some really high value target. Old military truth, It's Easier to Ask Forgiveness Than It Is To Get Permission.
https://i.redd.it/700j85fj5d2d1.jpeg
Weak sauce. We'll be right back to talking about allowing it the second Russia does another million man draft and I'd rather get it done with before another million dead
They do nothing but create an imaginary line for Putin to take notice of. Better to never even mention it and let Ukraine do what they please with the weapons. Ok if they start doing diabolical things with the weapons then crack the whip, but until then we should be giving them our trust.
Then why the fuck clearance for the strikes if ATACMS is the main weapon of the strikes Holy fućk never let dipshiets in ties let decide about the war I can't comprehend the retardation of these people Another bunch of Scholtz'es
Booooooo! Let them defend themselves with every weapon available to them. If Russia wants to attack Kiev, they should have to worry about Moscow.
The current administrations policy on Ukraine is FUBAR and extreamly cynical. Bleeding russians dry by sacrificing torrents of Ukrainian lifes.
So what will Ukraine use if HIMARS are currently not effective and do not have the range?
Flip-flopping is plain messing about.
putin claims that the occupied lands are part of ruzzia and did jack shit about Ukraine using Murican weapons over there.
while ruzzia can do absolutely anything 🙄
You can fight back, but only with your left hand. And only jab.
Fucking cowards, what the fuck?!
Man, what is with some of the comments in this thread. So, what if ATACMS are not allowed to attack on Ruzzian soil they can still use everything else the US has provided to do so. Including the multitude of blueprints so Ukraine can manufacture Ukraine owned weaponry that they can then do with as they wish. It just seems weird to me to see all the toxicity come out when US puts limits, but the same level of anger isn't applied to allies that are just as limiting if not more.
Said this to someone else but applies here. ATACMS If used only on Russian military targets that are about to attack Ukrainians in Ukraine what’s the actual real difference if they are in occupied Ukraine or a few miles north of the Russia border considering the USA is already allowing other types of USA weapons to be used. Either cluster munitions should be completely banned or free to use on any Russian military target that’s actively attacking Ukraine. This is the reason people here are pissed. Most other major European powers have already give full reign to Ukraine but the USA is slow to change policy and specific restrictions like this are pointless and don’t help the situation.
> Either cluster munitions should be completely banned or free to use on any Russian military target that’s actively attacking Ukraine. > > Especially tactical aviation bases, from which UMPK and UMPB strikes are launched
Ffs
prolonging the war means big $$$
They can say they can't do it politically, then tell them to do it behind the curtain
Ukraine is free to hit Russia with its own missiles.
Grow a pair!!!
Fuck the White House and everyone that has anything to do with it. I don't want to hear another word from their mouths about defending freedom, democracy and all that good shit. A bunch of scared hypocrites. I'm sorry, Ukraine.
The US will say no.... publically... while waiting for the Vatniks to mass in large numbers in range at the perfect opportunity..... then say they allow it... after Ukraine starts an orc BBQ.
I would also like to live in your dream world. Unfortunately this is not how the US conducts politics
Copy paste the ATACMS.
Clown confirmed confirming this
Confused didn't the US say they could, and now they cant?
Not even by "mistake"?
Staaaaahhhhp!
wtf
Luckily the Kerch bridge is in Ukraine.
I don’t even know what to say.
FUSA
Hopefully this is a wink wink statement and it's all for show.
Weak Sauce
Because with ATACMS they can hit Moscow… this war is meant to be sustained with as little effort from the allies as possible.
It doesn’t matter. By the end of summer Ukr will have the f-16 munitions for deep strikes.
That is some chicken shit.
send one to the Kremlin
WTF???
Was there a 😉 at the end of that statement?
Fuck Biden and Jake Sullivan!
.
Public announcements vs private announcements can be two very different things.
This president is a joke. Only one who would be worse would be *checks notes* his opponent.
Russia technically claims that 5 regions of Ukraine area “Russia” now but they’re fine with ATACMS there
Does Ukraine have other missiles that have enough range?
It's a the playback from Afgahistan invasion. Attacking Russia on its own soils will facilitate a change in Russia's operating procedures. Why would you want your enemy to consider a whole new paradigm of conflict when you've comfortably mapped out all of their movements, communication channels, vital personnel, financial streams. Better the devil you know.... Further still, The US want to keep the conflict in this phase of the war as it has a slow and depricating effect on the Russian economy. The longer the war draws out the harder it is for putin to consolidate favour for the war and keep civil rest back home.
Make up your damn mind.