Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Hades_adhbik t1_j69uels wrote

The more the opposing army can be defeated from a distance, the less causalities

>Ukraine and its Western allies are engaged in “fast-track” talks on the possibility of equipping the invaded country with long-range missiles and military aircraft, a top Ukrainian presidential aide said Saturday.

>Mykhailo Podolyak, an adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, said Ukraine’s supporters in the West “understand how the war is developing” and the need to supply planes capable of providing cover for the armored fighting vehicles that the United States and Germany pledged at the beginning of the month.

17

afops t1_j6advy1 wrote

And so long as Russia can attack Ukraine from the safety of Russia indefinitely, how can Ukraine be safe?

Ukraine needs the tools to hit Russia on every inch of Ukraine and some ability to attack the launch sites for long range attacks. The problem here is I doubt many western countries would like to donate cruise missiles with their flag on them that hit Russian bombers at an air base near Moscow. That fear I understand. The ATACMs fear not so much.

6

hikingmike t1_j6aid1y wrote

Air defense saturation would really limit the attacks from Russia without requiring hitting inside Russia. They’ve done great lately and that keeps increasing. But Ukraine hitting Russia’s launch sites that are responsible for their strikes (more?) would be great. When I envision how this could look if (when) Ukraine pushes them fully out, I expect Russia to keep shooting like this unless there is a drastic change… until they realize it is futile due to Ukraine’s defenses. That’s a hope anyway.

7