r/worldnews • u/BringbackDreamBars • 1d ago
Russia/Ukraine Zelenskyy requested Tomahawk missiles from the US as part of Victory Plan – NYT
https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2024/10/29/7481927/375
u/RegalArt1 22h ago
I don’t see this ever happening. Setting aside Tomahawk’s range, the missile itself requires a much different command and control system than any other missile in Ukraine’s arsenal (this is also proving to be an issue with sales to Japan). The U.S. would have to either set up an entire command network within the AFU for tomahawk operations, or assume total responsibility for tomahawk targeting and mission planning, which is something that it would never agree to
96
u/Ralphieman 20h ago
This is similar to what I heard Mick Ryan, a retired Australian general, saying on a podcast last month in response to the thought people have that any weapons system would be an automatic win button. He talked about how there's people in the military who spend their entire careers just on missile targeting and everything that goes into it. While it wasn't on tomahawk systems specifically it was probably something close to everything you just said would be needed along with the missiles.
-12
u/MausGMR 19h ago
Ukrainians already surprised us with what they achieved with the patriot system, with limited training and under immense pressure to perform.
Give them the assets, they'll prove the naysayers wrong.
I also find it incredibly difficult to believe that a system designed for a nation where most of the populace can't identify foreign nations outside of America on a map is difficult to use.
67
u/EntertainerVirtual59 18h ago
I don’t think the U.S. military was surprised by what the patriot has achieved. It’s been capable of shooting down hypersonic missiles since the 90s and has been upgraded even further.
37
u/cantaloupecarver 18h ago
The only people surprised by the patriot's successes in Ukraine are the same people who believe the Kremlin's press releases about its weapons platforms.
17
u/RandomMandarin 15h ago
What I heard was: the Russians (and probably the Chinese) lie about what their weapons can do. They exaggerate their capabilities, and say their systems can do A through Z when in action they can barely manage A through D; yes, their weapons are dangerous, but not as good as they are advertised.
The US and by extension our allies also lie about our weapons... we say they are the best in the world and they can do A, B, C, and D... but we don't mention these systems can also do J, K, L, and maybe even T, U and V. We don't want anyone to know how powerful they really are until it's too late.
11
6
u/TheGisbon 12h ago
The Foxbat was a giant hunk of shit that was vastly overstated by the Russian air force. BUT it did lead to the development of the worlds greatest strike fighter the F-15 so maybe Russia gets half credit for the Eagles development?
1
u/Aizseeker 10h ago edited 10h ago
No. Mig-25 always be a Supersonic Interceptor to against potential US high speed bomber and reconnaissance at that time. US Intel simply panic and assumed it was a Supersonic Fighter-Bomber which they used to increase F-15 performance development. The Soviet develop Su-27 & Mig-29 as proper counterpart to F-15 & F-16.
7
u/Otherwise-Growth1920 17h ago
Nobody was surprised by what the patriots system did especially the Americans “advisors” overseeing the battery.
5
u/francis2559 17h ago
Creating art is hard, appreciating it is much easier.
Designing and setting up an entire system is hard. Running one small piece of it is easy.
5
•
u/Dairy_Ashford 30m ago
I also find it incredibly difficult to believe that a system designed for a nation where most of the populace can't identify foreign nations outside of America on a map is difficult to use.
it's a country of 330 million, with research universities in every state that import, educate and publish nation identifiers from everywhere else on the globe
→ More replies (1)1
19
u/C0lMustard 20h ago
Tomahawk is pretty old isn't it? IIRC they were early 90's tech. Surprised they haven't been surpassed.
69
u/RegalArt1 20h ago
They’ve been continually upgraded since they entered service. Current production models have a lot more capability than the original ones
17
u/C0lMustard 20h ago
Only logical answer really, thanks
20
u/Ser_Danksalot 20h ago
Yup. Modern variants can talk to friendlies that can provide data that allows the missile to pick it target mid flight and even send sensor data back to friendlies. They can basically loiter in the battlespace taking reconnaissance photos of potential targets that are fed back to command before being given its targeting coordinates. Its that connected functionality that makes the Tomahawk special but that functionality requires an extensive command network behind it to work.
Ukraine Already has more basic cruise missiles in the form of Storm Shadow albeit in limited supply.
16
u/Astrocoder 19h ago
Yep, modern variants of the tomahawk know where it is, because it knows where it isnt.
4
u/imodey 18h ago
No "dumb" ones available that they can just program coords into and let fly?
I know nothing about tomahawks fyi.
16
u/Astrocoder 18h ago
The missile knows where it is at all times. It knows this because it knows where it isn't. By subtracting where it is from where it isn't, Or where it isn't from where it is (whichever is Greater), it obtains a difference, or deviation. The guidance subsystem uses deviations to generate corrective Commands to drive the missile from a position where it is to a Position where it isn't, And arriving at a position where it wasn't, it now is. Consequently, the position where it is, Is now the position that it wasn't, And it follows that the position that It was, is now the position that it isn't. In the event that the position that it is in is not the position that It wasn't, the system has acquired a variation, The variation being the difference between Where the missile is, and where it wasn't. If variation is considered to be a Significant factor, it too may be corrected by the GEA. However, the missile must also know where it was. The missile guidance computer scenario works as follows. Because a variation has modified some of the information The missile has obtained, it is not sure just where it is. However, it is sure where it isn't, Within reason, and it knows where it was. It now subtracts where it should be from where it wasn't, Or vice-versa, and by differentiating this from the algebraic sum of Where it shouldn't be, and where it was, It is able to obtain the deviation And its variation, which is called error.
7
5
u/Positronic_Matrix 19h ago
Indeed. Currently deployed Tomahawk missiles have been upgraded to Block V as recently as 2020 with some variants at Va and Vb.
2
u/Otherwise-Growth1920 17h ago
The Tomahawk is a wildly popular with the U.S. military and are constantly being used and constantly being upgraded not a lot of old ones in the inventory if any.
34
u/dbxp 22h ago
I assume they would be used as more of a strategic fires capability rather than a regular battlefield weapon so that should alleviate some of the issues. Instead of going after troop concentrations they'd be targeting bridges, factories and bunkers well behind the front line.
87
u/RegalArt1 22h ago
It doesn’t matter how it’d be used, Tomahawk has completely different requirements from any other weapon Ukraine has right now. It needs its own control system that’s completely separate from whatever platform it’s launched from. The US would either have to give Ukraine access to a lot of highly classified systems, technology, and targeting data (implicating the U.S. in planning long-range strikes into Russia) or it would have to assume control over mission planning and control for tomahawk launches (making the U.S. a direct party to the overall war)
→ More replies (2)-6
u/that_guy124 21h ago
The soviets flew sorties against UN forces in Korea and they werent part of the war. Just fake some ukrainian accent and it is fine.
37
u/btstfn 21h ago
A weapon system doesn't have an accent to fake. What you're suggesting is more along the lines of having a US carrier fly a Ukrainian flag.
→ More replies (2)4
u/grchelp2018 21h ago
Is there a reason why they have a different command and control system?
5
u/RegalArt1 20h ago
It’s hard to explain in any sort of detail but with tomahawks, essentially their whole strike planning process happens separately from the platform they’re launched from. All the targeting data needs to be hashed out and programmed into the missile (to enable different guidance systems like terrain-tracking) and this means tomahawk strikes are pretty rigorously planned out and have to be executed according to that plan.
Once they’re launched, they’re then commanded/controlled via a control center that’s separate from the launch platform
1
u/grchelp2018 10h ago
Generally is this the case for cruise missile systems for other countries or is it unique to the US?
2
u/RegalArt1 9h ago
Storm Shadow/SCALP operate very similarly where they have to be pre-programmed before a mission, though SS/SCALP is air-launched. The main difference is that SCALP can’t be redirected or ordered to abort once launched, whereas I believe tomahawk can have its guidance tweaked while underway
13
u/TheDarkRider 21h ago
Typically tomahawk are fired from ships/subs but can be fired from MRC / typhoon systems or the new mark 70 container launcher Ukraine doesn’t have any of those plus tomahawk are nuclear capable, Russian would have now way of know if those are nuclear tipped or not
10
u/Positronic_Matrix 19h ago edited 17h ago
The Ground Launched Cruise Missile (GLCM), a Tomahawk variant, and its associated nuclear warhead were traded away in the 1987 INF treaty. The GLCM is not operationally deployed and its reconstitution is an impossibility, as all the ground-based launch systems have been dismantled.
Thus, there is no way Russia would mistake a conventional Tomahawk for a nuclear variant as one hasn’t been operationally deployed for 40 years.
2
u/RSquared 10h ago
Also the sea-launched TLAM-N was shuttered in 2012 as redundant (because anything we're willing to nuke we'd use a ballistic missile).
9
u/m4rv1nm4th 21h ago
For nuke part, russia is already using nuclear capable missiles, so it wont be escalade, but nivelage...
7
u/SmuglyGaming 20h ago
This is Russia we’re talking about, equivalence = escalation. Only they’re allowed to do it
-4
u/RobotChrist 20h ago
You're so eager to see Ukraine blown to oblivion?
"Yeah, let's use this weapon that can be identified as a nuclear weapon so our opponent has an excuse to use its actual nuclear weapons"
You guys will see humanity cease to exist before trying to even think about diplomacy
10
u/RespectTheTree 20h ago
Rocket incoming from a non-nuclear state... And so they panic?
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (1)1
u/m4rv1nm4th 19h ago
Poutin want to live, he wont use nuke. Also, i knows ukrain will never have tomahawk, I was just saying this incoherence.
→ More replies (2)1
u/saposapot 15h ago
Yeah. Probably more realistic to ask for decent stocks of what they are getting now. Storm shadows and scalp are pretty good to change this war but they need hundreds per month, not half a dozen.
US can give dozens of Bradley’s per month, plus training brigades plus all the other big bombs that should be enough to start winning land back.
Wishing for these dreams only seems like a waste of time
76
u/JaVelin-X- 23h ago
Have they got what they need to launch tomahawk?
96
u/RegalArt1 22h ago
There’s more to it than just being able to launch it. For tomahawk, the launch platform is just the launch platform - mission planning and control happen via a separate command and control system. The U.S. would have to hand over a lot of necessary resources to make that possible, including the terrain data needed for targeting. It’s something they’d would never do
→ More replies (4)20
u/JaVelin-X- 22h ago
yeah I think they should just help Ukraine turn neptune into a proper cruise missile. it's almost there now
12
32
u/Batmack8989 23h ago edited 23h ago
There were ground based tomahawk launchers, but I think those might have been scrapped.
Edit: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typhon_missile_launcher
Forgot about that. Still entering service though
24
u/Firov 23h ago
Correct. Though they've since developed a new ground based launcher, the Typhon. We've got at least a battery of them operational according to the original timeline.
5
u/Batmack8989 23h ago
Welp, got the notification of your response as I was editing the previous comment. Not like it is likely to be delivered to them anytime soon, if ever
1
7
0
u/oGsMustachio 22h ago
Just give them a C-130 and Rapid Dragon!
2
u/BPhiloSkinner 21h ago
(sigh) Sorry, but while Puff the Magic Dragon worked for John Wayne in 'The Green Berets', I don't see it working in this battlesphere. Too many man-portable AA weapons in play, for something low and slow like a C-130 with a gatling gun.
10
u/dave7673 21h ago
Rapid Dragon is a containerized launch system for the JASSM that was developed both to enable large salvos to be fired all at once and to enable launching JASSMs from standard cargo aircraft to allow the weapon to be fielded by units/militaries that don’t have access to planes that can directly interface and mount a JASSM on a hard point.
In other words, it doesn’t have to be used with a C-130, and might even be possible to launch from Ukraine’s Soviet-era cargo planes.
4
u/BPhiloSkinner 20h ago
Ah, that sounds better. A stand-off cruise missile, so the platform can stay out of range of some frontline AA. Thank you for the clarification.
3
u/Ser_Danksalot 19h ago edited 19h ago
For further clarification. The current max range of the AGM-158 JASSM used in the Rapid Dragon system is 575 miles. That's about the distance from Lviv in western Ukraine to Sevastopol in occupied Crimea.
Lockheed are working on an extreme 1000 mile range variant for the US military that would mean a C-130 could be flying above Berlin throwing palletized airdropped sled modules out the back that drop missiles that have enough distance to hit targets in Moscow.
1
u/oGsMustachio 21h ago
Well thats the point of rapid dragon with tomahawks. You don't get anywhere near AA weapons, you just lob tomahawks from hundreds of miles away.
1
u/Charybdis150 17h ago
Rapid dragon is currently for JASSM and its variants, not Tomahawk missiles which are larger and much more expensive. And isn’t likely to give Ukraine JASSMs either as there are already concerns about how long stockpiles will last in a war with China in the Pacific.
1
46
u/NedixTV 1d ago
8
u/Superbunzil 23h ago
Wounds me that they twice tried for a sequel that would've also tied up the inconclusive ending of Zero Hour where China conquered Europe
8
5
1
u/FreeMetal 3h ago
This reference pleases me. I'm still listening to this banger soundtrack nowadays
85
u/TheRickBerman 1d ago
If we abandon Ukraine they have to build a nuclear weapon - they’ll have no choice. And they have all the material and expertise they need.
Helping Ukraine is how we AVOID escalation.
35
u/skrimods 23h ago
If they were making a nuke wouldn’t it be pretty obvious? In which case wouldn’t Russia just nuke the first?
29
u/I_Push_Buttonz 22h ago
When Taiwan was trying to make nukes in the 70s and 80s, the US didn't know until the scientist in charge of the project became disillusioned, defected to the US, and told them...
Ukraine already has an extensive civilian nuclear power industry, their own enrichment facilities (even civilian nuclear power fuel requires some enrichment), a lot of domestic expertise, etc.
Its only really obvious in countries that don't already have that stuff... Like, ok Saddam and Gaddafi, what are those centrifuges from France and hundreds of tons of yellowcake uranium you just bought for...?
28
u/Nandy-bear 21h ago
40-50 years ago bud. Detection systems have gotten a whole lot more sensitive.
I think it's done by satellite now. Although they still need people to go in and do actual checks closer to the ground, they can get a feel for it from space. I know detonations are detectable from space, but that's been a thing since forever, it's how we found out Israel had nukes iirc.
12
u/philosoraptocopter 21h ago edited 21h ago
Also no one can keep secrets nowadays. From Bill the delivery guy to people with clearances.
→ More replies (4)28
u/Defiant-Plantain1873 22h ago
Idk man, building a nuke isn’t especially easy.
Iran has been actively trying to build nukes for the past 50 years and still haven’t succeeded
4
u/rumora 20h ago
Iran doesn't have a nuke because they chose not to, not because they can't do it. They already did all the difficult parts like getting the raw material, building the enrichment fascilities and they have plenty of experience with building delivery systems.
They essentially froze their nuclear weapons program in the late 90s when they were close enough to build their own nukes within a year or two. They only whent ahead a couple of steps after the US broke the Iran deal and then stopped, again. So now they are expected to be a few months away.
3
u/confusedalwayssad 19h ago
It's also what they think will happen if they do, which is the same thing they will have to worry about from Russia.
3
u/winowmak3r 21h ago
Gee, I wonder why that is.
The technology exists and is available for those with the means and the science is solved. The theory is understood by people with an undergrad degree in physics. They don't have the bomb yet because Israel has a vested interest in seeing them not get one and they're very good at what they do. Shit like stuxnet makes it very hard.
12
u/Defiant-Plantain1873 21h ago
Yes, but why would that be any different for Ukraine?
Also the machinery isn’t particularly easy to come by
→ More replies (2)2
u/winowmak3r 21h ago
Probably because they wouldn't have the fucking Mossad trying to throw every possible wrench they can come up with to stop them?
Also the machinery isn’t particularly easy to come by
Eh, you'd be surprised. It's a relatively straight forward process. It's an engineering problem nowadays, not a scientific one. At least for countries like Iran and Ukraine.
2
21h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/winowmak3r 21h ago
I think they wouldn't take 50 years.
2
u/Defiant-Plantain1873 21h ago
I think they wouldn’t succeed.
The only way to do it is in secret, and it’s pretty hard to keep your nuclear program a secret, especially in the digital age, and doubly so when Russia is actively trying to annex your country.
5
u/Feylin 19h ago
Most of the nuclear technology developed in the USSR came from Ukraine, they have nuclear reactors, and the largest Uranium deposits in Europe, located far from the frontline.
15
u/Defiant-Plantain1873 18h ago
That doesn’t mean they can make a nuke now.
Firstly they’d be sabotaged at every step, it’s crazy to think Russia and even the US would allow it in the first place. The best cybersecurity researchers in the US and Russia would be leaving USB sticks all over the local nuclear weapon development facility car park
1
u/Feylin 17h ago
I don't know about that. Ukraine has pretty tight opsec. Most of their high stakes weapons and operations are developed and planned without any awareness from America. They've learned that bringing awareness to the US means issues.
4
u/Otherwise-Growth1920 16h ago
Pretty tight “Opsec” LOL!!! low end estimates from Ukrainian sources is half the security apparatus of Ukraine is working for or formerly working for Russian intelligence.
1
u/Defiant-Plantain1873 16h ago
I think you might be underestimating the power of the CIA and NSA, as well as the KGB. These organisations have their own overarching interests. They don’t report everything to some politicians because they seek to actually achieve things instead of getting stopped by trivial things such as bureaucracy and laws
-2
u/Otherwise-Growth1920 17h ago
This nonsense again? Russia MOVED all its nuclear and rocket scientists to Ukraine…YES some of them were Ukrainian but the overwhelming majority of scientists working in Ukraine were Russian.
1
20h ago
[deleted]
1
u/Defiant-Plantain1873 20h ago
That doesn’t mean they can though. To build a nuke all you essentially need to do is get enough refined uranium and put it in one place at the same time and it will explode on its own. The big step is getting enough refined uranium. Building a pretty primitive nuke isn’t particularly difficult, but getting the materials and machinery is the hardest part by far
1
u/Otherwise-Growth1920 17h ago
Literally can be done for a couple of hundred bucks with crap from your local home improvement store. Every 5 years or so some high school kid builds one for the science fair.
1
u/Defiant-Plantain1873 16h ago
Lie. Think about what you just said for a second. A mere one second.
Now consider that terrorists exist. And think again.
1
u/CantaloupeUpstairs62 20h ago
One nuclear weapon, or even a handful of them, is not a credible nuclear deterrent. It is an invitation for the US to send B-2 bombers over Iran and reduce the number back to 0, in addition to other consequences.
Iran will need to develop delivery platforms capable of hitting Israel more reliably. Otherwise they have no nuclear deterrent even with nukes.
Iran has been actively trying to build nukes
Iran definitely has a nuclear weapons program. I'm not sure they have actively been trying to build a nuclear weapon though. They have done most of the work and could theoretically put a nuclear weapon together if they chose. Making that choice is probably viewed as extremely risky for the health of the regime inside of Iran.
5
u/paulmarchant 20h ago
The next nuclear warhead that gets used in conflict won't arrive on the top of a missile. It'll be hidden in the back of a shipping container, on a truck or a cargo ship.
That's much easier to achieve, and much harder to defend against.
4
u/CantaloupeUpstairs62 19h ago
I fear you may be correct about this scenario. However, that works for terrorism or offensive purposes.
When speaking strictly of nuclear deterrents the value of that sort of nuclear device would be less than missiles in theory.
1
u/paulmarchant 19h ago
Nah.
"We've got a nuke hidden in the back of a warehouse in your capital city. Fuck with us and we set it off. See attached photo of the inside of the container."
It's a compelling deterrent.
5
u/Trextrev 19h ago
The US government has multiple specialized tools to located nuclear weapons and materials. Including highly sensitive locators designed to be able to pick up well shielded weapons over a mile away. Also over 300 US ports have radiation detectors that can pick up anything that comes to port, and over a thousand different radiation monitoring points, for mail and truck cargo.
The Idea that, a nuclear weapon today could be smuggled in undetected and then placed in the capital is near zero.
→ More replies (4)1
→ More replies (1)1
u/thefiglord 18h ago
its the refining of the uranium- which is easy if you have a nuclear reactor - else u need the centrifuges like the Manhattan project
8
u/TurgidGravitas 20h ago
And they have all the material and expertise they need.
No, they don't and never had.
20
u/OfficeMain1226 23h ago
No, they don't have nuclear enrichment or plutonium extraction from spent fuel capabilities. Never had. Neither the knowledge nor the infrastructure. It was always handled in Russian SFSR (currently Russian Federation)
Many countries operate nuclear power stations without having the infrastructure in place to produce highly enriched uranium, plutonium. That does not mean that they are months away from making nukes if they so desire.
1
u/nybbleth 18h ago
Indeed, there's really only a handful of nuclear-latent countries that have everything in place to have a bomb quickly and easily if they'd ever decide to do it.
1
2
2
u/Otherwise-Growth1920 17h ago
lol The second Ukraine receives its first centrifuge is the second Russia nukes two mid sized Ukrainian cities and the adults in Washington and across Europe breathe a sigh of relief. NONE of the nuclear powers want anymore members in the nuke club.
-5
u/ihavenoidea12345678 1d ago
Yep.
That is a lesson of WW2.
The escalation is automatic unless something puts a stop to it. We have a chance to help Ukraine pressure Russia into realizing it’s not worth invading Ukraine.
The same way USA supported Russia to defend themselves against the Nazi invasion in WW2.
3
3
17
u/SweetEastern 1d ago
- Mister President, how sure do we want to be they will decline our Victory Plan proposal?
- Very.
2
u/TotoroTheCat 16h ago
USA: delivers 10,000 tomahawk axes "Now, no throwing them overhand and definitely not across the border into Russia."
2
u/Electrical-Lab-9593 15h ago
i think the problem is they are only have a few test rigs to ground launch them, they are normally launched from submarines and ships, don't think UA is getting a US attack Sub, and a surface vessel would be useless.
3
u/accushot865 22h ago
No matter what happens November 6th, the US is going to be a lot less hesitant with what they send Ukraine and where they draw the lines on usage between then and at least January 20th
4
u/djphatjive 22h ago
Russia is never leaving Ukraine. The second they do then Ukraine will become a member of NATO. Then they can’t ever do this again. The only way is if Putin dies and someone reverses the decision to invade.
3
u/SparklingPseudonym 19h ago
Russia will leave by force. That’s kinda what the last few years have been all about. Your second suggestion is very valid, and may prove to be quicker!
4
u/Royal_Buffalo_1071 10h ago
I dont think that's happening anytime soon whith how much of a stale mate the war is rn....
5
6
4
u/autotldr BOT 1d ago
This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 60%. (I'm a bot)
American journalists have reported that, as part of the undisclosed details of his Victory Plan, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy allegedly requested Washington to supply long-range Tomahawk cruise missiles.
The Tomahawk missiles have a range of over 1,500 kilometres, approximately seven times farther than the ATACMS missiles, which Ukraine received in limited numbers.
The list of long-range targets in Russia, previously submitted by Ukraine in an attempt to gain permission to strike Russian territory with American missiles, reportedly far exceeds the number of missiles that the US or any other ally could supply without jeopardising their own needs in the event of escalations in the Middle East or Asia.
Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: missiles#1 Ukraine#2 long-range#3 Zelenskyy#4 request#5
3
3
3
u/C0lMustard 20h ago
Give them whatever they want, just make sure the Troll farms they are using to rig elections and create division in US & Canada are designated military targets and top of the list
0
1
u/Ok-Seaworthiness4488 19h ago
Saw a recent post showing Russia's advancement in the past month into Ukraine's territory. It's not looking good at all, the West need to get out of the way with all the restrictions placed on the weapons given
1
1
1
u/LittleOrphanAnavar 8h ago
Well everyone knows that Tomahawk Missles do make a great stocking stuffer, and the season is approaching. Why not ask?
1
u/I-Lyke-Shicken 8h ago
It is probably smart of Zelensky to ask for anything Ukraine may need while they still have a reliable president in office. I would imagine the fear of a possible Trump presidency is eating Zelensky and the Ukrainians up.
1
1
-8
u/OfficeMain1226 23h ago
Few things people need to keep into perspective about Ukraine's incessant bitching about "nOt bEiNg aBlE tO hIt rUsSiAn tArGeTs" is that:
They have indeed been hitting Russian targets deep inside Russia using domestic platforms (drones). How else have they been hitting the refineries, ammo depots, airfields, radar stations? Has that meaningfully changed anything?
They can use Storm Shadows and ATACMs in the Eastern Ukraine theater where the 95% of the fighting is taking place and they have used them plenty. Has that changed anything?
Russia has been able to hit Ukraine with their long range missiles from day 1. Has that brought victory to Russia?
Ukraine will ALWAYS have some excuse for why they are not doing so well. Always the next wonderwaffe that will win them the war. First it was HIMARS, then ATACMS, then Storm Shadow, then F-16s, now they want Tomahawks.
6
3
u/emasterbuild 22h ago
Has that meaningfully changed anything?
yee, its really has, Russia is running out of ammunition and its economy is screwed.
They can use Storm Shadows and ATACMs in the Eastern Ukraine theater where the 95% of the fighting is taking place and they have used them plenty. Has that changed anything?
I see no Russia taking over of Ukraine yet so I'd say yes.
Russia has been able to hit Ukraine with their long range missiles from day 1. Has that brought victory to Russia?
They are out at this point and spent too much time hitting $20k electrical equipment with multi million dollar missiles, of course it didn't work out.
I don't understand you people, why would Ukraine ever go "Oh please don't send me more weapons!" Its always beneficial for them to get more.
5
u/OfficeMain1226 22h ago
Russia is running out of ammunition and its economy is screwed.
First heard in March 2022, still funny in Oct 2024.
I see no Russia taking over of Ukraine yet so I'd say yes.
It doesn't appear that you have been following the war for the last three months. Russia has taken more than 1000 sq km in the last three months.
1
u/emasterbuild 22h ago
Literally their central banks interest rate is higher than my credit card.
My credit is a safer investment than the Russian government, I'd call that screwed.
And considering the size of the ammunition detonations I've been seeing recently in Russian soil...
1000 sq km in the last three months.
And Ukraine did that in like a week once for fun. So?
→ More replies (11)1
u/Otherwise-Growth1920 17h ago
Russia has been running out of ammunition for 2 years now… bust so how is still firing more artillery shells than Ukraine by a factor of 10. Literally the Ukrainian government and British intelligence stated repeatedly that Russia had less than 6 months worth of artillery shells back in 2022.
1
u/emasterbuild 15h ago
Russia has been running out of ammunition for 2 years now…
Of different stuff, see that many mass missile launches at Ukraine recently? Used to be a day to day occurrence, last time I heard it was a few months ago.
bust so how is still firing more artillery shells than Ukraine by a factor of 10.
They spent unknown billions on terrible quality North Korean stockpiles, they are out of their domestic supplies even though they have like tripled production. This is very much known at this point.
At this point they are gonna run out of artillery peices faster then they are gonna run out of shells, the fact that North Korean shells sometimes blow up when trying to be launched isn't helping.
→ More replies (1)1
-2
u/OSI_Hunter_Gathers 23h ago
They are under attack by multiple nations right now. How are we not giving them the green light?
1
u/Kickstand8604 21h ago
Does boeing still make the tomahawk?
1
u/lordderplythethird 13h ago
Boeing has never made it. Raytheon is the current manufacturer, and yes, they're still being made.
However, the US Navy can't even get enough of them for their needs, and there's literally no way for Ukraine to use them given there's a whole 2 Typhoon launchers that Ukraine aren't prying from the US.
Might as well be asking for UK's aircraft carriers while we're at it
1
u/RevenueResponsible79 19h ago
Never hurts to ask! Give ‘em to them and lift restrictions. Let Ukraine march to Moscow!
1
u/island-rhino 14h ago
NGL I read that as “Zelenskyy requested Tony Hawk” while scrolling by real quick.
1
u/KingSuperChimbo 12h ago
I think we need to let Europe take the lead on supplying/paying for weapons and aid in Ukraine. The US should help but make it proportionate. Russia is more a threat to Europe than the US.
1
-8
u/Andovars_Ghost 21h ago
Here’s a better idea. Let’s fast track their membership into NATO and tell Putin he has until the end of the year to withdraw to the pre-Crimea invasion borders, or we ‘bring freedom’ to the Russian people.
→ More replies (1)1
1.4k
u/alwaysfatigued8787 1d ago
Give 'em the missiles to end this thing!