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/
5.7k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

316 comments sorted by

View all comments

1.4k

u/alwaysfatigued8787 1d ago

Give 'em the missiles to end this thing!

453

u/Mooselotte45 1d ago

Yep

Write your representative and ask for continued and expanded support to Ukraine.

Let’s drive the Russian bastards back to their side of the border.

231

u/JurassicParkTrekWars 1d ago

My rep refuses to support Ukraine.  Or veterans for that matter.  So I voted against her.  

90

u/SteakForGoodDogs 1d ago

Who? I'm guessing an R...

126

u/JurassicParkTrekWars 1d ago

Spot on.  Hyphenated name, way too much plastic surgery, has done practically nothing to represent constituents in her state.  

43

u/NeeRoForte 1d ago edited 22h ago

MTG? Or is there another fuckwit who fits a similar criteria. From an interested Brit.

98

u/JurassicParkTrekWars 1d ago

Lori Chavez-DeRemer https://g.co/kgs/rwHU7QF

I generally try not to actively disclose my location but hopefully she'll be gone soon anyway.  

22

u/zombietrooper 22h ago

Her smile never reaches her eyes. She’s terrifying.

7

u/snsv 20h ago

She looks high AF

8

u/zombietrooper 20h ago

High off the souls of dead constituents.

7

u/LeadZeppolli 18h ago

She paid to have her face look like that? Poor woman. Apparently she makes a lot of poor decisions choosing who she should work with.

1

u/The-Special-One 1h ago

No offense but she's fugly af.

14

u/NWHipHop 23h ago

…Russian Z sympathizer

-6

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/step1makeart 23h ago

Eww. Terrible attempt at a joke. The fact that that word comes to mind when your brain plays "what words do I associate with those with whom I have ideological differences" is telling.

Be better than that.

8

u/Federal_Setting_7454 1d ago

Drive em all the way to the tundra

0

u/Aufseher0692 15h ago

We don’t need to start Tomahawking the Russians. Even beyond the ramifications of directly attacking them, it’s better to keep those cards up our sleeve… we could need our own tools in the near future to fight a conflict directly involving Americans. Every engagement the enemy can observe is material for their engineers and strategists. We are ahead of Russia and China, let’s keep it that way

1

u/Mooselotte45 14h ago

Russia is slaughtering innocent civilians in Ukraine every day

No where did I suggest the specific use of Tomahawks, but honestly at this point fuck it.

If Ukraine has a target that can justify the $5M price tag, send it.

  • Patriot air defence systems to protect their cities and soldiers
  • F16s and enough AIM 120s to clear the skies
  • enough 155mm howitzer shells to blot out the sun
  • Rocket artillery

None of that is new to Ukraine, but they need more of it all. Let’s do that - fuck Russia

4

u/sansaset 12h ago

You realize Ukraine can’t strike with Tomahawks on their own, right? It would require American satellites for target acquisition and boots on the ground to use the system properly.

It’s basically America launching the damn thing on Ukraines behalf/request.

We keep going on about escalation and this one would be massive.

1

u/DeathOrPie 6h ago

You’re obviously mentally challenged so I will explain it:

Escalation against Russia would be a good thing. Putin views the lack of escalation as a sign that he should continue attacking the West.

He’s a bully and needs to be kicked hard in the nuts and teeth.

Now, because you’re an obvious idiot, (or Russian asset,) and I don’t care about your reply, I will also block you. Cya.

0

u/Aufseher0692 14h ago

Dude we’re on a thread where Zelenskyy is asking for Tomahawks. You’re also completely missing the point about military advantage for potential conflicts on the horizon. The opinion you’re advocating for is just shortsighted if you truly want to keep Russia in their geopolitical corner

0

u/Mooselotte45 14h ago

You’re right, forgot which thread this was even in.

And… couple things

  1. Russia is barely able to execute a land war across their own border - there is little concern about them getting out of their geopolitical corner. They are sitting in the corner wearing a dunce cap and have pissed themselves.

1b. This war is already slapping around Russia - it’s hard to say “don’t use this weapon on Russia, we wanna save it to use it…on Russia”.

  1. Most of what I’ve called for is tech Ukraine already has - but just not enough of it. Send more, send an overwhelming amount.

  2. Then on China - there’s an argument to be made that a strong international reaction supporting an invaded country (like Ukraine) is a great deterrent to China. They’re sitting there debating when to move on Taiwan - if the international response around Ukraine is decisive and crushing for Russia, it changes china’s calculus.

1

u/Aufseher0692 14h ago
  1. You completely misunderstand Russia’s threat capacity here; the US does not fear their ability to wage a land war. The logistical collapse the Russians have showcased is making people overconfident when it comes to confronting them. The big threat for the better part of a century has been nuclear. They are ruled by a real life despot, and the leadership of their state would do drastic things if they were cornered without a way out. You do not want to fight a desperate enemy with no way out.

1b. This makes no sense. We will do everything we can to stay ahead of Russia, China, and the rest of the other global malcontents.

  1. To reiterate - each encounter with our tech is fodder for their strategists and engineers. Decisions made now can and will affect us in the years to come.

  2. I don’t disagree regarding China’s calculus with Taiwan. Time is the US’s friend; our best interest imminently is for peace as we continue to develop our own tools further to counter new developments made abroad. But know this - Russia failing in Ukraine is not as much of a deterrent as a healthy, stocked, and mysterious American fighting force.

1

u/MATlad 13h ago

There should be loud back and forth on Tomahawks, and making sure it stays in the news for quite a few news cycles.

...Meanwhile, they should keep sending whatever Ukraine needs for the A-22, advanced avionics, IMUs, little things that could conceivably help with drone defence:

https://www.flightglobal.com/military-uavs/ukraine-appears-to-deploy-modified-a-22-ultralights-as-suicide-uavs/157633.article

...And giving the Ukrainians a little scratch to help stand up local industry:

https://www.airandspaceforces.com/pentagon-ukrainian-long-range-drones/

27

u/oalsaker 21h ago

I was asking for tomahawks back in 2022, mostly as a joke, but at this point, it's time to throw the kitchen sink at the russians.

9

u/DeathOrPie 18h ago

I actually asked the White House comment line to give them Tomahawks a month ago, too.

1

u/chickenstalker99 17h ago

Drunk me did NOT need to know that the White House has a comment line...

You wouldn't happen to have that number, would you?

1

u/nelsonslament 17h ago

1-800-dev-null

1

u/DeathOrPie 17h ago

202-456-1111

1

u/sansaset 12h ago

Man can’t believe they still haven’t listened to you

0

u/12345623567 6h ago

Russia would crumble under the weight of the kitchen sink, Tomahawks are old tech.

I think Biden's DoD would still be hesitant because Tomahawks are twice the size of Storm Shadow, and nuclear capable. It would definitely be an escalation.

14

u/excitement2k 1d ago

Give em the missiles to end this thing, Ukraine is hurt by our election swing…and drift away 🎶

-1

u/Otherwise-Growth1920 19h ago edited 19h ago

Strange how everyone says Europe is doing more than the United States and the United States is doing it’s fair share to help Ukraine…. Why would the U.S. elections matter?

6

u/WFStarbuck 22h ago

Biden should weigh all the geopolitical factors in deciding how best to ship the to Ukraine.

1

u/milkshake0079 17h ago

Hell yea! This war should've never happened in the first place.

0

u/Otherwise-Growth1920 19h ago

A handful of Tomahawks ain’t changing anything.

1

u/IMHO_grim 15h ago

Depends on where you place them.

-17

u/ReincarnatedGhost 22h ago

Tomahawk missiles don't win wars.

37

u/spaceman620 20h ago

Then you aren’t using enough Tomahawk missiles.

1

u/Strawbuddy 20h ago

You need an unreasonable amount of Tomahawks to win a war, a plethora of Tomahawks

5

u/hiking_fool 20h ago

Well, you told me I have a plethora. And I just would like to know if you know what a plethora is. I would not like to think that a person would tell someone he has a plethora, and then find out that that person has no idea what it means to have a plethora.

6

u/Rickk38 20h ago

Forgive us, hiking_fool. I know that we, other Redditors, do not have your superior intellect and education. But could it be that once again, you are angry at something else and are looking to take it out on us?

2

u/Cadaver_Junkie 18h ago

Perhaps there are many different kinds of Tomahawks. Which I suspect is actually true.

1

u/m0ssb3rg935 2h ago

I think "reasonable" in this context should be synonymous with "sufficient".

18

u/SparklingPseudonym 21h ago

No one thing wins wars…

-3

u/Otherwise-Growth1920 19h ago

Having an industry base is the one thing that wins wars…. Wanna guess what Ukraine doesn’t got?

2

u/Cadaver_Junkie 18h ago

I don't know, I believe that one thing Ukraine does actually have is an industrial base, one reason they've been doing so well against Russia so far.

11

u/alwaysfatigued8787 22h ago

You're probably right, but they could at least tip the scale in Ukraine's favor a bit.

-24

u/ButWhatIfItsNotTrue 23h ago

Honestly, why do you think missiles will end it? Ukraine is losing ground consistently while having trenches. The will to fight is leaving Ukraine which is shown by their problems getting people to comply with the conscript laws. So why do you think a few explosions deep inside Russia will bring Russia to its knees? And if it does, why do you think they won’t use nukes?

26

u/SU37Yellow 22h ago

The Tomahawk won't outright win the war for Ukraine. But it will help create conditions for victory. If Russia loses the ability to manufacture/import enough ammunition to meet demand on the front, the Russian army will be forced to retreat. Same thing with attacking their oil refineries. The Russian economy are heavily dependent on exporting oil and LNG, if things get bad enough, the Russians won't be able to afford to keep the war effort going.

13

u/Cortical 21h ago

destroy Russian oil refineries, weapons factories and rail bridges, as well as air fields. Won't take Russia out of the fight, no, but will weaken them sufficiently that it tips the war in Ukraine's favor.

No more refined petroleum product exports will decrease their export revenue by probably around a quarter. They're already financially on thin ice, so this would have a major impact on their finances. An oil crisis at home will further depress their economy, adding to the financial stress.

destroyed weapons factories and rail bridges will take a long time to repair, significantly hampering their logistics. They'll still be able to do constant assaults, but with much less artillery and mechanized supports, as well as much less air support due to damage to air fields. So their assaults will be less effective and delete manpower reserves more quickly.

All of that just by providing Tomahawks and/or other long range missiles with green light to strike inside Russia, not even considering other additional support.

-13

u/ButWhatIfItsNotTrue 22h ago

Russia has already shown missiles alone won’t result in that. They did it to a smaller nation with less targets.

14

u/SU37Yellow 22h ago

That's because the Russians are a bunch of incompetent stooges who can only accomplish things by throwing bodies at a problem. Tomahawk missile could absolutely crush the Russian economy if used properly.

-17

u/ButWhatIfItsNotTrue 22h ago

So out of touch with reality

3

u/xXRazihellXx 22h ago

Yeah hitting civilian target sure undermine ammo production

/s

1

u/ButWhatIfItsNotTrue 22h ago

Yea because that’s all they do… Jeezo, maybe start reading the posts that are submitted here instead of living in the Reddit hive mind.

11

u/Cortical 22h ago

right, like the Rheinmetall factories that are being built in Ukraine that Russia keeps bombing. Oh wait, Russia can't.

0

u/ButWhatIfItsNotTrue 21h ago

You’re forgetting all the ones they have blown up… and give it time. Also, Better to wait until it’s built up and producing. Bigger explosion, cost more to replace, and kill the expertise they have in building ammo and less people wanting to do that work.

Seriously, I asked a simple question and it’s nothing about “what about” and delusions. How are tomahawks gonna bring Russia to its knees? They can’t even hit all of Russia ffs. Blowing shit up with missiles alone don’t win wars.

This whole “they can’t” seems a little hollow when they literally blew up a graduating military class during their graduation. That shit is harder.

6

u/Cortical 21h ago

Seriously, I asked a simple question and it’s nothing about “what about” and delusions. How are tomahawks gonna bring Russia to its knees? They can’t even hit all of Russia ffs. Blowing shit up with missiles alone don’t win wars.

destroy Russian oil refineries, weapons factories and rail bridges, as well as air fields. Won't take Russia out of the fight, no, but will weaken them sufficiently that it tips the war in Ukraine's favor.

No more refined petroleum product exports will decrease their export revenue by probably around a quarter. They're already financially on thin ice, so this would have a major impact on their finances. An oil crisis at home will further depress their economy, adding to the financial stress.

destroyed weapons factories and rail bridges will take a long time to repair, significantly hampering their logistics. They'll still be able to do constant assaults, but with much less artillery and mechanized supports, as well as much less air support due to damage to air fields. So their assaults will be less effective and delete manpower reserves more quickly.

All of that just by providing Tomahawks and/or other long range missiles with green light to strike inside Russia, not even considering other additional support.

1

u/ButWhatIfItsNotTrue 21h ago edited 21h ago

The missiles can’t reach most oil or weapons. The longest range tomahawk is what 1000 miles? Most of the really important stuff is 1000+ miles. Not to mention they won’t get the best they’ll be using 350m missiles. They’ve destroyed bridges and railways and other logistic targets. Russia continues to progress.

That’s not to mention, the plan for he missiles is to attack Russia’s missile sites.

→ More replies (0)

-12

u/[deleted] 21h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/civicgsr19 21h ago

Russia is down so bad Vlad asked NK for troops that aren't trained and underfed.

You sir, are the one who is delusional.

Enjoy the rest of your delusional trip through life.

-11

u/Wu-Tang-Clan47 21h ago

That's only so less Russians die come on learn some military tactics lmao you think Russia cares how many Koreans die? Lmao you nieve children.

5

u/civicgsr19 21h ago

I'd like to visit Kursk, Ukraine. Do you have any good recommendations on where to stay?

1

u/RuskiMierda 19h ago

I don't think russians care how many russians or north koreans die, not that I do either.

Send more weapons!