1. By no means is Ukraine “provoking Russia even further”. Ukraine is defending itself against an aggressor. They need all the help they can get.

    1. @Tiger Bettas 3 look up “peace for our time” and you’ll understand why negotiation with Putler won’t wprk.

  2. In lieu of providing aircraft, the US should supply cruise missiles to Ukraine. Ukraine needs to be able to strike logistics centers and transportation links behind the front to disrupt Russian advances. If the Ukrainians could interdict the Russian supply lines their forces in the field would become ineffective due to a lack of supplies. It would exacerbate Russia’s poor logistics.

    1. @Dallas Elliott None of the ordinary people wants to die anywhere, but if instead of talking there will be only military actions and an escalation of hostilities, then the war will go beyond the borders of Ukraine 100%.

    2. @Sigi that’s what the request for the patriots and similar advanced air defense systems as well as aircraft were for. Securing Ukrainian airspace.

  3. I was in an MLRS Battalion and it is a nasty weapon system! We could take out a grid square on a map with each pack of rockets. It is very accurate and mobile and would absolutely be a game changer. The scary part is if the Russians capture them.

  4. Get them what they need to fight
    Russia doesn’t plan on stopping
    until there is no Ukraine
    and that is unacceptable
    considering how much
    they have sacrificed
    We definitely need to do the best we can for
    I hope to visit Ukraine one day
    SLAVA Ukraine 🇺🇦

    1. Go enlist Shannon if you are wanting a taste of war. It’s not like hiding behind the keyboard.

  5. If Ukraine had these kind of weaponry from the start , Russia would have never been able to make the advances that they currently have

    1. @kirikoo these are armored vehicles that fire there rockets in three minutes and then move. These weapons also out range all the weapons the Russians have. It’s not likely the Russians will be able to target these weapons.

    2. @joe mammon Russia has not counter artillery that can hit these weapons. By the time these rockets can be detected the launcher will be long gone.

    3. @Our News do you think NATO could do better than the Ukrainian, if it is for javelins, stinger, MLO, howitzers, switch blade, baryactar drone the Russian pass the test very well. At the beginning of the war they underestimated the Ukrainian but in the last two months I don’t see any spectacular javlin, stinger or drones strike on the Russian everything is being neutralize.a

  6. If Ukraine forces were to obtain this kind of firepower from the US, then this would definitely help level the playing field against Russia! I get that the US is worried that this will prolong the conflict, but remember, Russia started this fight against Ukraine. All they want to do is push the invaders out of their country!

    1. @Lady Bug all that matters is how many Russians are killed and how much of there equipment is taken out the longer this conflict go’s on the less Russians there will be in the world.

    2. @Music on a budget So…let all the nuclear countries invade who ever they want. Seeing as they can end up using them?

    1. @Scar626 Yes that’s exactly what I would say since it should have all been done months before…smfh

    2. No they shouldn’t. In fact we should not be sending anything to them. Zelensky got them into this mess, he should pay the price for his hubris.

  7. Still considering, why? These systems should have been provided back in February 2022. Wars cannot be won with half-measures.

    1. Well, most would consider just delivering weaponry a half measure, instead of sending the army themselves.

  8. These have been requested for ages. Why is Biden always behind the curve?
    This war is about artillery range, combined with accuracy and troop numbers. The range of weapons so as to be able to defend/attack Russian invaders without putting your troops at risk is important. The longer range also allows fewer troops as the radius of protection/attack is bigger. e.g. if you just had hand grenades you would have to be lose and there is more risk to your soldiers. Planes and missiles and long range artillery are key combined with ideally long distance drones, minisub drones, natural protection such as rivers etc.
    It is easier and less costly to give the proper support earlier than doing what Biden/EU/(Nato) has done which is belated support and increase offensive/defensive capability of weapons. It is not clear how the war has affected Russia’s military stores. Hopefully it is affecting those and production. It does not seem to have kicked in yet, noting how artillary is indiscrimitely used by the Russians.
    The suffering of Ukranians in terms of food/water/energy supplies/exposure to cold/starvation/ destruction of infrastructure-generations of accumulated family wealth/businesses / jobs /maming, rape, becoming refugees, being trafficked,deported to Russia and imprisoned in foreign lands, having children without parents, having etc., having people in Mariupol bombed when captive is horrendous, the use of phosphorus which burns at over 2000 degrees and cant be put out etc.etc.

    . The risk of food supply issues to 47 million people going into food security and starving needs to be taken into account.

    Ukraine is interested in defending and regaining its territory. It will not be interested in attacks into Russia apart from supply lines as it does not wish to aggravate Russia. It is not interested in civilian targets, though you do feel that if Russian infrastructure was bombed to nothing without hurting people it would be good so they knew how it felt to lose your life’s possessions but that is not really the aim or desire.

    The risk of nuclear war is small, but it is worth it. The level of aggression of these mad men has to be checked as they will always want more. The depravity of Putin and risk to people beyond Ukraine’s borders is also important. Russia does not want nuclear war either.

    1. @Matt Johnson most people would not know! Survivors of a full exchange might wish they had not!

  9. “The problem is that these could be used to launch attacks into Russia itself.”

    AAAAAAAAND????? What’s the hold up??

    1. The fact you would make such an inane comment is exactly the reason why US is hesitant to send them.

  10. Unnecessary deaths have happened because of these delays. Timely supply of adequate weapons is needed.

  11. Far too much “considering” that iis, stalling and dithering, instead of giving Ukraine the tools to hit Russian military bases and other infrastructur. In effect, USA is forcing Ukraine to fight with one hand tied behind their backs, whereas Russia can act as if it runs zero risk and is untouchable.

    1. It’s a game of footsies always on the edge of brinksmanship – looking into the abyss because one bad move could mean the end of of human life on earth – those are the actual stakes. I’m okay with intel ski8rmished, poke and prod, assess reactions in public and behind the curtain, move when sensible. You don’t go blustering in with everything or you’ll get an unpredictable response. Also, as the war progresses and fortunes change what do you suppose Ukraine will doo to defend the last major cities if the tides (which they are) turn that way? They will strike as deep into Russia as they need to in order to cut off supplies and scramble logistics. A single campaign focused primarily on depost, railheads, spawner lines could be accomplished in a matter of hours with long range missiles – how would/will that change Russia’s metrics – if/when the only way Ukraine can defend itself is to weaken the actual interior military infrastructure of the ORC invades?

  12. IVE BEEN SAYING THIS FROM THE BEGINNING TO SEND UKRAINE THE (M270) And (M142) (HIMARS) High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems..

  13. I just called both senators and my representative and asked them to get those MLRS weapons to Ukraine. This sort of “caution” just invites ever more aggression. The only way to end this war is on the battlefield.

    1. Moscow is using food as a weapon, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said, speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos. “Russia uses hunger and grain to gain influence.”
      That is, the West wants to take grain out of Ukraine in order to condemn Ukrainians to starvation, but Russia is to blame

    2. @Jay the Nihilist Moscow is using food as a weapon, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said, speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos. “Russia uses hunger and grain to gain influence.”
      That is, the West wants to take grain out of Ukraine in order to condemn Ukrainians to starvation, but Russia is to blame

    3. @Persephone Moscow is using food as a weapon, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said, speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos. “Russia uses hunger and grain to gain influence.”
      That is, the West wants to take grain out of Ukraine in order to condemn Ukrainians to starvation, but Russia is to blame

    4. Ukraine would want nuclear weapons more,which would drag everybody into it. If west send MLRS, Russia would do everything they can to stop its delivery, maybe a tactical nuke strike on its route, what then? I guess that might be a desired consequence for Kiev.

  14. It’s not enough to help Ukraine just keep up. They need to gain an advantage. If Ukraine suddenly gains the ability to reach inside Russia, then maybe Russia should have considered that risk before starting a war.

  15. Russia can rocket, bomb, use artillery every day on Ukraine, but Ukraine can only fight when they receive weapons which seems like every 2 or 3 weeks.
    If we and NATO do not want to send them what they need than everyone should stop helping them and let them lose. After all wouldn’t it be nice to have more friendly countries like Russian near you.!

  16. The Eastern front is so long that Ukraine can’t cover it without long range rockets. The idea isn’t to bomb Russia.

  17. In terms of escalation, the Russians have earned a few shells and missiles inside their own borders.

  18. NATO needs to either commit to giving Ukraine everything they need to win this horrible war or withdraw all military support. Cancel the half measure trade embargoes they have against Russia. Basically give into all of Russia’s demands every time Russia threatens to use nuclear weapons. Which is seven days per week and twice on a Sunday.


    2. @Enrique Perezarce very all in financially, I’m quite amazed last 40B was approved & hope it never stops. You know how expensive it is per day to fund a country that size?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.