In reply to Tanker123 The US officially dropped that policy during Blinken's visit.

In reply to Tanker123

Tanker123 said:

---

If it is true the US is dictating Ukraine can't us US weapons to strike targets in Russia, then it is quite a disservice to Ukraine's ability to win the war. It is imperative to hit near and far targets in war.

---

Welcome to page 100 of the thread!

In reply to Tanker123

Tanker123 said:

---

If it is true the US is dictating Ukraine can't us US weapons to strike targets in Russia, then it is quite a disservice to Ukraine's ability to win the war. It is imperative to hit near and far targets in war.

---

Yeah, this has to be extremely frustrating for the Ukraine brass because I'm sure they can clearly see that Russia is stacking thousands of troops, equipment, and supplies just a few hundred yards into Russian territory, but they can't do anything about it or else the US will cut off the stream of support. In reality, they should be smashing the hell of out of all that stuff with HIMARS before it even makes it across the border and gets put to use against the Ukrainian forces. Russia knows they have a safe zone and can stack everything up close by with no concern or consequences. Huge advantage for Russia.

In reply to txaggie02 Check the link I posted yesterday. We dropped the policy and Ukraine is now weapons free.

In reply to txags92

txags92 said:

---

Tanker123 said:

---

If it is true the US is dictating Ukraine can't us US weapons to strike targets in Russia, then it is quite a disservice to Ukraine's ability to win the war. It is imperative to hit near and far targets in war.

---

Welcome to page 100 of the thread!

---

Thanks! lol

This war is fascinating from the perspective of seeing it all - new and accurate weapons, evolution of drone technology, massive WWI tactics, an incredibly inept adversary, Ukraine's lack of requisite offensive weapons to turn the tide, a country without a navy winning the naval war, M1 tanks being relegated to attack by fire only, Total War, millions of displaced civilians, Russian soldiers used as cannon fodder. What am I missing?

In reply to Teslag

Teslag said:

---

Check the link I posted yesterday. We dropped the policy and Ukraine is now weapons free.

---

That Ukraine is allowed to use US weapons to fire on targets in Russia?

In reply to Tanker123 Correct. Hamstringing them like that was ridiculous from the start.

In reply to JFABNRGR He "made clear" that he wasn't going to invade Ukraine, that the Russian military was only conducting exercises, and that the US was spreading Russophobic disinformation. Sooooooo…yeah.

In reply to Tanker123

Tanker123 said:

---

txags92 said:

---

Tanker123 said:

---

If it is true the US is dictating Ukraine can't us US weapons to strike targets in Russia, then it is quite a disservice to Ukraine's ability to win the war. It is imperative to hit near and far targets in war.

---

Welcome to page 100 of the thread!

---

Thanks! lol

This war is fascinating from the perspective of seeing it all - new and accurate weapons, evolution of drone technology, massive WWI tactics, an incredibly inept adversary, Ukraine's lack of requisite offensive weapons to turn the tide, a country without a navy winning the naval war, M1 tanks being relegated to attack by fire only, Total War, millions of displaced civilians, Russian soldiers used as cannon fodder. What am I missing?

---

Yeah, sorry I was a bit sarcastic. The news we were hamstringing them like that was about a year old, but as was said above, we have apparently relaxed our restrictions to let them maximize effectiveness for what we are giving them.

In reply to Rossticus

Rossticus said:

---

He "made clear" that he wasn't going to invade Ukraine, that the Russian military was only conducting exercises, and that the US was spreading Russophobic disinformation. Sooooooo…yeah.

---

And now is floating the idea the absurd notion that the Kiev government isn't legitimate so he won't be able to negotiate even if he wanted to.

In reply to Teslag

Teslag said:

---

Correct. Hamstringing them like that was ridiculous from the start.

---

Concur big time. That decision is in line with not giving Ukraine the requisite offensive weapons to kick Russian ass. Russia is more than willing to fight a war of attrition and Ukraine has little choice but to fight into the strength of the Russian military.

In reply to Teslag

Teslag said:

---

Correct. Hamstringing them like that was ridiculous from the start.

---

It seems that we rarely, if ever, get the rules of engagement correct.

In reply to SPF250

SPF250 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Correct. Hamstringing them like that was ridiculous from the start.

---

It seems that we rarely, if ever, get the rules of engagement correct.

---

That's what you get when you let the politicians prosecute the war instead of handing it over to professionals and turning them loose.

"Ukraine launched a large-scale, long-range drone attack against oil infrastructure within Russia's borders. Sevastopol, home of the Black Sea Fleet headquarters, in the Russian-occupied Crimea peninsula, was also targeted. The attacks come a day after it was confirmed that Ukraine had destroyed several Russian combat aircraft in a missile strike on Crimea's Belbek Air Base."

"Ukrainian officials have struck a more upbeat note about the situation in the region, which borders Russia.
Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky said today the situation in the Kharkiv region has "stabilized" despite reports that Russian forces have advanced as far as 6.2 miles into Ukrainian territory in one area. "Today, our defense forces have stabilized the Russians where they are now. The deepest point of their advance is 10 kilometers," Zelensky told journalists."


Today's SITREP.

In reply to Agthatbuilds

Agthatbuilds said:

---

How many such systems have been lost so far? One or two or more?

---

Trying to read through the fog I believe the number to be about 6 which isn't bad considering russians long range capabilities and improved longer range ISR lately.

Of note they have lost almost half the of M777 howitzers but I did come across a 2023 article that stated Ukraine is manufacturing their own version on a pace of 6 a month back then. BAE has a contract to replace parts on M777 now and is ramping up whole unit productions for delivery in later 2025. Hopefully at that time they will be for future wars and not this one.

"While the recent aid package includes the munitions necessary to defend against the ongoing Russian offensive, it also contained over 100 M2 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicles (IFV) and 100 M113 Armored Personnel Carriers (APC)."

ARMOR

In reply to 74OA Is the $3.2 million unit cost for a Bradley accurate? It seems like a very efficient use of funds, especially given the success Ukraine is having with them. There are probably many additional costs I'm not considering, such as munitions, maintenance, and so on.

In reply to 74OA That drone attack inflicted some serious damage. Hopefully Ukraine can get a serious uptick in the production of those particular kamakazie type drones to continue the massive swarm attacks. Seems to be highly effective.

In reply to 74OA

74OA said:

---

"While the recent aid package includes the munitions necessary to defend against the ongoing Russian offensive, it also contained over 100 M2 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicles (IFV) and 100 M113 Armored Personnel Carriers (APC)."



ARMOR

---

I believe we have given Ukraine 200 M2s already. However, I am positive they have lost some.

In reply to Tanker123

Tanker123 said:

---

74OA said:

---

"While the recent aid package includes the munitions necessary to defend against the ongoing Russian offensive, it also contained over 100 M2 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicles (IFV) and 100 M113 Armored Personnel Carriers (APC)."



ARMOR

---

I believe we have given Ukraine 200 M2s already. However, I am positive they have lost some.

---

Over 80 M2s lost.

Since Russia doesn't seem to care much about their poor population maybe it's time for a massive drone strike to one of the lucrative neighborhoods. Maybe if they start killing rich kids/families that would put more pressure on Putin to stop this non sensible war. Or maybe it would do the opposite?

That would be insanely stupid. Ukraine would put their western support a risk and face far greater reprisals from Russia. If you want to bring The Ukraine war to the Moscow and St. Petersburg suburbs, drive fuel prices through the roof by attacking refineries and when winter comes around, start taking out electrical distribution networks.

In reply to lb3 I really don't know how Russians think and I don't think most of us ever will. But it's obvious a coup on Putin is not coming from the poor. It won't likely happen until you affect the rich. While higher fuel prices effect the economy I think they are still unlikely to get Putin out of power. People that thought they were untouchable start getting hit them who knows? Regardless of the method I think Ukraine needs to find a way for the Russian elite to suffer. Better ideas and I'm all ears.

Not sure this demographic ratio shift is true, but devastating if so.

⚡️‼️🗣️Khodorkovsky predicts Kharkov to fall this year, Odessa in 2025, and all of Ukraine in 2026:

🏹 🇷🇺 🇺🇦 Russian Opposition figure Mikhail Khodorkovsky

🔶️ Putin spends about $120bn a year on the war – 5.4% of Russia’s $2.2 trillion GDP – with the most commonly used Russian… pic.twitter.com/Mq5WAXMSqt

— SIMPLICIUS Ѱ (@simpatico771) May 17, 2024

In reply to FJB24 Why would all of Ukraine fall if Russia is only trying to secure the ethnic Russian areas of eastern Ukraine?

I would consider the precision weapons and dronesUkraine is using are Revolutions in Military Affairs,