Pentagon has quietly barred Ukrainian long-range strikes in Russia with US missiles, WSJ reports

[j brown's body]

"The U.S. has quietly implemented a review process giving Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth authority to bar Ukrainian long-range strikes inside Russia with American missiles, effectively blocking strikes for months, the Wall Street Journal reported on Aug. 23. The unannounced high-level Defense Department approval process has prevented the use of Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) against targets inside Russia since the late spring, an unnamed official said.

U.S. President Donald Trump on Aug. 21 said that Ukraine had "no chance of winning" if not permitted to attack Russia and criticized former U.S. President Joe Biden for not letting Kyiv "fight back, only defend.""

Link

Oh.

 

[Pyrite]

"The U.S. has quietly implemented a review process giving Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth authority to bar Ukrainian long-range strikes inside Russia with American missiles, effectively blocking strikes for months, the Wall Street Journal reported on Aug. 23. The unannounced high-level Defense Department approval process has prevented the use of Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) against targets inside Russia since the late spring, an unnamed official said.

U.S. President Donald Trump on Aug. 21 said that Ukraine had "no chance of winning" if not permitted to attack Russia and criticized former U.S. President Joe Biden for not letting Kyiv "fight back, only defend.""

Link

Oh.

https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/pentagon-has-quietly-blocked-ukraines-long-range-missile-strikes-on-russia-432a12e1?mod=hp_lead_pos1

The Pentagon has for months been blocking Ukraine’s use of long-range missiles to strike inside Russia, U.S. officials said, limiting Kyiv from employing a powerful weapon in its fight against Moscow’s invasion.

A high-level Defense Department approval procedure, which hasn’t been announced, has prevented Ukraine from firing any U.S.-made long-range Army Tactical Missile Systems, or ATACMS, against targets in Russia since late spring, the officials said. On at least one occasion, Ukraine sought to use ATACMS against a target on Russian territory but was rejected, two officials said.

The U.S. veto of long-range strikes has restricted Ukraine’s military operations as the White House has sought to woo the Kremlin into beginning peace talks.

Elbridge Colby, the Pentagon’s undersecretary for policy, developed the “review mechanism” to decide on Kyiv’s requests to fire long-range U.S.-made weapons as well as those provided to Ukraine by European allies that rely on American intelligence and components.

The review gives Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth final say over whether Ukraine can employ the ATACMS, which have a range of nearly 190 miles, to strike Russia.

“President Trump has been very clear that the war in Ukraine needs to end. There has been no change in military posture in Russia-Ukraine at this time,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement. “Secretary Hegseth is working in lockstep with President Trump.”

The Pentagon and Ukrainian officials didn’t respond to requests for comment.

The Pentagon’s approval requirement has effectively reversed a decision by President Joe Biden in his final year in office to permit Ukraine to strike inside Russia with ATACMS....

 

[multivita-man]

Good

 

[Pyrite]

Good

Why is trump's refusal to allow Ukraine to target Russia in the same manner as Russia attacks Ukraine a "good" idea, in your view?

 

[multivita-man]

Why is trump's refusal to allow Ukraine to target Russia in the same manner as Russia attacks Ukraine a "good" idea, in your view?

This war needs to end. There should be security for Ukraine but that can come in the form of neutrality, which has worked for Austria and Switzerland. The problem all along is that it's the USA that hasn't wanted neutrality in Ukraine.

 

[Pyrite]

This war needs to end. There should be security for Ukraine but that can come in the form of neutrality, which has worked for Austria and Switzerland. The problem all along is that it's the USA that hasn't wanted neutrality in Ukraine.

The problem "all along" has been putin's determination to grab and retain territory that doesn't belong to Russia.

 

[multivita-man]

The problem "all along" has been putin's determination to grab and retain territory that doesn't belong to Russia.

None of this would have happened if the US didn't have designs on using Ukraine as an extension of its influence. Let's suppose it's the year 2035. Canada's really worried about its deranged neighbor to the south, *which increasingly talks of making Canada its 51st state and starts massing troops at the border as a periodic show of force. So let's say Canada and Russia (or China) sign a security agreement. **Do you really believe the US would just sit back and watch and let this unfold?

*This has actually happened - not made up

**Of course not. You know what the US would do. It's what any nation with means would do. That is what Russia is doing now. It's shoving the United States out of its realm of influence.

 

[Pyrite]

None of this would have happened if the US didn't have designs on using Ukraine as an extension of its influence. Let's suppose it's the year 2035. Canada's really worried about its deranged neighbor to the south, *which increasingly talks of making Canada its 51st state and starts massing troops at the border as a periodic show of force. So let's say Canada and Russia (or China) sign a security agreement. Do you really believe the US would just sit back and watch and let this unfold?

*This has actually happened - not made up

Post #7

What's your basis for making the claim that "None of this would have happened [Russia would not have attacked, occupied, destroyed Ukraine, killed Ukrainians, and kidnapped Ukrainian children] if the US didn't have designs on using Ukraine as an extension of its influence."

Can you provide details re actions the US took prior to the Russian attacks on Ukraine that support your thesis?

Can you provide details that speak to putin's reaction to those actions and support your thesis that were it not for the actions taken by the US, the Russian leader would not have invaded/attacked/occupied Ukraine?

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

"The U.S. has quietly implemented a review process giving Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth authority to bar Ukrainian long-range strikes inside Russia with American missiles, effectively blocking strikes for months, the Wall Street Journal reported on Aug. 23. The unannounced high-level Defense Department approval process has prevented the use of Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) against targets inside Russia since the late spring, an unnamed official said.

U.S. President Donald Trump on Aug. 21 said that Ukraine had "no chance of winning" if not permitted to attack Russia and criticized former U.S. President Joe Biden for not letting Kyiv "fight back, only defend.""

Link

Oh.

Again....
This is not the first time we've restricted Ukraine on this.
Stupid jerks, what is even the point...yeah we KNOW what the point is. /s

 

[multivita-man]

Post #7

What's your basis for making the claim that "None of this would have happened [Russia would not have attacked, occupied, destroyed Ukraine, killed Ukrainians, and kidnapped Ukrainian children] if the US didn't have designs on using Ukraine as an extension of its influence."

Can you provide details re actions the US took prior to the Russian attacks on Ukraine that support your thesis?

Can you provide details that speak to putin's reaction to those actions and support your thesis that were it not for the actions taken by the US, the Russian leader would not have invaded/attacked/occupied Ukraine?

In 2008 it was announced that Georgia and Ukraine were going to become NATO members.

There's Euromaidan.

There's the security agreement in 2021.

 

[Pyrite]

In 2008 it was announced that Georgia and Ukraine were going to become NATO members.

There's Euromaidan.

There's the security agreement in 2021.

AND....you need to provide proof that these events induced putin to ignore the earlier agreement that Ukraine is an independent state.

 

[multivita-man]

AND....you need to provide proof that these events induced putin to ignore the earlier agreement that Ukraine is an independent state.

It's evident - if you read history.

 

[Pyrite]

None of this would have happened if the US didn't have designs on using Ukraine as an extension of its influence. Let's suppose it's the year 2035. Canada's really worried about its deranged neighbor to the south, *which increasingly talks of making Canada its 51st state and starts massing troops at the border as a periodic show of force. So let's say Canada and Russia (or China) sign a security agreement. **Do you really believe the US would just sit back and watch and let this unfold?

*This has actually happened - not made up

**Of course not. You know what the US would do. It's what any nation with means would do. That is what Russia is doing now. It's shoving the United States out of its realm of influence.

Post #7

What's your basis for making the claim that "None of this would have happened [Russia would not have attacked, occupied, destroyed Ukraine, killed Ukrainians, and kidnapped Ukrainian children] if the US didn't have designs on using Ukraine as an extension of its influence."

Can you provide details re actions the US took prior to the Russian attacks on Ukraine that support your thesis?

Can you provide details that speak to putin's reaction to those actions and support your thesis that were it not for the actions taken by the US, the Russian leader would not have invaded/attacked/occupied Ukraine?

In 2008 it was announced that Georgia and Ukraine were going to become NATO members.

There's Euromaidan.

There's the security agreement in 2021.

Post #10

AND....you need to provide proof that these events induced putin to ignore the earlier agreement that Ukraine is an independent state.

It's evident - if you read history.

Post #12

Then you should find it relatively easy to connect that history to each of the three events in your Post #10 and corroborate your claim in Post #7 that "None of this would have happened if the US didn't have designs on using Ukraine as an extension of its influence."

 

[Pyrite]

https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/pentagon-has-quietly-blocked-ukraines-long-range-missile-strikes-on-russia-432a12e1?mod=hp_lead_pos1

The Pentagon has for months been blocking Ukraine’s use of long-range missiles to strike inside Russia, U.S. officials said, limiting Kyiv from employing a powerful weapon in its fight against Moscow’s invasion.

A high-level Defense Department approval procedure, which hasn’t been announced, has prevented Ukraine from firing any U.S.-made long-range Army Tactical Missile Systems, or ATACMS, against targets in Russia since late spring, the officials said. On at least one occasion, Ukraine sought to use ATACMS against a target on Russian territory but was rejected, two officials said.

The U.S. veto of long-range strikes has restricted Ukraine’s military operations as the White House has sought to woo the Kremlin into beginning peace talks.

Elbridge Colby, the Pentagon’s undersecretary for policy, developed the “review mechanism” to decide on Kyiv’s requests to fire long-range U.S.-made weapons as well as those provided to Ukraine by European allies that rely on American intelligence and components.

The review gives Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth final say over whether Ukraine can employ the ATACMS, which have a range of nearly 190 miles, to strike Russia.

“President Trump has been very clear that the war in Ukraine needs to end. There has been no change in military posture in Russia-Ukraine at this time,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement. “Secretary Hegseth is working in lockstep with President Trump.”

The Pentagon and Ukrainian officials didn’t respond to requests for comment.

The Pentagon’s approval requirement has effectively reversed a decision by President Joe Biden in his final year in office to permit Ukraine to strike inside Russia with ATACMS....

more from the wsj article:

...In a social-media post Thursday, Trump said Ukraine couldn’t defeat Russia unless it could “play offense” in the war, which has lasted longer than three years following Moscow’s invasion.

“It is very hard, if not impossible, to win a war without attacking” the invading country, he wrote. “There is no chance of winning!”....

 

[dmpi]

Borders are arbitrary, possession is nine-tenths of the law and there are over 150 current border disputes.

 

[LouC]

Pentagon [via Trump] has quietly barred Ukrainian long-range strikes in Russia with US missiles, WSJ reports.​

If so, that is dumb.

 

[roberthughey]

Ask yourself why the US denied Ukraine the use of these missiles until late Nov 2024?

 

[LouC]

Ask yourself why the US denied Ukraine the use of these missiles until late Nov 2024?

Fer Shits and Giggles?

 

[roberthughey]

​

Why the US declined to send Ukraine long-range missiles, tanks.​

Issued on: 22/12/2022

However, the Biden administration declined to give Ukraine ATACM long-range missiles due to wariness about escalation risks, and declined to send US tanks because of operational concerns.

The Patriot air defence weaponry was just one of the Christmas gifts Kyiv wants.

“We are grateful for [the US’s] support, but it is not enough,” Zelensky told Ukrainian troops near the frontline at the eastern battleground city Bakhmut on Tuesday. “It is a hint – it is not enough.”

Top Zelensky advisor Mykhailo Podolyak posted a tweet in early December titled: “My Christmas Wishlist”. In addition to Patriots, Podolyak asked for the US’s ATACM long-range missiles, US Abrams tanks and German Leopard and Marder tanks.

https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20221222-why-the-us-declined-to-send-ukraine-long-range-missiles-tanks

 

[roberthughey]

​

Why the US declined to send Ukraine long-range missiles, tanks.​

Issued on: 22/12/2022

However, the Biden administration declined to give Ukraine ATACM long-range missiles due to wariness about escalation risks, and declined to send US tanks because of operational concerns.

The Patriot air defence weaponry was just one of the Christmas gifts Kyiv wants.

“We are grateful for [the US’s] support, but it is not enough,” Zelensky told Ukrainian troops near the frontline at the eastern battleground city Bakhmut on Tuesday. “It is a hint – it is not enough.”

Top Zelensky advisor Mykhailo Podolyak posted a tweet in early December titled: “My Christmas Wishlist”. In addition to Patriots, Podolyak asked for the US’s ATACM long-range missiles, US Abrams tanks and German Leopard and Marder tanks.

https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20221222-why-the-us-declined-to-send-ukraine-long-range-missiles-tanks

Ukraine was denied the use of these missiles since the beginning of war - (over 2 1/2 years) and it seems the reasoning behind that decision was widely understood at the time.

 

[Pyrite]

Ukraine was denied the use of these missiles since the beginning of war - (over 2 1/2 years) and it seems the reasoning behind that decision was widely understood at the time.

Understood by whom?

Do you support trump's reversal of Biden's policy? Is so, why?

 

[roberthughey]

Understood by whom?

Do you support trump's reversal of Biden's policy? Is so, why?

Right there in front of you as I posted.


However, the Biden administration declined to give Ukraine ATACM long-range missiles due to wariness about escalation risks.

 

[Pyrite]

Right there in front of you as I posted.


However, the Biden administration declined to give Ukraine ATACM long-range missiles due to wariness about escalation risks.

That was early on.

Way back in Post #2, I red-highlighted this fact:

The Pentagon’s approval requirement has effectively reversed a decision by President Joe Biden in his final year in office to permit Ukraine to strike inside Russia with ATACMS....

Thus my question to you in Post #21, @roberthughey:

Do you support trump's reversal of Biden's policy? Is so, why?

 

[roberthughey]

That was early on.

Way back in Post #2, I red-highlighted this fact:

The Pentagon’s approval requirement has effectively reversed a decision by President Joe Biden in his final year in office to permit Ukraine to strike inside Russia with ATACMS....

Thus my question to you in Post #21, @roberthughey:

Do you support trump's reversal of Biden's policy? Is so, why?

The answer is in this question. Would you like to answer it please?

Ask yourself why the US denied Ukraine the use of these missiles until late Nov 2024?

 

[Pyrite]

The answer is in this question. Would you like to answer it please?

Ask yourself why the US denied Ukraine the use of these missiles until late Nov 2024?

Post #24

I see you don't want to answer the question I've asked you in Post #s 21 and 23:

Do you support trump's reversal of Biden's policy? Is so, why?