@Render
Now that #Ukraine is using the 300 km ATACMS, what is your take on the decision to only give them the 160 km version until recently? I know the publicly stated reason was concern that there would be strikes deep into Russian territory, and things would escalate out of control.
To me, that was denying them the tools to adequately defend themselves. How many Russian missile strikes could have been prevented if some key airfields had been cratered a year (or two) ago?
Accurate and somewhat un-interceptable by Russian air defense.
Ukraine tried a modified version of the Mathias Rust approach, and it still works.
@voltronic I think I've mentioned that I wasn't happy with the sending of the bare minimum before.
With artillery ammo, it's somewhat understandable. Production limitations were going to be reached quickly.
There is still a deal to be reached with Egypt that nobody seems interested in pursuing.
Egypt has some 2000+ older Soviet (T-55, T-62, some T-80) and US (M-60) tanks that are just sitting in storage.
Egypt needs grain, badly.
...
@voltronic ...
What they've done is give Ukraine the bare minimum that needs to defend itself. And then cut off even aid that for 6 months.
History will not be kind to the names of the (bi-partisan) people responsible for this.
@voltronic @Render
I think the restriction is useless now that Ukraine has developed its own accurate long range attack capability without using ATACMS.