Well, here we go red lines crossed Biden gives the go ahead to use long range missiles

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

I think if they could hit that far into Russia, they could also hit the likes of Moscow or very close.

From what i can gleen the standard versions of ATACMS do not have the range to reach Saratov from Ukrainian territory.

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: Ravenwatcher

I doubt this was Biden.

This was the Raytheon Muppet Austin. The MIC wants their wars.

Exactly

Isn't there a graphic floating around somewhere showing the ONE constant in all administrations since JFK's assassination have numerous cabinet members who were employed or would be employed by the MIC?

While we can rationalize that this is likely to organically happen, having so many with every administration seems as if it's a situation that could be exploited for corporate advantage and influence.

a reply to: andy06shake

But Storm Shadows?

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

I think the primary aircraft being used to launch Storm Shadow missiles are the Su-24 bombers Ukraine has left.

It just depends on how close they can get to their target before launching which needs to be within 250 km.

The truth is Russia has the capability to blow them out of the sky if they were ever to venture into their occupied airspace.

a reply to: andy06shake

Thanks.

Developing now:

Reports are Ukraine used western missiles for the first time on Russian territory.

Rueters

-Two Ukraine outlets say ATACMS used in Russia for first time
-No official comment from Kyiv
-Russia says it destroyed Ukrainian drones in region of attack

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
Developing now:

Reports are Ukraine used western missiles for the first time on Russian territory.

Rueters

-Two Ukraine outlets say ATACMS used in Russia for first time
-No official comment from Kyiv
-Russia says it destroyed Ukrainian drones in region of attack

Was about to post but it is already having repercussions on the stock market, strange days indeed most peculiar momma

Just days after the United States allowed Ukraine to use its long-range missile for deep strikes within Russian territory; President Vladimir Putin has approved changes to his country’s nuclear doctrine.
The changes to the nuclear doctrine have been approved by Putin on Tuesday.
The most noticeable change is that it expands the conditions under which nuclear weapons can be used by Moscow.
To put things into perspective, Russia can now use nuclear weapons in instances when a non-nuclear state supported by nuclear power attacks its area.

www.yahoo.com...


I know I get some flak on here for worrying that Vlad is mental enough to go nuclear,butthis development does not ease my worry.
I know some say "he just bluffing."
Which I agree with-he has been bluffing-so far.
But people can bluff many times,until they don't.

Lets hope this is not the start of something which leads to the Deagel.com’s infamous 2025 population forecast.
I always thought it would take a nuclear war or meteor strike to reach the numbers of dead in those forecasts,written by shady intel types.

a reply to: putnam6

If there’s one thing the market hates, it’s uncertainty.

There’s going to be no shortage of that for a while.

Biden can approve all the long range missiles he wants but reality is it’s not going to stop the key cities and transportation hubs in the east from falling.

Why do you think Biden approved this? To escalate broader tensions before Trump gets back into office.

Russia is taking key sectors lately in the east. And projected to break through going west to the Dnipro etc and in the north coming up.

For example, in the past couple of days Russian Forces gained control over the complete industrial area in eastern Kupyansk. A key transportation hub/city in the north east.

WWIII, global economic collapse still on the menu.

Where are all my naysayers at?

a reply to: Imhere

I don’t think this was a wise move, and it does more provocation than preventing anything.

That said, I can see why the west feels like action has to be taken.

Russia has signed security agreements with NK and Iran.

Iran provides drones, NK just recently provided 10k soldiers with talks of 100k more on the way. What do they get out of it, I think that’s an important question. Additionally, there’s something to be said about blatantly autocratic countries teaming up. And there’s much of the world who hasn’t forgotten where that can lead.

There’s a fine line between capitulation and provocation. I don’t have confidence that’s being navigated wisely right now, but eventually it will have to be done.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

The real problem I see Is Putin backed himself into a corner, He can't be seen as weak, so he has to do something big in way of retaliation to save face with those around him and allies.

a reply to: Ravenwatcher

He has been seen to be weak ever since the Kursk incursion and his failure stop it.

Which red lines have been crossed, there are 15 of them a reply to: schuyler2

You know this HAS happened before in Cuba, just reversed.

As you probably know the USSR was going to put missles in Cuba, Ukraine wants NATO to put missles right by Russia.

We were right to not allow it and Russia has a very good reason to not allow it.

I think Trump will have a solution better than sending weapons to their borders. Isn’t it funny how borders mean so much to Dems now?

a reply to: Texastruth2

Those were nukes in Cuba.

This is a post I just put in another thread, I think it fits here too..

Judge Andrew Napolitano has an excellent podcast, interviewing many (non-mainstream media) geopolitical specialists who have various knowledgeable analytic sources outside of the Western government propaganda narrative pushers.

In the following excellent video Judge Napolitano interviews British expat Gilbert Doctorow, a retired corporate executive and consultant to multinational corporations with expertise in Russian and Eastern European countries. He is also an independent political analyst and author of commentaries on international events.

At about the 9:12 mark he plays a clip of President Trump's short (about 2mins.) speech commenting on the Biden admin's "permission" for Ukraine to send missiles into Russian territory.

This is may be the best speech Trump has ever done - well worth watching.

a reply to: Texastruth2

If NATO had wanted nuclear weapons on Russia's border the USA, UK and France wouldn't have agreed to Ukraine handing over it's large nuclear arsenal to Russia after the break up of the Soviet Union and they would have fast tracked Ukrainian membership instead of telling them they had no realistic chance of joining the EU for at least another 25 years - of course that last bit was before Putin's invasion which itself contravened Russia's side of the deal.

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: Texastruth2

If NATO had wanted nuclear weapons on Russia's border the USA, UK and France wouldn't have agreed to Ukraine handing over it's large nuclear arsenal to Russia after the break up of the Soviet Union and they would have fast tracked Ukrainian membership instead of telling them they had no realistic chance of joining the EU for at least another 25 years - of course that last bit was before Putin's invasion which itself contravened Russia's side of the deal.

Didn't Putin agree to not invade Ukraine during this deal of giving up nukes?