Skip Navigation

Ukraine destroyed columns of waiting Russian troops as soon as it was allowed to strike across the border, commander says

www.businessinsider.com Ukraine destroyed columns of waiting Russian troops as soon as it was allowed to strike across the border, commander says

Ukraine is now able to strike military targets in Russia using Western-supplied weapons. One commander said Ukraine had destroyed columns of troops.

Ukraine destroyed columns of waiting Russian troops as soon as it was allowed to strike across the border, commander says
  • Ukraine destroyed columns of waiting Russian soldiers with HIMARS, a Ukrainian commander said.
  • He said Ukraine targeted them as soon as it got permission to use allied weapons across the border.
  • Military experts say Ukraine's ability to use Western-supplied weapons in Russia is aiding its fightback.
97

You're viewing a single thread.

97 comments
  • Striking those Russian oil and gas facilities really seemed like the thing that made actual impact. But that damaged global trade which America wasn't a fan of.

    • Ukraine has both tactical and strategic plans for striking Russian oil and gas facilities. Strategically it's important to hit these facilities as reducing output results in a long term slowdown in Russia's ability to wage war on its neighbours. Tactically it's a way of both boosting Ukrainian morale and also (most interestingly) forcing the US to help resupply Ukraine.

      By reducing Russian production, Ukraine is pushing up oil and gas prices which affects the World and, more importantly, the US economy. Due to the US election cycle, inflation is a hot button topic in the US ATM and the Biden administration will do just about anything it can to reduce its impact on the upcoming Presidential election.

      It's entirely valid to conclude that the Ukrainian's can bring pressure on the US to provide military aid by attaching Russian oil and gas assets.

      Let me be clear: I'm on the side of the Ukrainians.

      • I'm not following. The first part makes sense, but wouldn't driving gas up make Ukraine less popular and less likely to get US aid?

        • That's a good question. The answer lies not so much about the general popularity and sympathy for Ukraine but rather the amount of pressure Ukraine can exert on the the present US administration to leverage more military aid.

          The Ukrainians are aware of the level of sympathy they have in the US as the plucky underdog in this conflict. Striking oil and gas targets deep inside Russia doesn't diminish this but rather underlines and reinforces the situation. However, reducing the supply of oil and gas impacts the price of oil and gas and has a knock on effect on inflation.

          The majority of Americans don't consciously make that connection, they just feel the pinch in their hip pocket. For better or worse inflation is commonly viewed as domestic issue and this is reinforced by the retoric of those on the right of US politics. So, for many inflation is Joe Biden's fault.

          Therefore, by attacking these targets or threatening to, the Ukrainians can bring the very real pressure on the Biden administration. The President has to continue to show support to the Ukrainians (both moral and materiel) while attempting to rein in the Ukrainians ability and desire to strike deeply at oil and gas targets in Russia.

          It appears that this delicate balancing game is ongoing with the US administration pressuring their opponents in the Congress to back down on defunding the Ukrainians while at the same time convincing the Ukrainians to back off a little and focus more on military targets.

      • I support Ukraine too but throwing Ukrainian soldiers into the meat grinder is a lost cause.

        What Russia does care about (and needs to keep their invasion going) is money. Which Russia mostly makes from their oil and gas.

        So America not allowing Ukraine to hit Russia where it actually hurts means Putin has no reason to agree to a ceasefire. His money keeps flowing and he can keep his war economy going.

    • Sounds like a win/win then.

97 comments