Jump to content

Russia's defence ministry: Ukraine hits Russia with US long-range missiles


Recommended Posts

Posted

 

 

In a significant escalation in the ongoing Ukraine-Russia conflict, reports have emerged indicating that debris from an Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) missile, supplied by the United States, has fallen on a military facility in Russia's Bryansk region. This information has been confirmed by the Russian Defense Ministry through various news agencies.

 

According to the Russian military, their anti-missile systems reportedly intercepted five out of six ATACMS fired by Ukraine, with one missile managing to reach its target. The Ukrainian military has stated that it launched an attack on Russian positions in the Bryansk area but has not confirmed the specific use of the ATACMS missiles.

 

Security and defense editor Deborah Haynes, reporting from the G20 summit in Rio de Janeiro, noted that while the possibility of Ukraine utilizing these missiles within Russian territory was anticipated, the Russian claims raise questions about reliability. She highlighted that Ukraine's focus lies in effectively deploying its weaponry, rather than explicitly confirming details of their operations.

 

The Russian government claims that six ATACMS were fired into its territory, leading to speculation about the extent of the damage caused by the missiles that bypassed their defenses. Experts suggest that this tactical use of long-range systems could provoke a different strategic response from Russia.

 

President Putin has recently warned the West of severe consequences should the U.S. or UK authorize more extensive use of long-range missile systems by Ukraine. The situation is further complicated by Russia's updated nuclear doctrine, which reportedly lowers the threshold for a potential nuclear response in the event of a conventional attack. This marks a shift in Russian military policy, which previously limited nuclear retaliation to situations involving a nuclear strike or an existential threat to the state.

 

Amidst these tensions, officials from Britain and the U.S. continue to assert that Russia has no desire for a nuclear conflict due to the disastrous consequences it would entail. The UK Prime Minister's spokesperson condemned Russia's adjustment to its nuclear strategy, terming it "irresponsible" behavior from the Kremlin.

 

Deborah Haynes further emphasized that discussions among U.S. and UK officials suggest caution against Russia's nuclear saber-rattling, which they believe is designed to influence Western support for Ukraine. President Biden has allegedly given Ukraine the green light to utilize long-range missiles against Russian targets, bolstered by the recent introduction of North Korean troops into the conflict.

 

While this development could slightly alter the tactical landscape, it does not represent a game-changing moment for Ukraine, as there remain inherent limitations regarding the range and quantity of the missile systems available to them. The UK’s Storm Shadow cruise missiles, for example, are in limited supply and take considerable time to replenish.

 

As the situation unfolds, the international community remains vigilant, closely monitoring the implications of these developments on the broader conflict.

 

As reported by Sky News.

 

 

news-logo-btm.jpg

 

news-footer-4.png

 

image.png

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, CharlieH said:

President Putin has recently warned the West of severe consequences

 

He has warned them from the very beginning (since before 2014)

 but they take no heed of the warnings  and are "surprised" / outraged when he eventually takes action to back up his warnings..he has also warned about the use of these missiles to strike Russian territory,  ignored as usual  and so wait for the "surprise"  when WWIII erupts  (remember who predicted that F16's and Nato troops would mean WWIII ?? )

  • Confused 2
  • Haha 2
Posted
4 hours ago, tai4de2 said:

 

In the context of this topic -- which is about Ukraine using American missiles -- your stance presumes that Ukraine is worth American involvement to defend.

 

My opinion: nope, let Europe handle it, with their own tax Euros instead of my tax dollars, and cleaning up their own mess after propping up Russia by e.g. buying their oil and gas for many years.

 

I agree with your observation , Europe should be doing more. The money is there but gets wasted on less worthy causes.

Some of the smaller European countries are doing their best and I believe Denmark ,Latvis and Lithuania are the countries putting up the greatest percent of their GDP in helping Ukraine.

 

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...