Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Biden Allows Ukraine to Strike Russia with Long-Range U.S. Missiles

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 137 posts

Re: Biden Allows Ukraine to Strike Russia with Long-Range U.S. Missiles

#11

Post by exe34 »

stoneman24 wrote: post #9
exe34 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they need to capture as much Russian soil as they can, and when the orange man and the other clown tell them to freeze the border, Ukraine can say sure, if you insist!

Not sure how much additional real estate they can capture due to limited resources (especially manpower). But this gives them a better chance of holding what they have and destroying the Russian logistics and infrastructure. Hopefully the European powers and the UK will lift any restrictions that they have imposed and provide additional supplies.

whatever they're going to do, they have two months. I really hope they manage to get a reasonable deal out of this. I personally think giving up land should come with full NATO membership or at least the kind of mutual defence that the UK signed with Finland and Sweden on their way into NATO.

Re: Biden Allows Ukraine to Strike Russia with Long-Range U.S. Missiles

#12

Post by azemetre »

20after4 wrote: post #7
toomuchtodo wrote: post #2

[flagged]

If you are sincere then I think this must be the most reckless, unhinged proposal I've read on this website. Are you really literally suggesting to start a nuclear war with Russia?

Sad to say but the only way to be taken seriously and avoid military incursions/invasions is to hold nuclear weapons.

I do wonder how nuclear disarmament will continue when it looks like obtaining nuclear arms is one of the few ways to truly achieve sovereignty and not rely on the benefactors of your neighbors.

Curious if anyone has reading materials about this.

Re: Biden Allows Ukraine to Strike Russia with Long-Range U.S. Missiles

#14

Post by toomuchtodo »

azemetre wrote: post #12
20after4 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are sincere then I think this must be the most reckless, unhinged proposal I've read on this website. Are you really literally suggesting to start a nuclear war with Russia?

Sad to say but the only way to be taken seriously and avoid military incursions/invasions is to hold nuclear weapons. I do wonder how nuclear disarmament will continue when it looks like obtaining nuclear arms is one of the few ways to truly achieve sovereignty and not rely on the benefactors of your neighbors. Curious if anyone has reading materials about this.

Nuclear disarmament is over because, otherwise, you’re putting your nation’s sovereignty in the hands of the US electorate. Would you trust them with your life and future? I certainly wouldn’t.

If you can’t trust superpowers (including the US), you have to protect and defend yourself. That’s the nuclear way (and perhaps a bit more percentage of GDP towards defense for everyone).

In a civil world, it wouldn’t be necessary, but based on who keeps floating to the top of the power hierarchy, it’s mandatory. Maybe a nation worth trusting will rise again, but I’m not hopeful.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Si_vis_pacem,_para_bellum

Re: Biden Allows Ukraine to Strike Russia with Long-Range U.S. Missiles

#17

Post by blub »

petermcneeley wrote: post #13

Russia claimed that deep strikes into Russian territory would be crossing a "red line". We shall see; I am nervously excited.

Likely response is bombing whatever is left of Ukrainian power generation and potentially arming the Houthis.

The analysis I’ve seen indicates that these weapons will not fundamentally alter the course of the war. Kursk was a gamble to improve Ukraine’s negotiating position, which has gotten consistently worse.

Re: Biden Allows Ukraine to Strike Russia with Long-Range U.S. Missiles

#18

Post by blub »

MrHamburger wrote: post #8
20after4 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are sincere then I think this must be the most reckless, unhinged proposal I've read on this website. Are you really literally suggesting to start a nuclear war with Russia?

It is quite logical. Budapest Memorandum signed in 1994 where UK, USA and Russia guaranteed sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine in exchange for nuclear weapons on Ukrainian soil which remained there after dissolution of USSR. If Russia wants to renege on Budapest Memorandum, Ukraine should get their nukes back. Also you can see another side of the coin - Iran and DPRK would need to be insane to get rid o…

The Budapest Memorandum was a way to force a potential* nuclear player and/or nuclear wildcard out of the game.

When you see it for what it is, giving Ukraine nuclear weapons is the last thing anyone (except internet posters) wants.

* They didn’t control the weapons, nor could they financially afford to maintain them.

Re: Biden Allows Ukraine to Strike Russia with Long-Range U.S. Missiles

#19

Post by MrHamburger »

azemetre wrote: post #12
20after4 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are sincere then I think this must be the most reckless, unhinged proposal I've read on this website. Are you really literally suggesting to start a nuclear war with Russia?

Sad to say but the only way to be taken seriously and avoid military incursions/invasions is to hold nuclear weapons. I do wonder how nuclear disarmament will continue when it looks like obtaining nuclear arms is one of the few ways to truly achieve sovereignty and not rely on the benefactors of your neighbors. Curious if anyone has reading materials about this.

My guess is, that if USA will keep playing around and pretend that Ukraine is somebody else's problem to solve, they will find out that Eastern Europe can make a nuke too. Then what is USA going to do? Sanction Europeans? Then there is no reason to continue sanctioning Iran from Europeans perspective for exactly same thing.

Re: Biden Allows Ukraine to Strike Russia with Long-Range U.S. Missiles

#20

Post by monetus »

The atacms strikes will help in kursk, but less so in the east imo. Maybe this will mess up those logistics as well, but it seems too little too late.

Just politically, It isn't parity to ten thousand soldiers and 60% of their shells being North Korean. North Korea is at war in Europe, and this is not a commensurate response.

Lifting the restrictions now after Russia's logistics have already retreated also took the bite out of their potential. It should have been a surprise, overnight, when the Russian airforce was still relatively concentrated and unconcerned.

Better than nothing; I hope it changes something, for a time at least.

Post reply on HN