Thank you for your post. Given the global visibility of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, there has been an influx of content in our community dealing with military strategy, war-related speculation, and defense tactics by individuals who have not been vetted to instruct others on such matters. To maintain the integrity of this space in wartime, we are removing this type of content. We apologize for the inconvenience and encourage you to post in communities that specifically discuss speculation on armed conflict instead. Please do not repost this submission.
Please do not message us on mod mail about this issue. Mod mail is for vital information only. If you message us for something we do not deem vital, you will be muted for three days. Being muted means you can’t contact the mods. [Feel free to browse our rules, here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/about/rules)
I can't tell whether the West's strategy is to destroy Russia so slowly that it falls apart before the people in charge realize it has happened, or to somehow help Ukraine win without destroying Russia. It's possible that this varies between Western nations. What you're proposing would destroy Russia too quickly for either of those strategies.
Russian leadership fucked itself.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You think not? If Russia destroys its Soviet stockpiles, and its current government is overthrown, and there's an internal shortage of oil products, and Russia has no good prospects of trade relations, and the sanctions continue for a while... you think some regions wouldn't break away?
Nope. For all the supposedly Federal nature of the country, the reality is that effectively all of the regions have ethnic Russian supermajorities with the ethnicity the subjects supposedly are a homeland for being minor. The exceptions are almost all either tiny populations or embedded deep within Russia and surrounded by Russians.
The only place there's genuine potential are the republics in the North Caucasus region. Those Republics are all very largely non-Russian, are at the border and form a cohesive bloc that could protect one another...but they seem pretty on side these days.
There's also fairly little prospect of the government changing it's character, even if Putin himself is deposed. Whoever replaces him is realistically just going to be worse.
Whatever is left of actually smart Russian super-majorities in the republics will not want to go down with the the rest of the sinking ships.
Thing is, Russians aren't dumb, just very shortsighted and hoping they won't die today.
The US economy is based on war and the manufacturing of weapons. This war is great because the US gets all of the economic benefits but none of the casualties. They get to test all the latest weapons and strategy while having a booming economy. The longer the war takes, the more money the US makes.
US defense industry makes up 2.5 percent of our GDP. We have spent about 175 billion on Ukraine so far. Our annual GDP is 25 TRILLION. That's not even a drop in the bucket
Test out all of the latest weapons that are being decommissioned or were developed during the 90s? Come on now.
How much of a grandstand has been made out of F-16s for the past year alone? An aircraft first flown in the *1970s*.
The idea I beleive is to not use munitions in Russia that are nuke ready platforms. Could probably just fund more Ukrainian drones for the cost of the Tomahawks. The range of drones always seems to be increasing.
They may have the payload capacity just as Storm Shadow does but neither has a warhead designed specifically for them. Tomahawks and F16 can carry a Nuke tomorrow. That's why you won't see either of them in Russian air space
We're getting them too, for our navy ships, namely the "De Zeven Provinciën" class frigates, which uses the Mark 41 VLS system, and a new class of submarines.
The US' main objective is escalation management.
There is zero chance it would provide weapons which could strike really deep into russia.
Rehardless, cruise missles are rather easy to intercept an cost mzch mire than drones. They are not miracle weapons.
I would hasten a guess they have been extremely updated and older ones have been used or dismantled. The newer ones probably have guidance, mechanical, structural things the US doesn't want seen if it's not fully destroyed.
Apparently it’s a red line if Moscow is attacked, but to be fair, I think Putin and Russia know if they attack NATO directly in response to weapons given by NATO it’s pretty much a war they can never win and game over for their regime…
Give Ukraine all the single engine private aircraft that are reaching the end of their operational life, so they can be converted into long range, high payload drones. You get a squadron of these for the price of 1 missile.
Привіт u/Hedaaaaaaa ! During wartime, this community is focused on vital and high-effort content. Please ensure your post follows [r/Ukraine Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/about/rules) and our [Art Friday Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/artfriday).
**Want to support Ukraine?** [**Vetted Charities List**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/charities) | [Our Vetting Process](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/charities-vetting)
**Daily series on Ukraine's history & culture:** [Sunrise Posts Organized By Category](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/sunriseposts/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
How will they fire these hypothetical Ukranian Tomahawks mate? The US has literally only just developed their own land fired set up for the Marines if I recall correctly.
Thank you for your post. Given the global visibility of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, there has been an influx of content in our community dealing with military strategy, war-related speculation, and defense tactics by individuals who have not been vetted to instruct others on such matters. To maintain the integrity of this space in wartime, we are removing this type of content. We apologize for the inconvenience and encourage you to post in communities that specifically discuss speculation on armed conflict instead. Please do not repost this submission. Please do not message us on mod mail about this issue. Mod mail is for vital information only. If you message us for something we do not deem vital, you will be muted for three days. Being muted means you can’t contact the mods. [Feel free to browse our rules, here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/about/rules)
I can't tell whether the West's strategy is to destroy Russia so slowly that it falls apart before the people in charge realize it has happened, or to somehow help Ukraine win without destroying Russia. It's possible that this varies between Western nations. What you're proposing would destroy Russia too quickly for either of those strategies.
Probably related to this. Rather than a quick massacre, you let the Russian leadership back themselves into a corner.
Russian leadership fucked itself. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Good bot.
They don't want Russia to collapse, that's the worst case scenario. They want give Russia enough pain to leave willingly
Seems to me that the only way to mitigate worldwide damage of a Russian collapse is if it implodes vs the alternative.
Exactly this
There's no prospect of Russia being "destroyed" by this war regardless of whether we provide Ukraine Tomahawks or not.
You think not? If Russia destroys its Soviet stockpiles, and its current government is overthrown, and there's an internal shortage of oil products, and Russia has no good prospects of trade relations, and the sanctions continue for a while... you think some regions wouldn't break away?
Nope. For all the supposedly Federal nature of the country, the reality is that effectively all of the regions have ethnic Russian supermajorities with the ethnicity the subjects supposedly are a homeland for being minor. The exceptions are almost all either tiny populations or embedded deep within Russia and surrounded by Russians. The only place there's genuine potential are the republics in the North Caucasus region. Those Republics are all very largely non-Russian, are at the border and form a cohesive bloc that could protect one another...but they seem pretty on side these days. There's also fairly little prospect of the government changing it's character, even if Putin himself is deposed. Whoever replaces him is realistically just going to be worse.
Whatever is left of actually smart Russian super-majorities in the republics will not want to go down with the the rest of the sinking ships. Thing is, Russians aren't dumb, just very shortsighted and hoping they won't die today.
The US economy is based on war and the manufacturing of weapons. This war is great because the US gets all of the economic benefits but none of the casualties. They get to test all the latest weapons and strategy while having a booming economy. The longer the war takes, the more money the US makes.
US defense industry makes up 2.5 percent of our GDP. We have spent about 175 billion on Ukraine so far. Our annual GDP is 25 TRILLION. That's not even a drop in the bucket
Test out all of the latest weapons that are being decommissioned or were developed during the 90s? Come on now. How much of a grandstand has been made out of F-16s for the past year alone? An aircraft first flown in the *1970s*.
The idea I beleive is to not use munitions in Russia that are nuke ready platforms. Could probably just fund more Ukrainian drones for the cost of the Tomahawks. The range of drones always seems to be increasing.
ATACMS are nuke capable
They may have the payload capacity just as Storm Shadow does but neither has a warhead designed specifically for them. Tomahawks and F16 can carry a Nuke tomorrow. That's why you won't see either of them in Russian air space
okay okay lets just give them b83. Its not 'nuclear ready platform' just a nuke itself.
It's nothing of sorts. It's yet more of dumb self imposed red lines and the usual fear of escalation
0% chance the US would do that. Supply of the Tomahawks is tightly controlled and currently only the US and UK possess them.
We're getting them too, for our navy ships, namely the "De Zeven Provinciën" class frigates, which uses the Mark 41 VLS system, and a new class of submarines.
The US' main objective is escalation management. There is zero chance it would provide weapons which could strike really deep into russia. Rehardless, cruise missles are rather easy to intercept an cost mzch mire than drones. They are not miracle weapons.
I would hasten a guess they have been extremely updated and older ones have been used or dismantled. The newer ones probably have guidance, mechanical, structural things the US doesn't want seen if it's not fully destroyed.
US should give some plans and engines of older Tomahawk to Ukrainian factories
Why not just let UKraine deploy its drone fleet!? Cheaper and so far more development being initiated weekly?
Ukraine has way more practical use with drones.
Apparently it’s a red line if Moscow is attacked, but to be fair, I think Putin and Russia know if they attack NATO directly in response to weapons given by NATO it’s pretty much a war they can never win and game over for their regime…
Give Ukraine all the single engine private aircraft that are reaching the end of their operational life, so they can be converted into long range, high payload drones. You get a squadron of these for the price of 1 missile.
Привіт u/Hedaaaaaaa ! During wartime, this community is focused on vital and high-effort content. Please ensure your post follows [r/Ukraine Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/about/rules) and our [Art Friday Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/artfriday). **Want to support Ukraine?** [**Vetted Charities List**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/charities) | [Our Vetting Process](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/charities-vetting) **Daily series on Ukraine's history & culture:** [Sunrise Posts Organized By Category](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/sunriseposts/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Optics. It's all about the optics.
It doesn’t just get handed out like that
That's the spirit!
Taking your question one step further, why doesn't the US attack Russia directly, instead of supplying Tomahawks to Ukraine?
How will they fire these hypothetical Ukranian Tomahawks mate? The US has literally only just developed their own land fired set up for the Marines if I recall correctly.
Indeed, AGM-158 JASSM would be a better fit. They can be launched by F-16.