Politico reported Friday that the Biden administration is leaning towards giving Ukraine advanced long-range rocket systems, which would mark a significant escalation in US military aid to Kyiv.
Ukraine has pleaded with the US to send the Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) and High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS). Both systems might be included in the next weapons package for Ukraine that could be announced next week, but it hasn’t yet been approved by President Biden or Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin.
Certain munitions fired by the MLRS systems could reach ranges of 190 miles, but a US official said those types of long-range munitions won’t be sent to Ukraine. Instead, Ukraine would likely receive systems that can launch munitions between 20-45 miles, which would still make it the longest-range weapons provided to Ukraine.
Ukrainian officials have been pleading with the US to send the MLRS and HIMARS for months, but earlier reports said Biden was hesitant to give Ukraine the rocket systems over concerns they could be used to hit targets inside Russia, which would risk prolonging the war and provoking Moscow.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov on Thursday warned the West against giving Ukraine weapons that could hit Russian territory, calling it a “serious step towards unacceptable escalation.”
The next weapons package for Ukraine will come out of the new $40 billion aid package for Ukraine President Biden recently signed into law. It includes $11 billion in presidential drawdown authority, which gives Biden the power to ship weapons to Ukraine directly from the Pentagon’s stockpiles.
When asked about the contents of the next weapons package on Friday, Pentagon spokesman John Kirby wouldn’t share details, and just said the US is in close contact with the Ukrainian government. “I won’t get ahead of decisions that haven’t been made yet, but we are in constant communication with them,” he said.
64 thoughts on “US Leaning Towards Giving Ukraine Long-Range Rocket Systems”
US Leaning Towards Giving Ukraine Long-Range Rocket Systems
… and they will get long-range rocket systems in return, you know, for their trouble, just not in the original packaging!
Warthog, your comments always make me grin
Giving Zelensky long range missiles is like giving a retarded 3 year old a loaded handgun and setting him out in the city square.
Please Russia eliminate the drugged out drag queen!
Better take him alive. There’s got to be some moiety of justice seen to be served. The Neocon/NATO-nazis are beyond reach; but the Ukro’s, at least, ought to be “Nuremberg’d. And let the world watch the entire process –the subalterns exposed before the bar of Justice.
CT loves ableist language and calling for assassination and genocide. The fact that he’s tolerated here says a lot about AW.
“US Leaning Towards Giving Ukraine Long-Range Rocket Systems” = most likely it’s done already.
perhaps Russia should give long range rocket systems to Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Bolivia et. al.
Their governments need such ‘defensive’ weapons and would surely make better use of them strategically than the dumb zelensky / Ukrainians
short of that, the US is putting itself in a position of clearly being a co-belligerent in this war…. Where will it all go, I don’t know
Right now, we are on course for WWIII. Let’s see who blinks first.
I am fine with Cuba having a 40 mile rocket system. Perhaps Russia should not invade its neighbors.
Your government wouldn’t be. And Cuba would already have been cratered if similarities to Ukraine were happening there.
I would be fine with that sentiment if you extended it to the US in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Kosovo, Grenada, Panama, etc, or supporting Saudi Arabia’s naked unprovoked aggression against Yemen. Because I agree; nations should NOT be invading other countries. What I can’t abide is the endless hypocrisy in the US about how OUR warmongering and killing of innocents is “justified” and that of people we don’t like is “just like Hitler”.
Oh for sure we are hypocrites, I am opposed to our invasions as well, for the record
Then we agree!
Huh. I don’t seem to recall anything from you opposing US invasions on these pages. Could you give a reference to any site where you voiced opposition to US/NATO invasions? Recently, have you expressed opposition on US nterventions in current situations?
I could be wrong, but frankly I don’t believe you. .
When was our last invasion, I didn’t like our actions in Syria, Libya I don’t like our support of SA particularly as it relates to Yemen. Iraq 2 a huge mistake Afghanistan a monumental blunder. All this stuff happened years ago though.
Your claim. I don’t believe you. And it is cheap rhetoric to claim the obvious that Afghanistan was a “monumental blunder” .
And the point was where where you as an advocate for peace on those interventions you “didn’t like”? You certainly are active on pro Ukraine side of this war. Where where you on the 14,000 dead people in Donast and Lugansk? On the US coup on 2014 in Kiev?
Didn’t hear from you on Libya, Syria, Yemen. And those aren’t “recent” Africom screwing with Africa? Nothing.
The only things I’ve seen from you are pro intervention, pro sanctions and Putin/Russia bad. Intelligence agencies, Pentagon and neo liberal talking points.
Don’t like that either. I do not understand why we are messing in Somalia and what we possibly think we can achieve.
Funny, but, in your claim of being consistent, you are now “on record” as opposing half a dozen or more US wars of aggression. Doesn’t that tell you something? The USA is HABITUALLY starting wars. It’s bases ring the globe. It engages in regime change on every continent. It strangles with sanctions anyone who defies it. Therefore, it is not actually all that surprising that, in fact, it ginned up and actually STARTED this war in Ukraine as well.
Being “antiwar” and pro UN charter doesn’t mean being a mindless, juvenile, both siderish, critic of all wars, however fought and fought for whatever reasons. It means actually looking at history and current events with a critical eye, ascertaining which country and which set of countries are the cause of most of the wars around the world, and going on from there. A mature, adult, person with genuine, sophisticated antiwar views recognizes that is it the USA and its empire which are the root cause of most of the strife around the world. And such a person formulates their attitudes with that in mind. The empire has been poking Russia for three decades. Now, it has gone beyond that. That’s what a real antiwar person understands.
Your stance is jejune and indefensible. Stop promulgating pro imperial propaganda. Stop hiding behind weak sauce, both siderist disinformation.
Jejune! So your idea is we do nothing while Russia takes over Ukraine? Then do nothing while Russia takes over Poland. I suppose that is a point of view strict isolationism.
Domino theory! Wow!
Yep, lets see we were rocked back on our heels in Vietnam and did nothing relatively speaking until Grenada ( tiny) Then Iraq 1 came along and that went great, we turned a small profit and the “ghost of Vietnam” was banished. Then the gloves were off we were poking our noses into trouble spots the world over. Till finally we put our foot in it in Afghanistan and Iraq. Now we are hopefully adverse to invading places for a generation or two. Similarly Putin had some success in Chechnya then Georgia and now he has put his foot in it in Ukraine.
It is a curious thing where appetite increases with eating.
You left out the Balkans, Syria, Libya, Somalia, etc. Please. The USA is the source of most war in the world. If you don’t understand that, then you are not “antiwar.”
We have been in some conflict pretty much every year of being a nation. I do somewhat sympathize with Putins “Anglo-Saxon” line of thought. It is true the USA and UK are really warlike.
John, Iraq 2 was a “huge mistake”?!
You don’t think it goes a bit further than that?
Amerikkka decimated the cradle of civilization, overthrew their leader resulting in utter chaos, displaced millions, resulted in the deaths of half a million Iraqi children ( no worries, the murdering b*tch Albright , currently rotting in a very bad place, opined that it was “worth it”).
This amounts to a bit more than a “mistake”. Wouldn’t you agree?
Iraq 1 was a huge mistake too.
I don’t see that, Saddam invaded another country we pushed him out. Seems legit. I do realize there was awful diplomacy at the front and perhaps with better communication it all could have been avoided.
He invaded Iran too. And our state department basically greenlighted his invasion of Kuwait. Another example of our extreme hypocrisy. So, we sent Iraq back to the stone age and we turned on another of our bought off tyrants after he served his usefulness for our needs. Sure, seems legit.
Yes he did, I was rooting for Iran on that one. The theme here is I don’t like invaders and invasions.
I do recall John making comments against our belligerence and our ass kissing of Israel. He also had said he agreed Russia had valid security concerns.
Yes. A posture IMO. But I was referring to early interventions or on other current involvement. That would have shown commitment and real anti war credibility. I don’t think he has that. Similar to MS democrats that are gung ho statists.
The article speaks about the Ukraine,but you must introduce your own pet peeve-stop changing the subject.
You can’t possibly be that dense. I replied to sambor71’s comment about another person’s comment history. Do you understand the concept of replying to other people’s comments? Now if I replied to his comment with something about this article THEN I would have been changing the subject. But of course, my truthful comment about our government’s a$$ kissing of Israel is what set you off. As always, you are a one trick pony who only seems concerned about the parasite latched to our underbelly.
Again with this nonsense. The point isn’t what “john” the anonymous internet poster supports or “opposes,” but what the USA supports and opposes. The USA is in no position to complain about “invading” other countries. Neither are any of the Coalition of the Willing partners (such as the UK, Urkaine, Poland, the Baltic States, etc). Nor any country that participated in the attack on Serbia back in the 90’s. Etc.
No one gives a tinker’s damn about what “john” supports or opposes, “for the record” or otherwise. “We,” meaning the USA in particular and “the West” in general, are indeed hypocrites. And hypocrites should shut up, and stop pretending as if there is a credible international legal regime that can, does and should prevent Russia from doing what it is doing, as it never thinks that regime applies to itself.
Sure, principled individuals, such as you claim to be, can bark all they want. I don’t care. What I care about, as a US citizen, and thus also a citizen of “the West,” is US and Western policy and actions. I don’t want my country to court WWIII by giving Ukraine rockets to Russia. And that is true regardless of what “john” thinks about anything.
You realize that you are arguing with some random guy named John on the internet.
perhaps the US should not have funded Neo Nazis in regime change operations…. Just remember the original threats by the coup leaders to get rid of the Russian speaking subhuman scum infesting Eastern Ukraine…. it was US funded Coup and those threats of Genocide that started this whole thing in 2014! Just remember also that the Cuban Missile Crisis was the result of the US putting Nukes directly on the Soviet Border. Also remember that the Russians can do something that no other country that has gone to War with the US could do…. directly and devastatingly bomb the US and kill 00s of millions of Americans within the first day of conflict nay the first hour!
And just perhaps the U.S. and the West should have kept to its word and not expanded NATO and moved right up to Russia’s borders?
The US MIC is the gift that keeps on giving…
I’m sure the Russians will enjoy disecting whatever is left of our most advanced weapons to make upgrades to their own systems. They’ll probably share what they learn with China also. Our best weapons will only prolong Ukraine’s destruction.
Probably not. Most Russian weapons are better than what the US has already. And they cost much less.
“but earlier reports said Biden was hesitant to give Ukraine the rocket systems over concerns they could be used to hit targets inside Russia, which would risk prolonging the war and provoking Moscow.”
Half right. The intention IS to prolong the war without pissing Russia off enough to trigger WW3. So, the talk of giving Ukraine what they need to “win” this war has always been a load of bullshit. Proof positive that we’re using them as a pawn to reach the stated goal of “weakening” Russia.
And since these missiles would be capable of nuclear warheads, how would Russia react upon a launch toward a Russian city?
What could go wrong?
This particular system, that is not the case. This one uses multiple rockets to kill 50% of the troops inside a 1kmx1km grid square.
And Russians are using fuel air bombs on Ukrainians.
That’s not the long range missile system that Zelensky has asked for. What you are referencing is rocket artillery. Even then, one of those systems is capable of using a 180 lb warhead . Guess what? How much does a tactical nuclear warhead weigh? Add in the targeting system? .Answer…. under 180 lbs. .
The MLRS is not considered nuclear capable by any rational actor, of course you are entitled to your opinion.
As I said. the MLRS is NOT the system Zelensky has asked for. Ukraine already has a version of this system. This is rocket artillery. Been around for 50 years. And it is not “long range”.
Of course, you are entitled to your opinion. Yours is dangerous to millions though. And you claim “rational actors” to defend your position” . Logical fallacy . Appeal to authority.
How about a real discussion on the technology? How much weight is a mini nuke? Why can’t such be configured in a package that fits any system that can launch a payload of this weight? You do realise that nukes can be used in conventional artillery, right? INCLUDING rocket artillery… This had been known as a fact for better part of a half century.
Regardless, the MLRS isn’t the system in question. Neither is it the HIMRS. This was political cover from another gaff by the Biden regime. The system in question is an export version of the PrMS. Which Zelansky has asked for BECAUSE it it the US version of what Russia has used in Ukraine. The demand from Zelzasky was “to level the playing field”.
Dumb. Really, really dumb. The ultimate oxymoron: military intelligence
Nothing new here. The war in Ukraine drives our November election. No candidate wants to be tagged as “soft on Ukraine”. And the Democrats also have to worry about the 2024 presidential election. Zelenski is a puppeteer and nearly all US Senators and Representatives are his scared and willing puppets. If the war gets worse for Zelenski I expect him to address our Congress again.
Not so sure, it is darn expensive 40 billion is quite a chunk of cheese.
They just print up more money, and reduce the effects of the US debt through inflation. Man in the streets gets poorer.
You’re absolutely wrong. Watch the Democrats in Nov. suffer one of the worst defeats in history. Americans are tired of this War that was totally preventable. We’re also tired of Billions going to Ukraine, while the politicians are getting kickbacks.
Wouldn’t that be “ratcheting up the tensions”?
And who are their counterparts in Ukraine. Right wing hotheads control Security Council, appoint commanders, micromanage. They could not manage any front thus far. Give them strategic weapons to attack Russia?
First, those weapons like the others before them will not make a diference. Will be destroyed. However, if used to attack Russia — this would make us combatants.
It is the incompetence and violent nature of Kiev regime that is scary. Russia is taking this into account — I wish we were.
If you analyze the $40 billion aid package, over 80% is not weapons, it’s mostly free money to the MIC and the EU. Which means Washington is sending even less weapons to Ukraine than it did before, albeit bigger ones. Bigger ones that won’t matter because Russia has air supremacy and artillery that can still out range whatever the US sends. Ukraine already has MLRS in its inventory – it hasn’t helped so far.
Those M777 howitizers? Turns out Russia has a counter-battery device which detects the approximate location and identity of the artillery being fired at them – sort of like Shot Spotter in some US cities to detect gunshots – which then sends a drone to get the exact coordinates so the Russian artillery can counter-battery fire directly on target.
Idiots don’t realize that all this stuff is on a tactical level – and the war is being won by Russia on the operational and strategic level.
Loved that, Deganawida!
you are most welcome…
If Ukrainian forces decimate Russian forces with these weapons that is not good for any hope this war will end soon.
If Ukrainian forces kill Russians on Russian soil this will not end well for all of humanity.
It will be the start of World War 3.
In the regional and city councils of Kharkiv, Mykolaiv, Sumy and other regions of Ukraine, the discussion of the Manifesto on the creation of a new state has began.
You are all real hypocrites, you pretend to be anti-war advocates, but I can’t see anyone that’s condemning Russia’s constant aggressions or at least hoping for a cease fire. Shame on you all, people are dying!
Why not give the Nazi’s nukes right away and see what happens? I mean not one of their trainers, certainly not the US, objected when Ze was threatening Moscow by saying he was going to build them just before Russia preemted the ukranian attack on Donbass.
Comments are closed.