to be clear, ukraine went ahead and did this anyway. And then the US lifted restrictions on this kind of stuff (idk if it was completely, but they did do it)
It’s not really arbitrary, it’s just geopolitics being geopolitics, ukraine and the rest of europe showed that russia would bluff, and we’re supporting them more now.
I guess it should make sense coming from a partially republican legislature that doesn’t even believe in the ukraine war to begin with.
they have sent other munitions from other sources fairly deep into russia, i believe the submarine dock attack was with a storm shadow missile, and at least one drone attack, the obvious one being the kremlin bombing, as well other other sourced materials they can find. They’ve been doing it whenever accessible and possible. Oh and obviously the recent offensive into russia itself.
The obvious example is the ATACMs missile, but i believe that was post restriction.
to be clear here, i’m not saying they broke the US restrictions, i’m saying they broke the “taboo” on firing into russian territory.
sevastopol is in crimea right? Is crimea recognized broadly by the global nations to be ukrainian territory? Crimea is annexed by russia, there was a whole thing around this when it happened. I know ukraine contests this and wishes to get it back, but currently for most intents, and most purposes, crimea is a part of russia.
i guess i’d probably define it by either governmental ties, although i believe crimea was closer to a territory of ukraine, than an actual part of ukraine, and whether or not the government itself has some sort of significant influence in that region.
Geo politics is fun.
I guess the other alternative is digging through the history of ukraine and crimea to see if they ever established any sort of relationship that you could use as a basis for a modern claim of “ownership”
naturally post USSR implosion it gained independence. I feel like i’d probably leave crimea up for debate at the moment tho. I could see it going either way depending on how you classify it’s relationship to ukraine.
Ya I’m with you there, they have broken so many taboos (or as the russians call it, red lines), tanks, western help, javelins, hitting oil depos, substations (but that was retaliation I guess), …
What about a kremlin attack? I only know about a staged one with a drone from IDR like 2022?
to be clear, ukraine went ahead and did this anyway. And then the US lifted restrictions on this kind of stuff (idk if it was completely, but they did do it)
It’s not really arbitrary, it’s just geopolitics being geopolitics, ukraine and the rest of europe showed that russia would bluff, and we’re supporting them more now.
I guess it should make sense coming from a partially republican legislature that doesn’t even believe in the ukraine war to begin with.
It’s about atacms strikes deep (+100km) inside russia, what according to you did they do “anyways”?
They attacked with long range drones rather than American weapons
I know, and that has always “been allowed”.
they have sent other munitions from other sources fairly deep into russia, i believe the submarine dock attack was with a storm shadow missile, and at least one drone attack, the obvious one being the kremlin bombing, as well other other sourced materials they can find. They’ve been doing it whenever accessible and possible. Oh and obviously the recent offensive into russia itself.
The obvious example is the ATACMs missile, but i believe that was post restriction.
to be clear here, i’m not saying they broke the US restrictions, i’m saying they broke the “taboo” on firing into russian territory.
The submarine dock was in Sevastopol, which is Russian-occupied Ukraine rather than Russia.
sevastopol is in crimea right? Is crimea recognized broadly by the global nations to be ukrainian territory? Crimea is annexed by russia, there was a whole thing around this when it happened. I know ukraine contests this and wishes to get it back, but currently for most intents, and most purposes, crimea is a part of russia.
You can make up your own mind, but that’s a strong yes to me:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_status_of_Crimea#Stances
i guess i’d probably define it by either governmental ties, although i believe crimea was closer to a territory of ukraine, than an actual part of ukraine, and whether or not the government itself has some sort of significant influence in that region.
Geo politics is fun.
I guess the other alternative is digging through the history of ukraine and crimea to see if they ever established any sort of relationship that you could use as a basis for a modern claim of “ownership”
Crimea and Sevastopol both had majority votes for independence in 1991.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Ukrainian_independence_referendum
naturally post USSR implosion it gained independence. I feel like i’d probably leave crimea up for debate at the moment tho. I could see it going either way depending on how you classify it’s relationship to ukraine.
Ya I’m with you there, they have broken so many taboos (or as the russians call it, red lines), tanks, western help, javelins, hitting oil depos, substations (but that was retaliation I guess), …
What about a kremlin attack? I only know about a staged one with a drone from IDR like 2022?
oh was the drone attack on the kremlin staged? I remember hearing that as a possibility, but i never looked into it after the fact.