“ATACMS to Ukraine!”: The expert named the targets for a retaliatory strike on the Russian Federation for the attack on October 10

Katerina Schwartz 10:35, 10.10.22 UNIAN

These missiles are needed not to strike at civilian targets, but to eliminate military targets, Kovalenko noted.

Ukraine needs long-range ATACMS missiles / screenshot
Ukraine needs long-range ATACMS missiles / screenshot

Ukraine needs ATACMS long-range missiles . Ukraine has every right to retaliate and destroy Russian military installations, such as the Shaikovka airfield, where Tu-22M3 long-range supersonic bombers are stationed.

This was written by the military-political observer of the Information Resistance group Alexander Kovalenko.

“These missiles are needed not to strike at civilian targets, as Russian terrorists do, but to eliminate military targets. For example, the Shaykovka airfield, where Tu-22M3s are deployed. Ukraine has every right to strike in response. And we are talking not only about moral and legal rights, but about leveling the combat potential of Russia, which it uses to kill ordinary Ukrainians,” he said.

“If you are on the same side with Ukraine, then be with us to the end. ATACMS to Ukraine! Removal of restrictions on strikes against military infrastructure in Russia!” Kovalenko added.

ATACMS long-range missiles for Ukraine

It is known that Ukraine made a request for the transfer of 300 km of ATACMS missiles on the condition that it  would coordinate with Washington all attacks on

However, not so long ago it was reported that the  United States is not yet inclined to transfer long-range ATACMS missiles  to the M142 HIMARS, M270 MLRS and MARS II launchers with a range of up to 300 kilometers to Ukrainian troops.

Asked why Washington is not giving the UAF ATACMS missiles, US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said that the  United States is supplying Ukraine with weapons that are “very, very effective” on the battlefield, and that “it’s not just about the equipment that you have” .

https://www.unian.net/war/dalnoboynye-rakety-atacms-ekspert-nazval-celi-dlya-otvetnogo-udara-po-rf-12005871.html

22 comments

    • I am really confused because sometimes I think Ukraine already has them.
      I have strong doubts on whether the explosions on the Kerch bridge were indeed caused by a truck.

      One road bridge had two segments blown off at some distance, and the destroyed road section was the furthest from the railroad. Also, the airport in Crimea was attacked with missiles.

      There are also some strange things about the truck explanation Russia gave: as the truck driver allegedly survived the blast and lives in Russia. At this point, I think the bridge was blown up with missiles, but Russia just does not want to admit that because it would prove its air defense failed miserably.

      Maybe the U.S. will only admit having sent ATACMS after Russia will accuse the U.S. from doing it, but so far, they did not. The same thing happened with the anti-radiation missiles Ukraine put on its MIG’s to destroy Russian radars. The U.S. did not announce them, and only after Russia claimed that Ukraine had them, they admitted so.

      Lloyd Austin also did not give a clear explanation: he did not even deny Ukraine has them, he just gave a vague statement.

      Why would the U.S. say they sent ATACMS if Russia itself has an interest not to make this public? As long as both sides keep quiet on it, Russia will not respond to it.

      I think the truck story doesn’t add up, so I think it is very likely Ukraine already has some of them. Another reason to back up this theory is that I think Ukraine does not want to blow up the Kerch bridge entirely, as it means Russian soldiers can no longer flee Crimea on foot if the need arises. Thus, the best situation for Ukraine is to only render it unable for large trucks and trains carrying heavy weapons but keep it open for light traffic.

  1. I think this message needs to get out loud and clear. Now that Vladolf started a full invasion there will always be a threat from Mordor and they will always be able to send missiles into Ukraine. Therefore, in order for Ukraine to protect herself she will have to eliminate the threats…which will be in Mordor.

    • Telegraph now : “Volodymyr Zelensky, the Ukrainian president, said Russia was trying to wipe his country “off the face of the earth”….

      NFZ now. FFS.

    • Why are so many putinazi missiles getting through?
      Probably because the defenders are still having to use old Soviet air defence systems.
      It is an utter disgrace that after 9 months of genocide, Kyiv’s cities are still not protected properly.
      This matter needs to be addressed urgently. As does the urgent need for long range missiles.

      • To be honest, I think Ukraine’s air defense is top of the line and got much better over the war as the coordination between units very much improved. I cannot think of any war in which air defense shot down more missiles, drones, helicopters and jets than this war.

        I mean, even Israel doesn’t get a 100% score protecting itself against much slower and less advanced missiles, while it is much smaller and way easier to defend. They even know from what direction to expect a missile barrage.

        I think BUK and S-300 are really capable systems, despite being from the Soviet era, and in terms of nameplate specifications they are better than for example the Patriots missiles, which is essentially technology that is as old as the S-300 missile system or even older. And they also have some advantages over Western produce, such as excellent mobility.

        In practice I would rather have Western stuff because of reliability and build quality, even if on paper they have a lower range, don’t get me wrong.

        I think the fact that Russia had no success with them in Syria and on Crimea is mostly because of poor training, maintenance and morale, not because the systems themselves suck. Ukraine successfully used them against hundreds of missiles and drones.

        Of course, I want Ukraine to have the best Western air defense as soon as possible, but I think Ukraine’s current performance is really impressive. Closing the sky entirely is impossible giving Ukraine’s huge territory, also if you give them the very best the West has to offer.

        • There is no need to close the skies entirely. Closing them in all major and medium population centers and essential infrastructure would be doable, and the first phase to achieving more security. The second phase would be an aggressive counter battery campaign to demolish air bases, missile-firing ships and land-based missile sites.
          Naturally, Ukraine would need the necessary weapons to achieve this goal. It could already be in place, if Biden weren’t such a pussy.

          • I agree, but I meant that even with Patriots or even Iron Dome missile systems in place you will not be able to shoot down every missile in this area. I think if you can achieve an 80% success rate you can consider this excellent.

            Israel cannot even shoot down all missiles while they have the world’s best multi layered air defense system. Ukraine already managed to shoot down more than half of the missiles aimed at the major cities: I think that is a very high rate that barely any other nation can replicate.

            My point is: what they have now doesn’t suck at all. I think when we would give them Western equipment it will not dramatically improve the success rate.

            Still, I am very much in favour. Every additional missile shot down saves human lives. But I do not expect miracles from it.

            I would rather see that Ukraine will be given the ability to destroy air bases near the border, as shooting down missiles is dealing with the symptoms, not the problem.

            • Yes, destroying air bases in mafia land – and Belarus – would be very helpful indeed. Having both capabilities – attack and defense – would be ideal.

  2. Woke up this morning on the news of the various missile strikes including Kyiv. I’m seeing a big change here in the US on the news reporting. Individuals who were at best lukewarm on Ukraine are now yelling that the US must give Ukraine the ATACMS. Allot of criticism of Biden on his Armageddon remark. These lukewarm individuals are extremely critical of that remark and are suggesting it simply emboldens the cockroach.

  3. I’m hearing also from both sides of the aisle in U.S. politics more voices getting louder and increasing pressure on this administration to do way more in assisting Ukraine. There are still fringes however in the far left and alt right driven by politics claiming we can’t help Ukraine and still address this, that, or the other. But The United States is fully capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time. U.S. can and must quadruple the efforts supporting Ukraine against this genocide.
    U.S. can do this as well as address other issues at the simultaneously.

  4. It would be lovely to have a shitload of these and completely destroy every single military installation in the shithole.

    Then give them 1 hour notice to evacuate all civil airports and blow them to fuck also.

What is your opinion?