A group of senior Republicans in the U.S. Congress urged President Joe Biden to send longer-range missiles to Ukraine, in a show of continued support for Kyiv among U.S. lawmakers despite pushback from some conservatives against more aid.
In a letter to Biden dated Nov. 1 and seen by Reuters, the top Republicans on congressional foreign relations and armed services committees said they welcomed reports that the administration has provided some limited-range Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) to Ukraine, but asked that he also send more longer-range systems.
“Ukraine’s requirement for deep-strike capability remains urgent, particularly to range targets throughout Crimea,” Representatives Michael McCaul and Mike Rogers and Senators James Risch and Roger Wicker wrote.
McCaul chairs the House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee, Rogers leads the House Armed Services Committee, Risch is the top Republican on Senate Foreign Relations and Wicker is the top Republican on Senate Armed Services.
They sent the letter as the Republican-majority House of Representatives moved toward a vote on a stand-alone bill providing aid to Israel, defying Democratic President Joe Biden’s request for a broad $106-billion national security funding bill with funding for Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan.
Reuters reported in September that the Biden administration was close to approving the shipment of longer-range missiles packed with Cluster bombs to Ukraine, giving Kyiv the ability to cause significant damage deeper within Russian-occupied territory.
In October, Ukrainian forces used U.S.-supplied ATACMS missiles for the first time, with President Volodymyr Zelensky saying the weapons had “proven themselves.”
In their letter, the U.S. lawmakers said Ukraine has requested long-range ATACMS and demonstrated the ability to employ them in a responsible manner and Russia has not escalated in response to their use.
“Clearly, it is time for you to finish the job on ATACMS,” they wrote. “The costs of failing to do so not only risks stalemate on the battlefield and the further protraction of this war, but also threatens further global instability as our adversaries conduct influence operations around the globe.”
“The costs of failing to do so not only risks stalemate on the battlefield and the further protraction of this war, but also threatens further global instability as our adversaries conduct influence operations around the globe.”
Maybe this is why Zaluzhnyi mentioned stalemate, to see if a little reverse psychology will get Biden to wake up to reality. China must be laughing at the ineptitude of this administration, they could walk into Taiwan tomorrow, and Biden would still think choosing his flavour of ice-cream for the day was more important.
Roger Wicker!
I might have expected him to be on that list. Now that is a Republican who would not take any shit from a maggot nazi like putler.
If only he was president!
From wiki :
“In December 2021, Wicker threatened a preemptive nuclear strike against Russia, saying: “we don’t rule out first-use nuclear action.” He issued this threat two months before the Russian invasion of Ukraine began. Wicker also supported implementing a no-fly zone over Ukraine in 2022, which National Review called “a very bad idea”.
National Review can fuck off. Along with all the other putler appeasing fucktards.
Wicker or Nikki for POTUS!
Dan Rice has the answer as to how to kick out the putinaZi rats:
https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3780494-the-battle-should-not-be-in-dc-its-time-to-break-the-back-of-the-russian-army-in-ukraine.html
I’m skeptical that 2400 rockets will end this war. Ukraine needs 2400 rockets for every meat wave that rolls in. Definitely with the mentioned cluster munitions + long range ATACMS + several hundred F16s + more of everything else that’s been provided, I’d say that scenario has a good chance of working.
After Zaluzhnyi’s declaration we are entitled to wonder if this will change anything.
Can this change the situation?
In my opinion, we have passed this milestone. The best tools remain severe economic sanctions (why have we still not definitively deprived the Orcs of their frozen money?) and the elimination of terrorists from Moscow. There is no difference (in a legal sense) between gangsters like Bin Laden and the Kremlin rat. Same scourge, same remedy.
It’s still a shame that in recent decades the CIA(?) has spent its time blunting its knives in Latin America or even in the USA on political figures, or trying to make terrorists breathe underwater at Guantanamo. For once this agency could be useful. 🙂
Slava Ukraini