And a reminder to all the people falling for this Kremlin b.llsh.t - every single time systems have been provided, Russia's backed down. HIMARS went from a red line to "no better than Smerch and Uragan systems Ukraine already has", Patriot went from a red line to "no better than S-300 systems Ukraine already has". Neither claim is true, of course, with HIMARS vastly more effective than either Warsaw Pact heavy MLRS and Patriot at least on paper substantialky more capable than S-300. One can expect that Leopard 2s will be "no better than T-80s Ukraine already has" and ATACMS "no better than Tochka-Us Ukraine already has", and don't be surprised if A-10s, F-16s and F-15s respectively turn out to be no better than Su-25s, MiG-29s and Su-27s respectively.jimbob wrote: ↑Thu Dec 29, 2022 8:21 amGood op-ed piece on CNN
https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/20/opinions ... index.html
The escalation game
Since well before February’s invasion, portentous but vague threats from Russia of unspecified but alarming responses have been sufficient to serve as a massive brake on Western support for Ukraine.
And for almost a year afterward, Western powers were careful not to give the Ukrainian armed forces weapons that could threaten Russia itself.
In doing so, the West has played along with the Kremlin’s pretense that it is not at war, only waging a “special military operation.” In effect, it has protected Russia from the consequences of its own aggression.
There is nothing Russia can do to retaliate that does not make their position radically worse, which is why they have not retaliated when their supposed "Red Lines" have been repeatedly crossed - and it is why they won't when their current claimed "Red Lines" are crossed in the future.