"US Helped Target the Moskva" Topic

The US says it shared intelligence with Ukraine about the location of the Russian missile cruiser Moskva prior to the strike that sank the warship, an incident that was a high-profile failure for Russia's military…

The Guardian: link

Admitting to a proxy war, smart move.

And another one: link

How dangerously stupid to brag about this. In addition to giving away valuable information about US intel sharing and capabilities, the Biden team have also cemented the concept held by Putin and his cabal that Ukraine is an existential war against all of "The West," and if they lose, they personally will die or be broken.

And we have sitting US Congresspersons and Congressional leaders like Pelosi and others saying the US is at "war" with Russia, and "we're in it to win it." What utter arrogant madness, and their sons and daughters won't be put in front of the guns to pay the price of their words.

If you thought the losses to Russia in Ukraine and economic pain would sway the Russian people against Putin, or move Putin to accept a negotiated peace – forget it!! You have US leaders saying, on TV before the world, that the US wants to defeat Russia, fueling Putin's crazy brain and letting him spin the Ukraine war to internal audiences as a pre-emptive measure to protect Russia against The West, instead of the stupid miscalculation that it is, further clouding the picture for Russians who might oppose the regime.

Oh, and Russia has nukes. Can I remind you of that?? Russia. Has. Nukes. When a tyrant like Putin is backed up against the wall, why wouldn't he use them…

I must agree with SB here. There are certain things one shouldn't say out loud. It seems as though they can't see more than 3 feet in front of themselves. These are our elected president and representatives doing their best to start WWIII.

But it would be okay for someone to run their mouth off about the USA having more and better nukes? H'mmm.

This has been proxy war more or less since day one. Though it only went properly 'hot' when Putin decided to openly invade Ukraine. And arguably he's the one who made it a proxy war against the 'decadent West', again far longer ago than this year.

I am surprised by the continual drumbeats for war, even coming from politicians that you would not normally think would be in favor of this. Proxy wars are one thing and there have been quite a few of them in the past, but this is getting dangerously close to stepping over the line. What happens when Russia says enough and hits one of the staging area for Western arms shipments in Poland with a nuke and says A) either back off, or B) we're going to global nuclear war? I'm not sure we really want to get to that point and find out! I'm all for secret arms shipments, training, passing along some intel, etc. However, we're at a point where the West may as well be pulling the triggers themselves.

So, he hits a NATO target and we do nothing? Then he just continues to up the ante. If they hit a NATO target, we hit back with proportional force on a Soviet target.

LOL

So it's OK to admit to providing Ukraine with military hardware, but not to providing them with intelligence? Pretty thin distinction for something which has been out in the open since before the war.

Yeah this is a dangerous situation, but I can't see the argument for denying that we are supporting Ukraine, even if that would fly (which it wouldn't obviously). So we organize sanctions, ship arms, share intelligence, and publicize much of this to provide the "stick" (as in carrot and stick), but draw the line at direct military involvement unless NATO is attacked. The line between what we should and shouldn't do is a fine one, and there will always be those who dispute the details, especially if they live in a fantasy world where everything would be fine if only they had won the last election…

I think it's a great idea to give the Ukrainians all the intel we can gather, up to and including what kind of underwear Putin wears. Just don't brag about it.

So we organize sanctions, ship arms, share intelligence, and publicize much of this to provide the "stick" (as in carrot and stick), but draw the line at direct military involvement unless NATO is attacked.

Yes, but if the US openly brags about sharing intel that resulted in the destruction of a Russian capitol ship, that pretty much crosses the line of direct military involvement. Not to mention the insanely stupid US politicians saying we're at war with Russia. Do they want a general war with Russia??!?! IF they do, they're going about it the right way…

Things are getting a bit 'weird' and very dangerous. Who would be stupid enough to reveal Intel ? Only Media ? Falklands… lot of blokes died because of Press reportage.

OT but is unattributed briefing common in political circles in America?

It happens a lot in the UK and should almost be never taken at face value (at least in the UK – since its usually about intra-party points scoring).

@SBminisguy;

Yes, but if the US openly brags about sharing intel that resulted in the destruction of a Russian capitol ship, that pretty much crosses the line of direct military involvement. Not to mention the insanely stupid US politicians saying we're at war with Russia. Do they want a general war with Russia??!?! IF they do, they're going about it the right way…

Just recently, U.S. Government official sources appear to be doing the opposite of "openly bragging", by emphasizing that the targeting decisions are Ukraine's, and they just provide certain intelligence to supplement Ukraine's. thehill.com/policy/defense/3479388-pentagon-denies-providing-specific-targeting-information-in-sinking-of-russian-warship You may be thinking of media reports, which are often not as diplomatically phrased.

Also I remember Biden saying on a number of occasions that we do not plan on getting into a war with Russia. So I'd say your characterization above is a bit off.

The US had a P-8 in the vicinity, but the US is saying the datalinks are incompatible to the Ukrainian missile.

Just recently, U.S. Government official sources appear to be doing the opposite of "openly bragging

You may want to tell the Speaker of the House to quit chest beating for the cameras while surrounded by Congresscritters vying to one up each other on how tough they are. She's just two heartbeats away from the Presidency…

microgeorge
"up to and including what kind of underwear Putin wears."
thats not on my need to know list