1) Joe Barnes, “US warns Ukraine it may not be able to continue ‘same level’ of support; Washington says it cannot supply long-range Atacms missiles, as it would harm its own readiness for war,” The Telegraph, February 14, 2023 2:52 pm);
In a stunning if inadvertent admission, the U.S. has stated it cannot supply thelong-range (300 km) artillery rockets for use with the HIMARS units because, U.S. officials have reportedly told the Ukrainians, to do so would harm U.S. readiness to fight its own war. Joe Barnes of The Telegraph reports:
In a recent meeting at the Pentagon, US officials told their Ukrainian counterparts that sending army tactical missile systems, which have a range of nearly 200 miles, would harm the US military’s readiness to fight its own war.
The White House has repeatedly denied Kyiv’s requests for the surface-to-surface missiles as the Ukrainians seek to ramp up their ability to strike Russian positions deep behind enemy lines.
If Ukraine and the West lose this war, it will in no small part be due to the strategic myopia and stupidity of the U.S. military and their civikian bosses.
Didn’t they anticipate various scenarios under which ATACMS artillery rockets ,ight be transferred to Ukraine for use with HIMARS uartillery units the U.S. is sending to Ukraine?
Did it not occur to anyone that there might be aneed to ramp up war production of munitions like the ARACMS artllery rockets?
At this late phase in the game, it seems disingenous to tell Ukraine The U.S. can’t transfer the ATACMS rocket to Ukraine because we don’t have enough of them?
The lack of strategic foresight in the Biden administration has been an endemic feature of tge Biden administration’s decision making since long before the Russian invasion on February 24, 2022.
It seems that military planners are afraid to get out in front of the schlerotic decision making that is characteristic of Joe Biden and his administration. Biden decides we won’t supply ATACMS to Ukraine because he is afraid that might “provoke” Putin to…to…to…detonate a nuclear device?. The Pentagon concludes there is no need for contingency planning in case Biden’s policy changes.
There doesn’t seem to be anyone of high intelligence coordinating all elements of U.S. policy towards Ukraine.Consider the follow, reported by Je Barnes:
It comes as US officials privately warned representatives from Kyiv that they face losing Western support unless they make significant gains on the battlefield.
Is it the policy of tge Biden administration that future support depends on Ukeainian success of the battlefield?
That is not what Joe Biden has been saying.
Who were these clown who were telling the Ukrainians that future level of miltary aid would be dependent of Ukrainian success on the battlefield.?
The last thing we want is for these clowns ro be influencing Ukraian strategy and battlefield decisions.
During the last year we have seen numerous examples of officials going off message. Biden does not run a tight ship.