We did change the guidance and gave them guidance that they can use them to strike these particular types of targets,
Retaliatory actions are being prepared."
It's way too little, years late. It's been a truism that Ukraine has needed the capability to strike the Russian rear for many years at this point."
It feels like everything that we've been getting has been either too late or it's just enough to barely hold on."
Had Ukraine been able to destroy several squadrons of Su-34 and Su-35 fighters early in the year, then Russia would have significantly less capacity to employ glide bombs against Ukrainian positions and civilians,
Putin is not entitled to a veto over US or NATO policy on the basis that he can threaten us."
In this case, (the missile) was without explosives...There were no types of explosions like we expected. There was something, but it was not huge."
I would say this is an incredibly expensive way to deliver what is probably not that much destruction,
It's one thing to use these weapons within Ukraine's 1991 borders,
Satellite images of Yuzhmash have emerged following a strike by Oreshnik
The images do not support the Russian claims that the plant was "erased to dust".
Right now, they are able to use ATACMS to defend themselves in an immediate-need basis. And right now, understandably, that's taken place in around Kursk, in the Kursk Oblast."
Bombs will not help, ... so the only hope is that kind Russia will warn about launches in advance. Therefore, it is better to stop supporting the war."
Given the scale of Russia’s hostility, my message to members today is clear: While no-one should underestimate the Russian aggressive and reckless cyber threat to NATO, we will not be intimidated by it and we will never allow it to dictate our decisions or policies.”
The Russian side has clearly demonstrated its capabilities, and the contours of further retaliatory actions in the event that our concerns were not taken into account have also been quite clearly outlined.”