A Russian missile attack killed two civilians in an apartment building in southern Ukraine on Wednesday, local authorities said, as President Vladimir Putin dismissed the importance of a new U.S.-supplied weapon that Kyiv used to execute one of the most damaging attacks on the Kremlin’s air assets since the start of the war.

Putin told reporters that Russia “will be able to repel” further attacks by the U.S.-made Army Tactical Missile System, known as ATACMS.

Ukraine claimed it used those missiles to destroy nine Russian helicopters, as well as ammunition, an air defense system and other assets at two airfields in Russia-occupied regions on Tuesday.

  • mustbe3to20signs@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Since everything Putin says is a lie, every Ukrainian ally should increase their ammunition exports.

  • Mindlight@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m pretty sure it has been proved that the weapons supplied by the US dismisses the importance of Putin.

    • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m just going to point out that we made this thing in the 90s to fight an enemy we didn’t expect this thing to do more than mildly wound.

      This wasn’t a great wunderwaffen, this was just our version or advanced artillery, and here it is shattering parts of the Russian army at a stroke.

      The greatest generation would be so confused.

      • HamSwagwich@showeq.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The US has spent decades preparing to fight an enemy on equal technological footing, and now that it turns out that enemy never made it past the 1970s technologically or organizationally, the US is basically fighting with lasers against muskets.

        China might be able to bring more to the table but that’s looking questionable.

        Disregarding the nuclear option, I suspect a direct conflict with Russia would, while costly, end up much like the middle east, where the enemy only succeeds with guerilla tactics and throwing bodies at the problem, but can never hope to actually win.

        • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          What’s sad is that after the Soviet Union fell… we decided to go ahead and finish the F-22.

          That’s not even overkill, that’s just insulting their mother.

  • Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean, when your whole war strategy is to use the bodies of your people to soak up all the ammo of your enemy I’m pretty sure anyone supplying ammo to them is going to make a pretty big difference.

  • teamevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    So basically it’s US weapons making a huge difference. . always be bullshitting pooty.

  • RubberStuntBaby@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    So, he’s admitting that he’s done such a bad job of conquering Ukraine that he’d still be failing even without western assistance?

  • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    It would be awesome to see Putin giving some sort of address talking about how some weapon doesn’t pose a threat and then in the background some military asset gets destroyed during the address.

    Assuming he’s on the same side of the Urals as Ukraine. Maybe he’s playing it safe and is staying in the part of Russia that’s in Palin’s backyard.