And that is why I don't like this narrative about NATO-country troops in Ukraine started by Macron. The topic of discussion is unrealistic and doesn't help Ukraine at all right now. The only thing it does is taking away attention from more sensible means of supporting Ukraine, such as sending more artillery munition or giving Ukraine the capability to hit the Kerch Bridge.

[–] golli@lemm.ee 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

But is lack of attention really the problem hindering artillery munition or long range missiles? To me the issues with artillery shells seems to be simply lack of manufacturing capabilities and for Taurus (the system most likely able to take down the bridge) lack of attention certainly isn't an issue either, quite the opposite it couldn't be more prominent in the media.

I personally think it is correct to not rule out troops and do so publicly, regardless of whether or not it ends up actually getting acted upon. If anything it moves the goalposts in public perception of what is acceptable/an escalation, which is good in my books. And concerning Russia's thoughts on the matter I don't think we should care. They aren't rational actors and we don't have influence on how they interpret things, so might aswell ignore their opinions.