[Goose]

There’s such a thing as a measured, non-escalatory response that still acts as a deterrent. We don’t need port access to fire off a few cruise missiles at Russian troop positions.

Any significant response is escalatory by definition. Some are more so than others. US missiles striking a Russian target, even one in Ukraine is a "big deal". One very seriously bad effect of this is that Putin can then tell his people (truthfully) that they have been attacked by the US and he is calling a general mobilization. It also would undoubtedly fire up lots of his troops that right now are pretty demotivated. This doesn't mean we should do nothing, but what we do will have consequences. My guess is that Putin then destroys the Aegis Ashore site in Poland. He hates it being there, it isn't operational yet so it can't defend itself, it will kill US troops (though not many), and it is in Poland which sends a message about more attacks on Polish cities. Now what?

The actual tactical effect of firing a few cruse missiles at Russian troop positions is nugatory. Doing damage to tactically positioned troops that way is pretty difficult. Cruise missiles are the wrong weapon for that. You need a more concentrated target, like a tank park or barrack's facility to do any real damage that way. Russia would just shrug that off. A MLRS "Finger of God" would possibly get their attention. Neither of these would prevent more missiles into Poland IMHO. They would have the bad side effects named above.

While its is possible for the US to fire cruise missiles from Europe (actually from/through European air space. We don't have any GLCM capability) against a Russian target without the support (or at least acquiescence) of most other NATO countries, the political consequences to NATO of us doing so would be dire. It simply won't happen without it. We may be able to get that acquiescence, but we would require it. A MLRS strike from Ukraine to a point in Ukraine probably does not. OK, I admit it, I have all along wanted to give Ukraine MLRS capability. It can do some real damage. I think we are loath to do that because it is a precision strike weapon that could be fired into Russia.

[Goose]

There’s such a thing as a measured, non-escalatory response that still acts as a deterrent. We don’t need port access to fire off a few cruise missiles at Russian troop positions.

Any significant response is escalatory by definition. Some are more so than others. US missiles striking a Russian target, even one in Ukraine is a "big deal". One very seriously bad effect of this is that Putin can then tell his people (truthfully) that they have been attacked by the US and he is calling a general mobilization. It also would undoubtedly fire up lots of his troops that right now are pretty demotivated. This doesn't mean we should do nothing, but what we do will have consequences. My guess is that Putin then destroys the Aegis Ashore site in Poland. He hates it being there, it isn't operational yet so it can't defend itself, it will kill US troops (though not many), and it is in Poland which sends a message about more attacks on Polish cities. Now what?

The actual tactical effect of firing a few cruse missiles at Russian troop positions is nugatory. Doing damage to tactically positioned troops that way is pretty difficult. Cruise missiles are the wrong weapon for that. You need a more concentrated target, like a tank park or barrack's facility to do any real damage that way. Russia would just shrug that off. A MLRS "Finger of God" would possibly get their attention. Neither of these would prevent more missiles into Poland IMHO. They would have the bad side effects named above.

While its is possible for the US to fire cruise missiles from Europe (actually from/through European air space. We don't have any GLCM capability) against a Russian target without the support (or at least acquiescence) of most other NATO countries, the political consequences to NATO of us doing so would be dire. It simply won't happen without it. We may be able to get that acquiescence, but we would require it. A MLRS strike from Ukraine to a point in Ukraine probably does not. OK, I admit it, I have all along wanted to give Ukraine MLRS capability. It can do some real damage. I think we are loath to do that because it is a precision strike weapon that could be fired into Russia.