[GK3]

https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/moscow-..._permalink

According to that proposal, which Lavrov erroneously described as approved by Kyiv at the time, Russia would have a veto power over any action by the other guarantors of Ukrainian security—making those assurances pointless. On Wednesday, Lavrov said China should also have equal powers in these guarantees.

And there it is; Russia essentially insisting on a veto over Western security guarantees, which is ridiculous at its face.  As I surmised earlier, Russia is basically trying to give the illusion that it is willing to negotiate for peace in order to forestall further reaction from the US while not actually negotiating.  Sadly, it seems like the strategy has been effective to date.

BC

Indeed. The administration has a chance to force Putin to compromise. To do that they would have to make nice we with India and other importers of Russian oil. This administration doesn't know how to create win-win situations. Therefore they will do nothing.

I don't think there is much chance of us getting any more involved in the Ukraine mess unless Russia attacks a NATO ally, and even then I don't know what this administration will do.  I am more worried about us getting dragged into a real war with Iran.  I don't think there is any question that Israeli leadership is trying to make that happen. Not sure we are smart enough to avoid that possibility.

---

Getting the accuracy right will be important. There is extensive GNSS denial all over Russia, so these missiles will likely need good inertial guidance. I doubt that Ukraine will be able to use more advanced guidance such as video terrain matching. Their kludged long range drones thus far have had some success, so I'm optimistic they can make it work.

I think this question has some very interesting issues, first and foremost would be what would the most logical targets be for these weapons?  It is logical to assume that things like factories, refineries and pipeline terminals would be first.  I do think you have to think about Russia's transportation infrastructure. They have limited long haul rail lines and are pretty dependent on them.  There will be critical bridges and other choke points which if seriously damaged would cause some major issues. The bridge to Crimea would be an obvious target.  If you can drop a major rail bridge it can't be fixed as easily or quickly as a road and with Winter not too far away it would get complicated.  Things like this might be defended to a lesser extent making a successful attack more probable. 
A symbolic target like Moscow would also be possible.

[GK3]

https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/moscow-..._permalink

According to that proposal, which Lavrov erroneously described as approved by Kyiv at the time, Russia would have a veto power over any action by the other guarantors of Ukrainian security—making those assurances pointless. On Wednesday, Lavrov said China should also have equal powers in these guarantees.

And there it is; Russia essentially insisting on a veto over Western security guarantees, which is ridiculous at its face.  As I surmised earlier, Russia is basically trying to give the illusion that it is willing to negotiate for peace in order to forestall further reaction from the US while not actually negotiating.  Sadly, it seems like the strategy has been effective to date.

BC

Indeed. The administration has a chance to force Putin to compromise. To do that they would have to make nice we with India and other importers of Russian oil. This administration doesn't know how to create win-win situations. Therefore they will do nothing.

I don't think there is much chance of us getting any more involved in the Ukraine mess unless Russia attacks a NATO ally, and even then I don't know what this administration will do.  I am more worried about us getting dragged into a real war with Iran.  I don't think there is any question that Israeli leadership is trying to make that happen. Not sure we are smart enough to avoid that possibility.

---

Getting the accuracy right will be important. There is extensive GNSS denial all over Russia, so these missiles will likely need good inertial guidance. I doubt that Ukraine will be able to use more advanced guidance such as video terrain matching. Their kludged long range drones thus far have had some success, so I'm optimistic they can make it work.

I think this question has some very interesting issues, first and foremost would be what would the most logical targets be for these weapons?  It is logical to assume that things like factories, refineries and pipeline terminals would be first.  I do think you have to think about Russia's transportation infrastructure. They have limited long haul rail lines and are pretty dependent on them.  There will be critical bridges and other choke points which if seriously damaged would cause some major issues. The bridge to Crimea would be an obvious target.  If you can drop a major rail bridge it can't be fixed as easily or quickly as a road and with Winter not too far away it would get complicated.  Things like this might be defended to a lesser extent making a successful attack more probable. 
A symbolic target like Moscow would also be possible.