Ukraine fires British Storm Shadow missiles into Russia | Ukraine War



British Storm Shadow missiles have been fired into Russian territory by Ukraine for the first time, a source has told Sky News.

The move follows a decision by the US to allow US-made long range missiles to be used to attack targets in Russia.

Several countries closed their embassies this morning after US intelligence suggested a large Russian attack could happen.

Live updates: https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-war-latest-putin-trump-zelenskyy-live-sky-news-12541713

#ukraine #war #skynews

SUBSCRIBE to our YouTube channel for more videos: http://www.youtube.com/skynews

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/skynews
Like us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/skynews
Follow us on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/skynews
Follow us on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@skynews

For more content go to http://news.sky.com and download our apps: Apple https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/sky-news/id316391924?mt=8 Android https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.bskyb.skynews.android&hl=en_GB

Sky News Daily podcast is available for free here: https://podfollow.com/skynewsdaily/

For analysis of world events, tap here for The World With Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim: https://podfollow.com/the-world-with-richard-and-yalda

Sky News videos are now available in Spanish here/Los video de Sky News están disponibles en español aquí: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzG5BnqHO8oNlrPDW9CYJog

To enquire about licensing Sky News content, you can find more information here: https://news.sky.com/info/library-sales

source

46 thoughts on “Ukraine fires British Storm Shadow missiles into Russia | Ukraine War”

  1. What an idiot! Just because Brandon says it’s ok with him is no reason to fire a missile into the heart of Russian territory and provoke a world war!!! What if they’d just said ‘No’?

    Reply
  2. Our Prime minister has no self preservation instinct and put lives of British citizens in danger. And for what? Corrupt, proxy failed state? It seems to me that this escalation was in the making for decades, after US election, the deep state wants to punish us with a global war. Europe will be ruined like after WW2, and who is going to help to rebuild it? Of course our good brothers from US – forces of the good.

    Reply
  3. Firing American and EU weapons directly into Russia formally means a war between the US/EU and Russia. The Russians have declared the status as such and they are legally in the right to do so. Last night, an underground munition depot was destroyed by a new Russian medium range missile with MIRV-payload, which- this time- carried conventional explosives. After the next provocation, the Kiev parliament buildings may get chosen as target. After that, it will be targets in the EU. And NATO has no answer of comparable strength. We are governed by incompetent idiots.

    Reply
  4. Britain is doing everything possible to sabotage any political solutions bringing that second option on the table… is British public aware where is Starmer draging them into? Do they have any say to that?

    Reply
  5. Why do we always follow the yanks, the rest of Europe sits on the fence, the Germans especially have been cosying up to Russia recently, only the French have responded.

    Reply
  6. ❗Up to half of Western aid to Ukraine was stolen within the country, said former Polish Minister of Labor Piotr Kulpa:

    "A huge part of the funds was stolen in Ukraine. From 30% to 50% depending on the direction. The stolen money could have been used to create an annual support budget for Ukraine"

    Reply
  7. The Anglo-Saxons are eager to extend the war to the world level to keep Biden indefinitely. They are irresponsible because they are justifying a Russian reaction that will do to European countries what Hitler did not do, starting with the English!!!

    Reply
  8. Unbelievable timing!?! They've had years to do this, but the time is now, in the weeks before Trump takes power?! All of a sudden its IMPERATIVE that the U.S and Britain supply missiles to be fired into Russia!?! If this triggers a truly global war, human histories truly dumbest and brainwashed generation ( the modern "woke" left ) will say "see, Trump is a warmonger" ( despite this being triggered by Biden! ) if Trump creates a ceasefire the same DIPSHITS will say "see, Trump is Putins puppet"

    Reply
  9. So Ukraine fired the first long range missile into Russia?? So who is escalating the war?? UK, US or Ukraine?? So is Russia justify to use a long range missile into Ukraine?? An eye for an eye makes the whole UN blind???

    Reply
  10. Debra Haynes is a security and defense expert. I wonder what her qualifications are? She is spouting some propaganda about North Korean troops now fighting for Russia. There is no solid evidence for this, and it looks like it;s just a flimsy excuse by NATO to escalate this conflict. This is incredibly reckless, and is bringing great danger to the people of the countries involved in firing these missiles. These missiles are aimed and handled by British and Americans, so that is virtually an act of war by the UK and the USA. It would be like Cuba inviting Russian personel to Cuba with Kinshel missiles and firing them into Texas on military targets. Think what the US response would be!!

    Reply
  11. Is Ukraine worth defending.? It is certainly not a democracy. Zelensky cancelled other political parties and cancelled the elections. He is no longer the legal leader!! It is highly corrupt and a lot of the money being given as aid is simply ending in off shore bank accounts of the Ukrainian gangster government, or rather mob leaders. The whole arming of Ukraine since 2014 was about provoking a war, provoking Russia.

    Reply
  12. The NATO-Russian military balance

    Russia’s stated intent is, of course, only part of the analysis. Russia’s actual capacity to win a military conflict with NATO is also a critical determinant of motivations. Even if Russia perceives its motivations as defensive, if it also believes it is capable of winning a war with NATO, aggression could be attractive from the standpoint of maintaining Russia’s buffer defense and deterrent capacity against perceived external enemies. If Putin believed expanding Russia’s territory by force was a realistic ambition, it could become part of Russia’s security thinking regarding NATO.

    To assess this threat, it is necessary to first dismiss the notion that the lines between hybrid or proxy warfare and conventional conflict have become so blurred that “we are already fighting the Third World War with Russia.”

    22.>>An actual conventional conflict between Russia and the United States and its NATO allies would vastly differ from a “cold” political conflict or the current war between Russia and Ukraine. In the context of a Russian invasion of NATO, the restrictions that NATO has observed concerning the war in Ukraine would largely disappear, and — as in all wars — actions and policies would be adopted that now seem unthinkable.

    A full-scale war between Russia and NATO is the prospect addressed in this analysis. This is also the prospect which any Russian policymaker contemplating a direct attack on NATO would have to contemplate — and fear. This section considers the objective deterrent value of this prospect to Russian policymakers. Based on the balance of forces, could they expect to gain significantly more in such a conflict than they lose?

    23.>>There is already some evidence of Russia’s answer to this question that can be gleaned from its behavior in the Ukraine war. Russian threats to use nuclear weapons if NATO intervenes directly in Ukraine were intended to deter NATO countries from doing so because Moscow knows that any large-scale intervention — even if it were only by the air forces of the United States and other NATO countries — would doom Russia to defeat.

    In the words of the Chief of the British Defence Staff, Admiral Sir Anthony Radikin:

    [[appropriate link.for.justifying its natural full.scope.contents…

    23.A.>>>https://quincyinst.org/research/right-sizing-the-russian-threat-to-europe/#h-russian-intent-and-strategic-thinking.}}

    24.>>“The inescapable fact is that any Russian assault or incursion against NATO would prompt an overwhelming response. The thousands of Allied troops currently stationed in Poland and the Baltic states could draw on the 3.5 million uniformed personnel across the Alliance for reinforcement.”

    “NATO’s combat air forces — which outnumber Russia’s 3 to 1 — would quickly establish air superiority. NATO’s maritime forces would bottle up the Russian Navy in the Barents and the Baltic, just as Ukraine pushed the Black Sea Fleet from Crimea. NATO has four times as many ships and three times as many submarines as Russia … With a collective GDP twenty times greater than Russia. And a total defence budget three-and-a-half times more than Russia and China combined. Plus NATO has the additional strategic depth of a population of over 1 billion. And sitting above all of this is NATO as a nuclear alliance. The biggest reason that Putin doesn’t want a conflict with NATO is because Russia will lose. And lose quickly.”

    Below, we flesh out Radikin’s assertion with a fuller discussion of a Russia–NATO conflict. Our core question is the rationality of a preplanned, intentional Russian ground assault on a NATO country, launched by Russia and its ally Belarus, after a Russian victory in the war in Ukraine.

    25.>>Similar military considerations would also apply to a full-scale Russia–NATO conflict triggered in other ways.

    Table 1 below shows a simple estimate of the numerical count of NATO and Russian land, air, and sea forces drawn from the 2024 Military Balance published by the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

    26.>>Turkish forces are not included, as their participation is doubtful, and no Ukrainian military forces are included in the NATO alliance to reflect a worst-case contingency of Ukrainian defeat.

    Reply

Leave a Comment