more about what this means is some of the potential anti-aircraft systems, like the sa-10, used by some of the countries around ukraine and eastern europe, the s-300 is another one. i don t believe the u.s. has either in its inventory at this point isn t that bull gary has some? yes, exactly. so that seems like that would be more likely there, but i am going to ask question about the word systems. not only can they be antiair, but some have the potential to stop ballistic missiles. a lot of the damage we ve seen has been caused by missiles. 9,000 antiarmor systems, that means nosh jahvid lynn. 7,000 small arms. the reason that s important is that it shows that there are
you heard president biden s remarks. do you get the sense that he s saying, yes, we re going to do that? we will give us this. he seems to be leaning in a direction of we can do more. he was very careful talking about a major deviation from what there has been, and the white house knows the s-300 missile systems could help. it s a symbol because zelenskyy made it a symbol. u.s. intelligence officials also determined they think putin will see the planes as a step too far, and ukrainians look at that and say that s preposterous. we know what a plane is, and yeah, what does a missile system look like? drones, those are dangerous.
you want to speak to people, you have to do it with their language. he s done this with every address, whether it s canada he addresses their own history and fears. what he s trying to send a message, is saying, kyiv is our new york city. it s hard not for him to create that sympathy. at the same time, he also knows, as you all said, the appetite for any kind of intervention is low, but he knows where there s wiggle room. it was interesting to see him address the issue of those s-300 missiles. he know a no-fly zone is off the table.
sea as well as supporting iran. the russians are lifting a five year embargo on the sa-10 missile to iran which makes any attacks on the program very difficult. i think both of these countries which used to consider each other as their primary threat because they are attached by the same land mass are now looking at how week can exploit the pull back from the world stage. i am glad you brought it out because of the parallels. we are seeing that in an opt-ed talking about china and russia. here is the what the writer said we should learn: this mattered because it encouraged moscow to go from a southeastern ukraine. the islands in the southeastern sea claimed by bijings are not