IMO, attacks by US backed Ukrainian operations/long range missiles on Russian infrastructure simply convinces the Russian population that Russia is under attack by the West and as such reinforces domestic support for the Putin Regime.....the very opposite of what Economic sanctions were designed to do.
The intelligent thing to do would be to concentrate these 'behind enemy lines operations' on Russian captured Ukrainian territory including the Crimea and as such not give the Russian public the impression that Russia is being attacked by the West and permit Economic sanctions to do as intended: ie; undermine Putin's authority.
IMO the escalation of this war on to Russian territory will simply put the Ukraine at risk of a tactical Nuclear response by Russia * which in turn will endanger us all because that will draw a direct US response, IMO.
The question we have to ask is Aus better off now or post a US/Russian Nuclear engagement? As country we have absolutely no means of defending ourselves against a Nuclear attack so for that reason we should be advocating peace; not an escalation of this war.
The bottom line is that we can't afford to defend ourselves against a ballistic missile attack and to farm out our defence to the USA is foolhardy, IMO, because the US will likely sacrifice Aus (as it did Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and now the Ukraine) in pursuit of US self interest ....
PS: The Vietnam War caused 3.8 million deaths and perhaps 3 times that in maimings only to see the US only to see the US unceremoniously withdrawing defeated after nearly 15 years .
In Geopolitics history is judged on outcomes, not war propaganda.
* Putin has stated clearly that Russia would use tactical Nukes if Russian sovereignty was attacked/threatened and some of these WMDs have been repositioned to Belarus to reinforce that intention.
