President Trump’s latest stance on arming Ukraine with long-range Tomahawk missiles has conservatives scratching their heads, wondering if this is caution or a missed opportunity to stand firm against Russian aggression.
The Hill reported that Trump has voiced reluctance to provide Ukraine with these powerful weapons, even as the Pentagon greenlights the move and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky pleads for them to bolster diplomacy with Russia.
Let’s rewind to the recent White House meeting on Oct. 17, 2025, where Trump sat down with Zelensky to hash out Ukraine’s needs. The Ukrainian leader has been pushing hard for Tomahawks, arguing they’re critical to pressuring Russia at the negotiating table.
Before that meeting, Trump was already signaling hesitation, telling reporters, “It’s not easy for us to give … you’re talking about massive numbers of very powerful weapons.”
Fair enough—conservatives appreciate a leader who doesn’t hand out military hardware like candy at a parade, but is this the time to hold back when Russia’s breathing down Ukraine’s neck?
The Pentagon, meanwhile, gave its blessing to send the missiles, with assessments showing no harm to U.S. stockpiles. Reports from CNN highlighted this approval, noting Zelensky’s long-standing request for the weapons as a game-changer.
Yet, Trump doubled down on his doubts while speaking to reporters on Air Force One, stating, “No, not really,” when asked about sending the Tomahawks.
That’s a pretty clear signal, though he left the door cracked with a “could happen” caveat. For a president who’s often all about strength, this waffling feels like a head-scratcher to many on the right who want a harder line on Moscow.
The week after their White House sit-down, Zelensky kept up the pressure, emphasizing how vital these missiles are for diplomacy. He argued that without this long-range capability, Russian President Vladimir Putin has little reason to come to the table.
In a video address, Zelensky put it bluntly: “The front line can spark diplomacy. Instead, Russia continues to do everything to weasel out of diplomacy, and as soon as the issue of long-range capabilities for us — for Ukraine — became less immediate, Russia’s interest in diplomacy faded almost automatically.”
He’s got a point—Russia’s not exactly playing nice, armed with self-made missiles, North Korean weaponry, and Iranian drones in their campaign against Ukraine. If Putin smells weakness, why would he negotiate?
Adding fuel to the fire, the Kremlin has issued stern warnings against the U.S. supplying these missiles to Kyiv. They’ve called it a major escalation, which, let’s be honest, sounds like the usual saber-rattling from Moscow meant to scare off any support for Ukraine.
Back on the home front, two European officials were caught off guard earlier last month when a Joint Chiefs assessment suggested there was no good reason to withhold the Tomahawks.
Yet, Trump pushed back, sticking to his cautious approach—perhaps wisely avoiding a deeper entanglement, or perhaps missing a chance to show strength.
Conservatives are torn on this one. On one hand, Trump’s restraint could prevent the U.S. from being dragged into another endless conflict, a concern for many who’ve grown weary of overseas adventures. On the other, letting Russia dictate terms through intimidation doesn’t sit right with those who believe America must lead with resolve.
Zelensky’s frustration is palpable, and it’s hard not to sympathize with Ukraine’s plight against a well-armed adversary. But Trump’s hesitation might reflect a deeper strategy—avoiding a direct clash with Russia while still keeping options open.