Really USA and Germany should supply the Ukrainians with long range ATACAMS and Taurus missiles. These can be used to disable the Crimea bridge and other Russian logistics infrastructure. Destroying logistics can let Ukraine mount a successive offense, killing 1100 soldiers a day probably won't.
The big problem with striking targets inside Russia, is that ol' Vladdy has declared so many red lines at this point he's used up his felt tip and had to resort to using a pink one.
Because of this people just laugh at his red lines, but as comical as seeing them walked through have been there are actually some real ones where he will bring out the big guns, and it is not when Ukrainian forces are standing within visual distance of Moscow.
There is almost certainly a situation in this war where Putin would consider the use of tactical nuclear weapons against Ukraine, after all total defeat would mean the end of his presidency (and possibly the Russian Federation) anyway so YOLO. Sadly nobody in the west can predict where that real red line may be because Russia (and the USSR) view nuclear weapons completely different to the west. Over hear when somebody says nuclear weapon everyone thinks of a big mushroom cloud vaporising a city and that's a nuclear weapon and the use of nuclear weapons is unthinkable. But in reality that's just the big "strategic" nukes, there are also smaller "tactical" nukes, I.E nuclear torpedo capable of taking out an aircraft carrier in one hit, nuclear depth charge capable of taking out multiple submarines, nuclear air defence missile capable of taking out a dozen bombers dumb enough to fly in formation, nuclear artillery shell capable of wiping out an advancing force, etc. Hell some of them are so small their blast is comparable to a large MOAB.
The holding of tactical nukes has all but ended in NATO but not in Russia where they maintain a 20:1 advantage over us (different treaty to big strategic nukes and that's what we cared about getting reduced), and they maintain that because they see their use as a completely separate issue to that of strategic nukes, with none of the associated taboos.
This is why we have to be very careful that anything we give Ukraine is only used in Ukraine, as widespread attacks on (pre-2014) Russian soil using NATO supplied hardware would almost certainly give Putin the ammunition (no pun intended) to rationalise/justify (at least with the Russian people) the use of tactical weapons against Ukraine.
