Jump to content

Do You Support A No Fly Zone Backed By NATO?


Do You Support A No Fly Zone Over Ukraine Backed Up By NATO   

19 members have voted

  1. 1. Do You Support No Fly Zone

    • Yes
      2
    • No
      17


Recommended Posts

  • Tiberius changed the title to Do You Support A No Fly Zone Backed By NATO?

I voted no, but I wouldn’t be outraged if we went ahead with it.  
 

That said.. war with Russia isn’t a game and nuclear war would change the world forever.  
 

Also, Ukraine/Russia is far more complex than most being manipulated into pushing our government into making life-altering decisions are realizing.  
 

We’re basically going to war over a family dispute across the ocean.  Look up their history.. this isn’t some out of nowhere aggression. Putin is an evil man, but innocent people are being decimated by evil around the globe (China, Yemen immediately come to mind) and we look the other way.  
 

This could all end if Ukraine and Russia came to a peace agreement.   I don’t believe Putin wants all of Ukraine.   If others feel different, ok… but we’re choosing an option to make Ukraine the next Vietnam.  That benefits nobody, aside from politicians and Warhawks who want to use Ukrainian blood as a lubricant for a proxy war against Russia.  
 

 

Edited by SCBills
  • Agree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Is that a demand? 

 

Don't make me press my big red button!

 

akrales_210125_4362_0002.jpg

 

11 minutes ago, ALF said:

 

That was not the question. Even Putin's Generals would not go that far.

 

 

Putin? Who said anything about Putin?

Edited by LeviF
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm no politician that's for sure & i'm not real sure of how this will be handled today & don't think a WW would be good for anyone but if NATO and those in it are for freedom and a countries sovereignty they need to band together & do something but i don't have any faith in our leaders !! 

 

I do feel that if this same thing would have happened 100 years ago Americans then would have went in & fought with Ukraine .

 

The thing i don't understand is that the US gov't went into Afghanistan and put all kinds of money in the back door to fight Russia & helped to run the Russians out yet the US gov't now sits on the side line & do nothing which speaks volumes for freedom around the world !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not hysterical about an all of a sudden nuclear war if NATO went with a no-fly zone in Ukraine.  

 

Russia won't bomb airfields or anything like that either.  They don't have the material, planes or pilots, and that opens up another front.  

 

They will shut off all their energy to Europe.    They will nationalize all the US corporate property in the Russia, effectively confiscating it.  They will cyber attack US natural gas and oil companies.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, T master said:

I'm no politician that's for sure & i'm not real sure of how this will be handled today & don't think a WW would be good for anyone but if NATO and those in it are for freedom and a countries sovereignty they need to band together & do something but i don't have any faith in our leaders !! 

 

I do feel that if this same thing would have happened 100 years ago Americans then would have went in & fought with Ukraine .

 

The thing i don't understand is that the US gov't went into Afghanistan and put all kinds of money in the back door to fight Russia & helped to run the Russians out yet the US gov't now sits on the side line & do nothing which speaks volumes for freedom around the world !!

No 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's alot more to this conflict than meets the eye, I think we all know that. 

 

I believe this is testing the western response. 

 

It's not going to be over quickly, not in weeks or months. 

 

I vote for zero confidence in this administration, I think there's a hidden agenda in this conflict. 

 

Hedge our bets, hold in military action because I'm afraid that before too long we are going to need the full might of our 750 billion dollar a year military budget, so don't deplete one bit of our military resource in the first few weeks of this. 

 

Don't forget folks, war is good for the economy.... 

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:


Cool. Which ones have you talked to? 

I understand when he's not attending "be less white" Pentagon briefings Gen. Milley speaks with hostile foreign commanders and generals so I expect he would know the specifics to the Russian's military intentions through mutual sharing of tactics and battle plans. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

I understand when he's not attending "be less white" Pentagon briefings Gen. Milley speaks with hostile foreign commanders and generals so I expect he would know the specifics to the Russian's military intentions through mutual sharing of tactics and battle plans. 


So Alf is Gen Milley or he has direct access to him?  Huh. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, ALF said:

 

It's called common sense.


I see and your common sense aligns with the Russian Generals?  Got it. 🙄

7 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Or perhaps Col. Vindman auditing phone conversations for the CIA between world leaders?


Maybe…Maybe.  But not sure how Alf got in the loop. 🤷🏻‍♂️

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, T master said:

I'm no politician that's for sure & i'm not real sure of how this will be handled today & don't think a WW would be good for anyone but if NATO and those in it are for freedom and a countries sovereignty they need to band together & do something but i don't have any faith in our leaders !! 

 

I do feel that if this same thing would have happened 100 years ago Americans then would have went in & fought with Ukraine .

 

The thing i don't understand is that the US gov't went into Afghanistan and put all kinds of money in the back door to fight Russia & helped to run the Russians out yet the US gov't now sits on the side line & do nothing which speaks volumes for freedom around the world !!

You must understand freedom...no one tells me to wear a mask to help save fellow citizens, but seat belts are ok. GOT IT! 😁

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:


I see and your common sense aligns with the Russian Generals?  Got it. 🙄


Maybe…Maybe.  But not sure how Alf got in the loop. 🤷🏻‍♂️

 

Russia could go to cyber warfare  or cut off natural gas to Europe and do a lot of damage. All out nuclear would be insanity  and that would be the end.

Edited by ALF
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ALF said:

 

Russia could go to cyber warfare  or cut off natural gas to Europe and do a lot of damage. All out nuclear would be insanity  and that would be the end.


So wait. Everyone says Putin is insane and you’re saying he wouldn’t do something insane?   Logic is terribly missing in conversations today.  And his generals are also likely crazy or unable to overrule him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Beach said:

im waiting for more information before voting

 

I'll provide some.


I'm pretty familiar with this type of thing, and it would take significant time to establish.
The Russians would not waste that time doing nothing.

 

First, there is no "No Fly Zone Backed up by NATO," per the thread title.
The only true capability would come from the US, and perhaps some UK.

Germany, Poland and the others provide no significant air to air capability enhancement against the Russians.


The only thing NATO would provide, other than proclamations of participation, would be runways to operate off of.

 

The requirements to enforce it would include:
   Fighters capable of high probability of success against Russian fighters.

   Those odds go up dramatically using F-22's and F-35's. US f-22's and F-35's, using US AWACS for fore integration.

    So the player roster would be US AWACS, US F-35's and US F-22's.


   Tankers.

   Because the numbers are not favorable, that means very long missions. Fighters doing an air defense mission are thirsty beings. Probably not smart to get the tankers or AWACS into contested airspace, so they would be anchored in some NATO country nearby.
   Electronic Warfare assets. The Russians have very sophisticated air defense weapons. Given range capability, they could use some on the ground in Russia to cover the area. How would this be handled? Is the "NATO" force going to attack systems on Russian soil? Is NATO going to accept its airplanes being shot at without attacking?

   I guarantee the pilots won't.
   Jamming requires three things. One is capability, two is proximity and three is wattage-lots of power. Does NATO have that ability to jam S-400 and S-500 systems?

   What happens when a Russian or NATO airplane gets shot down? Now we have an undeniable act of war between NATO and Russia.

 

    Further, this concept that a no fly zone solves/ends the problem is crazy. What about Russian ground forces, already present in great numbers with a lot more behind them?
Do they simply stop advancing and quit? I doubt the Ukrainians can successfully deal with that capability, and I doubt a no fly zone is going to allow strike aircraft to eliminate the Russian threat.

 

Let the sanctions do their work.
 A no fly zone sounds great, but it's de facto war, and things could get wickedly nasty in a very short time. 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...