Should America enforce a no-fly zone over Ukraine?

[blackhawk]

They weren’t caught off guard. Putin warned them for damn near a decade. Get informed.

I said no world leaders were caught off guard read post before spouting off.

 

[AlexanderPK]

Nope

The Coming False Flag - Vox Popoli

We haven’t seen the false flag we were all expecting at the start of the Russian special military operation, but Gonzalo Lira, a Chilean resident in Ukraine, appears to believe that one is imminent and that it will likely involve chemical weapons. The Americans are planning a false flag...

voxday.net

Well, this is a big lie. Right now the Russians are winning this war and winning it decisively. The fact is that the Ukrainian army’s command-and-control system is completely broken. The Ukrainian forces do not have an overall defensive strategy, for all intents and purposes, each unit is on its own. The Russians have successfully surrounded Kiev and Kharkov, the major cities. They’ve also surrounded and are in the process of pacifying Mariupol, so in the end, the Russians are winning. And most important of all, the Russians seem to have completely surrounded, and are currently, in all likelihood, annihilating the 60,000-strong army of the Ukraines which is currently in eastern Ukraine.

Not many people are talking about it but you should pay attention to that, that’s really important, because those 60,000 men represent the cream of the crop of the Ukrainian armed forces and they are
surrounded. Not only are they surrounded, there is no possibility of them being refueled or resupplied so it’s only a matter of time to either overwhelm them, overrun them, or annihilate them. It’s as simple as that….

As long as it's the cream and a Nazi one at that annihilate them would be the best option.

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

As long as it's the cream and a Nazi one at that annihilate them would be the best option.

Along with the dumb fucks from the west who volunteered

 

[lg325]

I do hope the third round of negotiations is successful. I have heard many times in the media just what you posted about NATOs rule about countries with border disputes not being members. Putin knows this so he may be looking for something else between the two countries. Ukraine needs the freedom to join mutual defense agreements with other nations. Including setting up a no-fly zone.

 

[JGalt]

They do have enough nukes to pretty much kill almost everyone in the west.

Do you hear yourself? Your talking about a nuclear holocaust like it’s so cool.
The return of the nuclear threat | DW | 14.03.2022

Nuclear weapons are way over-rated. We're talking about Soviet-era junk that some might actually hit the targets.

 

[AlexanderPK]

Along with the dumb fucks from the west who volunteered

They got the taste of what the real fire power is already and many are coming back in body bags.

 

[Esdraelon]

Putin can't nuke everyone.

He doesn't need to. I don't imagine such a war would begin with him deciding to commit national suicide. It would begin like all other wars. Someone would miscalculate the impact of their choice to use a nuke, ESPECIALLY a low-yield, tactical nuke.
Russi began building them a few years ago and they now have a 10:1 superiority over the west in that class of weapon. The idea is to USE them on the battlefield if it appears a superior force is going to rout the Russian military. For example... if he saw his armies being pushed out of Ukraine, he could stop that by setting off a couple of 1-5KT bombs at military bases or city centers. With an airburst, the fallout would be nearly non-existent but the impact would destroy any superior force arrayed against his armies.

The west would be left with a choice of continuing the fight conventionally, surrendering, or making use of our own nukes.

 

[JGalt]

He doesn't need to. I don't imagine such a war would begin with him deciding to commit national suicide. It would begin like all other wars. Someone would miscalculate the impact of their choice to use a nuke, ESPECIALLY a low-yield, tactical nuke.
Russi began building them a few years ago and they now have a 10:1 superiority over the west in that class of weapon. The idea is to USE them on the battlefield if it appears a superior force is going to rout the Russian military. For example... if he saw his armies being pushed out of Ukraine, he could stop that by setting off a couple of 1-5KT bombs at military bases or city centers. With an airburst, the fallout would be nearly non-existent but the impact would destroy any superior force arrayed against his armies.

The west would be left with a choice of continuing the fight conventionally, surrendering, or making use of our own nukes.

I would imagine that once Russia resorts to a single nuclear attack, the conventional response from allied NATO countries would be overwhelming and devastating. Their nuclear capability is not all that more in numbers than our own. Granted we gave them a slight edge by way of our nuclear proliferation treaties, but I have far more confidence in our own than I do theirs.

 

[KoolKolt]

Not in the least. The 3rd round of talks will be productive, that is, IF the media and political mouthpieces allow for that to happen. The media states that "Putin is appearing to be more reasonable" to accept that Ukraine as a neutral state.

All that NATO had to do to avoid loss of life was to state publicly on the world stage (easy to do within a few minutes nowadays), that according to their membership laws, no country can be a member with territorial disputes. NATO members chose to stay mute about that requirement and chose instead deliberate silence. So now, it's that "Putin" has come to his senses. Well perhaps, I don't claim to know. I do know that it's just as likely that NATO has decided to become....as the media is printing..."more reasonable". Anyone who places political postering over this blaring in your face solution that's been there all along to stop the invasion is a real piece of work.

I'll come back later with specific names of these NATO decision makers who chose to stay mute. It was obvious weeks ago that the best result was to declare Ukraine neutral.

Added note-any underinformed or misinformed poster who ignorantly misconstrues my position as a Putin lover, you are also a real piece of work and only interested in continuing the war most likely, perhaps financial gains in the works for you by war mongering.

About a week ago, Ukraine was offered these terms to end the fighting.
Moscow was demanding that Ukraine cease military action, change its constitution to enshrine neutrality, acknowledge Crimea as Russian territory, and recognise the separatist republics of Donetsk and Lugansk as independent states.

Ukraine rejected it.

 

[Esdraelon]

Nuclear weapons are way over-rated. We're talking about Soviet-era junk that some might actually hit the targets.

Low-Yield Nuclear Weapons: How Russia Would Destroy NATO Bases In A War

According to a recent study conducted by the Rand Corp., in the event of war with Russia, Moscow would be able to use its arsenal of low-yield nuclear weapons to destroy key bases in Europe.

www.19fortyfive.com

 

[KoolKolt]

All that NATO had to do to avoid loss of life was to state publicly on the world stage (easy to do within a few minutes nowadays), that according to their membership laws, no country can be a member with territorial disputes. NATO members chose to stay mute about that requirement and chose instead deliberate silence. So now, it's that "Putin" has come to his senses. Well perhaps, I don't claim to know. I do know that it's just as likely that NATO has decided to become....as the media is printing..."more reasonable". Anyone who places political postering over this blaring in your face solution that's been there all along to stop the invasion is a real piece of work.

I didn’t know that was one of the membership laws. Good to know.

And yes it makes sense that the silence really put fuel on the fire.

 

[JGalt]

About a week ago, Ukraine was offered these terms to end the fighting.
Moscow was demanding that Ukraine cease military action, change its constitution to enshrine neutrality, acknowledge Crimea as Russian territory, and recognise the separatist republics of Donetsk and Lugansk as independent states.

Ukraine rejected it.

Crimea, Donetsk, and Lugansk are already Russian held areas of Ukraine. Even if the treaty happened, there's no guarantee that Russia wouldn't use them as staging points for another invasion at some time in the future.

 

[AlexanderPK]

He doesn't need to. I don't imagine such a war would begin with him deciding to commit national suicide. It would begin like all other wars. Someone would miscalculate the impact of their choice to use a nuke, ESPECIALLY a low-yield, tactical nuke.
Russi began building them a few years ago and they now have a 10:1 superiority over the west in that class of weapon. The idea is to USE them on the battlefield if it appears a superior force is going to rout the Russian military. For example... if he saw his armies being pushed out of Ukraine, he could stop that by setting off a couple of 1-5KT bombs at military bases or city centers. With an airburst, the fallout would be nearly non-existent but the impact would destroy any superior force arrayed against his armies.

The west would be left with a choice of continuing the fight conventionally, surrendering, or making use of our own nukes.

The best option will be to stay out and mind your own American business, you've got plenty of that on your turf I bet. We'll deNazify and get down to restoring normal demilitarized life every Ukrainian will get used to pretty soon.

 

[AlexanderPK]

I would imagine that once Russia resorts to a single nuclear attack, the conventional response from allied NATO countries would be overwhelming and devastating. Their nuclear capability is not all that more in numbers than our own. Granted we gave them a slight edge by way of our nuclear proliferation treaties, but I have far more confidence in our own than I do theirs.

You're like Ukes who are, according to your and their media, winning day in, day out but, according to reality, getting their asses kicked all the time.

 

[Who_Me?]

NATO should have taken over the air a while ago. Putin makes threats and NATO / US backs down. The sad fact is that he's looking at NATO as a weak organization that has done nothing to protect Europe from his aggressive acts. Oh and by the way, China's watching to see how this plays out and if we continue down this chickenshit path, Taiwan is gone too.

Putin's threats are idle. He knows that if he launches a nuke, Moscow will be radioactive dust in seconds. His army cannot fight a conventional war, hell the Ukrainians have fended them off for weeks. His troops are ill trained, morale is low, and a few A-10's could have wiped out that 40 mile column of armor.

NATO is going to have to fight this guy sooner or later. The Baltics and Poland may be next. Putin will cross any line we draw, you've got to beat the bully with force. Time for us to call his bluff. Oh and by the way, where the hell is the UN? Now there is a waste of New York real estate.

Either that or do what Lindsey Graham suggested. Whack Putin.

 

[ClaireH]

About a week ago, Ukraine was offered these terms to end the fighting.
Moscow was demanding that Ukraine cease military action, change its constitution to enshrine neutrality, acknowledge Crimea as Russian territory, and recognise the separatist republics of Donetsk and Lugansk as independent states.

Ukraine rejected it.

Which media outlet, or outlets, do you believe is giving you an unbiased report? I assume your quote came from that outlet, source please so I can catch up.

Putin overstepped with comments about Finland. Declaring Ukraine neutral, however, is the best solution for peace and to end the war. There are more than 2 sides to this conflict.

I support the end of war. Wars do not resolve anything other than forced control for a specific timeframe, unfortunately Ukraine knows all about that over the past 10 centuries. It has never been a democracy, sadly due to de facto nation split by language and affiliations that prevent lasting self-determination. In the past there has been talk about an East and West due to the differences in allegiances. Another factor is the intermingling between Russians and Ukrainians...many families formed and have had children and grandchildren. It's a mess of a country with consistent war.

Zelenskyy? Not a fan, sorry. Jailing his opponent (the mayor who ran a close second) immediately following the election and continuing to raid his office, shutting down media outlets that were critical of his actions. Not a democracy, and Zelenskyy has his own motivations for control and possibility a motive to extend the war in order to gain external help supporting his power, drawing other countries into it. Fortunately, NATO at least has abided by their own bylaw about disputed territories

I look forward to learning about your sources, as reliable media sources are a precious commodity.

 

[Flash]

Yeah we know you’re a fucking idiot.

You fucking have the attention span of an ant.

I have told your sorry stupid Moon Bat ass several times that I am a real Conservative non interventionists but you don't have the ability to understand..

There have only been five times when Americans were justified to go to war.

The Revolutionary War to establish Independence.
Southerners fighting against the filthy Yankee invasion.
Americans fighting against the Indians to take the land away from them.
Kicking the Japs asses after Pearl Harbor although that isn't clean because our interventionist polices pissed them off.
Going after Bin Laden after 911 but that is also not clean because of our interventionists policies in the ME.

Even the war I was in was unnecessary.

I sure as hell don't give a shit about the Libyans that The Worthless Negro bombed or the Christians that Sick Willy bombed to protect the Muslim shit. I have no idea why Joe Potatohead supported the invasion of Iraq or why The Worthless Negro fought the Iraq War for three years and escalated the War in Afghanistan.

This Russian invasion of Ukraine doesn't bode well for peace in the world.

We need to balance our nationalistic interest with preventing this Putin shithead from expanding hostilities to be a worldwide conflagration.

 

[KoolKolt]

Which media outlet, or outlets, do you believe is giving you an unbiased report? I assume your quote came from that outlet, source please so I can catch up.

Putin overstepped with comments about Finland. Declaring Ukraine neutral, however, is the best solution for peace and to end the war. There are more than 2 sides to this conflict.

I support the end of war. Wars do not resolve anything other than forced control for a specific timeframe, unfortunately Ukraine knows all about that over the past 10 centuries. It has never been a democracy, sadly due to de facto nation split by language and affiliations that prevent lasting self-determination. In the past there has been talk about an East and West due to the differences in allegiances. Another factor is the intermingling between Russians and Ukrainians...many families formed and have had children and grandchildren. It's a mess of a country with consistent war.

Zelenskyy? Not a fan, sorry. Jailing his opponent (the mayor who ran a close second) immediately following the election and continuing to raid his office, shutting down media outlets that were critical of his actions. Not a democracy, and Zelenskyy has his own motivations for control and possibility a motive to extend the war in order to gain external help supporting his power, drawing other countries into it. Fortunately, NATO at least has abided by their own bylaw about disputed territories

I look forward to learning about your sources, as reliable media sources are a precious commodity.

I agree with you on Zelensky. That’s why it’s corruption fighting corruption and I have not been able to take a side.

My source is
BREAKING: Russia Offers Terms to Ukraine for an End to Hostilities (UPDATED)

 

[night_son]

Zelensky has asked the US, Canada, and the UK to enforce a no-fly zone over Ukraine. Do you think that would be a wise move or end up in WWIII?

What most Americans do not understand is that in the event of war between the US/NATO and Russia, United States main ground forces are 2-3 months away from landing on European soil. Further, imagine convoys of US ships crossing the Atlantic full of main battle tanks, armored personnel carriers and all other materials of war hunted down and sunk by Russian subs. People should really stop and think before pulling the US vs. Russia switch.

 

[KoolKolt]

What most Americans do not understand is that in the event of war between the US/NATO and Russia, United States main ground forces are 2-3 months away from landing on European soil. Further, imagine convoys of US ships crossing the Atlantic full of main battle tanks, armored personnel carriers and all other materials of war hunted down and sunk by Russian subs. People should really stop and think before pulling the US vs. Russia switch.

I agree. I don’t want American lives taken in a fight for Ukrainians. Now if it came down to Russians threatening the US, that’s another story.