2 ms·

Children buried in rubble after Russian airstrike on Mariupol hospital

12 points by squarefoot 5y ago

squarefoot 5y ago
No-fly-zone now! Let's get real: Russia would hardly respond to an enforced no-fly-zone over Ukraine by attacking countries outside of it, and certainly they wouldn't use nuclear weapons: that would be like choosing to lose everything rather than losing only Ukraine. Nuclear war is a powerful deterrent only to the extent it remains a threat; the moment one launches the 1st nuke is the moment they have lost, no matter the military outcome. Nobody would consider a victory hitting the enemy with 100 nukes if the enemy hit back with 50.
- sschueller 5y ago
  How does a no-fly zone stop a smart bomb from hitting its target exactly? They can be fired from the ground or from a ship and they can be hypersonic. All you prevent is aircraft which in order to enforce requires a NATO state to shot down a Russian plane. NATO do not want this to escalate.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > How does a no-fly zone stop a smart bomb from hitting its target exactly? “Smart bombs” are guided aerial bombs. No planes, no smart bombs. > They can be fired from the ground or from a ship and they can be hypersonic. No, they can't. You are confusing smart bombs with vastly more expensive weapons (probably cruise missiles.)
    - sschueller 5y ago
      During the Iraq War America was firing missiles from ships. Why would the Russians not fire such missiles?
      - dragonwriter 5y ago
        > During the Iraq War America was firing missiles from ships. Sure; those aren't smart bombs. > Why would the Russians not fire such missiles? They would and are (using cruise missiles; not sure the mix of land/air/sea launched.) They are also doing aerial bombing. Stopping the latter doesn't increase the capacity of the former to compensate.
      - lesuorac 5y ago
        Because cruise missiles are multi-million dollar weapons [1] and Russian is hemorrhaging money at the moment. It also appears that the Russian ships don't have sea to ground missiles either. [2] [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruise_missile#Deployment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruise_missile#Deployment [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_missile_boat_classes#Russia/USSR https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_missile_boat_classes#R...
  - squarefoot 5y ago
    > How does a no-fly zone stop a smart bomb from hitting its target exactly? Don't forget that Russians need planes to assist tanks and ground troops, not to mention the forces that could soon land in the south to take Odessa.

12 points by squarefoot 5y ago

No-fly-zone now! Let's get real: Russia would hardly respond to an enforced no-fly-zone over Ukraine by attacking countries outside of it, and certainly they wouldn't use nuclear weapons: that would be like choosing to lose everything rather than losing only Ukraine. Nuclear war is a powerful deterrent only to the extent it remains a threat; the moment one launches the 1st nuke is the moment they have lost, no matter the military outcome. Nobody would consider a victory hitting the enemy with 100 nukes if the enemy hit back with 50.

sschueller 5y ago
How does a no-fly zone stop a smart bomb from hitting its target exactly? They can be fired from the ground or from a ship and they can be hypersonic. All you prevent is aircraft which in order to enforce requires a NATO state to shot down a Russian plane. NATO do not want this to escalate.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > How does a no-fly zone stop a smart bomb from hitting its target exactly? “Smart bombs” are guided aerial bombs. No planes, no smart bombs. > They can be fired from the ground or from a ship and they can be hypersonic. No, they can't. You are confusing smart bombs with vastly more expensive weapons (probably cruise missiles.)
  - sschueller 5y ago
    During the Iraq War America was firing missiles from ships. Why would the Russians not fire such missiles?
    - dragonwriter 5y ago
      > During the Iraq War America was firing missiles from ships. Sure; those aren't smart bombs. > Why would the Russians not fire such missiles? They would and are (using cruise missiles; not sure the mix of land/air/sea launched.) They are also doing aerial bombing. Stopping the latter doesn't increase the capacity of the former to compensate.
    - lesuorac 5y ago
      Because cruise missiles are multi-million dollar weapons [1] and Russian is hemorrhaging money at the moment. It also appears that the Russian ships don't have sea to ground missiles either. [2] [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruise_missile#Deployment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruise_missile#Deployment [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_missile_boat_classes#Russia/USSR https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_missile_boat_classes#R...
- squarefoot 5y ago
  > How does a no-fly zone stop a smart bomb from hitting its target exactly? Don't forget that Russians need planes to assist tanks and ground troops, not to mention the forces that could soon land in the south to take Odessa.