3 ms·

I think it stands a better chance of keeping us OUT of a NATO conflict then starting one.. Violating a no-fly zone requires authorization, and hopefully thought

I think it stands a better chance of keeping us OUT of a NATO conflict then starting one.. Violating a no-fly zone requires authorization, and hopefully thought.. Whereas, right now, we're simply waiting for a bomb to mistakenly land on the wrong side of a border. No thought, no intention, no authorization...just one of those things that happen during war. I think this is a much more likely outcome.

FpUser 5y ago
>"Violating a no-fly zone requires authorization, and hopefully thought.." Putin did not sign for no flying zone. For him it is not a violation and as much as I hate this maniac he is under no obligation to respect NATO laws on non NATO territory. Violating Ukraine the way he did required way more than "hopefully thought" and yet it did not stop him. I think that no-fly zone is a guarantee to get nuked.
- mech422 5y ago
  I wasn't aware it was up to Putin.. But assuming your logic is correct, we're screwed anyway. Putin has always wanted to rebuild the USSR. He's annexed territory in the past, he's attempting to annex it now, and he'll attempt it again in the future.. So at some point, someone's gonna push the button..
  - FpUser 5y ago
    >"I wasn't aware it was up to Putin" I am not sure if this is sarcasm, but yes, it is pretty much up to him. >"He's annexed territory in the past, he's attempting to annex it now, and he'll attempt it again in the future" I think Ukraine is where his career ends. The question is how long. And in any way I do not think that he will attack NATO unless in return. I could be wrong but I prefer having a chance not to be annihilated vs a guarantee to the opposite.