Should NATO close the skies over Ukraine?

[Anonymous]

Yes

No

No idea what you're talking about

[ChrisMaster69]

Nope, it’s too much of an excuse for Putin to escalate.

Providing the Ukrainians 🇺🇦 With decent SAM systems is best way.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/ukraine/video-2633933/Video-STARStreak-missile-UK-send-Ukraine.html

The majority of the attacks are artillery and Missiles, the Russians appear to be struggling getting total air superiority.

Also the Russians would 100% use a no fly zone to their own benefit, it removes Ukrainian use of any air assets they have.

Main reason is, no one wants WW3 before May.

[OpenClose]

Absolutely not. The issue is not with "closing the skies" really. It's with enforcing the closing of the skies. If a Russian plane flies into a no-fly zone, how do they enforce it? Ask politely? And if that doesn't work?

The issue is that a no-fly zone is an order to shoot unidentified planes in the region. If they shoot down a Russian plane, we have entered war with Russia. All the dominoes fall with China siding with Russia and using it as a means to take Taiwan. And there we are, World War III.

That's the unfortunate thing about all of this. To prevent WWIII and potential nuclear disaster, Ukraine has to be on their own. We can only provide aid, but we can't get involved.

[Anonymous]

We need to start talking. Put down the weapons. Stop bombing and killing each other. Talk and find a solution. This is exactly what will benefit the innocent people involved, why do we think we can solve anything by killing each other. War seems ludicrous to me. Talking is the only answer that spares lives.

A cease fire should be arranged immediately, and a televised discussion should follow. No one would want to look like a d@ck on tv, and maybe then we could get some results and save many many lives.

[Jersey2]

You forget that both sides must be willing to seek peace. That is not the way of the world. Just be glad that you are protected from such people.

[Opinion Owner]

@Jersey2 I don’t deny both sides need to do this. I only said it is essential that it takes place

[Jersey2]

I hope they do stop killing and destroying. I think Kyiv must go through hell first though. If the Russians fail however, they may negotiate. If they succeed with fewer casualties than expected, then then will continue. Regardless, Kyiv will suffer first, likely in the next three weeks.

[Opinion Owner]

@Jersey2 I think it could take place sooner if things discussions were put in place. God knows it would save hundreds or even thousands from the hell they are going through. Macron has the right idea, reaching out for regular discussion. No one should be dying

[northerngal]

Any time a person asks for NATO to try to impose a no fly zone over Ukraine what they are actually asking is for NATO to declare war on Russia and risk escalation and possible use of nukes by a deranged despot. They are asking for WW3. Remember a wild animal is always the most dangerous when cornered. Plus closing the airspace will not stop artillery and rockets. Ukrainians will still be at a great disadvantage.

[bolverk]

If NATO blocked overflights over the Ukraine it would be construed as an act of War by Russia which would mean the conflict spreading, it is better to supply Ukraine with the weapons to defend itself, as at the moment Ukraine's forces has been fighting the Russians to a stand still.
Putin thought it would be a walk over but it has not turned out that way, and he has lost three of his most experienced unit commanders Lieutenant Colonel's Glebov & Safronov and Commander Zizevsky, not to mention the number of casualties and desertion of conscripts.

[DaveJord]

I think we should put boots on the ground in areas the Russians have not taken and limit their ability to maneuver without directly engaging them. But of course they will fuck it up and kill American soldiers and then we will be at war with these assholes.

But all these tender hearts who have never really and truly fought for something would cry about it... while Russia kills indiscriminately and we all pretend it does effect us. At some point we are while have to ask ourselves if we are responsible while we for this shit, while sit on the side lines and condemn it all.

[Crucis84]

Why don't YOU go there if you're so keen on the idea! What a stupid suggestion. The West has, and had, NO business being there in the first place!

[DaveJord]

@Crucis84 Sorry I served 22 year on active duty, and completed 5 combat tours already. But if the Army called me back at 45 I would go. Actually I was there for two weeks back in 2004. But I am glad you have such a strong opinion.

[RationalMale]

No. A no fly zone over Ukraine means dogfighting with Russian planes over Ukraine and heavy airstrikes against all anti aircraft in Ukraine and some in Russia.

What's happened to Ukraine sucks. But it's not worth sacrificing American lives and treasure. If someone feels strongly about it, they're free to donate their life savings or go join the Ukraine Legion, they are happily taking volunteers.

[monorprise]

That would mean going to war with the only country on Earth capable of wiping us off the Earth, Russia.

We spent nearly 80 years avoiding war with Russia for precisely that reason, during that time there have been many proxy wars such as the Ukraine. Lets not ruin our good luck.

[AviatorTom]

Creating a no-fly zone over Ukraine to limit Russian air attacks sounds like a good idea. But it would put NATO planes in a position of having to intercept and possibly shoot down Russian planes. That could easily escalate into all-out war in Eastern Europe. Better to keep the conflict in the Ukraine, with NATO countries giving support to The Ukraine any way they can... intelligence, arms and sanctions.

[exitseven]

o, but Biden should have supported Poland's offer of fighter jets to Ukraine so they can defend themselves. It seems like he wants the Ukraine to fail. I have to wonder if the 3.5 million dollars that Hunter Biden got from the wife of the Mayor of Moscow had anything to do with this decision. It could be a game changer in this conflict.

[DCooper]

That was probably the only decision I think old Quid Pro Joe got right. There isn't any reason Poland would need to drop off a few migs at Ramstein to get them into the hands of the Ukrainian pilots. It's not like Germany is on the way from Poland to Ukraine. The only reason to hand those planes off at Ramstein is to directly involve the US. There's no reason they couldn't be ferried directly from Poland to Ukraine if they were simply doing it to aid the Ukrainians.

[slatyb]

“Closing the skies”would mean attacking Russian aircraft in Ukrainian air space. Basically NATO would be atbwar with RRussia.

[joeldalton]

Absolutely not. It would immediately trigger WWIII and the left has weakened our country to the point we’d be destroyed.

[Jackblue]

An embargo is one thing, but a no-fly zone would arguably mean out and out war with Russia. War between two countries with nuclear weapons would be a bad idea.

[Dargil]

If we declare a no fly zone, who shoots down Russian aircraft? We do. That is an act of war.

[Slartybartfast]

Putin says he will start WWIII and use nuclear weapons if they do so.
GO FOR IT!

[Slartybartfast]

Seriously , I support Ukraine. My neighbor is Ukrainian. But Putin hasn't just been hinting, he litteraly moved an ICBM and will probably move nukes into Belarus. It's why he's spreading propaganda about the us putting nukes in Ukraine which is absurd. Even Poland got rid of it's nuclear weapons in 91.

[Crucis84]

Just how would they propose to do that? It's easy enough to enforce no-fly zones over nations that have already been bombed to bits and don't have much of an air force, but Russia isn't Libya, Syria or Yemen.

[genericname85]

i think doing those things only harms such people that have nothing to do with the conflict that's going on. not those that cause the conflict and that orchestrate the war activities.

[grega239]

And what? Shoit down any russian aircraft that goes in? Yeah , great plan

[Jersey2]

NATO is for NATO countries only. Ukraine is on their own while I support them though and hope that they get anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

[loveslongnails]

No, they should have send a shit ton of anti-tank weaponry and blew up the entire train of tanks the minute they started rolling in to the country.

[Pterodon]

Yes we should. The Russian army is a fucking joke. Grandmas with Molotov cocktails are kicking their ass. No way Putin would want to tangle with us

[Asker]

Hmm, I don't know. I'm torn on it. Putin was crazy and perhaps dumb enough to invade Ukraine. I don't know if we can trust that he wouldn't resort to nuclear weapons.

[Pterodon]

You don’t back down from bullies. We have nukes too

[NYlatefun]

you mean make Ukraine a no-fly zone? def not, that's involving the US in war against Russia, which means WWIII

[DWornock]

They don't have that capability. If they attempted, their planes would be shot down.

[jimmy2]

Right now it bwtween Ukraine and Russia. Ukrain doing very well showing Russia is weaker than anyone thought. If we go no fly zone there is WW3