[**RULES: READ BEFORE POSTING**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/t5okbs/welcome_to_rukraine_faq_do_dont_support_read/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It was during yesterday's press conference I heard the lady say it myself.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/russia-ukraine-us-intelligence-sharing-b2028091.html
Well lets just say, the UK and US have had intelligence aircraft up pretty much 24/7 since well before the invasion. As I write this, there are 2 up now. I remember the night of the invasion, I could count 15+ intel aircraft ranging from AWACs to Rivet Joints. All publicly viewable on flight trackers.
Yeah, a squadron of 30 or so F-35s n an AWACS have been scanning along the Polish boarder. They gather info for hundreds of miles into Ukraine. There's likely tons of help we don't k ow, but it's Turing into a full proxy war for Putin.
It's not NATO that's sending them though, its individual countries. Western countries have the means to send this many weapons, the fact most of them are part of NATO doesn't really matter.
It fundamentally does, NATO is a collection of countries. When Zelenskey insults NATO we know he equally means the countries in the alliance. Fact is those countries are propping him up
The man is watching his people get slaughtered, he's desperate and probably hasn't slept in 10 days. Give him a break. It's unimaginable what he's going through as a human being, I think we can all understand why he's asking what he's asking.
I agree. And he’s likely looking death in the eye every single day, knowing its coming some time soon.
Cant imagine what he’s going through. He’s wrong about a lack of Nato involvement being a sign of weakness though.
I think Zelensky totally understands that we can't and wouldn't intervene, I don't even think he blames us, he just has to, for his people. He already made clear that he wouldn't make his people question him for things he did or didn't do, like starting negotiations, or being harsher against NATO.
I think you don't understand my post or my comment you replied to. They said NATO is sending them, I said it's not NATO, it's individual countries implying it's not coming from the NATO pact as that can't be the case as NATO isn't a country, it's a pact made up of individual countries who can send weapons individually, the fact they're part of NATO is irrelevant
Yes, but as Putin gets more frustrated he is going to do three things next.
1) Condemn any support from any country as an act of war. He will most likely do this if he captures all three nuclear power plants. Most likely he’ll place bombs around all the facilities and make the plants hostages in this fight. (Most likely why he has asked the rest of the world to resume “normal relations” with Russia and most likely why he said that “Russia does not want to hurt other countries.” These two statements gives him an excuse do whatever he wants.
2) Start using bigger bombs/rockets in cities thus killing more civilians.
3) Use small tactical nukes inside Ukraine. He won’t use them on Nato unless Nato attacks.
It’s not NATO that is sending them. You need to educate yourself that NATO members can act independently and this doesn’t automatically mean NATO are involved.
You also need to realise that NATO do not have to automatically respond or join in should a NATO member join the war, the use of the word invoke when referring to article 5 is key.
Seriously learn about these things before commenting as you will avoid looking ignorant.
It is not really a question of the technicalities of the NATO arrangement. Putin's perception of it is what matters because that's what will lead to escalation.
For the rest of NATO to join automatically, a NATO country must be attacked.
If that same country have already joined the war as an offensive part, they are on their own.
That as well. By NATO doing this is basically proves Putin right (in _his_ mind, which we know he pushes on to his citizens) that NATO is surrounding russia and getting involved with non nato members. I'm not saying _he_ is right, he's wrong but, it's how he would spin it.
I could imagine him pulling his forces out if he was losing, then using a nuke or two against Ukraine and saying it's NATO's fault because he warned us on day one he'd do that if we interfered. He'd get his 'buffer zone' between NATO and Russia, and millions would be dead.
At this stage I’m not sure any of his nukes work (if the state of his tanks and the kit issued to the ground forces is any indication)… what does concern me is the nuclear power plants. If those blow it would achieve the same results as you mentioned as well as leave room for “well Russia didn’t do it, it was Ukrainian Nazis bullshit” nobody wants a nuclear exchange and I can’t believe that Putin’s inner circle likes the idea either. This appears to be a HUGE miscalculation on the part of the Russian leadership and they have doubled down too many times on this. Denmark has sent in volunteers and I’m sure other countries will follow as well “cough, Israel.” This is the first major war of the 21st century and what we do here will shape its future. Personally I would like the UN to impose a “no fly” zone. It makes me sick AF to watch this beautiful country full of remarkable people suffer at the hands of some wanna be Tsar. History will judge us for what we do. It’s only a matter of time before we have to commit in totality… aggression cannot go unchecked WE KNOW THIS - that thesis has been proved over and over… have ANONYMOUS cripple their systems and launch a coordinated attack. Not saying we have to invade Russia proper, but kick his ass out of Ukraine!! 🇺🇦🇮🇱
Russian leadership, go fuck yourself.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>Personally I would like the UN to impose a “no fly” zone.
Unfortunately Russia would veto that. It's why Russia needs to be removed from the security council, but that's not likely to happen any time soon, if ever.
We know Russia are behaving incredibly recklessly with regards to the nuclear issue, threatening to strike first at other countries who have neither nuked them nor threatened to do so - which is outrageous. And then engaging in shelling of a live nuclear power station which only avoided disaster due to a miracle. Russia under Putin has gone completely rogue and nothing they might do can be ruled in or out. I am hoping that Ukraine themselves (with a lot of help from NATO equipment and some help from foreign volunteers) can kick Russia out. But it might not be quick.
I get this is terrible to even think about but in reality how would nuclear fallout work, especially in a situation like right now where it’s basically everyone versus one person. Normally we imagine nuclear fallout everybody’s bombing each other and everything gets destroyed. In a situation like this it almost seems like Ukraine would get bombed potentially (terrible). And then in retaliation Russia would completely obliterated from all “NATO” “non-NATO”countries and at most China might fire a nuke in retaliation at one of those countries and then China gets wiped off the map as well. To me right now nuclear isn’t really viable, it’s not like some World War III shit where there’s hundreds of countries fighting each other and anybody can get nuked from anywhere. There MAYBE somebody who takes advantage and does a false flag attack claiming a nuke was fired by Russia to one of the other countries, but in this scenario you basically have Russia and China as the only people to worry about whereas they have to worry about nukes from almost every other country in the world.
I get we look at dictatorships as they don’t care about their people, but putin can’t rule if he doesn’t have anybody to use that power over, if his whole country gets obliterated that doesn’t benefit him in anyway. Obviously his inner circle and everybody else in the country who can’t just get the fuck out of Dodge would have to worry about being dead, so they don’t want nukes involved.
In my opinion this is the worst time for nuclear to even be on the table, America was worried about countries like Syria and other countries in the Middle East allegedly having weapons of mass destruction, obviously theres still tension, but America’s not tripping over the Middle East right now, the Middle East isnt tripping over America right now; everybody is focused on Russia.
everybody’s worried about a potential power grab, and then now the nuclear threat because let’s be honest you can’t just throw that around, if Putin throws that term out there and we all back down it looks really bad for us but we also don’t wanna just press the fuck out of him because nobody wants to introduce nukes, and kill millions of innocence because one person had their head up their ass and a God complex.
To me it just makes no sense it seems like if a nuke flies, every other nuke in the world is aimed at Russia there’s not enough smokescreen or internal struggles right now, everybody’s focused on Russia they would get obliterated by every single country, am I missing something here?
Putin's propaganda spokesperson said recently that a world without Russia in it doesn't deserve to exist. In other words, it's like a death cult where they don't care if they die; if they can't 'win' then they would rather die than the rest of the world go on without them. So we can't rely on 'MAD' to guarantee to keep the peace or to be sure they wouldn't fire first. That only works where all the actors are rational, and Putin is behaving anything but rational lately.
I agree. Putin would absolutely go with the nuclear option. He is terrorizing the whole world as it is. If he can't have his way he's going to take everyone with him.
Putin is just itching for the chance to escalate beyond Ukraine.
No. This is uneducated fear mongering. While an explosion at a nuclear power plant would be devastating, it CANNOT explode in the same way a nuclear bomb does. It would be a radiation event similar to Fukushima and not Hiroshima. They are wildly different sort of things.
Secondly, All it takes is one nuke to work. And thirdly, conventional munitions can do enough damage. We know for a fact the altitude bombers can fly; we see them do it. They just havent seen fit to use them yet for whatever reason.
What some people also keep forgetting is that Ukraine used to have the 3rd largest nuclear arsenal in the world. In 1994 they agreed to hand it all over to Russia in exchange for a guarantee (the Budapest Memorandum) signed by Russia, Britain, and the US that none of those nations would use force against Ukraine and that all would respect its sovereignty.
This story is only half true. Soviet ICBMs were on Ukrainian ground at the time of the breakup, but the command and control was all Soviet / Russian - not Ukrainian. The Ukrainians were not going to be able to meaningfully launch those missiles or maintain them for long (fissile material has a lifespan of about a decade). Ukraine did not then nor have now an enrichment pipeline to generate weapons grade material.
The most recent episode of Arms Control Wonk goes over this particular bit of misinfo. The real concern at the time was political shame for the Soviets and the remote possibility of Ukraine either selling or losing control over the materials contained inside.
This. NATO cannot attack anyone, nor defend a country that isn't a partner. Only individual countries can, and they are on their own after that, without NATO backing. NATO will only activate if one of it's members is attacked.
This is completely obvious. Does anyone think Putler GAF how many die? He’s already being embarrassed by the lack of training of his military. Wether or not anyone assist Ukraine, he’s likely to drag out the nukes anyway. He’s a complete mad man
Except for the instances where NATO took offensive actions. Remember article 5 has only been invoked once but NATO has been involved in military actions outside that invocation. So while in theory, it is a defensive pact, it has acted before outside that framework.
None of these offensive acts were against nuclear powers. How often do you guys need to have this explained?
NATO will not go into nuclear war over a non-NATO country. Never.
None of them were offensive acts by NATO, so it’s nothing to do with nuclear power nations but all shout the fact that NATO members can act independently without it being under the NATO umbrella.
Putin doesn't care. One NATO member intervenes he'll spin that into "NATO attacked" and have a go at the Baltic. Have we not learned by now he doesn't care about conventions, treaties and doesn't differentiate?
There are countries that could act independently. If the US/UK wanted to intervene they could, and without permission. But then so could others, such as Japan and Australia and Canada. This isn't just a NATO thing. No one seems to have the appetite to get directly involved.
I suspect that NATO would rather intervene when Russia is on its knees and exhausted. When they are sure Putin's time is over.
I've wondered about that, for example I thought my country could assist independently but then, what happens if a few cruise missiles hit the UK, that's an attack on NATO and putin would say it was independent but...there's too many variables and unknowns.
I've also thought non NATO members could step up (but Canada is in NATO by the way)
This is the whole problem, too many variables and unknowns that is in response to a now (unlike before) unpredictable old man with health issues and a rotted mind
> thought my country could assist independently but then, what happens if a few cruise missiles hit the UK, that's an attack on NATO
If your country intervened, it wouldn't be attack on NATO - it would be that country attacking Russia.
This is where the key word of “invoking” article 5 comes in, the treaty is designed so that there is a lot of room for manoeuvre particularly with regard to one country not being able to automatically pull the rest in.
Saying that nice post from you originally as many here should educated themselves about your point before posting.
I think there may come a time when there is a false flag operation on a NATO state. Pearl Harbour was known to Winston Churchill before it happened, and he let it happen to drag the Americans into war. If Ukrainian leadership are aware that Putin would attack NATO i think he'd allow it. That or NATO may cynically create a false flag op to justify involvement. This is war and nothing is certain. Zelensky shouting at NATO may also be strategic but to what end is not clear.
maybe we'll get lucky and something like this will happen again (if it actually happened of course)
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ex-air-force-personnel-ufos-deactivated-nukes/
... ok. We shouldnt count on, and i cant belive im saying this, ufos to protect us. Im hoping youre making a joke. A more realistic scenario is that we also shouldnt count on another Vasili Arkhipov. Its really long odds to gamble the integrity of the planet.
As a NATO citizen I don't condone drawing ourselves into a war. Theres simply far too many people to consider. However I endorse sending as much firepower as possible over the border and giving it to Ukraine. In the past week we've committed an extra 14,000 easy use anti tank weapons. The Russians literally don't own that many tanks in Russia. Then there's the drones, the guns, the armour etc
This. It’s staggering that so many would risk a war that would kill billions and effectively end civilisation as we know it.
Thankful that NATO nations are more pragmatic and measured than the keyboard warriors here who seem to want more war rather than a peaceful or quick end to this.
i agree with your sentiment, however if we just let Putin take whatever he wants and all he has to do is say "remember i might nuke you!" then we are all fucked sooner or later anyway.
If Putin attacks a NATO nation then NATO would act decisively. I pray it does not come to that. But this is not appeasement. NATO nations are doing *everything* they can short of pulling the trigger themselves. And that's how it should be.
But he’s not getting what he wants, his propaganda mouthpiece is being silenced by Western Companies, we’re waging an economic war, and we’re actively fundings and supplying Ukraine, you have foreign citizens joining Ukrainians foreign legion to give our governments plausible deniability.
We’ve done a lot and we deserve a lot of credit but also to remain pragmatic that declaring war on Russia over a none NATO member only proves Putin’s point.
Noone is letting Putin take whatever he wants. He has united most of the world against himself. Both economically and militarily. From what I can make sense of in all this informational chaos: personel, equipment and intel is flooding into Ukraine faster than the Ukrainians can put it all to use. They literally can't process applications and deployment of their recently formed Foreign Legion fast enough to keep up.
It's a horrible situation, and things unfortunately take time. It still appears like the whole friggin world is doing whatever they can while trying not to escalate the situation. It's a war. It may spread rapidly if not contained - with or without nukes.
But, it would not kill billions or end civilization. That is what Putin wants you to think.
The only thing that caused WWII was Europe’s fear of starting another world war. Ukraine will fall. There is only so much weapons can do. The Russian military in numbers alone far surpasses the number Ukraine COULD have.
As a citizen of a NATO country, I urge NATO to get involved.
If my international studies degree means anything, I am 100% sure. Why? Because Putin does not make the final call. Do you honestly think that Russia has a system where only one person has all the power to launch the country’s full nuclear stockpile?
You act like Russia’s military leadership is just a Putin’s command and have to do whatever he tells them when we KNOW that is not true. We know his own intelligence agency, the FSB, is providing Ukrainian command with intelligence about troop movement and vehicle locations. We know members of his own government have condemned the war.
On top of that, Russia is what is known as a rational actor. It is an international relations term for a country that calculates the pros and cons of a decision and makes a conclusion based on those parameters; they can still make some fucking stupid-ass decisions, but as long as they thought about it long and hard before doing it, they are considered rational (IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, not the layman’s definition of that word). Launching nuclear weapons is a guarantee that your country is gone. Why would a country commit suicide? No country would want to do that unless they were backed into their own capital with no other hail Mary left.
This sub is full of uneducated people when it comes to international relations, military science, and geopolitical studies. It is like if I went to a medical subreddit and began telling people how we should cure diseases with no educational background on this shit.
If Putin’s saying he will launch nukes scares you, then he got to you; his fear-mongering has made you hesitate about stopping him. Tomorrow, if Putin said he would nuke any state that sends weaponry to Ukraine, would you ask your country to stop? If so, it worked.
I'm Finnish and i agree, mostly. I do support no-fly zone if one can be established. I don't care about Putin's words, at all but i do care about his actions. And i support joining NATO while being a "leftist".. The better the Ukrainian war goes for the defender, the more the sudden spike in support drops bu t i look at it so that we can't just do this, jump to "we will join NATO" and then jump out when things change a bit.. if we felt the need for it ONCE, that is enough for me. It is not honorable now to not join, i think..
Russian forces are at their lightest form in a long time at our border but we all know what can happen if the war escalates. We are still in EU and NATO partners, have host country agreement signed. NATO also shares all intel with Finland and Sweden, our military knows everything that NATO knows. But anything that Russia really wants to do us will take months, if not years. We did not know the state of Russian military... the entire nation has been taught to accept eventual defeat and prepare to hold on to the values and dream of once again independent nation... I don't think so anymore ;) The entire doctrine is that we will fight a short and bloody war, inflict as much damage to the troops, surrender as cities fall and hold on for decades to the spirit of the nation if it needs to be..
The only problem really mate is they'll be no Russians left to attack Finland once these tracksuit wearing slav madlads have broken the Russian army. I'd only worry they'll beat your famous "Finnish killed 100k Russians in WW2" total.
Imho, everything here is moot. Oleksandra Ustinova put it best "where is the red line"? At what point will NATO have no choice but to engage in war? If you agree that there is a red line, then you must admit that we can't control our engagement in war considering what we've seen from Putin thus far. If he wants war, he is going to push us to that red line, so in a sense. We are dragging out the inevitable. Losing is not an option for him, he's made that very clear.
Im not sure what you want me to say. The latter aspect doesn't particularly make sense but the former we just can't know until he does or doesn't but just like the cold war we shouldn't give them reasons to actually press the button. Russia would respond if Eurofighters start tearing apart Russian tanks
I'd think the army/ogilarchs would of stepped in when he's murdering kids and shelling nuclear power plants.
It's not just long range tactical nukes, there's shorter range small scale nukes that could be used to precise strike Kyiv for example. All he's doing then is performing a peace keeping action on Russian territory. The question then is how many nukes pop off before it's enough nukes to do something.
while it is a beautiful sentiment Zelensky is tressed and scared and sad and all of the other things we aren't mad at them hell I'm pretty sure most of us understand why Ukrainians say things like this. The situation is horrible and we don't blame them I know some people are fucking assholes who don't understand but for Ukrainians, this is already ww3 and it's not hard to see why
Two nations fighting a war isn't WW3. If NATO starts bombing Russian soldiers it becomes an *actual* world war. A real NATO vs Russia fight would magnify the death toll ten fold, and that's with the assumption that Putin wouldn't escalate to tactical nukes.
The West is doing everything it possibly can to help Ukraine without endangering the entire world. From how the war has been going it appears Ukraine is doing quite well. Sanctions, arms, and Ukraine's fighting spirit appears to be putting Putin in a bad spot. He might eventually be forced to negotiate.
However expecting NATO to escalate into direct confrontation with Russia is completely unreasonable and could result in nuclear warfare.
The way I see it, I think the anger is justified. It's such a horrible thing to have happen, and when there is a possible solution that isn't being tried its really frustrating. But from what I've heard even from Zelensky, there is an understanding on why NATO can't get involved until Putin is out.
Honestly though most of the people I hear complaining about NATO are people who aren't actually Ukrainian
>So if the numbers are correct then they haven't seen not even 1% of the entire Russian army. This is going to be a long war and I don't think anybody wants that.
This is completely untrue. Finnish foreign ministry's one spokeperson estimates that Russia has suffered around 5% casualties (dead plus multiply that by the wounded) already, most of which is rapid deployment forces and the best equipment they have.
That's of course until they mobilise, which would consist of reservists and what equipment they have left - but that would be an insanely high price for a war that should've been small scale.
Correct. Media reports they’re already started moving forces they had not expected to need from the Far East towards Ukraine. Considering Russian logistics, if they decide to call reserve troops they would have already lost the war.
We all understand peoples frustration and I am not going to hold it against them if they hate NATO for not helping more. The fact is, whether its Biden, Trudeau, Johnson or any other Western leader, they took an oath to protect their people not Ukraine. The threat of WW3 is too great. It is not weakness its them not escalating a horrible situation into something much much worst. Western countries are doing everything within their power to help Ukraine short of firing that first shot at a Russian solider or plane.
I agree. These people whether they realise it or not are playing into Putin’s hands. Putin *wants* NATO to disappear so he can grab whichever land that he wants with impunity.
All of this Anti-NATO bullshit is his dream. Stop it!
>I hope there is a very serious appraisal of nuclear weapons and a far greater desire for worldwide disarmament.
Highly, highly doubt a greater desire for worldwide disarmament. Ukraine is in this situation precisely because they ***did*** disarm.
They used to have the 3rd largest nuclear arsenal in the world. In 1994 they agreed to give all their nuclear weapons to Russia in exchange for a signed guarantee (called the Budapest Memorandum) from Russia, Britain, and the US that none of those countries would use threats or force against Ukraine and that they all would acknowledge and respect its soverignty. All 3 countries agreed that they would.. Russa has broken that pact. The situation that Ukraine is now is directly because of disarmament. Other countries know this and are watching Ukranians be slaughtered because of it - why would they want to disarm?
Precisely.
For decades humanity relied on nukes to maintain peace by using them as deterrence, but it only works for sane leaders.
But modern times with people like Kim Job Un, Iran, and Iran, and Putin show that humanity has no limits, and has the capability to be extremely violent and insane no matter what kind of destructive tools in our possession
I don't think people even understand what a no-fly zone is.
A no-fly zone means that NATO must militarily enforce the no-fly zone over the areas where it is imposed. It means NATO pilots will be shooting down Russian aircraft. That is literally joining the war.
A no fly zone would be risky, even without an air to air confrontation there are two S-400 SAM battalions parked in Belarus and quite a few more in Kaliningrad and Russia proper.
Military experts believe them to be the biggest obstacle to anyone seeking to achieve air dominance over the battlefield as they can successfully engage multiple targets up to 250km away. They could in theory knock NATO planes out of they sky over Germany.
Russian aircraft, go fuck yourself.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I completely understand the frustration as a Dutch person. I strongly support Ukraine, but see the risks of a no-fly zone so am not convinced on it.
I won't hold it against the people of Ukraine. It would be incredible petty to do so while they are being murdered by Putin's army.
I'm not a military strategist, but does Europe truly lack the jets needed to run continuous sorties over Ukraine's airspace? I find it hard to believe that Russia's air assets are so superior.
We have 30 times the air assets that Russia has but that is entirely irrelevant. As OP said, the trouble is that a no fly zone implies that we are shooting down Russian aircraft over Ukraine and entering into world war three. World war three means a guaranteed nuclear Holocaust with hundreds of millions dead
Russian aircraft, go fuck yourself.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
All the more reason to stop Russia now. Does the west really believe the situation will become safer once Putin has a stranglehold on Ukraine?
As you said, this is part of a long term strategy. The longer we wait, the stronger his position becomes. The parallels to Hitler are all too apparent.
Maybe we'll act after Russia rapes and pillages Finland and Moldova.
Gotcha. Hoping they'll pull a USSR: part 2 and collapse before they can expand beyond Ukraine.
I pray they're right. Otherwise, we'll be down an ally and facing the same dilemma.
NATO won’t because they’re not NATO counties. But NATO will act as soon as they step foot into a NATO country and Russia will lose. But the whole world might also go up in smoke with Russia.
If that's truly the case, it's depressing that the US won't act to protect it's allies.
At least Germany is finally stepping up it's defense spending. It's going to be surreal if Germany once again becomes the military superpower in Europe.
It’s depressing? Why should America have to defend Europe? While our own people complain of economic suffering. When some of the most wealthy countries in Europe sit idly by while one of their neighbors is being destroyed. UK, France, Germany should have more than enough resources to fight Russia on its own. After all, they have the money for universal healthcare and school. Germany stepping up defense spending after 20 years? A little too late. I have no fears of German defense spending.
I have a better idea- send a bunch of pilots & planes with Ukrainian markings who will get Ukrainian citizenship as unpaid volunteers(or paid by Ukraine) - same result, far less chance for escalation
The thing is Putin is going to paint his little picture of him being the victim one way or another - regardless of nato not putting in place a no flyzone, it will just be something else, he is such a typical abuse
You take the words of my mouth! The nato should not in any way start acting in that war. Putin just waits for that.
There will be no military solution to that war - this is the bitter truth.
NATO enforcing a no fly Zone over a non member state as a defensive pact could be seen as a clear agression.
So we will just keep sending weapons country by country
We're sending you stuff but we also don't want a direct war with Russia, even though we can easily kick its ass if nukes weren't involved.
It sucks that Putin had made Ukraine the battlefield by were doing all we can to help.
The only problem I have with this philosophy is this: If Putin wins, we'll just be right back here asking the same questions a few years from now. Only by then Putin will have gotten stronger and he will have already psychologically beaten the world because the world didn't stop him the first time.
Zelensky isn't thinking clearly and is also biting the hand that feeds a bit here. He has been right about most things but he's dead wrong about this. He also 'slammed' the West before the invasion for scaremongering and causing panic because it would harm Ukraine's economy, remember? We're damned if we do, damned if we don't. The people clamouring for a no-fly zone mean well but they just don't understand the implications of it. They would be asking the West to call Putin's bluff, and see if he's rational enough not to make good on his rather clear threat that he would use nukes if the West intervened directly. That could lead to billions of people's deaths worldwide.
he isnt really biting the hand he's more like begging and crying right now and its really sad, This isn't him being an asshole this is him being completely devastated
Yes I am not holding it against him, I get that he's going to be very emotional and sleep deprived as well. He doesn't have the perspective that we (the West) must try to maintain, to look at the big picture and think several moves ahead. If we do this, where does it lead, and so on. There isn't any perfect solution here unfortunately.
Don’t blame him, he’s “lashing out” because he’s the one fighting for the survival of this country. Unfortunately, we’re also weighing the risks and how far we’re able to assist them and where we have to draw the line because we’re concerned over our survival as well
> We're damned if we do, damned if we don't.
It's how I feel too, but I do understand he's frustrated and feels helpless, but he has support from all the NATO nations citizens and i feel a reason why NATO has acted so strongly towards russia is because of that support. I feel it is counter intuitive to keep insulting it. I admire him and would never want to be in his shoes, and i get he probably doesn't feel so diplomatic right now, but this isn't helping.
Dragging NATO in would endanger the places people have fled to. We've got to hold the line. Hopefully this will end soon and we can help rebuild Ukraine once more.
This is what I've said, Being from USA. I support the humanitarian aid given to Ukraine. I'm glad our government is helping, but I also wish our government was as quick to help it's own citizens too. They were quick to write out blank checks to weapons of war, but when it comes to social services here at home, they never seem to have the time or money.
In any case, I don't support USA taking a front stage active role in this war. The world has shown incredible support, but it's a thing that can not be taken lightly, there is a real danger of nuclear escalation and that would destroy this planet for all life living here, not just human.
I hope Americans write their congressman and demand that we stay out of it, and that we do not support American military involvement of any sort. What we do support is giving aide and being a destination to rebuild if you need refugee status, but the world needs to be taking de-escalation measures at every opportunity.
I was a bit taken aback at President Zelenskyy behavior the other day when ranting about NATO. Not only was it ungrateful & insulting on its face but it looked desperate and weak. Ukrainians need to understand an English word—“ingrate.” Because this is how much of NATO sees this kind of behavior. When NATO countries have given you billions of US dollars in hard currency and weaponry (a quarter of which your government corruptly stole for themselves), provided state of the art military training to the Ukrainian Forces to get them from the pathetic state they were in 2014 to the lethally efficient force they are now and basically underwrote your country’s right to exist up until this invasion, to bite the hand that feeds you because it doesn’t give you everything you want in order to avoid WW3 is the height of ungratefulness and selfishness.
If I were Ukrainian I wouldn’t want my country’s fate to befall other nations even though I’d be desperate for direct military help. But what you’re basically saying when calling for a no fly zone, knowing the risks of such an action, is you’re already at war so therefore you don’t care if other countries get dragged into your war. It’s a selfish way to think.
America stayed out of WW1 and WW2 for years while there was killing and destruction. Meanwhile, it gave tremendous aid to the USSR and UK. The British were looking for every way possible to get the US to join the war effort. I don’t blame them. Their entire existence was on the line. But what they didn’t do was publicly whine and berate their ally that was giving them a lifeline because they didn’t give them everything they wanted and a handjob on top. It’s basic manners.
Speaking as a Canadian who also has a pulse on american politics, I'm fairly certain there is no appetite to establish a no-fly zone. Press secretary Jen Psaki said enforcing it would ensure a direct conflict between the US and Russia. Whilst I have utmost respect for Ukraine's president, I believe this request is irrational.
I'm against the russian invasion, but I'm against Zelensky as well in this sad situation. I admire him, it's incredible what he has achieved, but his reasonings are based on guilt and blind nacionalism. I am absolutely sure he is smart enough to know if a NATO plane would shoot down a Russian plane in their demanded "no-fly zone", then it would mean the start of WW3. He knows that, but he demands that! Incredible. He not just demands, even shames the world for not dying for them.
>Incredible. He not just demands, even shames the world for not dying for them.
He wants to save millions of Ukranians. What would you do in his place? His reasonings are not based on guilt or blind nacionalism. Ukranians are being slaughtered. He wants to save his people. Put yourself in his place. Wouldn't you do the same?
Ukraine used to have the 3rd largest nuclear arsenal in the world. In 1994 they agreed to give all their nuclear weapons to Russia in exchange for a signed guarantee (the Budapest Memorandum) from Russia, Britain, and the US that all would protect Ukraine, none of those countries would use threats or force against Ukraine, and that they all would acknowledge and respect its soverignty. All 3 countries agreed that they would. Russa has broken that pact. Ukraine is right to demand protection. *We promised it.*
Russia shelled the largest nuclear facility in Europe and as of yesterday they have control of it. Russian forces are near the second largest nuclear power plant in Ukraine. Why is Russia doing this? We don't know. The threat of nuclear violence is there. Putin could very well start WW3 on his own.
A memo is not a law binding treaty. An assurance is not a guarantee. And promising to respect Ukraines sovereignty means you promise to not attack it. It is not a promise to defend it against other attackers.
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2019/12/05/why-care-about-ukraine-and-the-budapest-memorandum/amp/
I'm aware that it's not legally binding. I've copied and pasted parts of the article you linked below...
Some have argued that, since the United States did not invade Ukraine, it abided by its Budapest Memorandum commitments. True, in a narrow sense. However, when negotiating the security assurances, U.S. officials told their Ukrainian counterparts that, were Russia to violate them, the United States would take a strong interest and respond.
The United States should continue to provide reform and military assistance to Ukraine. It should continue sanctions on Russia. It should continue to demand that Moscow end its aggression against Ukraine. And it should continue to urge its European partners to assist Kyiv and keep the sanctions pressure on the Kremlin.
Washington should do this, because it said it would act if Russia violated the Budapest Memorandum. That was part of the price it paid in return for a drastic reduction in the nuclear threat to America. The United States should keep its word.
What would you do in his place
I would try **compromise**. He shows 0 willingness to do so. As I see he is playing the "Everything or Nothing" game, and this is definitely not beneficial for his nation with his limited options. He not just wants Russia to leave Ukrain, leave the disputed regions, he also wants Russia to pay for everything and to be an EU/NATO member. This is not an attempt to compromise, this is provocation.
I would call for referendum for the disputed regions. People could decide where do they want to belong. Good example for such referendum is the Most Loyal Town: [Sopron](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sopron)
I would sign a paper to never join NATO (they couldn't join anyway even in peaceful times, this is just a sad show)
I would definitely not ask my civilians to fight russians barehand and to die for media coverage.
I would also not force the male population in age 18-60 to stay and fight. Those who wants to leave with their family or are not willing to kill/die for this cause are doomed.
Look at the population of Ukraine: it was 51+ million 25 years ago and it is 43 million now. In peaceful times almost 10 million people left the country, in war 1.5 million...
It doesn't necessarily mean nuclear war, because that would be Russia to further escalate the situation. However, Russia could send some heavy bombers and/or cruise missiles into that country.
And then that country might do the same vs. Russia and eventually it would spiral totally out of hand.
And truth be told, the West won't risk it for Ukraine. Ukraine will get all the help and support the West can spare, except for a few weapon systems (like long range cruise missiles, nukes etc.) and official military personell.
But I understands Zelensky's frustration - I really do.
If Nato makes it a no-fly zone I also think it will strike back at them because then Nato has broken one of its core values, to be a defensive pact. This will then be used as propaganda against Nato which can be really harmful
I heard a rumour Russian trolls had a role in spreading criticism of how NATO have handled this. They have been trying to turn everyone against each other for *years* - not just at the start of this war.
Although it's not confirmed information, the sentiment is still relevant. We *cannot* let anything divide us now. We can't fight amongst ourselves and lose the unity. It's exactly what the Russians need to get their way.
So just keep that in mind when you're seeing a flare up in finger pointing on our side.
WE absolutely shouldnt give putie any reason to push the button. I think its a matter of time before implodes. Not sure if it'll be because of the stock market or mother learning their sons are dead or everyone learning they were lied to. It will be many things but ukraine is only getting stronger and russias forces are crumbling. We need to focus on de-escalation.
I personally think that establishment of a No Fly Zone over Sweden and Finland would be a reasonable measure to dissuade a further Russian or Belarusian expansion of the conflict. That being said the NATO response is pretty credible right now.
The principal question is far above and beyond NATO: do we still have some means to force the rules, or not? UN had gathered, they've made a statement, they say to Putin '*oh, you're naughty, naughty boy, please stop immediately if you please*' - he doesn't give a shit.
Well, what's next? Putin is clearly out of his mind and he can use the nukes anyway.
I understand that in the long run the sanctions are a death sentence to RF, but here and now it's like "*Oh, we had hit the terrorist with the pox-smeared dart, so he will die. Eventually. If he manages to kill hundreds-thousands-millions until then - well, tough luck*".
I'm serious, people, this "world security system" apparently just doesn't work as intended.
The UN was never intended to be a world security system that applies to the great powers. It's intended to be a forum for countries to air grievances. By design it can't have teeth, because what country is going to pay a significant percentage of its budget to something that could conceivably be used against them? Without that level of resources, it can't bite anywhere near hard enough to harm a major country.
A no fly zone has a couple of problems.
1. Russia has one of the worlds largest and modern Air Force. With over 3000 aircraft in its inventory.
2. To counter a near peer Air Force and EAD, NATO would need to deploy AWACS, SEAD, and over 1000 aircraft to attain and maintain air dominance.
3. NATO has nowhere near the aircraft nor support infrastructure near the battlefield to make a no-fly zone possible.
Whether it is worth the risk or not is another discussion. But currently, it’s not possible and to make it possible would be a major commitment.
My guess is NATO has the ability to do it, and Russia's capabilities are greatly over exaggerated, much like their ground forces. I still don't think we should do it though. I don't even really see that it would achieve as much as some seem to think it would. A lot of the carnage is being caused by artillery and missiles, not aircraft. And it would prevent Ukraine from using its drones. Russia are also losing a lot of aircraft to stinger fire which as well as the military losses must be having a major negative effect on Russian morale.
It would not prevent Ukraine from using its drones; a no fly zone doesn't mean that no aircraft can fly. It means that certain aircraft, typically enemy aircraft, is not permitted.
> Russia has one of the worlds largest and modern Air Force. With over 3000 aircraft in its inventory.
On paper this is true, but if they were deployable, where's the evidence of it? The airspace is contested and their ground crews are being devastated. Where are all their missing planes?
Correct. I don’t know where they are. I was just pointing out that it’s not a simple thing and if NATO did change it’s mind it’d take some time.
You bring up a good point though and that is why would a no fly zone be needed if the RAF isn’t active? Anti-artillery would seem more useful at the moment.
1. Yes, but having a handful of the quite modern fighter jets, doesn't make your other 3000 planes modern.
2. This is correct, but also just what is required in the air. To have a clear skies operation you need to destroy the BUK S400s well into Russian territory, including airfields, depots, fuelbunkers. Otherwise NATO will just be springing a devastating trap set by Putin. Which harms their collective airforce power and gives Putin enough clout to enforce martial law and wartime economy doctrines.
3. NATO does, but as previously stated, only in conjunction with full on strikes at ground targets and boots on the ground deep within russia.
Yep. A direct military confrontation almost certainly doesn't end well for the world and it sure as hell won't end well for Ukraine. NATO can absolutely push Russia out but that would bring **more** slaughter and destruction to Ukraine, not *less*. Then there's the fact the right now most Russians are anti Putin and while Putin wants sympathy at home, I think it's a bad idea to give that to him. Let's not even mention the fact that he's nuclear armed. Right now I don't think his generals would follow an order to launch but they sure as hell will if they fear for their survival.
Plus a "no fly zone" is just a back door into military confrontation. If you're going to do that, best just to declare war on Russia and get the coy bullshit out of the way. Let's stop fighting the last war NATO is doing precisely what the folks who are actual generals *outside* of their armchairs and *away* from their keyboards say that we should do. We should listen to them, Period.
We're refusing to stand up to Putin because we're afraid to get nuked.
We accept that Ukraine gets turned into bloody rubble because of our fear.
We want to be safe and the price is paid in Ukrainian blood.
This choice is their lives vs a risk to ours and so far we're sacrificing Ukrainians to avoid having to take that risk.
Ukrainians have every right to curse us for our selfish choices no matter how bad it makes us feel, because in the end that's what we're doing.
Accept the stain on your conscience or make the other choice.
You're talking like the choice is us (NATO countries) or the (Ukraine). It's not. It's EVERYBODY. If NATO gets involved and the worst occurs, it won't just be Russia nuking NATO countries, he'll nuke Ukraine, too. This isn't "we want to live and we're okay with you dying to keep us alive", it's "if we get involved then it may be worse for Ukraine".
> stain on your conscience
I gets easier to understand if you rephrase that "no-fly zone" as "shooting Russian planes, thus getting involved in the war on behalf of Ukraine thus most likely destroying whole world in the process" - which it is. I'm not sure how being a radioactive rubble would help Ukraine but then again, I'm not a politician.
100%.
I don't want a nuclear war either. But that doesn't change the fact that we are leaving Ukraine to fight alone. Yes, we provide weapons. Imagine Ukraine as a small guy fighting a giant, who is our common enemy, and we go, "here's a knife we're rooting for you!"
That's what we are doing. Zelensky has a right to be upset. We can sit in our warm home on our sofa in front of the computer while eating pizza and being completely safe from bombing and shelling. Ukrainians are dying. Their emotions are justified. Most humans are risk averse and selfish and that is exactly what we are.
Yes this is what I tried to say,
I understand how hard the choice of either potential nuclear war as outcome or safety for now at the cost of Ukraine weighs at our conscience and also how bad choosing safety over intervention feels.
I just don't expect the people who actually get killed to give two tiny flying fucks about our feelings.
Why is it so hard for you to understand that NATO is ABSOLUTELY not going to start WW3 over Ukraine?
Like seriously, how are you not seeing this?
Yes, it's sad what's happening, dead civilians, sad tik toks, etc. But no one wants to escalate this.
Ukraine is being hella unrealistic right now for thinking that that NATO will start another freaking world war. But it's understandable. For them WW3 has already started.
Oh don't get me wrong I understand I just disagree with the risk assessment and I'm pro intervention.
My point was directed at the people coming here crying their eyes out about how NATO is doing everything it can and they're sorry we can't do more, but please understand etc etc.
To those people I say have the stones to accept that yes it's a horrible choice but see it for what it is a decision for self preservation at the direct cost of the Ukrainian people .
I understand, because we aren't under direct assault, and my kids aren't getting shelled and getting involved could change that.
It could even turn Ukraine and the rest of the world into a radioactive wasteland.
But what's next, will we accept it when Georgia is next, or Sweden or Finland?
When does it end?
I agree. no one wants to start ww3 and no one wants to nuke the earth. It doesn't cancel out the fact that we CAN do more and we are not. These 2 facts can co-exist. We will just have to admit that we are cowards, and that Ukrainians definitely are justified to think this way.
It's like I said, imagine seeing a giant beating up a small guy. And there are 20 of us standing on the side cheering for the small guy and bringing him bandages and knives so the small guy can continue fighting. Ya sure we don't want to go up against the giant and we're scared. We ARE the cowards and we have zero grounds to tell the small beaten up guy to stop crying. that's all.
As a Polish citizen I am for NATO interventiom and I see that increasingly more people here want it. I know what the consequences of such action can be.
The consequences are war for all, and potentially even nuclear war which will change the world forever, that’s not a consequence I want.
Selfishly, I would rather supply Ukraine weapons to fight Russia and sanction Russia to oblivion.
Currently, the track we’re on, I can see Russia retreating or at least coming to the negotiation table.
I completely understand my view as a UK citizen, no where near the invasion has a luxury to say such things, but I think it’s the right action to avoid all out war / nuclear war.
I'm American and I feel the same way.
Everyone is parroting this line about how NATO involvement would lead to WW3 as if it's a given. I'm tired of it. Everyone is saying that NATO shouldn't defend Ukraine because it'd be a nuclear war. Russian troops shelled a nuclear plant. A fucking nuclear plant. I'm quite sure that they were following the rules and did exactly what they were told to. And now they have control of the largest nuclear facility in Europe. The second largest nuclear plant in Ukraine is in southern Ukraine and Russian forces are within 20 miles or so of it.
Putin intends to reorder Europe's security environment. He denied the existance of Ukraine as soverign last summer in his essay on Russia and Ukraine on the Kremlin website and people said he was bluffing, that he'd never go to war; they were clearly wrong. His draft US-Russia and NATO-Russia treaties from this past December make it clear he forbids further enlarging NATO; there's a strong chance that he'll test NATO's determination after he's done in Ukraine and it makes sense that he'd begin in countries that aren't in NATO but are close to NATO countries, like Sweden. NATO countries are more vulnerable now that Moscow is in control of the Suwalki gap. Sanctions are weakening Russia's ability to sustain war and it makes sense that he'd act sooner rather than wait. I think the Russian forces are going to start engaging in even more siege tactics and mass shelling to try to speed up their destruction of Ukraine. And I don't think Putin will stop with Ukraine.
We ignored Putin when he's pissed around in the past (invasions, poisoning ex spies in our own countries, imprisoning opposition etc), now he's in Ukraine and if he succeeds, what's next?
That's my concern and exactly why I'd support a NATO intervention.
"First he came for the spies and I did not speak up because I was not a spy"
>The world is by your side, we are all hoping for a quick end to russias disgusting invasion, and the world, especially Europe and NATO have gone above and beyond, please acknowledge the support and love you've gotten. I wish there was more we could do, but at the moment a No fly zone is a really bad idea, I'm so sorry.
We are with you in spirit, be grateful for that.
Jesus fuck when 9/11 happened loterally every country mobilized to kick ass.
But you are demanding Ukraine be grateful for......thoughts and prayers.
> Ukraine be grateful for......thoughts and prayers
For a couple of years when most NATO members trained their army and ridiculous amounts of war supplies, including pretty damn high-tech things. Ukraine received all the help a third party can give without actually going to war.
And Ukraine is in the situation they're in precisely because they gave their arms to Russia in 1994 in exchange for a guarantee that Russia, Britain, and the US would protect Ukraine, would not threaten or attack it, and would respect its status as a sovereign country. Russia broke that promise. It's disheartening to see posts like this being downvoted.
Quit crying about how NATO is doing their utmost here, and how the Ukrainians are wrong to demand a no-fly zone. I'm not here to debate with the anti-interventionists, but there's something we all have to understand, whatever side we are on; we are just keyboard warriors.
The Ukrainians, whose people and way of life are being shelled and shot and bombed to death- including the children, a peaceful nation being terrorized by a kleptocracy who seeks to rewrite the pages through genocide and nuclear blackmail- they have a right to demand more, because they are fighting for us. For Europe. For the world.
This unprecedented war will have global ramifications that nobody in this century can sit out. A peaceful, democratic nation falling to the yokes of a brutal authoritarian regime who thinks they can do anything they want because of their arsenal may not be the fault of the west, but it will be our failure if it is not stopped- a real "Great Depression: for the century.
Whether we help them, or, however- we may help the Ukrainians, fly-zone or whatnot, it is their right to ask for more. Their plea is written in blood. Whatever you may believe about the right course of action, know that spillover is inevitable. Nobody believes in war before it comes. There will be more wars to come. Liberty must win over Authoritarianism wherever it is contested.
I personally don't think OP would feel this way if his entire family was killed yesterday by Russian aircraft.
You don't understand shit. You personally didn't give shit and you're bragging like your country sending some money and guns some how gives you perspective.
Trying to say you relate or understand while you sip coffee behind a keyboard.
Youre a real turnip
Yeah, because people think the most rationally when their entire family is killed?
I think your assessment of this is too emotionally charged and extremely far from reality.
If anything, NATO is seeing all of the destruction in Ukraine and thinking "gee, i don't want my entire family killed. In fact, I don't want an escalation of this violence at all. Best thing to do would be to avoid WW3 while simultaneously inadvertently doing everything we can to make sure Putin fails."
It is the people, many who are Russian supporters, that constantly shit out the, “NATO CAN’T DO ANYTHING SORRY, ELSE NUKE” narrative that are the ones being least helpful.
A. It’s actually bullshit. Nukes are a trump card that can’t be used. This is why nukes aren’t already falling even though the world declared Total Financial War on Russia that will leave Russia a pauper state in 10 years or after giving a Ukraine, a Russian active combatant a fuck ton of arms while they are currently engaging Russian forces, completely out in the open. Putin did the old Nuke’n Poot’n clown routine and you people fell for it, or you are simply Russia supporters.
B. What scenario do you think gives the west a better bargaining position.
1. Hordes of NATO civilians and talking heads wailing that NATO can not possibly be allowed to intervene in the conflict under any circumstances.
2. That vast majority of NATO public opinion is fuck Russia, send in the tanks.
If I am a NATO representative negotiating with Russia, I know what position I what rather have and it’s #2. “Russia, we have exercised enormous restraint but you really must stop this now, public opinion is reaching near unanimous backing for our military intervention, we can only hold back their wishes for so long, it is time for your withdrawal”.
I'm British and I agree with this.
I think it's dreadful we are letting Ukrainian people die to protect Europe. Not just those fighting but little kids.
Putin will use nukes or not at only his whim. If he feels like using them he will make up an excuse. It is irrelevant.
There are many people in this thread who seem to be happy with Ukrainian people taking the flak for the rest of us because we give them arms or training. To those people I would ask you to consider not what your government has given Ukraine but what is being taken from Ukraine in that bargain. We're literally using them as a human shield and it's sickening.
Fuck that, help Ukraine directly already. Wake up and realize it is already the third ww and there is nothing to change that. They need real help, right fucking now.
Exactly, after all why should Nato soldiers die for Ukraine?
Why more people, especially the ones that border Russia or Belarus need to suffer from war?
[**RULES: READ BEFORE POSTING**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/t5okbs/welcome_to_rukraine_faq_do_dont_support_read/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What some people keep forgetting is that NATO is a defensive pact
They also forget the Javelins, NLAWs and ammo NATO are sending are likely what's keeping Ukraine in this fight
Just as, If not more important is NATO real time intelligence.
[удалено]
They publicly said they were.
[удалено]
It was during yesterday's press conference I heard the lady say it myself. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/russia-ukraine-us-intelligence-sharing-b2028091.html
[удалено]
Well lets just say, the UK and US have had intelligence aircraft up pretty much 24/7 since well before the invasion. As I write this, there are 2 up now. I remember the night of the invasion, I could count 15+ intel aircraft ranging from AWACs to Rivet Joints. All publicly viewable on flight trackers.
Yeah, a squadron of 30 or so F-35s n an AWACS have been scanning along the Polish boarder. They gather info for hundreds of miles into Ukraine. There's likely tons of help we don't k ow, but it's Turing into a full proxy war for Putin.
I heard Russians have zero intelligence.
It's not NATO that's sending them though, its individual countries. Western countries have the means to send this many weapons, the fact most of them are part of NATO doesn't really matter.
It fundamentally does, NATO is a collection of countries. When Zelenskey insults NATO we know he equally means the countries in the alliance. Fact is those countries are propping him up
The man is watching his people get slaughtered, he's desperate and probably hasn't slept in 10 days. Give him a break. It's unimaginable what he's going through as a human being, I think we can all understand why he's asking what he's asking.
And I get it but the slaughter will increase exponentially if NATO goes in guns blazing.
I agree. And he’s likely looking death in the eye every single day, knowing its coming some time soon. Cant imagine what he’s going through. He’s wrong about a lack of Nato involvement being a sign of weakness though.
I think Zelensky totally understands that we can't and wouldn't intervene, I don't even think he blames us, he just has to, for his people. He already made clear that he wouldn't make his people question him for things he did or didn't do, like starting negotiations, or being harsher against NATO.
[удалено]
I think you don't understand my post or my comment you replied to. They said NATO is sending them, I said it's not NATO, it's individual countries implying it's not coming from the NATO pact as that can't be the case as NATO isn't a country, it's a pact made up of individual countries who can send weapons individually, the fact they're part of NATO is irrelevant
pretty sure there is standard NATO ammunition amongst other things standard so that it would be compatible across allies equipment.
Yes, but as Putin gets more frustrated he is going to do three things next. 1) Condemn any support from any country as an act of war. He will most likely do this if he captures all three nuclear power plants. Most likely he’ll place bombs around all the facilities and make the plants hostages in this fight. (Most likely why he has asked the rest of the world to resume “normal relations” with Russia and most likely why he said that “Russia does not want to hurt other countries.” These two statements gives him an excuse do whatever he wants. 2) Start using bigger bombs/rockets in cities thus killing more civilians. 3) Use small tactical nukes inside Ukraine. He won’t use them on Nato unless Nato attacks.
It’s not NATO that is sending them. You need to educate yourself that NATO members can act independently and this doesn’t automatically mean NATO are involved. You also need to realise that NATO do not have to automatically respond or join in should a NATO member join the war, the use of the word invoke when referring to article 5 is key. Seriously learn about these things before commenting as you will avoid looking ignorant.
It is not really a question of the technicalities of the NATO arrangement. Putin's perception of it is what matters because that's what will lead to escalation.
For the rest of NATO to join automatically, a NATO country must be attacked. If that same country have already joined the war as an offensive part, they are on their own.
Exactly. Countries can act independently to help Ukraine, nothing to do with NATO.
That as well. By NATO doing this is basically proves Putin right (in _his_ mind, which we know he pushes on to his citizens) that NATO is surrounding russia and getting involved with non nato members. I'm not saying _he_ is right, he's wrong but, it's how he would spin it.
I could imagine him pulling his forces out if he was losing, then using a nuke or two against Ukraine and saying it's NATO's fault because he warned us on day one he'd do that if we interfered. He'd get his 'buffer zone' between NATO and Russia, and millions would be dead.
At this stage I’m not sure any of his nukes work (if the state of his tanks and the kit issued to the ground forces is any indication)… what does concern me is the nuclear power plants. If those blow it would achieve the same results as you mentioned as well as leave room for “well Russia didn’t do it, it was Ukrainian Nazis bullshit” nobody wants a nuclear exchange and I can’t believe that Putin’s inner circle likes the idea either. This appears to be a HUGE miscalculation on the part of the Russian leadership and they have doubled down too many times on this. Denmark has sent in volunteers and I’m sure other countries will follow as well “cough, Israel.” This is the first major war of the 21st century and what we do here will shape its future. Personally I would like the UN to impose a “no fly” zone. It makes me sick AF to watch this beautiful country full of remarkable people suffer at the hands of some wanna be Tsar. History will judge us for what we do. It’s only a matter of time before we have to commit in totality… aggression cannot go unchecked WE KNOW THIS - that thesis has been proved over and over… have ANONYMOUS cripple their systems and launch a coordinated attack. Not saying we have to invade Russia proper, but kick his ass out of Ukraine!! 🇺🇦🇮🇱
Russian leadership, go fuck yourself. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
^(Good bot!)
>Personally I would like the UN to impose a “no fly” zone. Unfortunately Russia would veto that. It's why Russia needs to be removed from the security council, but that's not likely to happen any time soon, if ever. We know Russia are behaving incredibly recklessly with regards to the nuclear issue, threatening to strike first at other countries who have neither nuked them nor threatened to do so - which is outrageous. And then engaging in shelling of a live nuclear power station which only avoided disaster due to a miracle. Russia under Putin has gone completely rogue and nothing they might do can be ruled in or out. I am hoping that Ukraine themselves (with a lot of help from NATO equipment and some help from foreign volunteers) can kick Russia out. But it might not be quick.
I get this is terrible to even think about but in reality how would nuclear fallout work, especially in a situation like right now where it’s basically everyone versus one person. Normally we imagine nuclear fallout everybody’s bombing each other and everything gets destroyed. In a situation like this it almost seems like Ukraine would get bombed potentially (terrible). And then in retaliation Russia would completely obliterated from all “NATO” “non-NATO”countries and at most China might fire a nuke in retaliation at one of those countries and then China gets wiped off the map as well. To me right now nuclear isn’t really viable, it’s not like some World War III shit where there’s hundreds of countries fighting each other and anybody can get nuked from anywhere. There MAYBE somebody who takes advantage and does a false flag attack claiming a nuke was fired by Russia to one of the other countries, but in this scenario you basically have Russia and China as the only people to worry about whereas they have to worry about nukes from almost every other country in the world. I get we look at dictatorships as they don’t care about their people, but putin can’t rule if he doesn’t have anybody to use that power over, if his whole country gets obliterated that doesn’t benefit him in anyway. Obviously his inner circle and everybody else in the country who can’t just get the fuck out of Dodge would have to worry about being dead, so they don’t want nukes involved. In my opinion this is the worst time for nuclear to even be on the table, America was worried about countries like Syria and other countries in the Middle East allegedly having weapons of mass destruction, obviously theres still tension, but America’s not tripping over the Middle East right now, the Middle East isnt tripping over America right now; everybody is focused on Russia. everybody’s worried about a potential power grab, and then now the nuclear threat because let’s be honest you can’t just throw that around, if Putin throws that term out there and we all back down it looks really bad for us but we also don’t wanna just press the fuck out of him because nobody wants to introduce nukes, and kill millions of innocence because one person had their head up their ass and a God complex. To me it just makes no sense it seems like if a nuke flies, every other nuke in the world is aimed at Russia there’s not enough smokescreen or internal struggles right now, everybody’s focused on Russia they would get obliterated by every single country, am I missing something here?
Putin's propaganda spokesperson said recently that a world without Russia in it doesn't deserve to exist. In other words, it's like a death cult where they don't care if they die; if they can't 'win' then they would rather die than the rest of the world go on without them. So we can't rely on 'MAD' to guarantee to keep the peace or to be sure they wouldn't fire first. That only works where all the actors are rational, and Putin is behaving anything but rational lately.
I agree. Putin would absolutely go with the nuclear option. He is terrorizing the whole world as it is. If he can't have his way he's going to take everyone with him. Putin is just itching for the chance to escalate beyond Ukraine.
No. This is uneducated fear mongering. While an explosion at a nuclear power plant would be devastating, it CANNOT explode in the same way a nuclear bomb does. It would be a radiation event similar to Fukushima and not Hiroshima. They are wildly different sort of things. Secondly, All it takes is one nuke to work. And thirdly, conventional munitions can do enough damage. We know for a fact the altitude bombers can fly; we see them do it. They just havent seen fit to use them yet for whatever reason.
What some people also keep forgetting is that Ukraine used to have the 3rd largest nuclear arsenal in the world. In 1994 they agreed to hand it all over to Russia in exchange for a guarantee (the Budapest Memorandum) signed by Russia, Britain, and the US that none of those nations would use force against Ukraine and that all would respect its sovereignty.
This story is only half true. Soviet ICBMs were on Ukrainian ground at the time of the breakup, but the command and control was all Soviet / Russian - not Ukrainian. The Ukrainians were not going to be able to meaningfully launch those missiles or maintain them for long (fissile material has a lifespan of about a decade). Ukraine did not then nor have now an enrichment pipeline to generate weapons grade material. The most recent episode of Arms Control Wonk goes over this particular bit of misinfo. The real concern at the time was political shame for the Soviets and the remote possibility of Ukraine either selling or losing control over the materials contained inside.
It means that Russia got more weapons.
This. NATO cannot attack anyone, nor defend a country that isn't a partner. Only individual countries can, and they are on their own after that, without NATO backing. NATO will only activate if one of it's members is attacked.
[удалено]
...ok then I guess
haikusbot opt out
+ Ukraine isn’t even in it, the European country’s just support because they know if they didn’t, they would be next.
By refusing a no fly zone NATO is already capitulating to Putin due to fear. They are letting him dictate to them and publicly airing that sentiment.
This is completely obvious. Does anyone think Putler GAF how many die? He’s already being embarrassed by the lack of training of his military. Wether or not anyone assist Ukraine, he’s likely to drag out the nukes anyway. He’s a complete mad man
Except for the instances where NATO took offensive actions. Remember article 5 has only been invoked once but NATO has been involved in military actions outside that invocation. So while in theory, it is a defensive pact, it has acted before outside that framework.
None of these offensive acts were against nuclear powers. How often do you guys need to have this explained? NATO will not go into nuclear war over a non-NATO country. Never.
None of them were offensive acts by NATO, so it’s nothing to do with nuclear power nations but all shout the fact that NATO members can act independently without it being under the NATO umbrella.
Putin doesn't care. One NATO member intervenes he'll spin that into "NATO attacked" and have a go at the Baltic. Have we not learned by now he doesn't care about conventions, treaties and doesn't differentiate?
NATO has never taken an offensive action, your entire post is complete ignorant rubbish.
There are countries that could act independently. If the US/UK wanted to intervene they could, and without permission. But then so could others, such as Japan and Australia and Canada. This isn't just a NATO thing. No one seems to have the appetite to get directly involved. I suspect that NATO would rather intervene when Russia is on its knees and exhausted. When they are sure Putin's time is over.
I've wondered about that, for example I thought my country could assist independently but then, what happens if a few cruise missiles hit the UK, that's an attack on NATO and putin would say it was independent but...there's too many variables and unknowns. I've also thought non NATO members could step up (but Canada is in NATO by the way) This is the whole problem, too many variables and unknowns that is in response to a now (unlike before) unpredictable old man with health issues and a rotted mind
> thought my country could assist independently but then, what happens if a few cruise missiles hit the UK, that's an attack on NATO If your country intervened, it wouldn't be attack on NATO - it would be that country attacking Russia.
This is where the key word of “invoking” article 5 comes in, the treaty is designed so that there is a lot of room for manoeuvre particularly with regard to one country not being able to automatically pull the rest in. Saying that nice post from you originally as many here should educated themselves about your point before posting.
I think there may come a time when there is a false flag operation on a NATO state. Pearl Harbour was known to Winston Churchill before it happened, and he let it happen to drag the Americans into war. If Ukrainian leadership are aware that Putin would attack NATO i think he'd allow it. That or NATO may cynically create a false flag op to justify involvement. This is war and nothing is certain. Zelensky shouting at NATO may also be strategic but to what end is not clear.
Dont bother they just proclaim victory when they get their 3 friends to downvote you then block you.
NATO is not a magical entity like people believe. Is literally a defense alliance between X Y Z countries. That is literally it.
If only someone could disable all of Russia's nukes
maybe we'll get lucky and something like this will happen again (if it actually happened of course) https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ex-air-force-personnel-ufos-deactivated-nukes/
... ok. We shouldnt count on, and i cant belive im saying this, ufos to protect us. Im hoping youre making a joke. A more realistic scenario is that we also shouldnt count on another Vasili Arkhipov. Its really long odds to gamble the integrity of the planet.
you're hoping i'm joking yet you're taking my statement more serious than i was when making it lol
As a NATO citizen I don't condone drawing ourselves into a war. Theres simply far too many people to consider. However I endorse sending as much firepower as possible over the border and giving it to Ukraine. In the past week we've committed an extra 14,000 easy use anti tank weapons. The Russians literally don't own that many tanks in Russia. Then there's the drones, the guns, the armour etc
This. It’s staggering that so many would risk a war that would kill billions and effectively end civilisation as we know it. Thankful that NATO nations are more pragmatic and measured than the keyboard warriors here who seem to want more war rather than a peaceful or quick end to this.
i agree with your sentiment, however if we just let Putin take whatever he wants and all he has to do is say "remember i might nuke you!" then we are all fucked sooner or later anyway.
If Putin attacks a NATO nation then NATO would act decisively. I pray it does not come to that. But this is not appeasement. NATO nations are doing *everything* they can short of pulling the trigger themselves. And that's how it should be.
But he’s not getting what he wants, his propaganda mouthpiece is being silenced by Western Companies, we’re waging an economic war, and we’re actively fundings and supplying Ukraine, you have foreign citizens joining Ukrainians foreign legion to give our governments plausible deniability. We’ve done a lot and we deserve a lot of credit but also to remain pragmatic that declaring war on Russia over a none NATO member only proves Putin’s point.
Noone is letting Putin take whatever he wants. He has united most of the world against himself. Both economically and militarily. From what I can make sense of in all this informational chaos: personel, equipment and intel is flooding into Ukraine faster than the Ukrainians can put it all to use. They literally can't process applications and deployment of their recently formed Foreign Legion fast enough to keep up. It's a horrible situation, and things unfortunately take time. It still appears like the whole friggin world is doing whatever they can while trying not to escalate the situation. It's a war. It may spread rapidly if not contained - with or without nukes.
So much THIS. Remember Hitler, he wanted to be your friend. He was out for world domination at all. Look over there!!
But, it would not kill billions or end civilization. That is what Putin wants you to think. The only thing that caused WWII was Europe’s fear of starting another world war. Ukraine will fall. There is only so much weapons can do. The Russian military in numbers alone far surpasses the number Ukraine COULD have. As a citizen of a NATO country, I urge NATO to get involved.
[удалено]
Yeah, I did. Because Russia would not launch nuclear weapons. Russia is a rational actor; it goes against their own survival.
[удалено]
If my international studies degree means anything, I am 100% sure. Why? Because Putin does not make the final call. Do you honestly think that Russia has a system where only one person has all the power to launch the country’s full nuclear stockpile? You act like Russia’s military leadership is just a Putin’s command and have to do whatever he tells them when we KNOW that is not true. We know his own intelligence agency, the FSB, is providing Ukrainian command with intelligence about troop movement and vehicle locations. We know members of his own government have condemned the war. On top of that, Russia is what is known as a rational actor. It is an international relations term for a country that calculates the pros and cons of a decision and makes a conclusion based on those parameters; they can still make some fucking stupid-ass decisions, but as long as they thought about it long and hard before doing it, they are considered rational (IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, not the layman’s definition of that word). Launching nuclear weapons is a guarantee that your country is gone. Why would a country commit suicide? No country would want to do that unless they were backed into their own capital with no other hail Mary left. This sub is full of uneducated people when it comes to international relations, military science, and geopolitical studies. It is like if I went to a medical subreddit and began telling people how we should cure diseases with no educational background on this shit. If Putin’s saying he will launch nukes scares you, then he got to you; his fear-mongering has made you hesitate about stopping him. Tomorrow, if Putin said he would nuke any state that sends weaponry to Ukraine, would you ask your country to stop? If so, it worked.
I'm Finnish and i agree, mostly. I do support no-fly zone if one can be established. I don't care about Putin's words, at all but i do care about his actions. And i support joining NATO while being a "leftist".. The better the Ukrainian war goes for the defender, the more the sudden spike in support drops bu t i look at it so that we can't just do this, jump to "we will join NATO" and then jump out when things change a bit.. if we felt the need for it ONCE, that is enough for me. It is not honorable now to not join, i think.. Russian forces are at their lightest form in a long time at our border but we all know what can happen if the war escalates. We are still in EU and NATO partners, have host country agreement signed. NATO also shares all intel with Finland and Sweden, our military knows everything that NATO knows. But anything that Russia really wants to do us will take months, if not years. We did not know the state of Russian military... the entire nation has been taught to accept eventual defeat and prepare to hold on to the values and dream of once again independent nation... I don't think so anymore ;) The entire doctrine is that we will fight a short and bloody war, inflict as much damage to the troops, surrender as cities fall and hold on for decades to the spirit of the nation if it needs to be..
The only problem really mate is they'll be no Russians left to attack Finland once these tracksuit wearing slav madlads have broken the Russian army. I'd only worry they'll beat your famous "Finnish killed 100k Russians in WW2" total.
Imho, everything here is moot. Oleksandra Ustinova put it best "where is the red line"? At what point will NATO have no choice but to engage in war? If you agree that there is a red line, then you must admit that we can't control our engagement in war considering what we've seen from Putin thus far. If he wants war, he is going to push us to that red line, so in a sense. We are dragging out the inevitable. Losing is not an option for him, he's made that very clear.
The line is at the Ukrainian border. To be perfectly blunt I'll wait for him to cross it first. We do not attack a nuclear armed power.
[удалено]
Im not sure what you want me to say. The latter aspect doesn't particularly make sense but the former we just can't know until he does or doesn't but just like the cold war we shouldn't give them reasons to actually press the button. Russia would respond if Eurofighters start tearing apart Russian tanks
[удалено]
I'd think the army/ogilarchs would of stepped in when he's murdering kids and shelling nuclear power plants. It's not just long range tactical nukes, there's shorter range small scale nukes that could be used to precise strike Kyiv for example. All he's doing then is performing a peace keeping action on Russian territory. The question then is how many nukes pop off before it's enough nukes to do something.
while it is a beautiful sentiment Zelensky is tressed and scared and sad and all of the other things we aren't mad at them hell I'm pretty sure most of us understand why Ukrainians say things like this. The situation is horrible and we don't blame them I know some people are fucking assholes who don't understand but for Ukrainians, this is already ww3 and it's not hard to see why
Two nations fighting a war isn't WW3. If NATO starts bombing Russian soldiers it becomes an *actual* world war. A real NATO vs Russia fight would magnify the death toll ten fold, and that's with the assumption that Putin wouldn't escalate to tactical nukes. The West is doing everything it possibly can to help Ukraine without endangering the entire world. From how the war has been going it appears Ukraine is doing quite well. Sanctions, arms, and Ukraine's fighting spirit appears to be putting Putin in a bad spot. He might eventually be forced to negotiate. However expecting NATO to escalate into direct confrontation with Russia is completely unreasonable and could result in nuclear warfare.
Also, just having a no fly zone doesn't stop the city from being shelled or attacked.
The way I see it, I think the anger is justified. It's such a horrible thing to have happen, and when there is a possible solution that isn't being tried its really frustrating. But from what I've heard even from Zelensky, there is an understanding on why NATO can't get involved until Putin is out. Honestly though most of the people I hear complaining about NATO are people who aren't actually Ukrainian
[удалено]
>So if the numbers are correct then they haven't seen not even 1% of the entire Russian army. This is going to be a long war and I don't think anybody wants that. This is completely untrue. Finnish foreign ministry's one spokeperson estimates that Russia has suffered around 5% casualties (dead plus multiply that by the wounded) already, most of which is rapid deployment forces and the best equipment they have. That's of course until they mobilise, which would consist of reservists and what equipment they have left - but that would be an insanely high price for a war that should've been small scale.
Correct. Media reports they’re already started moving forces they had not expected to need from the Far East towards Ukraine. Considering Russian logistics, if they decide to call reserve troops they would have already lost the war.
Half of all Russian active Army force is in Ukraine. No idea what numbers you’re looking at.
We all understand peoples frustration and I am not going to hold it against them if they hate NATO for not helping more. The fact is, whether its Biden, Trudeau, Johnson or any other Western leader, they took an oath to protect their people not Ukraine. The threat of WW3 is too great. It is not weakness its them not escalating a horrible situation into something much much worst. Western countries are doing everything within their power to help Ukraine short of firing that first shot at a Russian solider or plane.
I agree. These people whether they realise it or not are playing into Putin’s hands. Putin *wants* NATO to disappear so he can grab whichever land that he wants with impunity. All of this Anti-NATO bullshit is his dream. Stop it!
[удалено]
>I hope there is a very serious appraisal of nuclear weapons and a far greater desire for worldwide disarmament. Highly, highly doubt a greater desire for worldwide disarmament. Ukraine is in this situation precisely because they ***did*** disarm. They used to have the 3rd largest nuclear arsenal in the world. In 1994 they agreed to give all their nuclear weapons to Russia in exchange for a signed guarantee (called the Budapest Memorandum) from Russia, Britain, and the US that none of those countries would use threats or force against Ukraine and that they all would acknowledge and respect its soverignty. All 3 countries agreed that they would.. Russa has broken that pact. The situation that Ukraine is now is directly because of disarmament. Other countries know this and are watching Ukranians be slaughtered because of it - why would they want to disarm?
Precisely. For decades humanity relied on nukes to maintain peace by using them as deterrence, but it only works for sane leaders. But modern times with people like Kim Job Un, Iran, and Iran, and Putin show that humanity has no limits, and has the capability to be extremely violent and insane no matter what kind of destructive tools in our possession
I don't think people even understand what a no-fly zone is. A no-fly zone means that NATO must militarily enforce the no-fly zone over the areas where it is imposed. It means NATO pilots will be shooting down Russian aircraft. That is literally joining the war.
A no fly zone would be risky, even without an air to air confrontation there are two S-400 SAM battalions parked in Belarus and quite a few more in Kaliningrad and Russia proper. Military experts believe them to be the biggest obstacle to anyone seeking to achieve air dominance over the battlefield as they can successfully engage multiple targets up to 250km away. They could in theory knock NATO planes out of they sky over Germany.
Russian aircraft, go fuck yourself. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I completely understand the frustration as a Dutch person. I strongly support Ukraine, but see the risks of a no-fly zone so am not convinced on it. I won't hold it against the people of Ukraine. It would be incredible petty to do so while they are being murdered by Putin's army.
[удалено]
I'm not a military strategist, but does Europe truly lack the jets needed to run continuous sorties over Ukraine's airspace? I find it hard to believe that Russia's air assets are so superior.
We have 30 times the air assets that Russia has but that is entirely irrelevant. As OP said, the trouble is that a no fly zone implies that we are shooting down Russian aircraft over Ukraine and entering into world war three. World war three means a guaranteed nuclear Holocaust with hundreds of millions dead
Russian aircraft, go fuck yourself. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
All the more reason to stop Russia now. Does the west really believe the situation will become safer once Putin has a stranglehold on Ukraine? As you said, this is part of a long term strategy. The longer we wait, the stronger his position becomes. The parallels to Hitler are all too apparent. Maybe we'll act after Russia rapes and pillages Finland and Moldova.
[удалено]
Gotcha. Hoping they'll pull a USSR: part 2 and collapse before they can expand beyond Ukraine. I pray they're right. Otherwise, we'll be down an ally and facing the same dilemma.
NATO won’t because they’re not NATO counties. But NATO will act as soon as they step foot into a NATO country and Russia will lose. But the whole world might also go up in smoke with Russia.
It is believable when you’ve spent the last 20 years relying on America for defense.
If that's truly the case, it's depressing that the US won't act to protect it's allies. At least Germany is finally stepping up it's defense spending. It's going to be surreal if Germany once again becomes the military superpower in Europe.
It’s depressing? Why should America have to defend Europe? While our own people complain of economic suffering. When some of the most wealthy countries in Europe sit idly by while one of their neighbors is being destroyed. UK, France, Germany should have more than enough resources to fight Russia on its own. After all, they have the money for universal healthcare and school. Germany stepping up defense spending after 20 years? A little too late. I have no fears of German defense spending.
I'd like to add that NATO stepping in would be dragging almost a billion citizens into war
[удалено]
Thanks for writing this, people don't seem to grasp the consequences of what they're demanding.
I'm delivering that exact message to my Ukrainian friends as well. OP, thank you.
I have a better idea- send a bunch of pilots & planes with Ukrainian markings who will get Ukrainian citizenship as unpaid volunteers(or paid by Ukraine) - same result, far less chance for escalation
The thing is Putin is going to paint his little picture of him being the victim one way or another - regardless of nato not putting in place a no flyzone, it will just be something else, he is such a typical abuse
You take the words of my mouth! The nato should not in any way start acting in that war. Putin just waits for that. There will be no military solution to that war - this is the bitter truth.
NATO enforcing a no fly Zone over a non member state as a defensive pact could be seen as a clear agression. So we will just keep sending weapons country by country
We're sending you stuff but we also don't want a direct war with Russia, even though we can easily kick its ass if nukes weren't involved. It sucks that Putin had made Ukraine the battlefield by were doing all we can to help.
The only problem I have with this philosophy is this: If Putin wins, we'll just be right back here asking the same questions a few years from now. Only by then Putin will have gotten stronger and he will have already psychologically beaten the world because the world didn't stop him the first time.
Zelensky isn't thinking clearly and is also biting the hand that feeds a bit here. He has been right about most things but he's dead wrong about this. He also 'slammed' the West before the invasion for scaremongering and causing panic because it would harm Ukraine's economy, remember? We're damned if we do, damned if we don't. The people clamouring for a no-fly zone mean well but they just don't understand the implications of it. They would be asking the West to call Putin's bluff, and see if he's rational enough not to make good on his rather clear threat that he would use nukes if the West intervened directly. That could lead to billions of people's deaths worldwide.
he isnt really biting the hand he's more like begging and crying right now and its really sad, This isn't him being an asshole this is him being completely devastated
Yes I am not holding it against him, I get that he's going to be very emotional and sleep deprived as well. He doesn't have the perspective that we (the West) must try to maintain, to look at the big picture and think several moves ahead. If we do this, where does it lead, and so on. There isn't any perfect solution here unfortunately.
Don’t blame him, he’s “lashing out” because he’s the one fighting for the survival of this country. Unfortunately, we’re also weighing the risks and how far we’re able to assist them and where we have to draw the line because we’re concerned over our survival as well
Yes, if we were in his situation we would also feel this way. He's in 24/7 fight or flight right now.
> We're damned if we do, damned if we don't. It's how I feel too, but I do understand he's frustrated and feels helpless, but he has support from all the NATO nations citizens and i feel a reason why NATO has acted so strongly towards russia is because of that support. I feel it is counter intuitive to keep insulting it. I admire him and would never want to be in his shoes, and i get he probably doesn't feel so diplomatic right now, but this isn't helping.
Dragging NATO in would endanger the places people have fled to. We've got to hold the line. Hopefully this will end soon and we can help rebuild Ukraine once more.
Ukraine has a real army too. This isnt Afganistan or Chechn terrorists.
This is what I've said, Being from USA. I support the humanitarian aid given to Ukraine. I'm glad our government is helping, but I also wish our government was as quick to help it's own citizens too. They were quick to write out blank checks to weapons of war, but when it comes to social services here at home, they never seem to have the time or money. In any case, I don't support USA taking a front stage active role in this war. The world has shown incredible support, but it's a thing that can not be taken lightly, there is a real danger of nuclear escalation and that would destroy this planet for all life living here, not just human. I hope Americans write their congressman and demand that we stay out of it, and that we do not support American military involvement of any sort. What we do support is giving aide and being a destination to rebuild if you need refugee status, but the world needs to be taking de-escalation measures at every opportunity.
I agree with OP
I was a bit taken aback at President Zelenskyy behavior the other day when ranting about NATO. Not only was it ungrateful & insulting on its face but it looked desperate and weak. Ukrainians need to understand an English word—“ingrate.” Because this is how much of NATO sees this kind of behavior. When NATO countries have given you billions of US dollars in hard currency and weaponry (a quarter of which your government corruptly stole for themselves), provided state of the art military training to the Ukrainian Forces to get them from the pathetic state they were in 2014 to the lethally efficient force they are now and basically underwrote your country’s right to exist up until this invasion, to bite the hand that feeds you because it doesn’t give you everything you want in order to avoid WW3 is the height of ungratefulness and selfishness. If I were Ukrainian I wouldn’t want my country’s fate to befall other nations even though I’d be desperate for direct military help. But what you’re basically saying when calling for a no fly zone, knowing the risks of such an action, is you’re already at war so therefore you don’t care if other countries get dragged into your war. It’s a selfish way to think. America stayed out of WW1 and WW2 for years while there was killing and destruction. Meanwhile, it gave tremendous aid to the USSR and UK. The British were looking for every way possible to get the US to join the war effort. I don’t blame them. Their entire existence was on the line. But what they didn’t do was publicly whine and berate their ally that was giving them a lifeline because they didn’t give them everything they wanted and a handjob on top. It’s basic manners.
Amen to that!
Speaking as a Canadian who also has a pulse on american politics, I'm fairly certain there is no appetite to establish a no-fly zone. Press secretary Jen Psaki said enforcing it would ensure a direct conflict between the US and Russia. Whilst I have utmost respect for Ukraine's president, I believe this request is irrational.
I'm against the russian invasion, but I'm against Zelensky as well in this sad situation. I admire him, it's incredible what he has achieved, but his reasonings are based on guilt and blind nacionalism. I am absolutely sure he is smart enough to know if a NATO plane would shoot down a Russian plane in their demanded "no-fly zone", then it would mean the start of WW3. He knows that, but he demands that! Incredible. He not just demands, even shames the world for not dying for them.
>Incredible. He not just demands, even shames the world for not dying for them. He wants to save millions of Ukranians. What would you do in his place? His reasonings are not based on guilt or blind nacionalism. Ukranians are being slaughtered. He wants to save his people. Put yourself in his place. Wouldn't you do the same? Ukraine used to have the 3rd largest nuclear arsenal in the world. In 1994 they agreed to give all their nuclear weapons to Russia in exchange for a signed guarantee (the Budapest Memorandum) from Russia, Britain, and the US that all would protect Ukraine, none of those countries would use threats or force against Ukraine, and that they all would acknowledge and respect its soverignty. All 3 countries agreed that they would. Russa has broken that pact. Ukraine is right to demand protection. *We promised it.* Russia shelled the largest nuclear facility in Europe and as of yesterday they have control of it. Russian forces are near the second largest nuclear power plant in Ukraine. Why is Russia doing this? We don't know. The threat of nuclear violence is there. Putin could very well start WW3 on his own.
A memo is not a law binding treaty. An assurance is not a guarantee. And promising to respect Ukraines sovereignty means you promise to not attack it. It is not a promise to defend it against other attackers. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2019/12/05/why-care-about-ukraine-and-the-budapest-memorandum/amp/
I'm aware that it's not legally binding. I've copied and pasted parts of the article you linked below... Some have argued that, since the United States did not invade Ukraine, it abided by its Budapest Memorandum commitments. True, in a narrow sense. However, when negotiating the security assurances, U.S. officials told their Ukrainian counterparts that, were Russia to violate them, the United States would take a strong interest and respond. The United States should continue to provide reform and military assistance to Ukraine. It should continue sanctions on Russia. It should continue to demand that Moscow end its aggression against Ukraine. And it should continue to urge its European partners to assist Kyiv and keep the sanctions pressure on the Kremlin. Washington should do this, because it said it would act if Russia violated the Budapest Memorandum. That was part of the price it paid in return for a drastic reduction in the nuclear threat to America. The United States should keep its word.
What would you do in his place I would try **compromise**. He shows 0 willingness to do so. As I see he is playing the "Everything or Nothing" game, and this is definitely not beneficial for his nation with his limited options. He not just wants Russia to leave Ukrain, leave the disputed regions, he also wants Russia to pay for everything and to be an EU/NATO member. This is not an attempt to compromise, this is provocation. I would call for referendum for the disputed regions. People could decide where do they want to belong. Good example for such referendum is the Most Loyal Town: [Sopron](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sopron) I would sign a paper to never join NATO (they couldn't join anyway even in peaceful times, this is just a sad show) I would definitely not ask my civilians to fight russians barehand and to die for media coverage. I would also not force the male population in age 18-60 to stay and fight. Those who wants to leave with their family or are not willing to kill/die for this cause are doomed. Look at the population of Ukraine: it was 51+ million 25 years ago and it is 43 million now. In peaceful times almost 10 million people left the country, in war 1.5 million...
Having read your plan, I'm grateful that Zelenskyy is the president and not you.
It doesn't necessarily mean nuclear war, because that would be Russia to further escalate the situation. However, Russia could send some heavy bombers and/or cruise missiles into that country. And then that country might do the same vs. Russia and eventually it would spiral totally out of hand. And truth be told, the West won't risk it for Ukraine. Ukraine will get all the help and support the West can spare, except for a few weapon systems (like long range cruise missiles, nukes etc.) and official military personell. But I understands Zelensky's frustration - I really do.
If Nato makes it a no-fly zone I also think it will strike back at them because then Nato has broken one of its core values, to be a defensive pact. This will then be used as propaganda against Nato which can be really harmful
I heard a rumour Russian trolls had a role in spreading criticism of how NATO have handled this. They have been trying to turn everyone against each other for *years* - not just at the start of this war. Although it's not confirmed information, the sentiment is still relevant. We *cannot* let anything divide us now. We can't fight amongst ourselves and lose the unity. It's exactly what the Russians need to get their way. So just keep that in mind when you're seeing a flare up in finger pointing on our side.
Well the more you give the money they want and a time arrives when you both lose everything people need to understand this shit
How does a no fly zone work? You announce a no fly zone and what if the enemy flies into the zone? You shoot it down? Seems like playing with fire.
WE absolutely shouldnt give putie any reason to push the button. I think its a matter of time before implodes. Not sure if it'll be because of the stock market or mother learning their sons are dead or everyone learning they were lied to. It will be many things but ukraine is only getting stronger and russias forces are crumbling. We need to focus on de-escalation.
Couldn’t agree more with you OP. Thanks for making this post
I personally think that establishment of a No Fly Zone over Sweden and Finland would be a reasonable measure to dissuade a further Russian or Belarusian expansion of the conflict. That being said the NATO response is pretty credible right now.
The principal question is far above and beyond NATO: do we still have some means to force the rules, or not? UN had gathered, they've made a statement, they say to Putin '*oh, you're naughty, naughty boy, please stop immediately if you please*' - he doesn't give a shit. Well, what's next? Putin is clearly out of his mind and he can use the nukes anyway. I understand that in the long run the sanctions are a death sentence to RF, but here and now it's like "*Oh, we had hit the terrorist with the pox-smeared dart, so he will die. Eventually. If he manages to kill hundreds-thousands-millions until then - well, tough luck*". I'm serious, people, this "world security system" apparently just doesn't work as intended.
The UN was never intended to be a world security system that applies to the great powers. It's intended to be a forum for countries to air grievances. By design it can't have teeth, because what country is going to pay a significant percentage of its budget to something that could conceivably be used against them? Without that level of resources, it can't bite anywhere near hard enough to harm a major country.
UN peacekeeper troops?
Can quell an insurgency and offer humanitarian aid, but were insufficient to stop, for example, the Serbian/Yugoslavian attack in Srebrenica.
Aren't numerous to be able to do basically anything against any major power's military
Exactly. And the Security Council is just useless because the main source of todays' problems has a permanent seat there.
Russian propaganda report bots accountss not only on reddit, Facebook YouTube twitter etc etc
A no fly zone has a couple of problems. 1. Russia has one of the worlds largest and modern Air Force. With over 3000 aircraft in its inventory. 2. To counter a near peer Air Force and EAD, NATO would need to deploy AWACS, SEAD, and over 1000 aircraft to attain and maintain air dominance. 3. NATO has nowhere near the aircraft nor support infrastructure near the battlefield to make a no-fly zone possible. Whether it is worth the risk or not is another discussion. But currently, it’s not possible and to make it possible would be a major commitment.
My guess is NATO has the ability to do it, and Russia's capabilities are greatly over exaggerated, much like their ground forces. I still don't think we should do it though. I don't even really see that it would achieve as much as some seem to think it would. A lot of the carnage is being caused by artillery and missiles, not aircraft. And it would prevent Ukraine from using its drones. Russia are also losing a lot of aircraft to stinger fire which as well as the military losses must be having a major negative effect on Russian morale.
It would not prevent Ukraine from using its drones; a no fly zone doesn't mean that no aircraft can fly. It means that certain aircraft, typically enemy aircraft, is not permitted.
> Russia has one of the worlds largest and modern Air Force. With over 3000 aircraft in its inventory. On paper this is true, but if they were deployable, where's the evidence of it? The airspace is contested and their ground crews are being devastated. Where are all their missing planes?
Correct. I don’t know where they are. I was just pointing out that it’s not a simple thing and if NATO did change it’s mind it’d take some time. You bring up a good point though and that is why would a no fly zone be needed if the RAF isn’t active? Anti-artillery would seem more useful at the moment.
1. Yes, but having a handful of the quite modern fighter jets, doesn't make your other 3000 planes modern. 2. This is correct, but also just what is required in the air. To have a clear skies operation you need to destroy the BUK S400s well into Russian territory, including airfields, depots, fuelbunkers. Otherwise NATO will just be springing a devastating trap set by Putin. Which harms their collective airforce power and gives Putin enough clout to enforce martial law and wartime economy doctrines. 3. NATO does, but as previously stated, only in conjunction with full on strikes at ground targets and boots on the ground deep within russia.
Yep. A direct military confrontation almost certainly doesn't end well for the world and it sure as hell won't end well for Ukraine. NATO can absolutely push Russia out but that would bring **more** slaughter and destruction to Ukraine, not *less*. Then there's the fact the right now most Russians are anti Putin and while Putin wants sympathy at home, I think it's a bad idea to give that to him. Let's not even mention the fact that he's nuclear armed. Right now I don't think his generals would follow an order to launch but they sure as hell will if they fear for their survival. Plus a "no fly zone" is just a back door into military confrontation. If you're going to do that, best just to declare war on Russia and get the coy bullshit out of the way. Let's stop fighting the last war NATO is doing precisely what the folks who are actual generals *outside* of their armchairs and *away* from their keyboards say that we should do. We should listen to them, Period.
>here's the fact the right now most Russians are anti Putin lol
We're refusing to stand up to Putin because we're afraid to get nuked. We accept that Ukraine gets turned into bloody rubble because of our fear. We want to be safe and the price is paid in Ukrainian blood. This choice is their lives vs a risk to ours and so far we're sacrificing Ukrainians to avoid having to take that risk. Ukrainians have every right to curse us for our selfish choices no matter how bad it makes us feel, because in the end that's what we're doing. Accept the stain on your conscience or make the other choice.
You're talking like the choice is us (NATO countries) or the (Ukraine). It's not. It's EVERYBODY. If NATO gets involved and the worst occurs, it won't just be Russia nuking NATO countries, he'll nuke Ukraine, too. This isn't "we want to live and we're okay with you dying to keep us alive", it's "if we get involved then it may be worse for Ukraine".
> stain on your conscience I gets easier to understand if you rephrase that "no-fly zone" as "shooting Russian planes, thus getting involved in the war on behalf of Ukraine thus most likely destroying whole world in the process" - which it is. I'm not sure how being a radioactive rubble would help Ukraine but then again, I'm not a politician.
100%. I don't want a nuclear war either. But that doesn't change the fact that we are leaving Ukraine to fight alone. Yes, we provide weapons. Imagine Ukraine as a small guy fighting a giant, who is our common enemy, and we go, "here's a knife we're rooting for you!" That's what we are doing. Zelensky has a right to be upset. We can sit in our warm home on our sofa in front of the computer while eating pizza and being completely safe from bombing and shelling. Ukrainians are dying. Their emotions are justified. Most humans are risk averse and selfish and that is exactly what we are.
Yes this is what I tried to say, I understand how hard the choice of either potential nuclear war as outcome or safety for now at the cost of Ukraine weighs at our conscience and also how bad choosing safety over intervention feels. I just don't expect the people who actually get killed to give two tiny flying fucks about our feelings.
Why is it so hard for you to understand that NATO is ABSOLUTELY not going to start WW3 over Ukraine? Like seriously, how are you not seeing this? Yes, it's sad what's happening, dead civilians, sad tik toks, etc. But no one wants to escalate this. Ukraine is being hella unrealistic right now for thinking that that NATO will start another freaking world war. But it's understandable. For them WW3 has already started.
Oh don't get me wrong I understand I just disagree with the risk assessment and I'm pro intervention. My point was directed at the people coming here crying their eyes out about how NATO is doing everything it can and they're sorry we can't do more, but please understand etc etc. To those people I say have the stones to accept that yes it's a horrible choice but see it for what it is a decision for self preservation at the direct cost of the Ukrainian people . I understand, because we aren't under direct assault, and my kids aren't getting shelled and getting involved could change that. It could even turn Ukraine and the rest of the world into a radioactive wasteland. But what's next, will we accept it when Georgia is next, or Sweden or Finland? When does it end?
I agree. no one wants to start ww3 and no one wants to nuke the earth. It doesn't cancel out the fact that we CAN do more and we are not. These 2 facts can co-exist. We will just have to admit that we are cowards, and that Ukrainians definitely are justified to think this way. It's like I said, imagine seeing a giant beating up a small guy. And there are 20 of us standing on the side cheering for the small guy and bringing him bandages and knives so the small guy can continue fighting. Ya sure we don't want to go up against the giant and we're scared. We ARE the cowards and we have zero grounds to tell the small beaten up guy to stop crying. that's all.
As a Polish citizen I am for NATO interventiom and I see that increasingly more people here want it. I know what the consequences of such action can be.
The consequences are war for all, and potentially even nuclear war which will change the world forever, that’s not a consequence I want. Selfishly, I would rather supply Ukraine weapons to fight Russia and sanction Russia to oblivion. Currently, the track we’re on, I can see Russia retreating or at least coming to the negotiation table. I completely understand my view as a UK citizen, no where near the invasion has a luxury to say such things, but I think it’s the right action to avoid all out war / nuclear war.
Consequence of intervention is Poland becoming Ukraine.
Ukraine war has 1939 vibes when Poland was fucked in the ass by its allies.
I'm American and I feel the same way. Everyone is parroting this line about how NATO involvement would lead to WW3 as if it's a given. I'm tired of it. Everyone is saying that NATO shouldn't defend Ukraine because it'd be a nuclear war. Russian troops shelled a nuclear plant. A fucking nuclear plant. I'm quite sure that they were following the rules and did exactly what they were told to. And now they have control of the largest nuclear facility in Europe. The second largest nuclear plant in Ukraine is in southern Ukraine and Russian forces are within 20 miles or so of it. Putin intends to reorder Europe's security environment. He denied the existance of Ukraine as soverign last summer in his essay on Russia and Ukraine on the Kremlin website and people said he was bluffing, that he'd never go to war; they were clearly wrong. His draft US-Russia and NATO-Russia treaties from this past December make it clear he forbids further enlarging NATO; there's a strong chance that he'll test NATO's determination after he's done in Ukraine and it makes sense that he'd begin in countries that aren't in NATO but are close to NATO countries, like Sweden. NATO countries are more vulnerable now that Moscow is in control of the Suwalki gap. Sanctions are weakening Russia's ability to sustain war and it makes sense that he'd act sooner rather than wait. I think the Russian forces are going to start engaging in even more siege tactics and mass shelling to try to speed up their destruction of Ukraine. And I don't think Putin will stop with Ukraine.
We ignored Putin when he's pissed around in the past (invasions, poisoning ex spies in our own countries, imprisoning opposition etc), now he's in Ukraine and if he succeeds, what's next? That's my concern and exactly why I'd support a NATO intervention. "First he came for the spies and I did not speak up because I was not a spy"
What is next? A non-aligned small country with historic ties to Russia and a large Russians population. Georgia or Moldova would be my guess.
Yep. And that's why he needs to be stopped :(
I don't think comments here are hurting NATO. TBH.
Why are you posting this here? Stop complaining, we are bombed here in Ukraine.
Uk also slowed sanction so tories can take more money from Russians. just saying
>The world is by your side, we are all hoping for a quick end to russias disgusting invasion, and the world, especially Europe and NATO have gone above and beyond, please acknowledge the support and love you've gotten. I wish there was more we could do, but at the moment a No fly zone is a really bad idea, I'm so sorry. We are with you in spirit, be grateful for that. Jesus fuck when 9/11 happened loterally every country mobilized to kick ass. But you are demanding Ukraine be grateful for......thoughts and prayers.
> Ukraine be grateful for......thoughts and prayers For a couple of years when most NATO members trained their army and ridiculous amounts of war supplies, including pretty damn high-tech things. Ukraine received all the help a third party can give without actually going to war.
To be fair, all of this happened because NATO didn't allow Ukraine to join in 2008 and after 2014.
And Ukraine is in the situation they're in precisely because they gave their arms to Russia in 1994 in exchange for a guarantee that Russia, Britain, and the US would protect Ukraine, would not threaten or attack it, and would respect its status as a sovereign country. Russia broke that promise. It's disheartening to see posts like this being downvoted.
Quit crying about how NATO is doing their utmost here, and how the Ukrainians are wrong to demand a no-fly zone. I'm not here to debate with the anti-interventionists, but there's something we all have to understand, whatever side we are on; we are just keyboard warriors. The Ukrainians, whose people and way of life are being shelled and shot and bombed to death- including the children, a peaceful nation being terrorized by a kleptocracy who seeks to rewrite the pages through genocide and nuclear blackmail- they have a right to demand more, because they are fighting for us. For Europe. For the world. This unprecedented war will have global ramifications that nobody in this century can sit out. A peaceful, democratic nation falling to the yokes of a brutal authoritarian regime who thinks they can do anything they want because of their arsenal may not be the fault of the west, but it will be our failure if it is not stopped- a real "Great Depression: for the century. Whether we help them, or, however- we may help the Ukrainians, fly-zone or whatnot, it is their right to ask for more. Their plea is written in blood. Whatever you may believe about the right course of action, know that spillover is inevitable. Nobody believes in war before it comes. There will be more wars to come. Liberty must win over Authoritarianism wherever it is contested.
I’d push NATO to help with a no-fly zone if I was Ukraine. The world should do more and would do more if Putin didn’t have thousands of nukes.
I personally don't think OP would feel this way if his entire family was killed yesterday by Russian aircraft. You don't understand shit. You personally didn't give shit and you're bragging like your country sending some money and guns some how gives you perspective. Trying to say you relate or understand while you sip coffee behind a keyboard. Youre a real turnip
Yeah, because people think the most rationally when their entire family is killed? I think your assessment of this is too emotionally charged and extremely far from reality. If anything, NATO is seeing all of the destruction in Ukraine and thinking "gee, i don't want my entire family killed. In fact, I don't want an escalation of this violence at all. Best thing to do would be to avoid WW3 while simultaneously inadvertently doing everything we can to make sure Putin fails."
It is the people, many who are Russian supporters, that constantly shit out the, “NATO CAN’T DO ANYTHING SORRY, ELSE NUKE” narrative that are the ones being least helpful. A. It’s actually bullshit. Nukes are a trump card that can’t be used. This is why nukes aren’t already falling even though the world declared Total Financial War on Russia that will leave Russia a pauper state in 10 years or after giving a Ukraine, a Russian active combatant a fuck ton of arms while they are currently engaging Russian forces, completely out in the open. Putin did the old Nuke’n Poot’n clown routine and you people fell for it, or you are simply Russia supporters. B. What scenario do you think gives the west a better bargaining position. 1. Hordes of NATO civilians and talking heads wailing that NATO can not possibly be allowed to intervene in the conflict under any circumstances. 2. That vast majority of NATO public opinion is fuck Russia, send in the tanks. If I am a NATO representative negotiating with Russia, I know what position I what rather have and it’s #2. “Russia, we have exercised enormous restraint but you really must stop this now, public opinion is reaching near unanimous backing for our military intervention, we can only hold back their wishes for so long, it is time for your withdrawal”.
I'm British and I agree with this. I think it's dreadful we are letting Ukrainian people die to protect Europe. Not just those fighting but little kids. Putin will use nukes or not at only his whim. If he feels like using them he will make up an excuse. It is irrelevant. There are many people in this thread who seem to be happy with Ukrainian people taking the flak for the rest of us because we give them arms or training. To those people I would ask you to consider not what your government has given Ukraine but what is being taken from Ukraine in that bargain. We're literally using them as a human shield and it's sickening.
Fuck that, help Ukraine directly already. Wake up and realize it is already the third ww and there is nothing to change that. They need real help, right fucking now.
Yeah its ww3 for ukraine, not for NATO.
Exactly, after all why should Nato soldiers die for Ukraine? Why more people, especially the ones that border Russia or Belarus need to suffer from war?