Electric Kool-Aid ‘No Fly’ Test

It seems this issue needs to be written about yet again.

Daily we are scolded for not imposing a ‘no-fly zone’ over Ukraine by the president of Ukraine, pundits, interviewees, some Americans as well as some of our Congresspeople….daily these people are calling for all out war with Russia.

I understand their urgency but a bigger picture needs to be seen as well…..Ukraine could become the Serbia of the 21st century.

I have given my opinion and explanation of the ‘no-fly zone’ here on IST……

 
But since no one wants to heed the warnings of the dangers of this situation let me try one more time…..
 
In an article written by Paul W. Singer for defenseone.com……

Many are calling for a “no-fly zone” over Ukraine. Few appear to be grappling with the details required to make it an actual policy proposal. If you’re proposing an NFZ, here are some of the questions you need to answer first:

1. What are the historic cases of NFZ success that you seek to emulate? 

2. How will your proposal work differently from the failed versions (Iraq, Bosnia, Libya), which didn’t alleviate most of the civilian harm, nor end the fighting, and ultimately led to participation in the ground war itself?

3. What organization will operate your NFZ? If the UN, how will you get past the certain Russian and Chinese veto? If NATO—whose current unity is a clear Russian target—how to handle the alliance division that it would spark, and likely non-unanimity in approving and then implementing it? 

4. Does your proposal call for shooting down aircraft, but not suppressing the ground-based Russian radar, surface-to-air missiles, electronic warfare, and command-and-control units and systems that would endanger the aviators who are enforcing it? If you do propose to attack these Russian targets, what do you expect to happen next? 

5. What are the zone’s rules of engagement and geographic area? (Note: Simply adding a creative adjective like non-kinetic or limited does not answer this.)

6. How will the NFZ handle Russian aircraft that enter the zone? Shoot first to prevent civilian harm? Or wait for the bombs or missiles to drop, and then respond after the fact? 

7. How will the NFZ handle the likely edge cases and deliberate provocations, such as our jets being lit up with targeting radar, making them potentially dead in seconds if they don’t fire first?

8. Most of the Russian aircraft that are striking Ukrainian targets launch their weapons from inside Russian or Belarusan airspace. Will you shoot down those too, or let them operate freely, as long as they fire from just across the border? A similar question applies if your plan includes suppression of Russian air defenses, which can strike at aircraft across the border?

9. The vast, vast, vast majority of Russian military activities that cause civilian harm are not air strikes but missiles, artillery, and especially MLRS rockets. Will your NFZ fly over all that activity with no action? How will you answer the inevitable criticisms about watching civilians die from overhead? If you do attack the overall Russian ground force, what do you expect to happen next? 

10. In all past NFZ cases, only one side had airpower. But the Ukrainians still have an operative air force. Notably, its drones are striking Russian forces to valuable effect in the very same areas of the proposed NFZ. As well, Ukrainian civilians are flying hundreds of their own drones to provide reconnaissance to the military, spotting for Russian troops and targets. Will your zone also ban these official and unofficial Ukrainian forces? If so, will you shoot them down if the Ukrainians fly them to defend their cities? If not, will you run escort missions when Russians target them? 

I want to aid Ukraine too, but to do so we need policy options that are both implementable and of actual military and political utility. These include rushing resupplies of ammunition, equipment, and all the other supplies in their logistics system that are already running low; more antitank weapons and SAMs, especially of longer-range types that Ukrainian forces are already trained to use; donating easily transferable and deployable counter-UAS systems as Russia increases its use of drones for ISR and strikes; and holding NATO exercises on Russia’s other borders to tie down its forces outside of Ukraine and thus divert potential reinforcements to the invasion. 

What doesn’t help embattled Ukraine are bumper-sticker proposals and op-eds that may sound tough but simply wave “jazz hands” over all the actual elements needed to make them real.

(defenseone.com)

Time for people to understand what this issue will lead to in the very near future…..do they want to try and start WW3?

It is only those two things that have prevented this conflict from becoming a repeat of World Wars I and II, when mutual assistance treaties among countries in Europe (like NATO’s Article 5 today), and the lack of an existential reality of global destruction, led to attacks against one country leading inexorably to a world-wide conflagration.

If the US or NATO Put Fighters in the Air Over Ukraine We’d Have World War

A report has come out about the ‘airstrikes’ carried out by Russian planes…..

An unnamed US official told Defense One that most Russian warplanes firing on Ukraine are doing so from inside Russian airspace. The official claims that Russia is flying about 200 sorties a day and is mostly launching long-range missiles from its airspace.

If this report is true then the ‘no-fly zone’ is a moot point…..the zone will  not stop Russia from sorties in their own airspace.

I’m not saying you’d learn *more* about what’s going on in Ukraine by turning off all cable news, but your knowledge deficit would be much lower.

Stop drinking the stupid kool-aid…..

Turn The Page!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

8 thoughts on “Electric Kool-Aid ‘No Fly’ Test

  1. I’m thinking it’s less about the “should we or shouldn’t we” regarding a no-fly zone.. but far more about what the “next step” should be because before this is over “we” WILL be deciding what the “next step” is going to be. The pressure is building just from watching images on our big screens in front of our Barkaloungers in the comfort and safety of our own homes. If chemicals get used and the TV shows gasping mothers and babies in the streets… we are way past no-fly zones. It’s totally emotional, and subsequently impulsive (remember our national desire to identify the culprits of 9/11 and go kill something, or invade someplace for revenge?)
    In an earlier reply I mentioned that Russians killed in this military fiasco so far is somewhere between 3,000 and 6,000…. in two weeks. That’s more than our loses in Afghanistan after 20 years. Russia cannot sustain those losses indefinitely. At the moment they are trying to encircle Kyiv with an eye to besiege and pummel it into submission. That zone of encirclement and the city proper is 350 square miles. That will be the greatest siege warfare in history…. greater than WW2 Stalingrad, and Battle of Berlin. The tough decision yet to come will not be a no-fly zone.

    1. I agree….so stop even thinking about the notion…..and if chem are used it will be an endless loop…..this is far from over and a heavy price will be paid by all. chuq

      1. I have a stainless steel bowl here that I can adapt to protect the family jewels… the sad part is that there’s some doubt that the family jewels need that much protection from anything anymore. It’s a bitch getting old.

  2. Very few Russian planes have been seen over cities, and as you say, most damage is being done by missiles fired from behind current Russian battle lines. Ukraine is understandably ramping up the news of ‘airstrikes’ to try to get NATO to fully commit to an all-out war against Russia. For the sake of a wider peace as things stand, we cannot allow ourselves to be dragged into this conflict unless they attack or invade a country within the NATO alliance.
    Best wishes, Pete.

  3. Reblogged this on Ned Hamson's Second Line View of the News and commented:
    “…An unnamed US official told Defense One that most Russian warplanes firing on Ukraine are doing so from inside Russian airspace. The official claims that Russia is flying about 200 sorties a day and is mostly launching long-range missiles from its airspace.

    If this report is true then the ‘no-fly zone’ is a moot point…..the zone will not stop Russia from sorties in their own airspace.

    I’m not saying you’d learn *more* about what’s going on in Ukraine by turning off all cable news, but your knowledge deficit would be much lower.

    Stop drinking the stupid kool-aid…..”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.