Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "" video.

Pretty sure it was enforced in Serbia, where SAM coverage was never truly degraded by destruction, just suppressed.
14
@woosix1 Civilian bombardments are being acomplished by shelling and rocket artillery, so enforcing a no fly zone would not impact that activity.
11
@Veldtian1 OP made it seem like it's impossible to enforce a NFZ in an area with competent SAM systems. You can. It's a No Fly Zone, all you need is to prevent unauthorized flights.
3
@the_undead From the perspective of the Russian citizen who isn't already "Western-minded" and against the war, he/she thinks that EU/NATO had a coup in Ukraine in 2014, they armed and financed death squads, kept shelling ethnic Russians in Ukraine, then a Ukrainian pesident came along who wanted the US to deploy THAAD in Ukranian soil, giving the US a chance to shoot down Russian missiles before they entered terminal phase. This looks like chess pieces moving to put NATO in position to attack Moscow and deny MAD by preventing the nuclear deterrent. Now half of the world seems to want to starve the Russian people. This isn't about the definition of logical. But which perspective you have. From their point of view, it's logical for their leader to make an ultimatum.
3
@graveperil2169 There's been direct confrontation between US special operations assisting local forces in Syria and Wagner. Nothing happened.
3
@coogrfan No, OP essentially said that the NFZ could not have been enforced over Serbia, even though it was. This is unrelated to Russia or Russian defense systems or NATO escalation. Please read. You're creating an argument over a really minor correction.
1
@coogrfan This isn't about Russia. Serbia's defenses were very capable for the time and size of the country, and they even managed to survive US SEAD operations. Don't know what nukes have to do with NFZs enforced in the past, since this isn't about Russia.
1
@coogrfan Did you read my comment? It's the third comment you have posted in reply to what I said. Yes, it's simple - a claim was made. I pointed out the claim isn't entirely accurate. That's all. I never said anything regarding the effort required or the capabilities, I didn't mention the Middle East (even though US and Israeli air forces have had to operate around defenses in Syria). OP said that the enforcement of a NFZ required the non-existence of defenses, and I simply stated that Serbian defenses remained operational. Serbia was and still isn't a nuclear armed power, so again I will ask you again to please read. This isn't about Russia, stop trying to argue with me about Russia.
1
@PappyGunn I don't know how any of that is related to what I said.
1
@the_undead They are because access to information still gets through. Remember when people thought Trump killed Koi fish in Japan by overfeeding them? Shinzo Abe dumped the fish food first, then Trump dumped his, and media only showed Trump dumping the food to make it look like he was overfeeding the fish. The ones who looked it up knew the truth. Most people don't look it up. The Russian people were told it was a special military operation and Ukraine was the aggressor. In the first days media was prohibited from calling it "war". Russian forces had most of their phones confiscated, so there's a lot of footage of Russian vehicles and soldiers taken out, but almost no footage of Russians filming dead Ukrainians. This was a smart play.
1
That still doesn't address the issue - what do you gain from enforcing a NFZ over Ukraine? If anything, letting more low flying Russian aircraft fall to shoulder launched weapons continues to drain their resources and morale without risk.
1
@M167A1 Doesn't matter how they feel, foreign volunteers have been fighting over there since 2014.
1
Aviation uses feet for altitude, knots for airspeed and NM for distance. Even in countries with the metric system. Although Russia and China do go against the grain here.
1