So, as a starter, I expect the US will finally provide long range weapons now. Which should have done a long time ago with the condition they be used against military and strategic targets only.

Damn. This could lead to severe escalation. A no fly zone from Nato in the Area from Poland to, lets say, Kyiv, would be an appropriate answer.

Oh jeez. The Poles would probably be the last group I'd want to piss off in this conflict. Not because of any perceived military might, but opinion in Poland right now is solidly anti-Russia and pro-Ukraine, and now they'll be even more so. Another really pissed off neighbor.

JJJ wrote:

Lot of Twitter and news chatter about a stray missile landing in Polish territory and killing two in a small village called Przewodów

You can probably already hear the typing of Russian media and useful idiots saying it's a false flag operation and the excuse NATO needed to get in the fray.

Not good.

Mistakes happen. India mistakenly launched a missile into arch-enemy Pakistan some months ago. No big consequences.

India's government has sacked three air force officers for the "accidental firing of a missile" into Pakistan in March.

The incident had escalated tensions between the two nuclear-armed nations.

Delhi had blamed the "deeply regrettable" incident on a "technical malfunction" during routine maintenance.

Islamabad warned Delhi to "be mindful of the unpleasant consequences of such negligence" and to avoid a repeat.

The officers responsible for the 9 March incident have been terminated from service, the Indian Air Force said in a statement on Tuesday.

-bbc

PS Agreed, things are different if injury is caused, as in Poland.

luckyone wrote:

Oh jeez. The Poles would probably be the last group I'd want to piss off in this conflict. Not because of any perceived military might, but opinion in Poland right now is solidly anti-Russia and pro-Ukraine, and now they'll be even more so. Another really pissed off neighbor.

Russia could have no objection now if Poland began CAP patrols over Ukrainian territory, or gave Ukraine some upgraded Mig-29s.

Some social media suggest the missile might have been an S-300.

Designed as a surface to air missile, there are two likely possibilities.

1) errant Ukrainian air defense missile

2) Russians have been using them as ground to ground ballistic missiles. It wouldn’t have the range from the battle front to get to Poland. From Belarus is a possibility.


I think (1) is more likely.


SLCPilot

JJJ wrote:

Lot of Twitter and news chatter about a stray missile landing in Polish territory and killing two in a small village called Przewodów

You can probably already hear the typing of Russian media and useful idiots saying it's a false flag operation and the excuse NATO needed to get in the fray.

Not good.

Tass is already calling 'the claim that Russian missiles hit Poland' a provocation.

Slcpilot wrote:

Some social media suggest the missile might have been an S-300.
Designed as a surface to air missile, there are two likely possibilities.
1) errant Ukrainian air defense missile
2) Russians have been using them as ground to ground ballistic missiles. It wouldn’t have the range from the battle front to get to Poland. From Belarus is a possibility.
I think (1) is more likely.
SLCPilot

This site says there were more than one missile. https://www.outono.net/elentir/2022/11/ ... wo-people/
Other sites have described the missile(s) as being cruise missiles.

But in a way it doesn't matter if it were an errant Ukrainian SAM; if that were the case it is still a matter of Russia bringing their war to Poland's doorstep.

Russia has extensively used S300's in an improvised air to ground role, showing how limited their stocks of proper systems for this role such as cruise missiles, likely are.
Naturally, they can be somewhat erratic.
It might be an errant Ukrainian SAM, however they have expended so many in this war, in their intended role, it's just more likely it was a Russian S300, in any case, why are the Ukrainians firing so many in the first place?

I agree, while the point made the other day about not supplying MGM-140's as a possible agreement not to do so as long as China gives no help to Russia, makes sense as an explanation, that's not proven.
With debris it will not take long presumably to source the S300 weapon.
Then if Russian, send the MGM-140's as well as more Avengers and any system that can be spared for AD.

Aside from these developments, the story of someone who was a kind of metaphor in human form for the occupation of Kherson and the Russian war in general'
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... n-official

TheSonntag wrote:

Damn. This could lead to severe escalation. A no fly zone from Nato in the Area from Poland to, lets say, Kyiv, would be an appropriate answer.

A no-fly zone west of Kyiv seems logical now to prevent another “accidental” Russian strike on NATO/EU territory. More air support for Ukraine and longer range missile systems may be in the cards now as well.

GDB wrote:

Russia has extensively used S300's in an improvised air to ground role, showing how limited their stocks of proper systems for this role such as cruise missiles, likely are.
Naturally, they can be somewhat erratic.
It might be an errant Ukrainian SAM, however they have expended so many in this war, in their intended role, it's just more likely it was a Russian S300, in any case, why are the Ukrainians firing so many in the first place?

I agree, while the point made the other day about not supplying MGM-140's as a possible agreement not to do so as long as China gives no help to Russia, makes sense as an explanation, that's not proven.
With debris it will not take long presumably to source the S300 weapon.
Then if Russian, send the MGM-140's as well as more Avengers and any system that can be spared for AD.

Aside from these developments, the story of someone who was a kind of metaphor in human form for the occupation of Kherson and the Russian war in general'
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/ ... n-official

I’m not proud, but this made me laugh out loud:

“I am on a constant high,” the Moscow-installed official told the Guardian in a phone interview in August. “We have won. I am living in a dream. Russia is in Kherson for ever.”

That “for ever” ended abruptly on Wednesday, when Stremousov, 45, was killed in a car crash as he was speeding away from Kherson.

luckyone wrote:

Oh jeez. The Poles would probably be the last group I'd want to piss off in this conflict. Not because of any perceived military might, but opinion in Poland right now is solidly anti-Russia and pro-Ukraine, and now they'll be even more so. Another really pissed off neighbor.

We traveled through a lot of Eastern Europe, I would feel pretty safe saying the whole area is anti Russia. From massive Ukraine flags dropping buildings to food and medicine drives.

Just about every restaurant we ate at had a special somewhere on the menu where ALL of the price was being donated. Me being the sceptical guy that i am had my doubts, but asking around it was pretty clear to me they were on the up and up.

In Prague we were at a beer garden overlooking the city, there was a 15 minute song where we were instructed to sing the chorus in our native language, the chorus was "f**k Russia, f**k Putin".

Vintage wrote:

luckyone wrote:

Oh jeez. The Poles would probably be the last group I'd want to piss off in this conflict. Not because of any perceived military might, but opinion in Poland right now is solidly anti-Russia and pro-Ukraine, and now they'll be even more so. Another really pissed off neighbor.

Russia could have no objection now if Poland began CAP patrols over Ukrainian territory, or gave Ukraine some upgraded Mig-29s.

You're not applying Russian logic are you ?

The same that led to the war in the first place, because of NATO's "aggression", Nazis in power in Ukraine etc.

Aesma wrote:

You're not applying Russian logic are you ?

No, I'm not.

dampfnudel wrote:

TheSonntag wrote:

Damn. This could lead to severe escalation. A no fly zone from Nato in the Area from Poland to, lets say, Kyiv, would be an appropriate answer.

A no-fly zone west of Kyiv seems logical now to prevent another “accidental” Russian strike on NATO/EU territory. More air support for Ukraine and longer range missile systems may be in the cards now as well.

Playing devils advocate, do we want to have a potential situation put in place where NATO aircraft could end up shooting down Russian aircraft ?

I am all for supplying Ukraine with whatever they want/need, but there is a real chance at escalating the war by putting NATO forces over Ukraine.

A bit like "fake news", the election was stolen, etc.

Revelation wrote:

Let's all agree to not call it a war, even though we all know it's a war. Let's agree to not call it a war because wars are bad things and we don't want to admit we do bad things. Let's call it a military action, that makes it sound more like a parade than invading another country, killing, ****ing and destroying as we go.

The reason why educated politicians fight over such wording is because we are all raised and live our lives under government directives / directions. So if the western governments officially declare it a Special Operation, the bulk of citizens will use that term. As we know history is written by the victors, so it may seem silly, but is China trying to fool folks or looking long term?

I agree with this assessment, as of what we know now;
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCcvfHa ... TvbjKiX4sI

Analysis;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYnw5mDYsX4
As referenced in the above;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPv_qHdZD6Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7alfs8DxUY

What next on the battlefield;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPv_qHdZD6Q

IMHO, this bleeds into to responses to Poland, in terms of expanded weapons supply, to be done ASAP.

Further up, when I mentioned the UK supplying 1000 more AD missiles, almost certainly Starstreak/Martlet, art wondered why the UK's recently retired Rapiers could not be included.
The most recent operational and updated ones perhaps, yet another system but it could release more mobile ones to the battlefield being itself for defending static targets;
From 3 years ago;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XL1qjGL8fXI

TheSonntag wrote:

Damn. This could lead to severe escalation. A no fly zone from Nato in the Area from Poland to, lets say, Kyiv, would be an appropriate answer.

I doubt this will lead to any sort of military escalation between NATO and Russia. So far, nothing points to it being a deliberate attack (what can you expect from missiles made from old washing machines anyway...) and it is unlikely that Article 5 will be invoked. Same goes for a no-fly zone, which is an incredible bad idea as it would be impossible to enforce without risking a direct military confrontation with Russia.

This will probably lead to international condemnation, possible more sanctions (if that is even possible by this stage), and more shipments of arms to Ukraine. The good people at NATO are working night and day to prevent WW3, and it will take more than a stray missile to risk a major war with potential nuclear risks.

jetwet1 wrote:

Playing devils advocate, do we want to have a potential situation put in place where NATO aircraft could end up shooting down Russian aircraft ?

When was rhe last time a Russian aircraft dared to venture west of KyIV.

A reasonable response would be air space buffer zone, say 40 Km from the Polish border over which any Russian missiles would be intercepted by NATO assets.

Ukraine would have to relinquish control of the buffer zone though, something that may be difficult to negotiate.

bt

jetwet1 wrote:

dampfnudel wrote:

TheSonntag wrote:

Damn. This could lead to severe escalation. A no fly zone from Nato in the Area from Poland to, lets say, Kyiv, would be an appropriate answer.

A no-fly zone west of Kyiv seems logical now to prevent another “accidental” Russian strike on NATO/EU territory. More air support for Ukraine and longer range missile systems may be in the cards now as well.

Playing devils advocate, do we want to have a potential situation put in place where NATO aircraft could end up shooting down Russian aircraft ?

I am all for supplying Ukraine with whatever they want/need, but there is a real chance at escalating the war by putting NATO forces over Ukraine.

JFK sums it up perfectly in his monologue from the brilliant movie "Thirteen days" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_TLztv ... aldKennedy

a modern variant could be: "... Here we are sixty years later, say one of their airplanes refuses to break away and return to Russia, and we shoot it down, they shoot down one of our airplanes in response, so we bomb their anti-aircraft sites in response to that, and they attack the Baltic states, so we respond in kind, and they fire their missiles, and we fire ours..."

bikerthai wrote:

jetwet1 wrote:

Playing devils advocate, do we want to have a potential situation put in place where NATO aircraft could end up shooting down Russian aircraft ?

When was rhe last time a Russian aircraft dared to venture west of KyIV.

A reasonable response would be air space buffer zone, say 40 Km from the Polish border over which any Russian missiles would be intercepted by NATO assets.

Ukraine would have to relinquish control of the buffer zone though, something that may be difficult to negotiate.

bt

Such a measure would make NATO an active belligerent in the war the result being a de-facto state of war between NATO and Russia. As you say, no Russian combat aircraft has dared venturing west of Kyiv, so why the need for a no-fly zone that could potentially risk the outbreak of WW3?

fallap wrote:

no Russian combat aircraft has dared venturing west of Kyiv, so why the need for a no-fly zone that could potentially risk the outbreak of WW3?

Because Russian cruise missiles have ventured west of Kiev.

GDB wrote:

I agree with this assessment, as of what we know now;
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCcvfHa ... TvbjKiX4sI

I agree as well.

One of the mooted responses is more weapons to Ukraine. Why don't we throw all weapons we are prepared to supply now instead of this gradual ramping up of weapons we have been seeing? I want to see Ukraine to be given as big an equipment advantage as possible as soon as possible.

Vintage wrote:

fallap wrote:

no Russian combat aircraft has dared venturing west of Kyiv, so why the need for a no-fly zone that could potentially risk the outbreak of WW3?

Because Russian cruise missiles have ventured west of Kiev.

In that case we can donate additional SAM systems to the Ukrainian Military, perhaps roll out the PATRIOT system.

fallap wrote:

Vintage wrote:

fallap wrote:

no Russian combat aircraft has dared venturing west of Kyiv, so why the need for a no-fly zone that could potentially risk the outbreak of WW3?

Because Russian cruise missiles have ventured west of Kiev.

In that case we can donate additional SAM systems to the Ukrainian Military, perhaps roll out the PATRIOT system.

The Patriot system is tailored to intercept missiles on ballistic trajectories, it isn't the best solution for low flying cruise missiles. And SAM sites can only be point defense against cruise missiles (besides we have no more SAM batteries to offer Ukraine). The best defense against cruise missiles would be area defense, as offered by supersonic aircraft.

art wrote:

GDB wrote:

I agree with this assessment, as of what we know now;
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCcvfHa ... TvbjKiX4sI

I agree as well.

One of the mooted responses is more weapons to Ukraine. Why don't we throw all weapons we are prepared to supply now instead of this gradual ramping up of weapons we have been seeing? I want to see Ukraine to be given as big an equipment advantage as possible as soon as possible.

Move the boundary of what is offered to Ukraine and give them systems that have greater range. Or get all of NATO together and announce a massive increase in military aid to Ukraine - something like +$100 billion in military aid.

What Russia is doing to the civilian population of Ukraine cannot stand. It is much worse than the accident in Poland.

Time to invoke part of the NATO charter.

fallap wrote:

In that case we can donate additional SAM systems to the Ukrainian Military, perhaps roll out the PATRIOT system.

It's a numbers game. The more assets you have the fewer chances that a missile can get through.

You can donate more, but it takes time for training.

At a drop of the hat, you can have NATO assets cover the border region and the Ukrainian can move their assets toward the east.

bt

People have been killed in Poland. If they were killed by a missile intended for a target in Ukraine, Poland is at risk of further people being killed by missiles intended for targets in Ukraine. Can that risk be accepted or do provisions need to be made to stop that occurring again? If the latter, then steps need to be taken to shoot down missiles in Ukraine in the air zone adjoining Poland. Poland cannot be expected to wait until they reach the Polish border before shooting them down.

Revelation wrote:

par13del wrote:

Revelation wrote:

Let's all agree to not call it a war, even though we all know it's a war. Let's agree to not call it a war because wars are bad things and we don't want to admit we do bad things. Let's call it a military action, that makes it sound more like a parade than invading another country, killing, ****ing and destroying as we go.

The reason why educated politicians fight over such wording is because we are all raised and live our lives under government directives / directions. So if the western governments officially declare it a Special Operation, the bulk of citizens will use that term. As we know history is written by the victors, so it may seem silly, but is China trying to fool folks or looking long term?

Some interesting analysis from the same WaPo G-20 article I linked above:

China is cautious about using the word “war” out of sympathy with Russia’s position and dislikes seeing the United States strengthen its alliances in response to the conflict, said Ren Xiao, a professor of international relations at Fudan University in Shanghai.

Ren added that Russia’s diplomatic importance to China makes it impossible to interrupt normal economic relations between the two countries. “China will not deliberately alienate Russia to move closer to the United States and Europe,” he said.

So the reasons for Chinese vranyo are tight economic ties with their neighbor Russia and their desire to remain in conflict with the United States, thus a war is not a war.

There is also Taiwan. When/if China tries to invade Taiwan, it will not be a war either. It will be the "great peaceful reunification" or something.

Vintage wrote:

[The best defense against cruise missiles would be area defense, as offered by supersonic aircraft.

One defense against cruise missiles, which isn't talked much about, is jamming of their navigation system.

Today's incident i Poland could easily be caused by successful jamming of Russian cruise missiles, which were programmed for targets within Ukraine.

Trere is little doubt that for all the most weapon technically advanced NATO countries and their weapon manufacturers the Ruzzski War is an on site laboratory for development of cruise missile jamming. Poland is the natural major physical location for such laboratory work.

Such work is of course by nature top secret, so we will never hear about it.

The only thing we hear about that is our news reporters in Ukraine "complaining" that GPS navigation in their cars is sometimes rather "challenging".

prebennorholm wrote:

One defense against cruise missiles, which isn't talked much about, is jamming of their navigation system.

Today's incident i Poland could easily be caused by successful jamming of Russian cruise missiles, which were programmed for targets within Ukraine.

Trere is little doubt that for all the most weapon technically advanced NATO countries and their weapon manufacturers the Ruzzski War is an on site laboratory for development of cruise missile jamming. Poland is the natural major physical location for such laboratory work.

Such work is of course by nature top secret, so we will never hear about it.

The only thing we hear about that is our news reporters in Ukraine "complaining" that GPS navigation in their cars is sometimes rather "challenging".

Good points.

Biden said that it’s unlikely the missile that hit Poland was fired from Russia.

https://apnews.com/25e615909ba0d871d5092f5b3aec21c8

dampfnudel wrote:

Biden said that it’s unlikely the missile that hit Poland was fired from Russia.

https://apnews.com/25e615909ba0d871d5092f5b3aec21c8

Does it also exclude Belarus? Or are these Ukrainian launched SAMs which missed their target and unfortunately just landed over the border? IMHO Russia has nothing to gain by provoking NATO. It’s way more effective to create a new wave of refugees from Ukraine to the west by destroying critical infrastructure. Refugees are much more effective in undermining the support for Ukraine than a missile which landed just over the border.

marcelh wrote:

dampfnudel wrote:

Biden said that it’s unlikely the missile that hit Poland was fired from Russia.

https://apnews.com/25e615909ba0d871d5092f5b3aec21c8

Does it also exclude Belarus? Or are these Ukrainian launched SAMs which missed their target and unfortunately just landed over the border? IMHO Russia has nothing to gain by provoking NATO. It’s way more effective to create a new wave of refugees from Ukraine to the west by destroying critical infrastructure. Refugees are much more effective in undermining the support for Ukraine than a missile which landed just over the border.

It’s looking like a Ukrainian one, of many fired at the huge onslaught of Russian attacks, some of which went deep westwards into Ukraine so a risk of hitting NATO territory by that action alone.
Given the very high kill rate, it’s seems of over 80%, that is a lot of defensive firing of missiles, the mainstay of which still are the S300 type.
So ultimately the responsibility is with Russia, their war after all, their mass attacks on civilians when they get humiliated again on the battlefield, when they are called out at a conference Putin is too chicken or just being out of the country paranoid to attend, he barely leaves the Kremlin after all.

The response should be a ramping up of support with AD systems, those recently retired Rapiers for instance, all the concerns about using expensive missiles against cheap drones does not count when using missiles that were likely to be eventually dismantled anyway.
This could apply to other systems too.

GDB wrote:

The response should be a ramping up of support with AD systems, those recently retired Rapiers for instance, all the concerns about using expensive missiles against cheap drones does not count when using missiles that were likely to be eventually dismantled anyway.
This could apply to other systems too.

Totally agree, also to minimize the flow of refugees to the west (which will come anyway). What concerns me the most is the number of Iranian drones and ballistic missiles which will come to Russia. If the war is continuing going south, I can see Russia doing a massive strike with drones and missiles to overwhelm the defenses and knock out most of the critical infrastructure. There are already plans made by the Ukrainians to evacuate cities because of the freezing cold:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna55969

US officials now admit blast in Poland caused by stray missile fired by Ukraine

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukrai ... e7bb06264e

Three U.S. officials said preliminary assessments suggested the missile was fired by Ukrainian forces at an incoming Russian one amid the crushing salvo against Ukraine’s electrical infrastructure Tuesday. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.

bikerthai wrote:

fallap wrote:

In that case we can donate additional SAM systems to the Ukrainian Military, perhaps roll out the PATRIOT system.

It's a numbers game. The more assets you have the fewer chances that a missile can get through.

You can donate more, but it takes time for training.

At a drop of the hat, you can have NATO assets cover the border region and the Ukrainian can move their assets toward the east.

bt

A de-facto no-fly zone already exists since any violation of Polish airspace would be intercepted by the Polish Air Force.

If we accept the growing belief that the missile that hit Poland was indeed one fired by Ukraine, for me there are two immediate take-aways:

1 - nobody believes Russia, even when they’re telling the truth

2 - Zelenskyy was too quick to play the “This was a direct attack on NATO” card.

The first is an obvious consequence of Russia’s duplicitous nature throughout the war and it’s constantly pathetic claims it doesn’t hit civilian targets. Nobody would have been surprised by a Russian denial followed by clear evidence that they did it.

Does Zelenskyy just ignore this, or how does he row it back while maintaining the huge credit that he’s built up through this barbaric attack by Russia?

fallap wrote:

A de-facto no-fly zone already exists since any violation of Polish airspace would be intercepted by the Polish Air Force.

Did not stop this missile, though, did it? I believe that the farm concerned is about 4 miles from the border. At a speed of 600mph that missile have would have spent 24 secs in Poland before exploding. 24 secs does not give much time for the Polish Air Force to intercept a missile, launch an AAM at it and for the AAM to reach its target.

prebennorholm wrote:

Vintage wrote:

[The best defense against cruise missiles would be area defense, as offered by supersonic aircraft.

One defense against cruise missiles, which isn't talked much about, is jamming of their navigation system.

Today's incident i Poland could easily be caused by successful jamming of Russian cruise missiles, which were programmed for targets within Ukraine.

Trere is little doubt that for all the most weapon technically advanced NATO countries and their weapon manufacturers the Ruzzski War is an on site laboratory for development of cruise missile jamming. Poland is the natural major physical location for such laboratory work.

Such work is of course by nature top secret, so we will never hear about it.

The only thing we hear about that is our news reporters in Ukraine "complaining" that GPS navigation in their cars is sometimes rather "challenging".

Even the most basic cruise missles also have inertial navigation to mitigate GPS spoofing. If this was a SA-300, those are not GPS directed missiles anyway, to my knowledge.
https://www.pcquest.com/missile-navigation/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-300_missile_system

Going that far away from the target zone show a severe lack of capabilities.

There is nothing top secret about spoofing commercial GPS. Secret? Yes, but Top secret implies you don't know what they are doing.
From way back in 2004:
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna3078694
“Ground troops have been cautioned not to rely on civilian GPS receivers because they can be spoofed. You wouldn’t want to rely on the coordinates from a spoofed receiver to coordinate live fire,” Langley said.

You must have one's own military grade GPS to guide munitions as it is trivial (as noted in above link) to degrade civilian GPS (reduce accuracy). While not in the link, it is also trivial to shift the GPS signal by large distances. The US controls the satellite network, so we control the signal location, accuracy, and can even turn off commercial GPS while maintaining military GPS. Please recall that GPS is a US military asset first and foremost.

Lightsaber

art wrote:

fallap wrote:

A de-facto no-fly zone already exists since any violation of Polish airspace would be intercepted by the Polish Air Force.

Did not stop this missile, though, did it? I believe that the farm concerned is about 4 miles from the border. At a speed of 600mph that missile have would have spent 24 secs in Poland before exploding. 24 secs does not give much time for the Polish Air Force to intercept a missile, launch an AAM at it and for the AAM to reach its target.

If NATO wants to enact 24/7 CAP patrols near Ukraine, within Polish/NATO airspace, to prevent similar events in the future, then fine with me. But I am firmly against the idea of NATO aircrafts flying patrols inside Ukrainian airspace, as it would de-facto make NATO an active belligerent in the conflict. What happened yesterday was a tragedy, but we shouldn't jump the gun and risk escalate the war into a direct confrontation with Russia.

I would suggest anyone interested in brinkmanship and high stakes diplomacy to read the book "Essence of Decision" (1999).

fallap wrote:

art wrote:

fallap wrote:

A de-facto no-fly zone already exists since any violation of Polish airspace would be intercepted by the Polish Air Force.

Did not stop this missile, though, did it? I believe that the farm concerned is about 4 miles from the border. At a speed of 600mph that missile have would have spent 24 secs in Poland before exploding. 24 secs does not give much time for the Polish Air Force to intercept a missile, launch an AAM at it and for the AAM to reach its target.

If NATO wants to enact 24/7 CAP patrols near Ukraine, within Polish/NATO airspace, to prevent similar events in the future, then fine with me. But I am firmly against the idea of NATO aircrafts flying patrols inside Ukrainian airspace, as it would de-facto make NATO an active belligerent in the conflict.

What would you think about fighters or SAM's in Poland launching against incoming missiles while they are still in Ukrainian airspace? The only way to stop them entering Polish airspace is to destroy them before they get there.

art wrote:

fallap wrote:

art wrote:

Did not stop this missile, though, did it? I believe that the farm concerned is about 4 miles from the border. At a speed of 600mph that missile have would have spent 24 secs in Poland before exploding. 24 secs does not give much time for the Polish Air Force to intercept a missile, launch an AAM at it and for the AAM to reach its target.

If NATO wants to enact 24/7 CAP patrols near Ukraine, within Polish/NATO airspace, to prevent similar events in the future, then fine with me. But I am firmly against the idea of NATO aircrafts flying patrols inside Ukrainian airspace, as it would de-facto make NATO an active belligerent in the conflict.

What would you think about fighters or SAM's in Poland launching against incoming missiles while they are still in Ukrainian airspace? The only way to stop them entering Polish airspace is to destroy them before they get there.

Unless it is 120% verified and confirmed that the missile is heading towards Poland, then I am against that as well. Under no circumstances should NATO forces engage ANY target inside Ukrainian territory. We are treading on eggshells here.