129
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2024
129 points (97.8% liked)
Ukraine
8368 readers
804 users here now
News and discussion related to Ukraine
*Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.
*No content depicting extreme violence or gore.
*Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title
*Combat videos containing any footage of a visible human must be flagged NSFW
Server Rules
- Remember the human! (no harassment, threats, etc.)
- No racism or other discrimination
- No Nazis, QAnon or similar
- No porn
- No ads or spam (includes charities)
- No content against Finnish law
Donate to support Ukraine's Defense
Donate to support Humanitarian Aid
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I don't understand why we don't put troops in cities and say fight away from civilians or commit an act of war against our soldiers
Because they don't want to actually go to war. Russia would bomb the cities as normal, and some of those troops would get injured/killed, but a retaliatory attack by any member of NATO would be viewed as an offensive, and void of article 5 needing to be enacted or followed. If one did use retaliatory strikes Russia would cry about being the victim like always.
The reason UN troops were not there to do such was because Russia has the ability to veto them stepping in. That took place in February 2022
Historically that hasn't gone well.
And at what point do you hand a city over? If the Ukrainians lose the ground around it, are you going to try and do an enclave? Or does it get handed over? What's the actual goal? Protecting civilians or protecting Ukraine? Because militarily cities are fantastic defensive ground, requiring years to fully occupy if they're properly contested. So you'd also be taking away some great defensive terrain.