You’re going to die on the hill of whether I said the US is an active or inactive participant in the proxy war it’s losing ? Your call.
You must think you're very clever inserting words for me I never spoke. Never said anything about ceding anything to anyone. But don't get your sensibilities offended if Russia spots an espionage drone 25 miles off the coast of Crimea and interferes with it. I'm glad President Biden isn't allowing his sensibilities to be offended over this. That would be poor judgment if he did. So far, he's handling this episode as it should be. It is what it is.
What is the sabotage, specifically? The article reads as if this was espionage. Which, if true, shouldn't be ignored, but when a headline says "sabotage Poland's train lines", I was expecting them to have uncovered a trove of explosives or something that would indicate a plan to derail the train lines. Did I miss that? Everybody has to deal with spies and hackers. They shouldn't be ignored, but Article V? Yeah, no.
You seem utterly clueless that the US drone was operating in international airspace and are taking issue that it was even there in the first place.
You're making incorrect assumptions. I never took any issue with the US flying a drone in international airspace. Can you point to specifically where I did? All I said is we understand the inherent risk of spying on our enemies when we do so under these circumstances. We're not going to go to war with Russia because they are messing with our drones off the Crimean coast. Continue to spy on Russia, yes. I'm all for it. But not going to get my feelings hurt if we're outed and taken out. That just comes with the territory. That's why we're using unmanned drones in the first place.
The airspace considered to be open for international use is well defined. we don't need to define anything, it is already spelled out in int'l law. that wheel ahs already been invented International Airspace and Civil-Military Cooperation.pdf (icao.int)
did you miss these three words? reading is fundamental, even for russian bots if succesfully carried out
being shot out of the sky while flying in international airspace does not come with the territory. we are using drones because theya re cheaper and can stay on station longer
Yes, I'm sure this PDF is available in Russian and Mandarin, as well. That doesn't answer my question to you. You stated "we" will defend international airspace and that Russia and China have "understand" that. I'm pretty confident Russia and China are already well aware of the information in your PDF, but still Russia chose to take matters into their own hands. So what are you proposing exactly that we do to help them "understand"? If it's to send them this PDF, lol. Now, please answer the question.
So, I didn't miss anything. Again, I asked specifically what sabotage were they planning to carry out? I'll help you out here. You have no clue, because the article doesn't reference any specifics as to what they were plotting to do. It only references surveillance and hacking, which they were already doing.
Or be fair, I think his complaints, if true, are more important than the breach of protocol, which is why he did it.
Maybe, but such complaints go up the chain of command, or inspector general, or to a member of the legislature. Any commander in any armed service in the world would be relieved for publicly airing dirty laundry in this manner.
No dispute there, only saying that for me the potential problems with their training and readiness is a much bigger story than one rogue commander pointing it out.
Don’t disagree there. I’m all for more direct supervision of Ukraine’s training and readiness. Members of our armed forces would be knifing each other in the back for a chance to serve in Ukraine in any capacity.
