video
Thư viện
Tài trợ
Không cấm bay được đâu
23 Mar, 2022
tuyên bố lệnh cấm bay, mà Nga không chấp nhận thì sao, có sẵn sàng bắn hạ máy bay Nga ko? và như thế là chiến tranh Nga-NATO,
thế nếu ko dám bắn để chiến tranh khỏi lan rộng hơn, thì tuyên bố cấm bay là trò hề ư -> NATO mất uy tín, khẳng định giúp đỡ Ukraine chỉ là lời nói suông, và lời hứa căn bản về phòng thủ tập thể chẳng còn đáng tin,
-> NATO chỉ làm được như những gì đang làm: cứu trợ dân thường tị nạn, và hỗ trợ vũ khí, đạn dược, lương thực, hậu cần cho quân đội Ukraine mà thôi...
-----
If the Russians did not accede (đồng ý, tán thành) to a no-fly zone (vùng cấm bay), NATO would have to decide whether to enforce (thực thi) it, which would mean being ready to shoot down (bắn hạ) Russian planes (máy bay)—and firing the first shots (bắn phát súng đầu tiên), at that. Make no mistake: whether or not air combat to enforce the zone would remain limited to Ukrainian airspace, it would amount to initiating war (phát động cuộc chiến) between NATO and Russia. And even limited conflict would be epochal (mở ra một kỷ nguyên, đánh dấu một thời kỳ; lịch sử): it would be the first direct war (cuộc chiến đối đầu trực tiếp) between major powers (cương quốc lớn) since 1945.
...what might happen if the Russians refused to accept the no-fly zone and, in the face of Moscow’s intransigence (không khoan nhượng), NATO backed down (chùn bước) and decided to not enforce it, after all—precisely to avoid a wider war. The declaration (tuyên bố) of a no-fly zone would be exposed as a pathetic bluff (lừa phỉnh đáng thương/tệ hại)—little more than a no-fly request. Although the importance of credibility is often exaggerated and too often used as an excuse for mistaken military commitments, in this case the damage (thiệt hại) to NATO’s credibility (uy tín) would be tremendous (khổng lồ). Such a move would not just reveal the emptiness of posturing to help Ukraine but would also highlight and intensify doubts about whether the alliance would make good on its foundational promise of collective defense, especially when it comes to weaker, newer members, such as the highly vulnerable Baltic states.
...NATO should help Ukraine, but its assistance must remain below the established threshold for escalation (ngưỡng leo thang). That would include more or less what the alliance has already been doing: where possible, providing relief for civilian refugees (dân thường tị nạn) and weapons, ammunition, food, and logistical support to Ukraine’s military.
Tags: ukraine
"Neither Ukraine's glory nor freedom have died yet.
Fate, Ukrainian brothers, will smile at us yet
Our enemies will perish like dew in the sun.
We will reign, brothers, in our dear land
We will give body and soul for our freedom
And show that we, brothers, are a Cossack family"
Update: From Wikipedia:
"In 1922, the Ukrainian SSR signed the Treaty on the Creation of the USSR ... Following the signing of the treaty, the anthem was immediately banned by the Soviet regime. The authorities later decided that each separate Soviet republic could have its own anthem, but Shche ne vmerla Ukraina was rejected in an attempt to help to suppress separatist sentiments held by Ukrainian Nationalists."