Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

frizzykid t1_iuhov7l wrote

Reply to comment by Floofyboy in Russian rocket falls in the north of Moldova by VileGecko

Russia/nato have accidentally shot at each other before and even shot down planes but under murky enough waters no one feels like there is any significant need to retaliate. If a rocket hit the center of Berlin and it caused a mass casualty crisis, I'd be worried. But a malfunctioning rocket hitting a tree in the middle of some woods which is the far more likely outcome is not a big enough deal that nato would start considering article v

59

ThrowAway_PFC220919 t1_iuhpzjx wrote

I would tend to agree. A missile hitting a random forest 150kms from the nearest city is not likely to be cause for a full-blown conventional strike on Russia. Especially where the missile was shot down by UA forces. However, (and I'll note Moldova is not a NATO member), striking assets near the border of Ukraine, where the neighbouring country also has important asset is a recipe for disaster.

Moldova has a damn about 10km from where the Russian missile was shot down.

28

DeliciousTruck t1_iui1knl wrote

There is and shouldn't be a leeway on where an explosive hits. An attack is an attack and if you brush it off as only an accident you are not only showing weakness but also giving russians room to actually hit infrastructure under the guise of some bullshit and just claim it was an accident.

France and the UK already tried an appeasment policy against Germany right before the second world war, hoping to avoid another war.

I'm against any war but there has to be a clear line with zero leeway.

−22

Skaindire t1_iuiapvb wrote

Right you are, but these fuckwits threatened to use nukes, their collateral damage is a lot higher than a few cubic meters of wood.

8