Ukraine no fly zone for nuclear plants?

[wnylib]

I understand the reason for not having no fly zones in Ukraine. They would involve the US or NATO in direct war with Russia because enforcement would mean bringing down Russian planes and escalating the war beyond Ukraine. But, we can provide humanitarian aid in getting sick and wounded Ukranians out of the country for treatment to lessen the death toll. And private individuals can volunteer to fight in Ukraine.

But, after the Russian attack on a nuclear plant that nearly became a nuclear disaster that for rest of Europe, are we justified in providing air cover for Ukraine's nuclear power plants?

One objection is possible "mission drift" to other areas of Ukraine. But can we, or should we take the risk of another nuclear power plant disaster since either the Russian military is inept at best, or, at worst, they are instructed to do nuclear damage?

[RockCreek]

1. I agree completely.

I have been thinking this all week. And, I would add, an area extending out from plants to allow housing of plant workers and their families. AND UN peacekeeping forces on the ground in those areas.

[2naSalit]

2. Nope...

Same outcome no matter how you slice it. A few Iron Dome system set ups around those facilities might be a better idea since all they need are rockets/missiles/tanks to damage a facility.

[AntiFascist]

4. Iron Dome supported by EU or UN, not US...

where is Israel in all of this? Are they still neutral?

[sarisataka]

3. It was a ground attack

Not aircraft damaging the plant.

Would the no fly zone extend to attacking ground forces?

[wnylib]

7. Yes, it was a ground attack - this time.

Was the goal just to take over the plant, and they were stupid about it? Or was the goal to inflict enough damage to cause a radioactive crisis but the Ukranians contained the damage? If Putin wants to create a radioactive disaster at some point in the fighting, he could use planes in the future.

Another poster has suggested UN ground troops to protect the nuclear plants. Would the Russian army fight the UN troops, creating an even worse situation with 3 fighting parties on the ground? Or would UN ground troops be a good way to protect nuclear plants.

Use planes against ground troops? If necessary, but if ground troops are close enough to the plant, an errant bomb could create the thing we want to prevent.

I don't have any answers, just concerns about the nuclear danger and questions about the best way to prevent a disaster.

[uponit7771]

5. Long and short range AA will work better

[wnylib]

8. Against an air attack, yes. What about ground attacks?

[uponit7771]

9. They have Javelin and NLaws, they got it covered unless RU goes to high altitude bombing. I've ..

... come to the conclusion Putrid has lost and the lobbing of munitions at citizens is his way of acting out but soon even those vehicles will have no fuel and he'll go high altitude and get his bombers shot out of the sky.

[David__77]

6. US is not going to militarily engage.

…