>>63918706
>it's the opposite of trivial.
so nato couldnt force a "no-fly" zone if it wanted???
I mean thats what we saw in reality....
>>63918713
>do you even know what AWACS stands for?
>do you know that most crew in a AWACS does the C part.
>a fighter pilot is already busy flying her fighter.
lmao, wild guess, but you have any idea what the 2nd C-eat *checks notes* i mean SEAT is for?
