Edit:
I will list my concerns, points of view, and arguments (to the limits of my knowledge):
1. I am not saying that refugees shouldn’t get out of the warzone if they want or that there are constant fights everywhere that stop civilians from having a pretty much normal life. I am saying that there are other ways of moving in and out of warzones that are maybe safer (idk) and that they don’t have such high safety standards that would prevent their activities.
2. I am talking from a civil aviation authority pov. I understand that since they are not taking the kind of measures that i am talking about, there is a logical explanation that i am trying to find out.
3. I am not talking about how the war should be handled or about what decisions regarding the situation should be taken by other authorities. I am talking strictly about how different (mostly geographic) civil aviation safety institutions work with warzones, considering the size, dynamics, or density of the conflict.
I am sorry if i still haven’t made myself clear, english is not my first language.
I am not trying to argue or make a point. I am just trying to find a pretty mutch on-point answer, a direct answer to my question, if there is one.
In: Other
Because there are still people living and working there. Even in Gaza people aren’t in bunkers 24/7, shops reopen hours after an airstrike. Kids walk to school as the rubble is swept from the roads.
Evacuating people and stopping all travel into the warzone actually makes things worse as it creates more refugees and makes it impossible for society to function and harder to return to normal when the war ends.
Latest Answers