'Securing' skies is a term that has been repeated a lot but in practice it means potentially shooting down Russian aircrafts to 'secure' a corridor.
This would mean a NATO member doing an act of war against Russia _without_ the purpose of defending a NATO member state.
The main argument is where do you draw the line? Why did NATO not provide air support for Georgia in South Ossetia, or for Crimea in 2014 but now does so for Donetsk in 2022?
In my opinion doing so would just give Russian propaganda a stronger argument that NATO is intended on attacking Russia rather than securing it's member states.
Shooting down Russian airplanes over Ukrainian territory when they are literally bombing Ukraine is not "an act of war against Russia". That's a bit of a far stretch don't you think?
If NATO bombs Belarus and Russian airplanes defend, you can hardly call that "Russian war against NATO".
It is an act of war. It is not a far stretch.
Russia did nothing, as usual.
That is literally a casus belli. It very much is an act of war.
Edit: So what would happen if Russia flies a fighterjet over NATO territory and they shoot it down. An act of war?
I was in favour that NATO would secure the skies, but that is now too late I guess.
Ukraine didn't even receive the latest and best equipment such as battle tanks. Once they receive those (I'm confident they will), it will make it easier for them to retake land.