http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/11/politics/martin-omalley-against-no-fly-zone/index.html
What do you think, good idea or bad?
I think O'Malley has it about right.
What do you think, good idea or bad?
I think O'Malley has it about right.
No Fly Zone Over Syria?
- Thread starter What Would Jesus Do?
- Start date
Are we thinking its a good idea to shoot down Russian planes? I think I'd rather pass on that solution, thank you.
I hope Russian planes would be excluded from such a policy. But who does that leave? How do we distinguish Assad's Russian-supplied planes from Russia's planes?
According to another report, we apparently now have a 20-mile rule. Until we hammer out an agreement with Russia, our pilots are under orders to turn away if they come within 20 miles of a Russian plane.
My guess it that it will be tough to come up with a satisfactory agreement with Russia that allows us to attack Assad.
There was a time when it would have been beneficial but that time is past.
I wonder if Obama's targeting of Assad for extinction has anything to do with the critical Qatari natural gas pipeline, one which would dethrone Russia as Europe's dominant and belligerent source of energy?
That was the point of Libya, too. Kick out Gaddafi so the Europeans could control Libyan oil. We did our bit, but he Europeans royally screwed up the follow-through.
That plays into Putin's hands. He knows very well that we will not engage his planes. I'm not saying shoot them down, but maybe some Top Gun style chicken with them will help keep them honest.
A no-fly zone is an exercise in futility. Who would enforce it? Russia wouldn't let it pass the security council, and they have been invited in by Syria. We aren't going to start shooting down Russian planes, so why even bother?
It is pretty obvious how this will play out. Russia will destroy all the other rebel groups, leaving the west with a choice between supporting syria and assad. ISIS has already made huge advances towards Aleppo thanks to Russian airstrikes. All the people who don't like either will just end up moving to europe.
It is pretty obvious how this will play out. Russia will destroy all the other rebel groups, leaving the west with a choice between supporting syria and assad. ISIS has already made huge advances towards Aleppo thanks to Russian airstrikes. All the people who don't like either will just end up moving to europe.
Since Assad is the legitimately recognized government and they invited Russia in, how does the USA have a say in who flies over Syria?
Now. Now. Listen to him, a flying stunt by our Air Force stands a very good possibility of backing Putin down and saving lives, time and money.
Here's the issue: how does Putin support his allies? He send troops to Syria, eastern Ukraine and South Ossetia. How have we helped our allies in those conflicts?
US aid comes with lectures about morality, Russian and Chinese aid comes unconditionally. Why do you think the 3rd world and developing world is leaning towards them?
Take a look at arms negotiations with India for why this is important.
I don't mean literally the move from Top Gun, but I do mean to be ready and able to engage if needed. As of now, we are the wimps in the neighborhood - which is terrible in an area that only respects strength.
You don't think we are ready to engage right now? We have been engaging Russia and they have engaging us since the Cold War started and after it 'ended'
