[Texas Fossil]

This had earlier been suggested to the US by N. Syrian forces. The suggestion was complicated by Russia's control over portions of the air space over Syria. The Russian control of the Efrin (Afrin) air space is what lead to the Turkish invasion and ethnic cleansing (and many crimes against humanity) of that region.

Turkey has used fighting ISIS (they actually did very little of that) to invade Iraq and Syria and maintain hold on territory there.

Now, such a no-fly zone might lead to expulsion of hostile forces protected by Turkey.

[thoughtomator]

How soon can this man be fired?

[Texas Fossil]

Syria Ping

[equaviator]

The United Nations can’t admit that they’re all out of ideas. Better to call upon the Hell’s Angels MC than to leave it up to the UN.

[freeandfreezing]

"That can be a UN force," he said on Tuesday, referring to the joint US-UK-Turkey no-fly zone in the late 1990s that protected Kurdish areas from the air force of Saddam Hussein."

Only one problem. Enforcing a no-fly zone against Iraq was easy, and they pretty much allowed it to happen. Enforcing a no-fly zone against Russia would be essentially impossible unless the Russians agreed to join in.

Does anybody seriously think that the Russian military couldn't, if they wanted to, create a giant mess in the middle east? What would the UN do if, for example, Russia declared a no-fly zone over the area itself? Or perhaps a no-ships zone off the coast of Syria. Short of a war how would the UN stop them?

For that matter Russia could just turn off the natural gas pipelines to Europe and leave the UN and EU trying to figure out how to keep their citizens from freezing to death.

The whole idea is crazy.

[Pollster1]

We have two semi-rational choices:

(1) Topple Assad if we have a better option, or
(2) Leave Assad in charge of a unified Syria.

I don’t see a third option that has any merit at all. A no-fly zone is too weak to topple Assad, although it is likely to extend their civil war.

[Lurker]

Ummm, no.

L