Since Clinton likes the F-35, and promises to sell it to Israel, this will be a nice trial run. We'll see if the F-35 can defeat MiG fighters that violate the no-fly zone.

of fish.

Very dangerous move and very unpredictable

This is 1990's thinking in a 2015 situation.

I am not surprised given her hawkish positions and stances though.

a foreign policy hawk. Not a surprise but she is indifferent to military strategy and it shows.

You don't ever want NATO and especially US aircraft facing off with SU 24s or any Russian piloted aircraft being shot down by US coalition forces. That is a big fat Christmas present for Putin.

Just one downed SU24 or Mi helicopter is all it would take to escalate a rather confusing and slap dash civil war into an old style NATO/Russian crisis/

No fly zone is too late and would not end ground fighting.

So, who's for this: Hillary, Tom Cotton, Carly Fiorina, John McCain. Oh, what blessed company!

Is Hillary looking forward to blowing Russian fighter jet out of the sky over Syria? You know, Russia, the long-standing ally of the Syrian regime, which is there with permission, as opposed to us.

Hillary Clinton was SOS for 4 years. I'll accept her judgement over yours.

we are not the good guys in Syria, BTW.

Unless you think Libya was a win. Or Iraq. Or Syria. None of that turned out to be a good idea.

http://thehill.com/policy/defense/255733-senators-demand-obamas-syria-strategy

<snip>

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, blasted the talks with Russia, calling them an accommodation of Russia's role of Syria.

“Unfortunately, it appears 'deconfliction' is merely an Orwellian euphemism for this administration’s acceptance of Russia’s expanded role in Syria, and as a consequence, for Assad’s continued brutalization of the Syrian people," he said.

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), one of the administration's biggest foreign policy critics, called on the administration to take stronger measures.

"We should establish no-fly zones in Syria and make it clear that any aircraft that enters those zones will be shot down,” he said.

<snip>

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/10/02/hillary-echoes-carly-fiorina-id-impose-a-no-fly-zone-inside-syria/

Hillary echoes Carly Fiorina: I’d impose a no-fly zone inside Syria
POSTED AT 1:21 PM ON OCTOBER 2, 2015 BY ALLAHPUNDIT

This was a bad idea when Fiorina pushed it yesterday and it’s still a bad idea today. Is one worse than the other, though? Fiorina wants an NFZ to protect American-backed rebels from Putin’s bombs; Hillary wants one for “humanitarian” reasons, the same sort of thinking that produced the paradise you and I know as modern Libya.

It’s worth risking a world war to help decide which barbarians ultimately prevail in Syria, no?

<snip>

Hillary is aligned with the worst Republican warmongers on this very stupid idea.

may Clinton should suspend her campaign temporarily fly to Syria to personally help the war effort. she's good under sniper fire, I hear.

How do you set up a no fly zone in Syria against the Syrian and Russian planes. Not to mention, WHERE in Syria would that no fly zone be? It is not clear that there is any area where there are not Assad, ISIS or AQ forces.

At this point, the best that the US seems to be able to do is to "de conflict" with the Russians - meaning that we know where they are and they know where we are to avoid unintentionally shooting each other down. Beyond that, US efforts have to be to get a cease fire in the civil war and get a transition government in Syria -- and then regain the area that ISIS has taken.

This will be a torpedo hit on the Clinton Lollipop Ship.

An American no fly zone would likely require the US asserting its control over areas of Syria - where they will be challenged by Syria and Russia. Would the US back any loss of American life doing this?

I hope that Obama and his better Secretary of State continue speaking of deconfliction and a diplomatic attempt to get a transitional government and an end to the civil war.

The comments on the WP article are incredible -- and very negative towards HRC. That is interesting because - I think - the WP was pretty neo con on foreign policy compared to other papers.

Besides, the no-fly zone crap didn't work in Iraq.

It's going to take more than expressions of concern and gestures in the direction of good policy to convince the public.

I don't determine my vote based on a single issue. This one is important to me.

going to open up WW3 over a country we have no relationship with and no stake in? The time for this was about six months ago, if it's even doable.

far more difficult than in Libya. Syria had a more powerful air force and the geography of where loyalists and rebels were was way more complicated. This was when McCain was first calling for it.

and protect civilians, wouldn't we have done it long before now?

Please advise.

Sad that this is what female candidates feel they have to do.

And Hillary will continue to see the "need" for this if elected.

And when the Russians declare a no-fly zone for American aircraft?

Wolf

Or is she getting advice from her bff Henry Kissinger?

"SURVEY SAYS . . . " and then she makes an announcement about foreign policy.

step one. Institute a ridiculous and unenforceable policy against a powerful and antagonistic world power.

step two. align with the GOP warmongers who have been itching to get into another conflict.

step three. hoodwink the Congress into voting for some bullshit "war resolution authorization" so that you can declare war anytime you damn well please.

does any of this sound familiar?

edit. step three would only apply if she would become president, which thankfully, she will not.

Do not pass go, do not collect $200?

And then what happens when it is crossed? More poor judgments are not welcomed.

Should be fun!

Dobbs: [Over the radio] Help him! Help him!

Yossarian: Help who?

Dobbs: Help the bombardier!

Yossarian: I'm the bombardier, I'm all right.

Dobbs: Then help him, help him!

lives, people who are dead or already refugees with 'no life, homeless, country less'

Assad, along with his buddies Russia, iran and china will end up killing off any assad descenters and destroy into rubble the entire infrastructure of his countries towns anyway.