Possible No-Fly Zone in Syria?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by jumpinjarhead, May 29, 2013.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Quote from piece:

    "A No Fly Zone sounds like it’s not a war, which is why Obama exploited a No Fly Zone to invade and implement regime change in Libya"

    Just remind me - when did Obama 'invade' Libya? Adds a bit of perspective to this, which is, its bollocks.
  2. rampant

    rampant LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    Whait until you read the list of contributers to Front Page: FrontPage Magazine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The biggest load of hysterical sh*t stirrers known to man.

    Ye gods they named Glenn Beck Man of the Year once.

    The author also writes for Gaffney's Family Security Matters - Gaffney being one of those who subscribe to the idea that Obama has adopted the ideals of the Muslim Brotherhood

    It's interesting that The Daily Beast article which inspired this one seems to put a more cautious spin on the subject: Obama Asks Pentagon For Syria No-Fly Zone Plan - The Daily Beast

    Addendum: I should say that I would give Front Page the same credibility as PressTV or the North Korean State Media
  3. Sometimes even media sources with which you disagree may be on to something. And in point of fact it was the Daily Beast, a media source otherwise known as an Obama sycophant that first broke the story.
  4. But supplying missiles to rebels means losing control over whose hands they end up in. NATO aircraft enforcing a no fly zone would be 100% NATO controlled, and give more political leverage.
    • Like Like x 2
  5. With the Beeb reporting this AM that Moscow is to supply President Assad with Gargoyle... There'll be a no fly zone alright.
    • Like Like x 3
  6. Just as what happened in Libya and ultimately led to the deaths of the US ambassador and embassy staffer and 2 heroic Navy SEALS who were apparently engaged in trying to get control/possession of Stingers and other bits of kit that the US had naively given to the "freedom fighters" of the "Arab Spring."
  7. I just hope they have plenty of CSAR assets available as the S 300 are a tad nasty.
    • Like Like x 2
  8. No they didn't. It would have been stupid if they had, but they didn't.

    The rebels already had plenty of SA-16 and SA-7s they'd looted from Gadhafi's vast arsenals.

    As do jihadists now in Syria (saw a terrifying vid today, in fact).
  9. Yes, they are! I just hope Cameron isn't rash enough to involve the RAF in this stupidity!

  10. The other aspect of course being that it's quite likely new air defence systems will have Sovi... sorry.. Russian "advisers" in close attendance. It's probably not a good idea to SEAD them.
  11. Thing is, how long would it take the S-300s to be operational? Putin will send trainers, sure, but crews?
  12. See above.

    In any case, I don't really think it matters. The Rooskies stating that they're supplying Assad and thus "standing by him" is probably enough to prevent our direct intervention.
    • Like Like x 1
  13. As it's part of a long standing arms contract I would imagine trained crews may well be in place having been trained in the Motherland.
  14. Quite. It's entirely unlike the ramping up of the Iraqi NFZs in early 2003 which - by pure coincidence, you understand - began to look like a preparatory SEAD campaign for an invasion. Not at all the same, oh no...