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.
I was wondering at what point AA missiles would find their way to Syria. A no-fly zone would achieve the same outcome (only if backed up by Western aircraft or missiles) of levelling the playing field. The surreptitious training of rebels and the provision of Int to the rebel forces will continue regardless.
This could be reminiscent of Soviet era Afghan shenanigans, but without (hopefully) Russian or Western uniformed forces.
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."
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...
Syria is going to rumble on With Iran and Russia backing assad the rehtoric from France and HMG is just words.
Once S 300 is in place a no fly zone would be a daunting prospect add that to backing on the ground from Hizbollah who have been fighting side by side with Assad forces on the lebanon border only a matter of time till we see Iranian ' Volunteers' on the ground in numbers as well.
It is not beyond the balance of probablities that UK and France have backed the wrong Horse on this one.