4
4
0
Saw this today on an e-mail I get from Washpo:
— As Russia intensified its airstrikes in Syria, Clinton broke with the Obama White House to urge a no-fly zone in the country. “I personally would be advocating now for a no-fly zone and humanitarian corridors to try to stop the carnage on the ground and from the air, to try to provide some way to take stock of what’s happening, to try to stem the flow of refugees,” the former secretary of state said in a local TV interview in Boston after a campaign event. “I think Putin is playing a very dangerous and cynical game. He’s clearly doing everything he can to prop up Assad and to establish sort of a Russian presence in Syria and the broader Middle East.”
U.S. intelligence officials say it has become increasingly clear that Russia is targeting U.S.-backed rebel strongholds, NOT areas controlled by ISIS, in a bid to keep Bashar al-Assad in power. Russian officials deny this, claiming that they are targeting “terrorist” groups. “If it looks like a terrorist, if it acts like a terrorist, if it walks like a terrorist, if it fights like a terrorist, it’s a terrorist,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in New York."
----------------------------
Enforcing a no-fly zone would require firing on Russian aircraft. I almost typed "Soviet". HRC is a super hawk any way, but that is nuts.
What is happening in Syria now is the type of event back in the 70's and '80s that it was thought could touch off a nuclear war between the US and USSR. It is pretty freaking dangerous now.
------------------------------------------------
I kinda mean for this to be a discussion of what is happening in Syria now. If Putin is targeting groups favored by the U.S. --- no one ever even thought that up in a movie.
Walt
— As Russia intensified its airstrikes in Syria, Clinton broke with the Obama White House to urge a no-fly zone in the country. “I personally would be advocating now for a no-fly zone and humanitarian corridors to try to stop the carnage on the ground and from the air, to try to provide some way to take stock of what’s happening, to try to stem the flow of refugees,” the former secretary of state said in a local TV interview in Boston after a campaign event. “I think Putin is playing a very dangerous and cynical game. He’s clearly doing everything he can to prop up Assad and to establish sort of a Russian presence in Syria and the broader Middle East.”
U.S. intelligence officials say it has become increasingly clear that Russia is targeting U.S.-backed rebel strongholds, NOT areas controlled by ISIS, in a bid to keep Bashar al-Assad in power. Russian officials deny this, claiming that they are targeting “terrorist” groups. “If it looks like a terrorist, if it acts like a terrorist, if it walks like a terrorist, if it fights like a terrorist, it’s a terrorist,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in New York."
----------------------------
Enforcing a no-fly zone would require firing on Russian aircraft. I almost typed "Soviet". HRC is a super hawk any way, but that is nuts.
What is happening in Syria now is the type of event back in the 70's and '80s that it was thought could touch off a nuclear war between the US and USSR. It is pretty freaking dangerous now.
------------------------------------------------
I kinda mean for this to be a discussion of what is happening in Syria now. If Putin is targeting groups favored by the U.S. --- no one ever even thought that up in a movie.
Walt
Conflict
Cold War
Hillary Clinton
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 13
4
4
0
Capt Walter Miller
The Rethugs made her seem like the Queen of the Amazons yesterday. They are the biggest fools in government.
Walt
Walt
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
"Hillary is a super hawk"...That is a good one. Hillary was hitting the reset button with the Russians just a few years ago convinced she could beguile them into submission. Now, after the Crimea, meddling in the Ukraine and the bombing in Syria she finds a backbone...I think not.
She is now saying what is politically expedient to prop her up in the polls on the democrat side of the aisle. It is now obvious to everyone, including Hillary, the Obama foreign policy approach with the Russians and in the middle east is a disaster and is not working by almost any standard.
You are correct though, a no fly zone in Syria! Who is going to enforce that and who is going to clear a pilot hot to shoot down a Russian airplane. The answer is, no one. This should come as no surprise even to the casual observer. The Russians have supported the Assad's for decades (daddy and son) and are going to strike when the see the US at it's weakest. We have been unable to cobble together an Army we spent millions on to field.
We have no strategy in the middle east to speak of. Obama is clearly trying to talk his way out of the issue with zero threat of a use of force that has any credibility to it. He met with Russia at the UN and a couple of days later they are bombing the people we support. What message do you think Putin received from Obama...The answer is, weakness.
She is now saying what is politically expedient to prop her up in the polls on the democrat side of the aisle. It is now obvious to everyone, including Hillary, the Obama foreign policy approach with the Russians and in the middle east is a disaster and is not working by almost any standard.
You are correct though, a no fly zone in Syria! Who is going to enforce that and who is going to clear a pilot hot to shoot down a Russian airplane. The answer is, no one. This should come as no surprise even to the casual observer. The Russians have supported the Assad's for decades (daddy and son) and are going to strike when the see the US at it's weakest. We have been unable to cobble together an Army we spent millions on to field.
We have no strategy in the middle east to speak of. Obama is clearly trying to talk his way out of the issue with zero threat of a use of force that has any credibility to it. He met with Russia at the UN and a couple of days later they are bombing the people we support. What message do you think Putin received from Obama...The answer is, weakness.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Capt Walter Miller this is like playing devils advocate after her Benghazi and e-mail fiasco. She has a lot of trust to gain, my question is where does it start?
(2)
(0)
Capt Walter Miller
She's nuts.
There are Russian aircraft -- based now in Syria. If anyone is half awake , HRC just deep-sixed her own campaign if it is true she called for a no-fly zone enforced by US aircraft.
Walt
There are Russian aircraft -- based now in Syria. If anyone is half awake , HRC just deep-sixed her own campaign if it is true she called for a no-fly zone enforced by US aircraft.
Walt
(2)
(0)
0
0
0
I came here b/c I thought you were actually posing a serious question. After your first response to someone who tried to answer I realize you are just being rhetorical.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
This is why it baffles me that she is so hated by some on the right when her foreign policy views are normally on par with them.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Capt Walter Miller
Et all. I still find it somewhat unbelievable that anyone here on RP can support Hillary. Yes I know (though do not understand) that there are Democrats serving in the military. Hell, some of my RP contacts are Dems or at least left leaning (CPT L S and LTJG James Jones).
But any veteran, whether left or right leaning, who can truthfully support Hillary after Benghazi and the private email server, I just don't get.
L S and James, I'm not necessarily implying that you support Hillary (unless you do, LOL).
Unlike other right leaning (Hell, left leaning types also) who don't like what someone who has different political leanings than they do, I like to think that I can intelligently debate and not resort to name calling.
Et all. I still find it somewhat unbelievable that anyone here on RP can support Hillary. Yes I know (though do not understand) that there are Democrats serving in the military. Hell, some of my RP contacts are Dems or at least left leaning (CPT L S and LTJG James Jones).
But any veteran, whether left or right leaning, who can truthfully support Hillary after Benghazi and the private email server, I just don't get.
L S and James, I'm not necessarily implying that you support Hillary (unless you do, LOL).
Unlike other right leaning (Hell, left leaning types also) who don't like what someone who has different political leanings than they do, I like to think that I can intelligently debate and not resort to name calling.
(0)
(0)
PO1 John Miller
CPT L S
Definitely! I've got some close personal real-life (non-Internet) friends who are Democrats and Republicans, LOL.
I'm a Libertarian so I manage to piss off both sides! :)
Definitely! I've got some close personal real-life (non-Internet) friends who are Democrats and Republicans, LOL.
I'm a Libertarian so I manage to piss off both sides! :)
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Vote for her she is a woman. Hillary says vote for me I'm a woman. How are you different from Obama? I'm a woman vote for me. I think she is a Harpee.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Well as I remember it Assad is a merciless ass hole dictator, and the Muslim brotherhood who Obama likes turned Into ISIS. Which was armed by the U.S. thru the Hillary Obama connection in Bengazi... which went south. Anyway the people were better off with ass hole Assad than backdoor US supported ISIS. The Russian took that opportunity to assist in a positive note with their usual backdoor motives. ISIS is bad news for any Muslims. That's why you will see civil war there. The ISIS brotherhood has been beheading many non Muslim Arabs and is much worse than the previous dictatorships in Libya Egypt and Iraq. For that reason let the Russians assist. Even Iran is against ISIS. Obama should not have supported the ISIS brotherhood movement. His motives are treachery to both the Muslims and this republic.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
The Democratic Debate moderator earlier this week asked Hillary Clinton which political “enemy” she’s most proud of. Her response? The NRA and … *drumroll* … “Republicans”!
She also laughed when Anderson Cooper asked it her emails were an issue in this campaign for president and blamed her enemies the Republicans.... Yes that is funny because the FBI investigation of her emails and server is a major concern. There is evidence that classified material was mishandled and her server could have been hacked.. And did she delete all of her emails that pertained to Benghazi and our Ambassador to Libya ?? We may find out this week when she tries to laugh this off in front of Trey Gowdy and his committee ...Should be interesting. But her minions have already said the hearings this week by congress are a political witch hunt.... Well I do agree with the "witch" thing... and would not be surprised to see Hillary fly in on a broom since we are close to Halloween and doesn't Hillary turn into a witch about now & stir up a pot of nasty stuff for her enemies the NRA & Republicans..??? Grab you popcorn and get ready for some fun TV watchin this week as Hillary goes back to Washington and takes on her enemies again..
She also laughed when Anderson Cooper asked it her emails were an issue in this campaign for president and blamed her enemies the Republicans.... Yes that is funny because the FBI investigation of her emails and server is a major concern. There is evidence that classified material was mishandled and her server could have been hacked.. And did she delete all of her emails that pertained to Benghazi and our Ambassador to Libya ?? We may find out this week when she tries to laugh this off in front of Trey Gowdy and his committee ...Should be interesting. But her minions have already said the hearings this week by congress are a political witch hunt.... Well I do agree with the "witch" thing... and would not be surprised to see Hillary fly in on a broom since we are close to Halloween and doesn't Hillary turn into a witch about now & stir up a pot of nasty stuff for her enemies the NRA & Republicans..??? Grab you popcorn and get ready for some fun TV watchin this week as Hillary goes back to Washington and takes on her enemies again..
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
This discussion seems to have wandered into politics, not policy.
Let me take a stab at policy.
What is apparent to me is that the Russians are targeting anybody but ISIS with the intention of eliminating options for a new government that will be acceptable to the West. In other words, if the degradation of opposition forces results in a choice between Assad and ISIS, the West will have to support Assad. Putin is a rock star to the surviving Syrian regime, as well as the Iranians, who clearly parlayed with Russia on this subject immediately on the heels of the Iran Nuclear agreement being signed.
So... options:
1. We could dialogue about it. The Russians and their friends would love this, as it buys them time to bombard "indiscriminately" (the Pentagon's choice of words) while they get more opportunities to publicly truck the US DoS as they have been doing for two years running. It also seems to be the preferred choice of Sec Kerry and possibly the President.
2. We could pretend to be on the same team as the Russians and continue our own operations in Syria. This has a lot of risks of unintended frictions with the Russians. What is likely is that Assad wins in this scenario - he is the only one not getting fired upon.
3. We could deny entry. I'm not sure who's airspace is being transited for Russian aircraft to get to Syria. They are certainly not flying over Turkey or NATO. We control Iraq's airspace, last I heard. Or have we abdicated that role...
They can't get there by sea with the Turks owning the strait.
Sounds to me like at least one, if not multiples of our "partners" have decided that the Russians better align with their interests than we do.
A "no-fly zone"? Because that worked so well in Iraq.
I think (holding my nose) that Trump might have stumbled onto the right answer: sit back, get the popcorn, and watch the Russians expend effort and treasure as a whole bunch of our enemies fight each other.
We should have done that in Libya.
Let me take a stab at policy.
What is apparent to me is that the Russians are targeting anybody but ISIS with the intention of eliminating options for a new government that will be acceptable to the West. In other words, if the degradation of opposition forces results in a choice between Assad and ISIS, the West will have to support Assad. Putin is a rock star to the surviving Syrian regime, as well as the Iranians, who clearly parlayed with Russia on this subject immediately on the heels of the Iran Nuclear agreement being signed.
So... options:
1. We could dialogue about it. The Russians and their friends would love this, as it buys them time to bombard "indiscriminately" (the Pentagon's choice of words) while they get more opportunities to publicly truck the US DoS as they have been doing for two years running. It also seems to be the preferred choice of Sec Kerry and possibly the President.
2. We could pretend to be on the same team as the Russians and continue our own operations in Syria. This has a lot of risks of unintended frictions with the Russians. What is likely is that Assad wins in this scenario - he is the only one not getting fired upon.
3. We could deny entry. I'm not sure who's airspace is being transited for Russian aircraft to get to Syria. They are certainly not flying over Turkey or NATO. We control Iraq's airspace, last I heard. Or have we abdicated that role...
They can't get there by sea with the Turks owning the strait.
Sounds to me like at least one, if not multiples of our "partners" have decided that the Russians better align with their interests than we do.
A "no-fly zone"? Because that worked so well in Iraq.
I think (holding my nose) that Trump might have stumbled onto the right answer: sit back, get the popcorn, and watch the Russians expend effort and treasure as a whole bunch of our enemies fight each other.
We should have done that in Libya.
(0)
(0)
Capt Walter Miller
As I understand, at least some Russian aircraft are now based in Syria. What do you take issue with re no-fly zones in Iraq? Did that not work?
Am I mistaken that enforcing a no-fly zone in Syria would have the U.S. confronting Russian aircraft?
Walt
Am I mistaken that enforcing a no-fly zone in Syria would have the U.S. confronting Russian aircraft?
Walt
(0)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
Capt Walter Miller, no fly zones in Iraq got the Kurds and Shia smoked post Gulf War. The Iraqis simply used helicopters to do their dirty work. A no-fly zone in Syria would require us to fly CAP as well as strike sorties, with the very real chance of confrontations with the Russians. The Syrians fly Russian-built aircraft too.
Who's team are we on anyway?
Syria's? The Russians? Iran's?
If everyone involved in an enemy or an adversary and they want to fight, let them.
By the time they are done, maybe we'll have come up with a policy that is coherent. Until then, this half-assed thing we are doing is pointless, expensive, and looks feckless to everyone that is watching.
Who's team are we on anyway?
Syria's? The Russians? Iran's?
If everyone involved in an enemy or an adversary and they want to fight, let them.
By the time they are done, maybe we'll have come up with a policy that is coherent. Until then, this half-assed thing we are doing is pointless, expensive, and looks feckless to everyone that is watching.
(0)
(0)
Capt Walter Miller
Yes, well the post DS no-fly zones didn't include helos. I wondered if that is what you meant. The Bush 41 administration seemed to ready to support those poor people and then did nothing to help them.
Walt
Walt
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google