question about no-fly zones

brattt

unread,

Jun 14, 2013, 12:50:10 PM6/14/13

to

I know there have been no-fly zones in the past, but don't understand who
has the authority to set up a no-fly zone. How can the USofA just say
this is a no-fly zone (even when it is needed)?

And just because someone says this is a no-fly zone, what happens if
someone else says I'm going to fly there anyways?

I guess I could understand if the country underneath the no-fly zone sets
it up, but when it is 5000 miles away?

da pickle

unread,

Jun 14, 2013, 1:19:10 PM6/14/13

to

Simple answer to the first question ... because they can.

The USA can do anything it wants to do if there is sufficient lack of
opposition to whatever it is ... the proper question is what is "lack of
sufficient opposition." It depends.

Your second question is easy ... the "someone" who flies there anyway
gets shot down.

Third question is undefined. 5000 miles away from where? The "country
underneath the no-fly zone" is usually the "someone" who decides to fly
there anyway.

ChrisRobin

unread,

Jun 14, 2013, 1:20:29 PM6/14/13

to

On Jun 14 2013 12:50 PM, brattt wrote:

> I know there have been no-fly zones in the past, but don't understand who
> has the authority to set up a no-fly zone. How can the USofA just say
> this is a no-fly zone (even when it is needed)?

Because we say so. You mean that isn't enough for you?

> And just because someone says this is a no-fly zone, what happens if
> someone else says I'm going to fly there anyways?

We'll shoot them down and claim it's their fault, since we had declared a
"no-fly" zone, and we were there first. See how this works yet?

> I guess I could understand if the country underneath the no-fly zone sets
> it up, but when it is 5000 miles away?

If violated, it provides an instant justification – however flimsy – for
direct intervention.

brattt

unread,

Jun 14, 2013, 1:50:27 PM6/14/13

to

I meant the no-fly zone is 5000 miles away from the USofA (I made up
5,000) - took a guess.

brattt

unread,

Jun 14, 2013, 1:51:25 PM6/14/13

to

I guess I have lived my life with a little Pollyanna in me - all this shit
is getting really ugly. I'm glad I'm old.

risky biz

unread,

Jun 14, 2013, 1:57:07 PM6/14/13

to

It's called the law of the jungle. If the US can bend enough arms it will
do it with the fig leaf of the UN. If not, it will do it anyway if it
doesn't fear the consequences.

The chemical arms claim is completely bogus. It has been reported that the
"rebels" were the ones using the chemical arms and conclusively confirmed
when some of them were arrested in Turkey with chemical weapons.

America's Democratic/Republican duopoly is frantic that their "rebels",
elsewhere labeled as terrorists by the same people, have not only lost
political support from the average Syrian (yes, religious-inspired
beheadings, summary executions, kidnappings, random murders, and extreme
Islamic religious courts do have consequences) but are also losing
disastrously militarily.

da pickle

unread,

Jun 14, 2013, 2:07:51 PM6/14/13

to

It is over 5000 from the USA to the middle east ... but it is not far
from our military bases (or staging stations) to almost anywhere in the
world. The aircraft or missiles that support a no-fly zone are often
quite close.

Hollis2

unread,

Jun 14, 2013, 9:24:09 PM6/14/13

to

On Jun 14 2013 12:50 PM, brattt wrote:

> I know there have been no-fly zones in the past, but don't understand who
> has the authority to set up a no-fly zone. How can the USofA just say
> this is a no-fly zone (even when it is needed)?
>
> And just because someone says this is a no-fly zone, what happens if
> someone else says I'm going to fly there anyways?

It really comes down to the ability to make it stick. If the US wants to
stop Syrian aircraft from flying over Syria, it can.

> I guess I could understand if the country underneath the no-fly zone sets
> it up, but when it is 5000 miles away?

The US can project its air power anywhere in the world with in air
refueling and the use of aircraft carrier groups.

BTW, a major consideration in declaring a no-fly zone in Syria is that it
would include the air space above a Russian naval base.

ChrisRobin

unread,

Jun 18, 2013, 7:24:08 PM6/18/13

to

On Jun 14 2013 9:24 PM, Hollis2 wrote:

> BTW, a major consideration in declaring a no-fly zone in Syria is that it
> would include the air space above a Russian naval base.

You think?

risky biz

unread,

Jun 19, 2013, 5:18:48 PM6/19/13

to

: )

Hollis2

unread,

Jun 20, 2013, 4:26:00 PM6/20/13

to

As far as the US is concerned the best outcome for this war would be that
it never end. So when it looks like Assad is gaining the upper hand the
US gives the rebels enough weapons to turn the tide, but never enough that
they actually win.

risky biz

unread,

Jun 20, 2013, 6:09:16 PM6/20/13

to

Hollis is showing some glimmers.