Read on.When conflict rears its ugly head around the world, there is usually a call for the United States to “do something.” One option that is frequently mentioned is the no-fly zone. The United States and its allies enjoy a significant advantage over most potential adversaries in the air. No-fly zones, therefore, are attractive due to the perceived lower cost and risk when compared to other options. Despite this, setting up a no-fly zone is anything but a “no brainer.” Depending on the circumstances, there may be steep costs and unseen risks. This short primer is intended to introduce readers to the way no-fly zones really work.
Defense One
Read on.People have been dying in Syria for years and fleeing in great numbers for months. For all that time, no-fly zones have been urgently called for as morally necessary, yet regularly dismissed as useless, too dangerous, or too costly. Now no-fly zones are being debated in the American presidential campaign. It is time that someone spelled out what the record shows no-fly zones can and cannot do.
Defense One
Those are a couple of good articles on what's involved in setting up a no-fly zone and when it's effective and when it's not. They're not long. Worth the read. Judge for yourself, but I'm with the faction that says it would be a huge waste of resources and likely only to lead to escalation of the war and worsen our precarious position vis a vis Russia. Maybe that's what she's looking or, war hawk and Russophobe that she is. It certainly wouldn't do anything to stop ISIS. They don't have planes.
...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.
UPDATE:
No comments:
Post a Comment