U.S. puts jets in Jordan, fuels Russian fear of Syria no-fly zone

Comments (64)
reality-again wrote:

There are billions of flies in Syria, which could make enforcing a no-fly zone in that country quite difficult, if not impossible.
As far as Assad’s air force is concerned, enforcing a no-fly zone would be pretty easy, considering the fact that it is depleted and mainly effective against unarmed civilians and rebels inadequately armed with light weapons.

Jun 14, 2013 9:24pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
hawkeye19 wrote:

Obama has crossed a number of red lines, but he keeps getting away with it. The Untouchable.

Jun 14, 2013 9:34pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
thingfish2 wrote:

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said U.S. military support for rebel forces in Syria risked escalating violence in the Middle East.
90,000 people dead and God knows how many other people hurt and maimed, and the Foreign Minister is worried about escalating violence?

It would seem Putin and Lavroy are more concerned about loosing face with the Russian people then Syrian’s dying in street to oust a dictator bent on staying in power. It’s hard to believe the Russian people call that leadership, but then again what choice do they have.

Jun 14, 2013 9:54pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

FU, USA… Nobody likes you!

Jun 14, 2013 10:22pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Fromkin wrote:

They keep saying 80,000 dead, 90,000 dead. What’s the break up of this number? Who really died? Why don’t those who are in charge of counting dead bodies tell us who really got killed? Are al qaida terrorists who eat human organs also counted among dead civilians? The US and its lackeys will not get away with this hoax easily.

Jun 14, 2013 10:28pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
MaggieMP wrote:

America’s involvement in Syria’s internal faction fighting is neither good nor reassuring news. After what we allowed re Iraq’s WMD’s, and our involvement in Libya’s internal faction fighting, it’s stunning to not have public statements from legislators and media asking for very VERY explicit proof.

I’ve felt for some time that the US hawkish view has been ‘itching’ for ‘just enough hint’ that they can tell the American public the ‘red line’ has ‘finally’ been crossed. More people than is already the horrific case will die, and considerable investment in marketing weapons of war will pay off handsomely. Our cause will of course be noble.

Yet another nation is at risk of being reduced to shambles but territory to control resources and build pipelines (or prevent same by those we call enemy) will be secure. Sorry to sound so sour but I really don’t trust the geopolitics of much anymore.

Jun 15, 2013 1:23am EDT  --  Report as abuse
beancube2101 wrote:

We have no rights to proof which one of their gods is better, so we shouldn’t drag into it even if those war sellers are trying to burn down our TV sets with propaganda. We have to focus on that coercive Binyamin Netanyahu of Zionists and why we should equipped them more.

Jun 15, 2013 6:26am EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

Will they shoot down Israeli bombers?

Jun 15, 2013 7:34am EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@Fromkin

Well the Al Queda terrorists assured us they wont eat hearts, just the body temperature liver of one of one of their victims. The good thing is, Obama wants to unarm American civilians of their semi automatic weapons, and give advanced military weaponry to Al Queda. We are willing to give up our First, Second, and Fourth ammendment rights to fight Al Queda, and at the same time, we want to arm Al Queda. We live in topsy turvy world over here in the US, and we still have mindless drones that support these treasonous politicians, both from the GOP and DNC.

Jun 15, 2013 7:39am EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

“They keep saying 80,000 dead, 90,000 dead. What’s the break up of this number? Who really died? Why don’t those who are in charge of counting dead bodies tell us who really got killed? Are al qaida terrorists who eat human organs also counted among dead civilians? The US and its lackeys will not get away with this hoax easily.”

Yeah, I want to see a list of names, and locations of where the remains are. That normally takes the tally down by 50% or more. It is very easy to make up numbers. Ask for details, and the claims disappear.

Jun 15, 2013 7:41am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Fromkin wrote:

Total propaganda. Oliver Holmes is probably Erika Salomon’s boss in charge of black propaganda at Reuters. Their names suggest strong ethnic ties to Israel.

Jun 15, 2013 8:45am EDT  --  Report as abuse
lex_70 wrote:

“JETS HIT WORLD TRADE CENTER FLOWN BY AL QAEDA REBELS’

Jun 15, 2013 9:54am EDT  --  Report as abuse
rednek1947 wrote:

Maybe it was American bombs delivered by Syria.

Jun 15, 2013 10:12am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Walmanski wrote:

Who in there right mind would arm that religious faction? I can only assume those of like mind.

Jun 15, 2013 10:15am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Slammy wrote:

“It has been giving these terrorists these weapons covertly since day one.”
This is great news! So, if these generals join the fsa do they automatically become terrorists or does it depend on faction they join? Or does it take something else? Fromkin, how do defected Syrian soldiers become terrorists?

Jun 15, 2013 10:24am EDT  --  Report as abuse
c12steven wrote:

Too little too late. It is time to admit defeat in Syria, and bolster our only real ally in the region.

Jun 15, 2013 10:34am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Lowell_Thinks wrote:

Obama is just an inert bystander, except when it comes to giving amnesty to illegals. On the world stage, he is a joke–Nobel Peace Prize?–nauseating.

Jun 15, 2013 11:44am EDT  --  Report as abuse
reality-again wrote:

Fromkin,

You’re amusing as ever “Oliver Holmes is probably Erika Salomon’s boss in charge of black propaganda at Reuters. Their names suggest strong ethnic ties to Israel.”…
What’s “black propaganda”? Does it have any connection to Barack Obama being the first black president of our country?
You guys in Tehran need to get a crash course in good manners and politically-correct speech. Yuo sound awful!
Also, as you very well know, your own name, Fromkin, is popular among Jews but not at all among Iranians such as yourself. Why, if I may ask, did you attempt to disguise yourself as a Jew?

Jun 15, 2013 12:08pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Lowell_Thinks wrote:

hawkeye19 wrote:
Obama has crossed a number of red lines, but he keeps getting away with it. The Untouchable.

You are right on. He retired to his chamber when our ambassadaor was being murdered; a military officer would have beend court martialed, but he is protect by his worshipers and the media, Reuters included.

Jun 15, 2013 12:18pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SKYDRIFTER wrote:

The Obushma Administration can’t scare up an extra dime for American Veterans, but they can arm Syrian rebels, who have joined forces with the Taliban & al Qaeda? What the U.S. provides to the rebels will enable the Taliban & al Qaeda to re-direct their weaponry inventory. Great! just great.

How much radical Islamic revenge will the American public be able to bear – when the revenge really gets underway? We know that the FBI can’t be bothered to warn Americans when they get spoon-fed threat information, by the Russians. How many agencies knew; and when did they know?

Jun 15, 2013 1:21pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
sidbobny wrote:

haven’t we learned that when we stick our nose in other peoples buisness.we opend pandoras box in irak and libbia and we just alkida and others that hate use more power . this is a russian alli . what would we do if another country got involved in turkey or other usa allies . keep out of other peoples buiesness . russia is getting along with us real good now . why mess things up . don’t supply these people with stuff to kill us

Jun 15, 2013 2:01pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Fromkin wrote:

@Slammy

The same way Timothy Macveigh or Adam lanza became terrorists. People are not born terrorists; it’s a choice.

Muslim Brothers in their underground hidings are trained to lie and twist things. Just to be clear nobody says all FSA fighters are terrorists. We all agree that a lot of Syrians, some of them misled, protested against the government. But what is going on now has nothing to do with their peaceful demonstrations. It has to do with the US and its allies using the Muslim Brothers as a tool to gain control of the mediterranean and its mineral deposits.

Jun 15, 2013 2:12pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Slammy wrote:

Woops, I copied and pasted the wrong quote above…
“71 Syrian army officers, including six generals, had just defected to Turkey”

Amazing what a few armed gangs can inspire top brass military to do.

Jun 15, 2013 2:15pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
mils54 wrote:

I don’t agree with the anti American Arabs and Persians who spew their hatred on this site….FU!. But i do agree this is not America’s fight!, Food,shelters,Medical supply’s… yes!, Guns and missiles… NO!!!!!. Stay strong Mr President, Don’t bow to the pressure!.

Jun 15, 2013 2:15pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
elpaso wrote:

Those who comment above don’t need training
to “twist things” They do it naturally or
from Fox talking points.

Jun 15, 2013 2:21pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
elpaso wrote:

Those who comment above don’t need training
to “twist things” They do it naturally or
from Fox talking points.

Jun 15, 2013 2:21pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
elpaso wrote:

Those who comment above don’t need training
to “twist things” They do it naturally or
from Fox talking points.

Jun 15, 2013 2:21pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
totherepublic wrote:

More like Russia will be humiliated when our stealth fighters blow up their air to ground missile sites in Syria. As with all air wars since early in Nam Us is supreme and that is an embarrassment Russia hates to admit. Just wait until two Carrier groups (they really only need one) park off shore. GO NAVY

Jun 15, 2013 2:54pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
totherepublic wrote:

elpaso

Got your green card yet?

Jun 15, 2013 2:56pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Fromkin wrote:

@Slammy

“71 Syrian army officers, including six generals, had just defected to Turkey”

I’ll check this from RELIABLE sources and I’ll get back to you. A lot of misinformation comes from Turkey,the headquarter of the bogus FSA, led by closet Muslim Brothers.

It’s a war. Soldiers defect/desert in a war especially when they are being promised petrodollars everyday. I am sure there are FSA fighters or even Al Nusra terrorists who defect/desert everyday. But the fight goes on and now you’d agree with me that the Syrian army is winning, just like I predicted.

Jun 15, 2013 3:04pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ConstFundie wrote:

@Fromkin, i have read of one that died, that i have not seen reported by Reuters or US news. Syrian rebels ‘execute teenager’, http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/06/201369175918244221.html

Very little of the violence being committed by the Syrian Rebels seems to make it to western news. Probably won’t be hearing about US weapons killing Americans in Afghanistan either. Round and Round we go.

Jun 15, 2013 3:16pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
joe10082 wrote:

Sounds like the making of a world war to me. Everyone is getting involved. That Obama would send F-16′s is frightening to say the least. We don’t need nor can we afford another war especially a nuclear war!.

Jun 15, 2013 3:34pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SKYDRIFTER wrote:

Few seem to want to speculate the outcome, if Assad wins. Who will feed the refugees who don’t dare return to Syria? What revenge will be brought to bear against those suspected of being dis-loyalists? What ‘thanks’ will Assad give to Hezbollah?

Assad would do well to keep a very low profile. Killing him would be the quickest way to hand a victory to the rebels.

Jun 15, 2013 3:47pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
silkscreen wrote:

Obama and his red lines, Bush and his Iraq weapons of mass destruction.
People want the truth, not garbage coming from their mouths.
Garbage mouth Obama and Bush, enough killing innocent civilians!

Jun 15, 2013 3:53pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

SKYDRIFTER said: “The Obushma Administration can’t scare up an extra dime for American Veterans, but they can arm Syrian rebels”

Congress, which isn’t part of the Obama administration last time I checked (particularly the House), are the ones who make these decisions. Your good buddy John McCain, you know a Republican, actually went there and hob nobbed with rebels. He has been pressing for more money and arms for the them. And Rand Paul (R) sits on the committee that approves or denies foreign aid. You would us believe that Obama is doing all these things on his own. Do you really have a clue about how our government works? I don’t think so! Per our Constitution the President, any President, can not spend 1 dime of tax payer money without Congressional approval…and that’s a fact Jack!

Jun 15, 2013 4:04pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
hallsway wrote:

Since al Qaeda is over-represented in the Syrian “rebel” forces… and since al Qaeda is a terrorist organization… it is illegal for the President to allow armaments to be sent to the Syrian “rebel” forces and if he does so it is an impeachable offense.

Jun 15, 2013 4:05pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

SKYDRIFTER..yeah I know it takes the argument out of your rant when reality is applied. But on the other hand, when reality is applied your rant simply makes you look like an uneducated moron.

Jun 15, 2013 4:10pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

This conflict is a “dog with fleas”. Nothing good will come from U.S. involvement. This is two different religious sects that are warring. Sure the rebels like us when we come with guns and money (remember Afghanistan when Russia was invading that country). In the end, either the same radical group (Assad) will keep control. Or a different radical group will take over. Look no further than Iraq to illustrate my point. Obama has been extremely reluctant to engage in this travesty. This is a U.N. issue. Let with far right “warmongers” squeal all they want. We need to stop funding or providing arms to a group that will ultimately prove to be as radical as the one currently in power in Syria.

Jun 15, 2013 4:19pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

totherepublic…take your medication and ask the nurse to put another blanket on you. The cold war ended decades ago. This conflict isn’t about the USA vs Russia. It’s about two warring religious factions in a third world country. Both of which are radical. And neither of them are our friends. A wise man would simply walk away. We have a lot to lose and zero to gain.

Jun 15, 2013 4:24pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
crod526 wrote:

Neither side is good for US. But is funny to hear those here defending Assad , his crooked regime and Hezbollah interventionists. And then the Obama bashers that would bash him no matter what he chooses to do.

Jun 15, 2013 4:30pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
nixonfan wrote:

It’s been way too long since we had a good head-to-head between Russian and American fighters. If Russia wants to sell more aircraft, they might want to avoid a confrontation. We can try out our new F-22s and maybe even an F-35 if we can get it off the ground.

Jun 15, 2013 4:39pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
nixonfan wrote:

It’s been way too long since we had a good head-to-head between Russian and American fighters. If Russia wants to sell more aircraft, they might want to avoid a confrontation. We can try out our new F-22s and maybe even an F-35 if we can get it off the ground.

Jun 15, 2013 4:39pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
nixonfan wrote:

It’s been way too long since we had a good head-to-head between Russian and American fighters. If Russia wants to sell more aircraft, they might want to avoid a confrontation. We can try out our new F-22s and maybe even an F-35 if we can get it off the ground.

Jun 15, 2013 4:39pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
nixonfan wrote:

It’s been way too long since we had a good head-to-head between Russian and American fighters. If Russia wants to sell more aircraft, they might want to avoid a confrontation. We can try out our new F-22s and maybe even an F-35 if we can get it off the ground.

Jun 15, 2013 4:39pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

hallsway..how does Congress Impeach a President for doing what they have approved? The only way that Obama can ship arms to Syria is if Congress approves it. Didn’t quite think that stupid comment all the way through..did you?

Jun 15, 2013 4:41pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Speaker2 wrote:

One more dumb war to get into, we didn’t learn in Viet-Nam, Gulf War I and the “Little Bush” WMD Follies I & II. Seems we have to keep butting into other people’s wars, keep our military Industry busy and have someone pissed off at us, so the government can say we have to spy on our citizens to protect them.

Jun 15, 2013 5:03pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Well said Speaker2! see the link below…the vast majority of Americans agree with you and me. We need to attend to our own problems. Syria isn’t one of them.

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/11/18905791-nbcwsj-poll-americans-oppose-intervention-in-syria?lite

Jun 15, 2013 5:39pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

nixonfan..the U.S.spends 43% of what the world spends on Defense. One would expect that our assets are superior to everyone else’s. And they are! Otherwise, we wouldn’t only crazy for spending that kind of money. We would also be stupid.

Jun 15, 2013 5:45pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Jake987 wrote:

Do you really expect Russia to believe this was a coincidence?????

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel has approved a Jordanian request for American F-16s and Patriot missiles to remain in the Western-backed kingdom after a joint military exercise there next week, a Pentagon spokesman said.

Heck ….I don’t believe it and I’m American.

Jun 15, 2013 6:01pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
CMEBARK wrote:

There should be as way to delete all these duplicate messages post,i.e. nixonfan.

Jun 15, 2013 6:02pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@XYZ2055

Congress didn’t approve our actions in Libya. That didn’t stop the President.

June 15, 2011

“The Obama administration argued Wednesday that its nearly three-month-old military involvement in Libya does not require congressional approval because of the supporting role most U.S. forces are playing there, a position that puts it at odds with some Republican leaders and the antiwar wing of its own party.”

Jun 15, 2013 6:04pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Fromkin wrote:

“The idea of a no-fly zone was endorsed by Egypt,”

This is the game the US has been playing with the Muslim Brotherhood. It set up subservient Muslim Brotherhood led governments everywhere in the ME, which in exchange “endorse” acts of aggression by the US.

The propaganda barrage was heavy. The moment of truth will arrive Monday when Western leaders will have to understand the meaning of the word NIET from the CZAR.

Jun 15, 2013 6:14pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

TheNewWorld..come on! Are you really that obtuse or are you just being coy? Our laws allow the President some leeway in these matters…I believe 90 days (War Powers Act?). Which after that time he has to get Congressional approval. Syria isn’t even on the radar in that area. And you have the whole far right wing of the Republican party just itching to get into this thing.

Jun 15, 2013 6:18pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

And McCain was pissed we didn’t do more in Libya.

Jun 15, 2013 6:19pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

TheNewWorld..the authorization for the War Powers Act, btw..comes from Congress. And they alone have the ability to take that right away from the Presidency. Therefore, I’ll stand on my original statement that the President is powerless without Congresses approval.

Jun 15, 2013 6:23pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
VonHell wrote:

“White House noted later that it would be far harder and costlier to set one up there than it was in Libya, saying the United States had no national interest in pursuing that option.” mmm costly and with no national interest… that usually translates into we will do it and it is already on the way …hehehe

But i would not be surprised if US wait for the new russian SAMs to arrive…
A few SAMs would not prevent the no fly zone, but think about it… if some F16s are shot down with cameras well positioned to register the SAM following in relatively low motion catching the plane and american pilots, particulary the new front line approved female officers, are captured and shown in video with a lot of masked guys behind… something not seen since desert storm in HD…
In the week following congress would approve the F35-elephanting at 300Mi / 1.5Bi lifetime maintenance cost… each…
the useful and the pleaseant united…

Jun 15, 2013 6:25pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@xyz2055

Well yes and no. They gave the President the power, but he now has that power. But I was just replying to your first comment that Congress would have to approve us shipping weapons. He can do it without their approval. He would be better off to get the approval first though. And yeah, McCain wants us in Syria. He hasn’t seen a war he didn’t like.

Jun 15, 2013 6:33pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

TheNewWorld..you’re just digging a deeper hole. Congress has already haven the President the power..he didn’t do this on this own. They wrote and passed legislation to make it so. He has the approval from Congress for up to 90 days…therefore your argument is little more than whining. Get a grip!

Jun 15, 2013 6:59pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@xyz2055

Semantics. Basically they gave the executive branch approval to go to war without their approval for 90 days. He is better off to have their approval from day one, or else they can turn on him. And if he provides material support to a group of people we are at war with, they can bring war crimes against him, impeach him, or even try him for treason. Reagan caught a lot of heat over playing both sides in the Iraq/Iran war. Directly supporting Al Queda now would make him very vulnerable.

Jun 15, 2013 7:37pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Slammy wrote:

@Fromkin

“It’s a war. Soldiers defect/desert in a war especially when they are being promised petrodollars everyday.”

True, but we are not talking about front line soldiers who have been under fire for days or week. These are generals and top brass. Look at the conflicts where the top people start leaving and how those turned out.

“But the fight goes on and now you’d agree with me that the Syrian army is winning, just like I predicted.”

Have I? Can you please repost that? I agree that they won a few battles next the Lebanese border with major help from Hezbollah. I believe that the regime is going to have a harder time retaking the rest of the country. Time will tell but you have been declaring victory for over a year and here we are.

Jun 15, 2013 8:11pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
GeorgeBrown wrote:

So the U.S. Air Force will provide air support for Islamist militants again just like in Libya? Short-sighted at best…

Jun 15, 2013 8:31pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

TheNewWorld..it isn’t semantics..It’s legislature signed into law. PERIOD.

Jun 15, 2013 8:52pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

TheNewWorld..here’s the litmus test..where does the authority come from? The Congress or the President. Argue all you want, but the authority comes from Congress period.

Jun 15, 2013 8:56pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@xyz2055

Authority, and approval are two different things. The War Powers Act says that a president has the latitude to commit troops to combat zones, but, within 48 hours of doing so he must formally notify Congress and provide his explanation for doing so. If Congress does not agree with the troop commitment, the president must remove them from combat within 60 to 90 days.

So again, the President would be better off to get their approval before he goes through with this. He has the authority to do it, but he does not have formal approval. And really do you think an act that originated in 1973 means that the Congress approves of all military actions by the executive office from 1973 until eternity. The War Powers Act is a reaction to the Vietnam War. Congress passed it in 1973 when the United States withdrew from combat operations in Vietnam after more than a decade. The War Powers Act attempted to correct what Congress and the American public saw as excessive war-making powers in the hands of the president.

Jun 15, 2013 10:23pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.