Well, thank God that’s over. I don’t have to watch another presidential debate for at least — what — 18 months or so? At least Wednesday’s show actually offered some substance, albeit not the substance the two candidates were hoping to expose. Buried in the middle of the usual babble and counter-babble, it suddenly became very apparent that a Hillary Clinton presidency will pretty much guarantee a shooting war with Russia.
Reiterating her previous statements on the issue of the growing conflict in Syria, Madame Clinton promised “I think a no-fly zone could save lives and could hasten the end of the conflict.” Hillary’s plan to end a disaster she actively helped to create involves putting American pilots in the sky over the most hotly contested piece of real estate on the market. Our aviators would be joining traffic from whatever leftovers the various Syrian factions can get aloft, occasional visits from neighboring countries’ Air Forces (many of which would involve American materiel funneled through Mrs. Clinton’s State Department pay-for-play operation) and Hillary’s former uranium client and current nemesis: Russia.
See, “no-fly zone” sounds like a stern and decisive plan. “We” are going to “enforce” a “no-fly zone.” Given the excellence of our various Air Force, Navy and Marine fighter pilots, it sounds like an impenetrable wall of jet-powered justice. Hillary says the United States will set up a “no-fly zone,” and Syria will be pacified; or at least become just another third-world hellhole torn apart by sectarian violence. She even cites previous “no-fly zones” as proof that the concept works.
Except that previous “no-fly zones” either didn’t work or weren’t located in areas bristling with potential enemies who are eminently capable of testing the limits of the “zone.” It’s one thing to clear the Gulf of Sidra and ground a bunch of Libyan surplus MiGs which are held together with cosmoline and duct tape. It’s another to warn off multiple air forces of varying allegiance, skill and equipment; while dodging ground fire which has already taken out passenger liners; directly over the one of the worst neighborhoods on the planet.
It gets even more complicated when you consider at least one of the other gangs fighting for the turf has as large and well-equipped an Air Force as we do. Granted, the Russian pilots are not as good as ours, but their planes come close enough that repeated proximity between the two is almost guaranteed to create some exciting moments. Moreover, the Russians, emboldened by the mewling appeasement of President Barack Obama’s foreign policy, are a lot less likely to back off. And then there’s the little matter of Hillary making partners in peace out of the same Russians she has spent most of this campaign blaming for nearly every crime she has committed over the last few years.
Fret not, dear friends. Hillary has a plan to make the “no-fly zone” an aerial zen garden.
“This would not be done just on the first day. This would take a lot of negotiation and would also take making it clear to the Russians and Syrians … I think we could strike a deal.”
Right. The countries with whom we have broken off negotiations on this very topic will change their minds because of… more negotiations. Hillary’s plan to make a “no-fly zone” effective involves telling the very people who object to a “no-fly zone” to refrain from flying in the no-fly zone. That Hillary also mentioned her plan to “…take back Mosul and then move into Syria and take back Raqqa…” ought to have raised a few more eyebrows, especially considering the people against whom she plans to enact a “no-fly zone” might object to her plan to march American soldiers into the heart of that zone.
Hillary Clinton, who promises to continue the Obama-era policies which she helped form, and which played a pivotal role in turning Syria into what could very well be a nuclear powder-keg, has managed to formulate a plan to prevent war in the region by provoking war in the region. A “no-fly zone” is such a bad idea, even the current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (and his current boss, the Commander in Chief) say it’s a bad idea. A Hillary victory will give us a vicious and angry president who was pro-war, became anti-war and now says she’s pro-war because she’s anti-war, has a plan to stop war — with war.
— Ben Crystal