(2) Moscow won't "tolerate aerial intrusion in the Syrian conflict by Turkey or any other NATO member." At issue is imposing no-fly zone intervention. Perhaps Russia is also concerned about lawless safe havens in Syrian territory if established.
Hopefully DF is right. Preventing full-scale war on Syria requires drawing red lines to be challenged if crossed. Washington prefers soft targets.
Tougher adversaries give Pentagon planners pause. Ones able give as much as they take may halt further war entirely. It's time to act and find out. Prioritizing Syria makes sense.
Since March 2011, Washington-led efforts ravaged the country relentlessly. Signs suggest imminent full-scale intervention. Perhaps it's coming after US November elections. They're less than three weeks away.
Turkish troops are mobilized on Syria's northern border. US and UK special forces are in Jordan on its southern border. Congressman Dennis Kucinich thinks they're up to no good.
"Without notifying Congress," he said, Washington is "immeasurably" closer to full-scale involvement. He told US News:
"I can see in a moment how it happens: we're a few dozen miles from the Syrian border and all of a sudden we are within the reach of physical danger. All it takes is a single incident."- Advertisement -
"Putting U.S. troops on that border draws the U.S. much closer to war in Syria, which is a nightmare already and can be more of a nightmare for our country."
"There's a trail of causality here".Once you position U.S troops on the border of a conflict area, it immeasurably increases the possibility of the US getting drawn into the conflict - because we're there."