No-fly Zone: Best Suggestion Ever

[mahatmakanejeeves]

This was a letter to the editor in the Washington Post on Monday, March 7, 2011.

Strategies for the Arab world

{It's the second one.}

A "no-fly zone" sounds great and would offer some cool footage of anti-aircraft missiles streaking through the desert sky on the evening news {"U.S. defense leaders warn of risks in enforcing no-fly zone," news story, March 2}.

In this age of austerity, however, wouldn't it be cost constructive to offer money - say $5 million per plane - to Libyan crews who would fly their bombers and helicopters to a neutral location? It is possible that for less than a billion dollars - small potatoes in terms of the monetary and human cost of mounting and maintaining a no-fly zone - the offensive capacity of the Libyan air force could be effectively shut down.

Of course, it might not work, in which case it would have cost nothing; neither would it make the evening news.

William Bateson, Washington

[HopeHoops]

1. Curiously, Doonesbury is right on target with this one. The Red Rascal is on the move....

[MineralMan]

2. Not a bad idea at all.

The thing that worries me most about the no-fly zone thing is shooting down planes over populated areas, thus causing non-combatant casualties. This idea might minimize the danger of that. Interesting.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

3. And it's a market-based solution,

guaranteeing that it will have the overwhelming approval of teabaggers.

Sure.