What We Really Mean When We Talk About a Syrian No-Fly Zone., page 1

I think they are now talking about possible Syrian no-fly zone sooner but right now it had no military intervention as of now by the United States.

In mid-August, talk show host Stephen Colbert asked U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice why the United States had not intervened to save the lives of Syrians as it had in Libya. Ambassador Rice replied that Syrian opposition members had told U.S. diplomats, "What they want from the United States is more leadership, political pressure, and sanctions, but very clearly no military intervention." ince then, opposition forces who seek the fall of the Bashar al Assad regime have increased their demands for an international military intervention in the form of a no-fly zone (NFZ) over all or parts of Syria. However, as was true in Libya, the military mission that is actually required is one of close air support. It is important for the international community to correctly assess the situation on the ground and understand the distinctions between NFZs and close air support before exploring the use of military force in Syria.

More leadership? No way, if European or Arab leaders leaders wanted them then let them have to it. www.theatlantic.com...

I mean i though a no-fly zone was to make sure that no aircraft was flying and no carrying out bombing raids for the opposition group.

On Bosnia, no-fly zone was enforced and it only used to protect UN-designated areas but not help on the other side.