Russia Has Conducted Its First Airstrike Against ISIS In Syria(NOW ASSAD Enemies). What Are Your Opinions?

SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 12:30:09 -0400

My opinion is that Russia should have got permission through the United Nations community to do the airstrikes. Russia should have did it logically with the backing of the UN. A Russian General gave a warning to the U.S. to get out the airspace while they attack ISIS. Wow this is disturbing to me with (1-hour) notice. This story is escalating, now its reported that the bombs were on ASSAD ENEMIES, NOT ISIS!

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-34399164

Washington (CNN)—Russia has conducted its first airstrike against ISIS in Syria, a Russian Defense Ministry spokesman said Wednesday.
The airstrike targeted ISIS military equipment, communications centers, vehicles and ammunition, Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov said, as part of pinpoint strikes against ISIS ground targets.
But a senior U.S. administration official told CNN's Elise Labott the Russian airstrike near the city of Homs "has no strategic purpose" in terms of combating ISIS, which "shows they are not there to go after ISIL." ISIL is another acronym for ISIS.
The official said the U.S. had no intention of preventing the strikes but that Russian planes didn't seem to be flying in areas where the U.S. was operating. "They are not stupid," the official said.
The State Department said U.S.-led coalition missions were continuing as normal despite an advance warning and request from Russia to stay out of Syrian airspace.
The official said the U.S. had no intention of preventing the strikes but that Russian planes didn't seem to be flying in areas where the U.S. was operating. "They are not stupid," the official said.
The State Department said U.S.-led coalition missions were continuing as normal despite an advance warning and request from Russia to stay out of Syrian airspace.
"A Russian official in Baghdad this morning informed U.S. Embassy personnel that Russian military aircraft would begin flying anti-ISIL missions today over Syria," said spokesman John Kirby. "He further requested that U.S. aircraft avoid Syrian airspace during these missions."
Earlier Wednesday, the upper house of the Russian parliament gave President Vladimir Putin approval to use the air force in Syria, according to state media.
"The Federation Council unanimously supported the President's request -- 162 votes in favor of granting permission," Kremlin Chief of Staff Sergey Ivanov said, according to ITAR-Tass.
The vote came after a request by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for military assistance in fighting ISIS, Ivanov said.
'No Russian boots on the ground'
Putin, speaking Wednesday at a government meeting, said his country would not become mired in the Syrian conflict.
"This military operation is limited in time. Russian air forces will help Assad's army while it's on the offensive mode," Putin said. "There will be no Russian boots on the ground."
After several days of familiarization flights, and the collection of potential targeting information by drones, the Russian air force was ready.
Four Russian Su-34 Fullback fighter jets are now at the Latakia air base in Syria, and more than 600 Russian troops are in place, a U.S. official with knowledge of the latest intelligence told CNN this week.

Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook told reporters Tuesday that Secretary of Defense Ash Carter directed his staff to "open lines of communication with Russia on de-confliction."
The timing of these discussions is to be worked out in the coming days. The purpose of the discussions is "to ensure the safety of coalition air crews," he said.
Cook added that the two nations have common ground when it comes to fighting ISIS, with Carter making clear that "the goal should be to take the fight to ISIL and not to defend the Assad regime."
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/30/politics/russia-syria-airstrikes-isis/
In a recent CNN article dated September 30, 2015.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-34399164

Russia conducts airstrike in Syria - CNNPolitics.com

Russian says its airstrike in Syria on Wednesday targeted ISIS; U.S. official says it had "no strategic purpose" in combating ISIS.

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Sep 30 at 2015 12:30 PM

LTC Stephen F. — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 12:30:48 -0400

Good news SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL.
Russia has been battling terrorists within the former soviet republics recently and throughout their nation for decades. The lessons they learned fighting in South Dagestan and Chechnia could be very useful in prosecuting the war against radical Islam in Syria.
Getting UN approval should not be a requirement. Unfortunately there is significant corruption and tremendous inefficient bureaucracy within the UN.

Response by SGT Jeremiah B. made Sep 30 at 2015 12:32 PM

SGT Jeremiah B. — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 12:32:27 -0400

So for all of Putin's grandstanding, he's just doing what we're doing. Personally, I was hoping for boots on the ground. Let them get a harsh lesson in how little the ME appreciates outside occupation.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 30 at 2015 12:34 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 12:34:18 -0400

So, only Russia can go after ISIS now? Oooooooooookay........

Response by 1LT Aaron Barr made Sep 30 at 2015 12:36 PM

1LT Aaron Barr — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 12:36:02 -0400

Much as I hate to say it, Russia's pretty much acting like us. We conducted airstrikes in Libya and Syria with no UN vote, let alone input from Congress. The Russians are the only power other than us that can really project power in serious manner beyond their borders and to think that they wouldn't is naïve.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Sep 30 at 2015 12:38 PM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 12:38:59 -0400

A nation exercising the same level of autonomy that we feel free to use all the time? How dare they?!

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 30 at 2015 12:46 PM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 12:46:14 -0400

Well, what can we said? that is their culture, they will kick off all "weakling" in the arena first, then deal with the one they want to fight.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 30 at 2015 12:49 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 12:49:34 -0400

Legally, Russia has greater basis to be there than we do with our coalition. The head of state, Assad, invited them. We have no legal basis.

That said, they did not conduct any of the missions against ISIL. The areas they attacked are in rebel/Free Syrian Army strongholds north of Homs. So a direct attack on the groups we are allied with.

What will be our response?

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 30 at 2015 12:55 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 12:55:34 -0400

The friend of my enemy's enemy is my...awe, screw it. It's sort of a Pro-Assad, anti-UN, unilateral muscle flex.

Response by SGT David T. made Sep 30 at 2015 12:56 PM

SGT David T. — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 12:56:46 -0400

This is risky because there is a potential for a very costly mistake. If they fire on us or we fire on them by mistake that runs the risk of escalating the conflict in a way that we do not want.

Response by PO3 Steven Sherrill made Sep 30 at 2015 12:57 PM

PO3 Steven Sherrill — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 12:57:19 -0400

SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL I am afraid this has nothing to do at all with ISIL, or Syria. This is the United States and Russia playing a game of chicken in the middle east for nation building rights. Russia supports the Al-Assad regime in Syria. They are going to support their "ally?" The United States does the same thing. Staying out of each other's way is going to be problematic if not impossible on this. Eventually a stand will need to be taken. Who makes the stand, and on which side they stand is going to have a great impact on the outcome of this insurrection. The real trouble with ISIL is that they, unlike a national military force, do not care about sovereignity when it comes to their area of operation. In order to combat that, they must be hit where they operate and where they live. That may mean bombing a town in Syria today, and a road in Iraq tomorrow. It may mean pursuing a retreating ISIL force across national boundaries. That in itself can lead to an international incident. The best thing for the world as a whole would be coordinated air strikes bringing the might of the US Air Force, US Navy, and Russian Air force to bear on ISIL infrastructure. The more nations working together, the more sustained the campaign can be. Imagine an air campaign that is twenty four hours of contiguous bombardment. Ask the Iraqi military how that felt during Desert Storm?

Response by SPC David S. made Sep 30 at 2015 1:00 PM

SPC David S. — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 13:00:47 -0400

What starts with ISIS and ends with Rebels? Russian air strikes

Response by CW3 Eric W. S. made Sep 30 at 2015 1:01 PM

CW3 Eric W. S. — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 13:01:58 -0400

I am glad to see that some country other than the U.S. is actually paying for this war. I say we let them continue. Every airstrike Russia conducts is one less that the U.S. has to conduct.

Response by SGT Ben Keen made Sep 30 at 2015 1:02 PM

SGT Ben Keen — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 13:02:56 -0400

And so the male reproductive organ measuring contest continues...as others have stated, Russia is merely doing what have done in the past; they just did it first this time. I think what we are seeing in all the grandstanding all sides could lead us back to a Cold War style conflict between Russia and America. Russia is kicking the hornet's nest while the US stands by. The battle for that region of the earth will continue on for a long time. The only question is what will be the impact on all of us?

Response by COL Jon Thompson made Sep 30 at 2015 1:17 PM

COL Jon Thompson — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 13:17:33 -0400

My concern is that with both nations flying over Syria and the Russian demands that we stop flying, the stage is set for a air to air confrontation. All we need is armed aircraft with pilots having to make a split second decision. The stakes are high here since I believe we already look weakened on the international stage. Is Putin betting that we will back down in a confrontation? This is a very disturbing situation with grave implications for the wrong decisions.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Sep 30 at 2015 1:21 PM

Capt Seid Waddell — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 13:21:33 -0400

The Russians are not attacking ISIS; they are attacking the "moderate" rebels in order to prop up the Assad regime.

Obama's weakness is provocative to the tyrants of the world, and is now bearing its bitter fruit.

Response by SGT Bryon Sergent made Sep 30 at 2015 1:31 PM

SGT Bryon Sergent — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 13:31:31 -0400

Well they have told us to pull our air craft out of the airspace! I see one of a couple of things happening.
1) the current administration is going to lay down roll over and say OK! DUH ( finger in mouth, drulling a little)

2) Tell them to Go to Hell with a please attached to it

3) send in a couple of squadrons and shoot them all down while we bomb the crap outta them like we should have let Patton do at the end of WWII!

4) Or try and political battle it out and then 3 Happens to US!

Response by SSG Warren Swan made Sep 30 at 2015 1:34 PM

SSG Warren Swan — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 13:34:00 -0400

I support ol Putin on this. Not because I really GAF about him or his military, but the fact that he thinks he's "taking the lead" and "doing something about ISIS" hopefully means for the US that we can finally sit back and watch Seinfeld reruns while someone else does the heavy lifting (if that's what they want to call it) for us. Give our troops a break...finally. I don't see Putin doing any heavy damage unless they invade, but even with that...he's STILL doing us a favor. I don't see a downside to his arrogance this time. Maybe while he's putting his military through this debacle we can work on fixing our internal issues and not waste the break given through Russian "stupidity"? Hell if we can even make a buck off it, I know where he could get a real good deal on some ol RG31's, Cougars, APC's, Hummers, and a few Jeeps. We're trying to give em away, so why not just sell the crappy ones to him and make him think he's got something special?

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 30 at 2015 1:52 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 13:52:27 -0400

I say that that is their side of the world we have medaled in enough international business i'd like to get to know my children, we have our own problems stateside. Besides if we get into it with Russian we will initiate WWIII, that's not just wiping out a bunch of boy loving goat herderds. Russia has actual military capabilities.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 30 at 2015 2:01 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 14:01:24 -0400

Russia is just trying to assert themselves as a major power again. That's all this is.

Response by TSgt Kenneth Ellis made Sep 30 at 2015 2:12 PM

TSgt Kenneth Ellis — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 14:12:25 -0400

I saw this on the news. I think Kerry is dumbfounded. I know Ibama wanted out. And left a vacuum for Russia to fill. We should concentrate on keeping Isis out of Iraq. Let the Russians get bogged down in Syria. We need to do something about these refugees. 70 percent are men of fighting age.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 30 at 2015 2:48 PM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 14:48:00 -0400

I think Russia is doing the right thing. They are a global power, and need to exercise within their sphere of influence. We do the same thing unchallenged for the most part, on the same token, can't complain when they do. Take into consideration they have been battling Islamic fundamentalists and terrorists for a while now, and I'm glad they are projecting the power, for whatever the real reason is, against them beyond their borders, in a direct manner. With everything else going on, I don't think we need to concern ourselves with someone like Assad, since "we've" armed and trained the rebels, with some if not all folding into ISIS, with weapons and funds. On top of that, we have our own problems and issues we need to deal with asap, including ISIS, but since we are being garbage and focusing on irrelevant crap (not all, but look at what people are generally concerned and talking about, and what the media is covering), I think at least we can do is not condemn Russia or fantasize about a conflict with them, because that is the last thing right now. Let them turn to dust those people down there. We have to clean up our yard first before cleaning others.

Response by SA Harold Hansmann made Sep 30 at 2015 2:49 PM

SA Harold Hansmann — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 14:49:08 -0400

Works for me.
Now maybe Isis will look elsewhere for their hostility.

Response by LTC Bink Romanick made Sep 30 at 2015 3:34 PM

LTC Bink Romanick — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 15:34:08 -0400

SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL The fact that Russia has begun operations against ISIS/Daesh begs the question "why"? Are the bombing ISIL? Are they bombing anti Assad forces? Are they there to prop Assad up? Are they there to protect their investment ?

These are all questions that Ned to be answered before we craft a policy.

Response by SMSgt Bryan Raines made Sep 30 at 2015 4:16 PM

SMSgt Bryan Raines — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 16:16:03 -0400

Yeah not a good idea to dictate terms to the Russians. They were invited by the current Syrian administration to help out. The US better be careful on this one.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 30 at 2015 4:22 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 16:22:20 -0400

I do not believe that Russia's current actions have anything to do with shoring up support for Assad, nor do I think that the current air strikes are an attempt by Russia to protect its national interests. Russia is an oligarchy whose political and business leaders are nothing more than former KGB members. With that in mind, it would appear to me that Russia's current actions are an attempt to ascertain the West's resolve in countering Russia's current hegemony.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 30 at 2015 6:42 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 18:42:09 -0400

At least Putin has the balls.

Response by SFC A.M. Drake made Sep 30 at 2015 7:14 PM

SFC A.M. Drake — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 19:14:49 -0400

I'm watching CNN now and they are saying that ISIS is not the target but forces going against the current Syrian administration

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Sep 30 at 2015 9:39 PM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 21:39:40 -0400

And why shouldn't Russia take charge, it's their back yard? Obummer can't even admit some muslims are extremists - he can't say the words.

Response by 1stSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 30 at 2015 10:30 PM

1stSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 22:30:17 -0400

All we can do is watch. THis is getting crazy.

Response by MSgt Curtis Ellis made Sep 30 at 2015 10:39 PM

MSgt Curtis Ellis — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 22:39:03 -0400

Waiting patiently for this one... It's gonna be good!

Response by Maj William Gambrell made Sep 30 at 2015 11:19 PM

Maj William Gambrell — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 23:19:08 -0400

I am not worried about it. It is nice getting some real help to gain control of the middle east. The Russians have no intent on an air-to-air confrontation with our fighter aircraft. They won't even know that are our 5th Gen aircraft are even watching them. Their Army is still very weak and I am not exactly sure what their plan is, but they won't do well if they attempt an all out ground war either. Having said that, they do have one advantage. They don't play fair and could care less about politics, which will scare ISIS.

Response by Sgt Mark Ramos made Oct 1 at 2015 10:05 AM

Sgt Mark Ramos — Thu, 01 Oct 2015 10:05:02 -0400

Often events occur that have long lasting ramifications, but are downplayed by those in power. Perhaps they don't want to be blamed, maybe they have no good response, or worst of all, they don't understand the significance at the time. Last night's bombing raid by Russia in Syria was one such event. Russia now has ground and air forces in direct opposition to US interests and they struck US aligned forces.
The ongoing conflict between Russia and the USA is now on a much more dangerous level. The US now has only one option, to cede any interest in Syria. Perhaps the Administration could get Iran to abandon aspiration on Yemen as a consolation. But, as Russia solidifies its influence in Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Egypt the balance of influence tips even further towards Russia in the Middle East. Stability for Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan just became even more fragile than it already was.
Amazingly the stock market is up, and the most important news on NPR seems to be the death of the Log Lady from Twin Peaks.

Response by CDR Terry Boles made Oct 1 at 2015 10:42 AM

CDR Terry Boles — Thu, 01 Oct 2015 10:42:03 -0400

Disturbing! A regional war between US and Russia could escalate using others to do each nations bidding. Weak leadership and lack of vision continues to cause us more harm, and once again it has escalated to a new level.

Response by Lt Col Stephen Petzold made Oct 1 at 2015 12:23 PM

Lt Col Stephen Petzold — Thu, 01 Oct 2015 12:23:13 -0400

LoL, at the headline "Russians bomb wrong targets." CNN and the others are suffering from short term memory syndrome and are forgetting all about the Russian information warfare ops that they did/are doing with Ukraine. Of course the Russians know who they are bombing. They are going to bomb whoever they want, namely anyone opposed to Asad, but all day long they are going to be saying that they are bombing ISIS.

Response by SFC Terry Fisher made Oct 1 at 2015 12:42 PM

SFC Terry Fisher — Thu, 01 Oct 2015 12:42:04 -0400

Not religious,but bear from the north,eagle from the west.So whos wearing the 666.

Response by Cpl Matthew Wall made Oct 1 at 2015 2:47 PM

Cpl Matthew Wall — Thu, 01 Oct 2015 14:47:29 -0400

They didn't bomb ISIS/ISIL though, they bombed civilians that were against Assad. Russia is looking for a war and they might get one if they keep doing stupid stuff like this. Of course, it will probably take a new POTUS to do this.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 1 at 2015 2:56 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 01 Oct 2015 14:56:40 -0400

I am sick of this president and his allegiance with ISIS.

Response by SrA Scott Harris made Oct 2 at 2015 5:22 AM

SrA Scott Harris — Fri, 02 Oct 2015 05:22:02 -0400

So....Russia is bombing anti-Assad targets (not ISIS) while lying about it, propping up Assad (who is an anti-American, death to the US, type), all while telling the US to stay out of their way, and Obama is too much of a pussy to do anything about it, just like during the invasion of Ukraine.

So, business as usual...

Response by Cpl James Waycasie made Oct 2 at 2015 6:24 PM

Cpl James Waycasie — Fri, 02 Oct 2015 18:24:12 -0400

You can bet one thing for sure, Russia is out for Russia. They may fight in the name of stopping terrorism but bottom line they have an agenda in this that will benefit Russia. Not exactly sure what it is, oil, land whatever. Russia is for Russia.

Response by PO1 Glenn Boucher made Oct 3 at 2015 12:30 PM

PO1 Glenn Boucher — Sat, 03 Oct 2015 12:30:13 -0400

I think that Russia feels as most of the rest of the world does about the UN, they are a toothless and senile old dog who can barley bark at a flea.
Russia has not learned from its own mistakes in the Middle East in the past and is backing the side that is promising them the most gain.
I think Russia is going to get stabbed in the back by Syria as soon as Assad gets what he wants from Putin.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Oct 3 at 2015 2:24 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Sat, 03 Oct 2015 14:24:16 -0400

I was thinking last night, what if Russia just wants to make it more difficult to fight ISIS.

Response by SPC Luis Mendez made Oct 3 at 2015 4:09 PM

SPC Luis Mendez — Sat, 03 Oct 2015 16:09:07 -0400

I think Russia is in a whole lot BETTER geographic and strategic Position to do it. I'll say, Let them do it! Specially after the boondoggle in Iraq by Georgie W.

Response by CMSgt James Nolan made Oct 3 at 2015 5:56 PM

CMSgt James Nolan — Sat, 03 Oct 2015 17:56:38 -0400

2015 called. The Cold War may not actually be over........

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Oct 16 at 2015 8:46 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Fri, 16 Oct 2015 20:46:06 -0400

I am guessing there is a good chance that Russia and ISIS will attempt to call a truce.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Oct 29 at 2015 7:04 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Thu, 29 Oct 2015 19:04:47 -0400

I want to know precision vs. bombs away.

Response by SGT Damaso V Santana made Jun 17 at 2016 5:12 PM

SGT Damaso V Santana — Fri, 17 Jun 2016 17:12:30 -0400

In the meantime obama keeps throwing temper tantrums at the use of word ISIS, he calls them ISIL...and California dreaming is becoming a reality...or so said the song.