Posted on Jun 21, 2017
Australia suspends air missions over Syria amid US-Russia tensions
846
17
8
2
2
0
Probably a good idea for the Aussies.
Australia suspends air missions over Syria amid US-Russia tensions
Posted from theguardian.comPosted in these groups: 
Aviation
Aviation
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
1
1
0
The thing most Americans don't understand about Syria and Russia is that Syria is and has been a Soviet, now Russian ally for decades. Thus, Russia is Syria's "older brother" and will defend Syria against attackers. How we (the US) even justify conducting military operations in and over Syria is a mystery to me. Last I checked, Syria is a sovereign nation who did NOT invite us over to play. We just sort of "mission creeped" our way into and over Syria. I think the only reason they haven't tried to expel us is that they already have their plate full. It would be like if China decided they didn't like the people of Oregon and started bombing the crap out of them, and eventually emplaced forces on US soil. Now it's not the same, because we're not in a state of civil war (yet) with several different anti-government insurgent forces operating within our borders (or do we? Antifa? BLM?) So yeah we would retaliate with a purpose. But the ideological question remains: what gave us the right o begin military operations in and over Syria? Unless I missed a declaration of war issued by the Congress of the United States, what are we doing over there, besides giving aid to terrorist groups trying to depose a legitimate government?
(1)
(0)
PO3 Steven Sherrill
SSG(P) (Join to see) It is that muddy water called GWOT. We are not outwardly in Syria to engage one side or the other in the civil war. We are there to eradicate ISIS. The reality is that we don't have an exit strategy. We know ISIS is wicked, and needs to be removed from the face of the Earth. The question is once we achieve success in Raqqa and other ISIS held areas, then what? We cannot occupy those areas without being labeled as invaders. We cannot withdraw without a stable force in the area, lest ISIS rise again. So we have essentially waded into the quagmire with no discernible plan beyond what we are doing right now. I am sure that the higher ups have been working this out, but they are certainly not sharing.
(1)
(0)
PO3 Steven Sherrill
GySgt John Olson - You cannot declare war on an ideology and expect positive results. It is not the same as fighting a war between nations. In a war between nations, the will to fight can be taken by many means. Many of which involve denying them access to territory, or movement of materiel through territory. When fighting an ideal, people who hold that ideal are not necessarily centralized, making the ability to deny them space and materiel to operate difficult at best. I would disagree about intellectually bankrupt, and agree fully that the task given them is impossible to achieve.
(1)
(0)
PO3 Steven Sherrill
GySgt John Olson - Still have to deal with the politicians. Win the war, don't get any Americans killed, and make sure they love us when it is over. There is not much that can be done with those parameters.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
1
1
0
PO3 Steven Sherrill
SSG (Join to see) I disagree. I think that they don't want to be piggy in the middle between the U.S. and Russia. Can't blame them for that. Would you stand in the middle of a Sumo ring waiting for the two behemoths to crush you between them? I certainly wouldn't.
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Is one of those behemoths a behemoth whose corner I've been in for at least 100 years?
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google