Skip to comments.The Army's 'Military Review' Just Declared that America Was Defeated in Syria
Posted on 04/01/2018 8:27:08 PM PDT by NorseViking
Could this be true? The Army's 'Military Review' Just Declared that America Was Defeated in Syria
I was interested to see in an article in the new issue of Military Review, a publication of the U.S. Army, conclude that, Russia appears to have won at least a partial victory in Syria, and done so with impressive efficiency, flexibility, and coordination between military and political action.
Looking at Putin, the article states that the Russian campaign might be judged a qualified success from the standpoint of the Kremlins own objective.
As for the United States, Saudi Arabia and Jordan, the authors (who are not Army employeesone is at the Center for Naval Analyses, and the other is at the Kennan Institute) conclude it is certainly a defeat for those who opposed the Russian-led coalition.
On the other hand, I thought as I read this grim assessment, military victory does not guarantee political successas the U.S. whole of government has demonstrated so well in both Iraq and Afghanistan. I have to wonder, is winning Syria really that big a prize? Or will there be a sequel (Syria II: Putin vs. the Ayatollahs) in which Russia grapples with Iran over who is in charge?
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
Obama’s Amerika and their proxy army isil, yes.
.... LOL ... It’s April 1st ....
The Rooskies are more against ISIS and US supported jihadists.
To the extent that the US is not against McJuan
Jihadists and Iran is Sedition.
Who knew we were in a war there?
Did Congress ever declare it?
Funny, I’m informed the opposite occurred.
We’ve been showing the ragtag who’s boss.
The last country the U.S. declared war on was Romania.
Not surprising as we did not have a clear goal, clear allies/enemies, and were mostly present. Present for what? In that vacuum, the Russians, with a clear goal, achieved it. We lose.
Obama’s “insurgency” there a.k.a. Al-Qeada, yes.
And we shouldn’t have been over there to begin with.
The limpwristed flap-eared pansy should have been opposed vehemently, but our elected officials were busy partying in DC.
To a certain degree America’s objectives were not very successfully achieved in Syria but this was by DESIGN by Obama and his surrender monkeys, just like they did in Libya.
We were crippled going in, in part, because we had few actual allies in Syria and we don’t want to piss-off the Turks because of our NATO bases there. Didn’t work.
Now we are not going to put more troops there to held the Kurds fight ISIS and Al Nusra and unless we give the Kurds (covertly), damned good anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles, they are going to be severely damaged, if not driven out of Syria and even Iraq.
This article was pretty accurate but remember, Obama never planned for the US to success against our enemies anywhere in the world because he would never let us fight a war to win.
I call this treason.
To readers of this thread, what is published in “Military Review” is not necessarily the opinion of the U.S. Army. Read the following instead of being fooled by implications in fake news.
“Military Review is the U.S. Army’s forum for original thought and debate on the art and science of land warfare. Authors and readers comprise researchers, politicians, leaders, academics, and heads of industry. Stimulating leaders to think critically and deal with controversial subjects while providing a medium to inform on new ideas and analyze concepts, doctrine and warfighting principles.” [U.S. Army https://www.army.mil/media/publications/ ]
To find out what was really in the article referred to by the Yahoo piece excerpted in the post above this thread, read the original article.
What Kind of Victory for Russia in Syria?
Matthew Rojansky, JD
This was Obamas war against Assad. I dont really care about Assad. Syria always seemed to be less agressive than its other Arab neighbors.
If one wants a Neo-Conservative type of war, one might say we lost...yes, and we probably financed some rebels along the way, some say that war has been going on well before 2011.
If one’s objective is as Trump’s, to defeat ISIS, I think that’s a victory.
But the Neo-Cons are coming out and seemingly want more than just that.
So according to the author, Putin has a PoS army with no drones but won Syria... typical libtard trying to say we need not fear Putin’s army, yet implies we were fighting Russians when in fact all along Obama was colluding
Syrians, like, in Iran, were throwing a legit overthrow of Assad which subsequently was quelled with Assad releasing Suni terrorists on his own Alawites now forced to obey him
Obama did the same releasing terrorists in Garland Texas to force people not aligned with him at that protest to beg for his protection
Iran's President Hassan Rouhani, Russia's Vladimir Putin and Turkey's Tayyip Erdogan meet in Sochi, Russia November 22, 2017. (photo credit: SPUTNIK/MIKHAIL METZEL/KREMLIN VIA REUTERS)
The Three Amigos
If we have lost in Syria, that’s quite an impressive accomplishment because it’s hard to lose when we were fighting for at least 3 different sides of the conflict.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.