Step into their perspective. From what I have read, a lot of strategists seem to feel that these conflicts have an inevitability to them. The pieces were put on the board a long time ago. The question everyone seems to be asking is how they can play their turn. The algorithm at play is unlikely to be achieving peace - as that may well be unattainable within the near future.
Again without condemnation or condonance, can you see why a strategist might choose this option while being perfectly rational and valid within their frame of reference?
> (Also, I find expectations on how Syrians would read USA involvement just wishful thinking)
Russian involvement in Syria is certainly looked at as that way i.e. they're propping up Assad as opposed to driving aggression and making major strategic moves.