Agreed...
The MAA's title is indeed the "Military Aviation Authority" and it supposedly does what it says in the title for all military aviation, not excluding the navy.
And those denegrating the need for "risk" apparently do so without assessing the amount of "knowledge" or "experience" required to calculate the risk.
What "front line commander" would willingly hazard his future missions by not assuring the servicability of his assets? Even squaddies have fairly reliable guns and they clean them when they can. Why would you treat an aircraft differently?