After chemical weapons killed about 100 people.
Bombing Al Qaida manufacture of Sarin is legal.
Topic: BGM-109 Tomahawk epic fail. (Read 2387 times)
Bombing Al Qaida manufacture of Sarin is legal.
After chemical weapons killed about 100 people. More precisely, it seems to 87. Yes, it's a tragedy, but how many people died after the bombing, Russian Aleppo? And in other cities! What's the difference than I did. Every life is precious! It seems to me that if the Americans did not showed themselves to be weak then this tragedy would not have happened.
What is the price of 59 BGM-109 Tomahawk to hit with 23 of them the Syrian canteen in desert?
$500.000.000
Experts are amoused about this large number of BGM-109 Tomahawk on 2 ships.
http://www.reuters.com/article/mideast-crisis-syria-airport-idUSL8N1HF5PT
Airport is operating, as reported.
$500.000.000
Experts are amoused about this large number of BGM-109 Tomahawk on 2 ships.
http://www.reuters.com/article/mideast-crisis-syria-airport-idUSL8N1HF5PT
Airport is operating, as reported.
Your math is off. The missiles cost the US 832,000 USD each. With 23 misses that cost the american tax payer 19 million.. OUCH!
What is the price of 59 BGM-109 Tomahawk to hit with 23 of them the Syrian canteen in desert?
$500.000.000
Experts are amoused about this large number of BGM-109 Tomahawk on 2 ships.
http://www.reuters.com/article/mideast-crisis-syria-airport-idUSL8N1HF5PT
Airport is operating, as reported.
$500.000.000
Experts are amoused about this large number of BGM-109 Tomahawk on 2 ships.
http://www.reuters.com/article/mideast-crisis-syria-airport-idUSL8N1HF5PT
Airport is operating, as reported.
Your math is off. The missiles cost the US 832,000 USD each. With 23 misses that cost the american tax payer 19 million.. OUCH!
It seems to me that it was possible to destroy them with a cheaper way. To achieve their goals in Syria, the Americans need to destroy the most modern weapons, and then old. Maybe the goal was the other?
By cheaper way, do you mean dropping bombs from military jets? It is definitely an inexpensive option, but there is always a risk of one of these jets getting shot down, and the pilot being taken as a prisoner of war (if not killed). If something like that happens, then Trump can kiss his popularity ratings a good-bye. They will nosedive from the current 35% - 45% levels to single digits.
I think you are giving Trump's supporters too much credit here. If anything happens Trump will keep escalating, that's his personality. Anyone testing the US with this administration is just asking for it.
What is the price of 59 BGM-109 Tomahawk to hit with 23 of them the Syrian canteen in desert?
$500.000.000
Experts are amoused about this large number of BGM-109 Tomahawk on 2 ships.
http://www.reuters.com/article/mideast-crisis-syria-airport-idUSL8N1HF5PT
Airport is operating, as reported.
$500.000.000
Experts are amoused about this large number of BGM-109 Tomahawk on 2 ships.
http://www.reuters.com/article/mideast-crisis-syria-airport-idUSL8N1HF5PT
Airport is operating, as reported.
Your math is off. The missiles cost the US 832,000 USD each. With 23 misses that cost the american tax payer 19 million.. OUCH!
It seems to me that it was possible to destroy them with a cheaper way. To achieve their goals in Syria, the Americans need to destroy the most modern weapons, and then old. Maybe the goal was the other?
By cheaper way, do you mean dropping bombs from military jets? It is definitely an inexpensive option, but there is always a risk of one of these jets getting shot down, and the pilot being taken as a prisoner of war (if not killed). If something like that happens, then Trump can kiss his popularity ratings a good-bye. They will nosedive from the current 35% - 45% levels to single digits.
It seems to me that it was possible to destroy them with a cheaper way. To achieve their goals in Syria, the Americans need to destroy the most modern weapons, and then old. Maybe the goal was the other?
By cheaper way, do you mean dropping bombs from military jets? It is definitely an inexpensive option, but there is always a risk of one of these jets getting shot down, and the pilot being taken as a prisoner of war (if not killed). If something like that happens, then Trump can kiss his popularity ratings a good-bye. They will nosedive from the current 35% - 45% levels to single digits.
Lets not talk about history (korea war, vietnam war).
What about afghanistan iraq under bush? Iraq-afghanistan-libya-syria under obama?
I think the russian bots have a software bug :S
It seems to me that it was possible to destroy them with a cheaper way. To achieve their goals in Syria, the Americans need to destroy the most modern weapons, and then old. Maybe the goal was the other?
By cheaper way, do you mean dropping bombs from military jets? It is definitely an inexpensive option, but there is always a risk of one of these jets getting shot down, and the pilot being taken as a prisoner of war (if not killed). If something like that happens, then Trump can kiss his popularity ratings a good-bye. They will nosedive from the current 35% - 45% levels to single digits.
According to the US Defence Secretary James Mattis, the American missile attacks destroyed 20% of the active aircraft in the possession of the Syrian Air Force. I know that the ISIS and the Al Qaeda will be rejoicing at this news.
The destroyed aircraft include six Russian-made MiG-23.
Is it the planes? The MiG 23 was put on the wing in 1969. It's junk. It seems to me that missiles were more expensive than the damage which they have caused Assad.The destroyed aircraft include six Russian-made MiG-23.
The missiles may be more expensive than the aircraft, but they did the purpose. No matter how old these aircraft were, some of them were used for dropping barrel bombs and other explosive devices. The Americans wanted to get rid of them, at any cost. The rebels were also finding the life quite tough as a result of the bombings. So I'd say it was $500 million well spent.
What is the price of 59 BGM-109 Tomahawk to hit with 23 of them the Syrian canteen in desert?
~ snip ~
Airport is operating, as reported.
~ snip ~
Airport is operating, as reported.
From what I know the tomahawk is "only" some $500k a piece. However, I may be wrong and the price is not important.
I was also "impressed" by the number of missiles shot. But I understand. They have to be used. And for good reason.
This way the american tax payers (and possibly later the Syrian oil) will have to pay for newer and better technology.
The fact they destroyed anything is of tiniest importance. The news reports will tell the "truth" that matters (did you see "Wag the Dog"?).
More in the range of 800.000$ per tomahawk.
So less then 50 million.
Donald just increased the defense budget by over 50 billion. ^^"
So much fail from our russian bots. It makes panda babys cry.
What is the price of 59 BGM-109 Tomahawk to hit with 23 of them the Syrian canteen in desert?
~ snip ~
Airport is operating, as reported.
~ snip ~
Airport is operating, as reported.
From what I know the tomahawk is "only" some $500k a piece. However, I may be wrong and the price is not important.
I was also "impressed" by the number of missiles shot. But I understand. They have to be used. And for good reason.
This way the american tax payers (and possibly later the Syrian oil) will have to pay for newer and better technology.
The fact they destroyed anything is of tiniest importance. The news reports will tell the "truth" that matters (did you see "Wag the Dog"?).
According to the US Defence Secretary James Mattis, the American missile attacks destroyed 20% of the active aircraft in the possession of the Syrian Air Force. I know that the ISIS and the Al Qaeda will be rejoicing at this news.
The destroyed aircraft include six Russian-made MiG-23.
Is it the planes? The MiG 23 was put on the wing in 1969. It's junk. It seems to me that missiles were more expensive than the damage which they have caused Assad.The destroyed aircraft include six Russian-made MiG-23.
The missiles may be more expensive than the aircraft, but they did the purpose. No matter how old these aircraft were, some of them were used for dropping barrel bombs and other explosive devices. The Americans wanted to get rid of them, at any cost. The rebels were also finding the life quite tough as a result of the bombings. So I'd say it was $500 million well spent.
According to the US Defence Secretary James Mattis, the American missile attacks destroyed 20% of the active aircraft in the possession of the Syrian Air Force. I know that the ISIS and the Al Qaeda will be rejoicing at this news.
The destroyed aircraft include six Russian-made MiG-23.
Is it the planes? The MiG 23 was put on the wing in 1969. It's junk. It seems to me that missiles were more expensive than the damage which they have caused Assad. The destroyed aircraft include six Russian-made MiG-23.
According to the US Defence Secretary James Mattis, the American missile attacks destroyed 20% of the active aircraft in the possession of the Syrian Air Force. I know that the ISIS and the Al Qaeda will be rejoicing at this news.
The destroyed aircraft include six Russian-made MiG-23.
The destroyed aircraft include six Russian-made MiG-23.
Late on 06 april 2017, starting around 8:40PM Easter Time (4:40 a.m., April 7, in Syria), the United States military launched 59 Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles (TLAMs) at the Shayrat Airfield in Syria's Homs governorate. Targets struck included the airfield's aircraft, hardened aircraft shelters, petroleum and logistical storage, ammunition supply bunkers, air defense systems, and radars. The missiles were launched from U.S. Navy destroyers (USS Ross (DDG 71) and USS Porter (DDG 78)) located in the eastern Mediterranean. The strike came in retaliation for a chemical attack on April 4 in Khan Sheikhoun which killed scores of civilians earlier. According to the DoD, Shayrat Airfield had been used to store chemical weapons and Syrian air forces. The U.S. intelligence community assessed that aircraft from Shayrat conducted the chemical weapons attack on April 4. The strike was intended to deter the regime from using chemical weapons again. Russian forces were notified in advance of the strike using the established deconfliction line.
You are mistaken. A large part of the Syrian Air Force's offensive capability against the ISIS is now neutralized. The ISIS has reported gains against the SAA in the province of Homs, where the attack occurred. The Americans have succeeded in shifting the momentum back to the ISIS.
And if ISIS somehow got hold on toxics, by conquering some former governmental supply? That itches me. Some suicide fanatic entered the civilian urban settlement, pulled the leash of from a can of chemicals. Days later millions of dollars got wasted, with a precision that dates back into the seventies of warhead development (below thirty percent hit rate) just to aid them by hindering air force strikes against their ground forces, where they are strong. ISIS doesn't own the manpower nor the material or expertise for airplane operations.What if the western got tricked by them?
The most important thing about this, is that US army and their government do not care about military spendings.
If they need to reach some goal, like sending rockets to a particular place, they dont hesitate and dont look at the costs.
This kind of behaviour may lead to great military domination as a country, but on the other hand would be expensive, and only wealthier countries can afford this kind of plan.
The amount of dollars going on the Unites States military is really big, that is also another reason why they dont care about the price- the money comes to them at regular basis.
Im sure that Russia doesn't care a lot about cost of military operations.
You are wrong. Russia is not a rich state and it will not be able to Finance the war. Compare budgets of the USA and Russia. The Soviet Union fell apart after 10 years of war in Afghanistan. Russian lead multiple wars. In Syria and Ukraine. If they lose Syria and there goes the oil and gas to Europe, Russia will collapse in 2-3 years. If they need to reach some goal, like sending rockets to a particular place, they dont hesitate and dont look at the costs.
This kind of behaviour may lead to great military domination as a country, but on the other hand would be expensive, and only wealthier countries can afford this kind of plan.
The amount of dollars going on the Unites States military is really big, that is also another reason why they dont care about the price- the money comes to them at regular basis.
Im sure that Russia doesn't care a lot about cost of military operations.
The most important thing about this, is that US army and their government do not care about military spendings.
If they need to reach some goal, like sending rockets to a particular place, they dont hesitate and dont look at the costs.
This kind of behaviour may lead to great military domination as a country, but on the other hand would be expensive, and only wealthier countries can afford this kind of plan.
The amount of dollars going on the Unites States military is really big, that is also another reason why they dont care about the price- the money comes to them at regular basis.
Im sure that Russia doesn't care a lot about cost of military operations.
If they need to reach some goal, like sending rockets to a particular place, they dont hesitate and dont look at the costs.
This kind of behaviour may lead to great military domination as a country, but on the other hand would be expensive, and only wealthier countries can afford this kind of plan.
The amount of dollars going on the Unites States military is really big, that is also another reason why they dont care about the price- the money comes to them at regular basis.
Im sure that Russia doesn't care a lot about cost of military operations.
Where are pictures of hitted civilians from the village near the airfeld?
A large part of the Syrian Air Force's offensive capability against the ISIS is now neutralized.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzMRwtMVhZ4 (In Russian)
The 9 destroyed aircrafts are a large part of 5 not destroyed.
As You see in the video, there is old crap from 1970 / 1980.
There are no damages on Runway.
In this way only 1/3 part of BGM-109 Tomahawk goes to hit the target.
This is a epic fail.
Without the fighter jets, what they will be able to do with the runways? Even before the attack, the Syrian Air Force was facing an acute shortage of aircraft. Now this shortage might have hit chronic levels. Also, they don't have enough pilots right now.
The US got the exact result they wanted in the cruise missile attacks, Remember the tomahawk are accurate to exactly 30 feet and the news that it didn't have the desired result is a lie perpetuated by the Russians. And no one trusts them except their own country men.
Death, murder, war have a way of making money meaningless. Sure the tomahawks may cost 500 million or whatever but the U.S. Dollar wouldn't exist without some obscenely expensive war expenditures in the past.
In the future Billionaires will be the new millionaires and trillionaires the old billionaires and everyone will have the right to own ICBM's.
keep diluting cordial you end up with water .. In the future Billionaires will be the new millionaires and trillionaires the old billionaires and everyone will have the right to own ICBM's.
Hitting the check points to the airbase from the road with a Tomahawk, this is precious target.
Death, murder, war have a way of making money meaningless. Sure the tomahawks may cost 500 million or whatever but the U.S. Dollar wouldn't exist without some obscenely expensive war expenditures in the past.
In the future Billionaires will be the new millionaires and trillionaires the old billionaires and everyone will have the right to own ICBM's.
In the future Billionaires will be the new millionaires and trillionaires the old billionaires and everyone will have the right to own ICBM's.
A large part of the Syrian Air Force's offensive capability against the ISIS is now neutralized.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzMRwtMVhZ4 (In Russian)
The 9 destroyed aircrafts are a large part of 5 not destroyed.
As You see in the video, there is old crap from 1970 / 1980.
There are no damages on Runway.
In this way only 1/3 part of BGM-109 Tomahawk goes to hit the target.
This is a epic fail.
Get that cheque book out spendy you need to replace them all back . 300 and odd million dollars.
I seen 4 get fired on the news BUT 54 was said..Rob rob rob taxes .
And also what are these Tomahawks FIRE CRACKERS..Little hole in the floor
.You can make a better bomb with a box of £5 fireworks .Go look on YOUTUBE ..
Wouldn't surprise me if they been charging the public 1.9 million dollars for rockets made from toilet
rolls and sellotape..
I can not distinguish the wreckage of the "Tomahawk" from the wreckage "Iskander". Sure that you are a specialist in this matter as I do. Just broadcast the position of Russian propaganda. View of the debris came and placed it gently on the place.
But the airport was hit by about 15 or 16 missiles.
..........
BGM-109 Tomahawk near Tartus city
..........
BGM-109 Tomahawk near Tartus city
If they had wanted to destroy the runways, the runways would be destroyed. It's as simple as that.
Really?
And what was the target of other 36 missiles?
https://youtu.be/yfsZyV9eVcs?t=3m47s
If they had wanted to destroy the runways, the runways would be destroyed. It's as simple as that.
Really?
And what was the target of other 36 missiles?
https://youtu.be/yfsZyV9eVcs?t=3m47s
A large part of the Syrian Air Force's offensive capability against the ISIS is now neutralized.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzMRwtMVhZ4 (In Russian)
The 9 destroyed aircrafts are a large part of 5 not destroyed.
As You see in the video, there is old crap from 1970 / 1980.
There are no damages on Runway.
In this way only 1/3 part of BGM-109 Tomahawk goes to hit the target.
This is a epic fail.
Seems in Mosul the things are bad.
According to the commander of the operation, the Iraqi army in Mosul, major General Najma al-Juburi, government forces control 90% of Western Mosul and advance their position in the Old town.Troops were preparing in the coming days to suppress the resistance of the enemy in remaining under the control of terrorists Tamuz, Refai, Meserve and Hamadan, said the Iraqi General.
Seems in Mosul the things are bad.
Why Russian miss American missiles? Firstly it has a reputation of Russian weapons, and secondly, it raises the popularity of Trump.
Quote
some sources have suggested only 23 missiles reached their targets
Ohhh, show me this "sources"!
The russian ministry of defense.
https://ria.ru/syria/20170407/1491726737.html
English:
https://www.rt.com/document/58e75defc36188ab578b4690/amp
Quote
some sources have suggested only 23 missiles reached their targets
Ohhh, show me this "sources"!
Vika do you have information if russias s-300/400 have been used to defend against the missile attack?
Why You are asking at me?
There are many ways to detect such activity.
But seems "Western" media like not this argument.
I'm enjoing this epic US shit news shower.
I have no data about why. It might be electronic warfare.
The airfeld electronic devices are in perfect conditions.
And there are no s-300/400.
I though u were interested in that stuff nvm.
But for the people who want to know:
Quote
Noteworthy, the TLAMs flew across the MEZ (Missile Engagement Zone) of the S-400 missile battery the Russians deployed to Latakia to protect the Russian air contingent deployed there in 2015.
Did Russia’s most advanced anti-aircraft defense system detect the missiles? For sure there are no reports of any of the BGM-109 intercepted by the S-400.
Designated SA-21 “Growler” by NATO, the S-400 is believed to be able to engage all types of aerial targets including aircraft (someone says even VLO – Very Low Observable ones), drones and ballistic and cruise missiles within the range of 250 miles at an altitude of nearly 19 miles. Equipped with 3 different types of missiles and an acquisition radar capable of tracking up to 300 targets within the range of over 370 miles, the Triumph (or Triumf) is a system made of 8 launchers and a control station.
Supported by effective EW (Electronic Warfare) capabilities, the S-400 fires missiles that fly at 17,000 km/h against aerial targets.
So, at least on paper, all non-stealth aircraft and missiles would hardly be able to dodge S-400 missiles. Assuming that the Russians probably detected at least some of the Tomahawks flying fast and low towards their targets at Shayrat Airbase it’s not clear why the Trimf did not attempt to intercept any of the TLAMs launched by the US destroyers, considered the reaction by Viktor Ozerov, head of the Russian Federation Council’s defense committee, who said the American attack was “an act of aggression against a UN member […] Cooperation between the Russian and US militaries may be shut down after the US strike.” according to state news agency RIA.
Perhaps, considered that they were informed beforehand, they simply decided to let them pass. The Russian MoD statement does not say mention any Russian air defense system intercepting any of the U.S. missiles launched towards Shayrat Airbase even though some sources have suggested only 23 missiles reached their targets because the other ones were brought down near Tartous by the local S-400 and S-300 batteries.
Did Russia’s most advanced anti-aircraft defense system detect the missiles? For sure there are no reports of any of the BGM-109 intercepted by the S-400.
Designated SA-21 “Growler” by NATO, the S-400 is believed to be able to engage all types of aerial targets including aircraft (someone says even VLO – Very Low Observable ones), drones and ballistic and cruise missiles within the range of 250 miles at an altitude of nearly 19 miles. Equipped with 3 different types of missiles and an acquisition radar capable of tracking up to 300 targets within the range of over 370 miles, the Triumph (or Triumf) is a system made of 8 launchers and a control station.
Supported by effective EW (Electronic Warfare) capabilities, the S-400 fires missiles that fly at 17,000 km/h against aerial targets.
So, at least on paper, all non-stealth aircraft and missiles would hardly be able to dodge S-400 missiles. Assuming that the Russians probably detected at least some of the Tomahawks flying fast and low towards their targets at Shayrat Airbase it’s not clear why the Trimf did not attempt to intercept any of the TLAMs launched by the US destroyers, considered the reaction by Viktor Ozerov, head of the Russian Federation Council’s defense committee, who said the American attack was “an act of aggression against a UN member […] Cooperation between the Russian and US militaries may be shut down after the US strike.” according to state news agency RIA.
Perhaps, considered that they were informed beforehand, they simply decided to let them pass. The Russian MoD statement does not say mention any Russian air defense system intercepting any of the U.S. missiles launched towards Shayrat Airbase even though some sources have suggested only 23 missiles reached their targets because the other ones were brought down near Tartous by the local S-400 and S-300 batteries.
They bombarded the base but didn't hit the runway and the planes escaped... Big deal, things like that happen, war is not like the movies.
Have you heard the story about British destroyer, sunk in the Falklands war? The ship had radar guided long range missiles made to track and kill incoming jets and one of them outrun the missile, approached the ship at close range, hit it with a missile and managed to run away, while the ship caught fire. Sometimes even the most advanced tech fails and you can't do anything about it.
Have you heard the story about British destroyer, sunk in the Falklands war? The ship had radar guided long range missiles made to track and kill incoming jets and one of them outrun the missile, approached the ship at close range, hit it with a missile and managed to run away, while the ship caught fire. Sometimes even the most advanced tech fails and you can't do anything about it.
French Exocets missiles?
The FAA had airfighters easily on par with the british ones. And with the french exocets they had the capabilities to destroy every single british ship.
The only problem they had was the amount of just 5 exocets missiles because the french (wanted or not) needed more time to deliver them.
Sometimes even the most advanced tech fails and you can't do anything about it.
Who is escaped?
The airfeld is still operating.
There are 5 aircrafts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VoqPfvJFCY
They bombarded the base but didn't hit the runway and the planes escaped... Big deal, things like that happen, war is not like the movies.
Have you heard the story about British destroyer, sunk in the Falklands war? The ship had radar guided long range missiles made to track and kill incoming jets and one of them outrun the missile, approached the ship at close range, hit it with a missile and managed to run away, while the ship caught fire. Sometimes even the most advanced tech fails and you can't do anything about it.
Have you heard the story about British destroyer, sunk in the Falklands war? The ship had radar guided long range missiles made to track and kill incoming jets and one of them outrun the missile, approached the ship at close range, hit it with a missile and managed to run away, while the ship caught fire. Sometimes even the most advanced tech fails and you can't do anything about it.
Vika do you have information if russias s-300/400 have been used to defend against the missile attack?
Why You are asking at me?
There are many ways to detect such activity.
But seems "Western" media like not this argument.
I'm enjoing this epic US shit news shower.
I have no data about why. It might be electronic warfare.
The airfeld electronic devices are in perfect conditions.
And there are no s-300/400.
Vika do you have information if russias s-300/400 have been used to defend against the missile attack?
Less then 30 of 59 tomahawks actually hit their target - what happened with the others?
I dont think it is surprising that not much got destroyed, because it wasnt the intention of the US.
They informed russia in advance and didnt even touch the runway.
This might just be a test of russias air defense in syria before the storm starts.
I'm sure that during the impact with the territory of the base was monitored by American satellites. They know 100% how many missiles hit the target. Let's hope that on this occasion will be formal comments. If the target gets only 50% of the rockets it is not a very good result. On the other hand, if the С-400 skips 50% of the rockets, it is a shit not protection. Less then 30 of 59 tomahawks actually hit their target - what happened with the others?
I dont think it is surprising that not much got destroyed, because it wasnt the intention of the US.
They informed russia in advance and didnt even touch the runway.
This might just be a test of russias air defense in syria before the storm starts.
Vika do you have information if russias s-300/400 have been used to defend against the missile attack?
Less then 30 of 59 tomahawks actually hit their target - what happened with the others?
I dont think it is surprising that not much got destroyed, because it wasnt the intention of the US.
They informed russia in advance and didnt even touch the runway.
This might just be a test of russias air defense in syria before the storm starts.
Less then 30 of 59 tomahawks actually hit their target - what happened with the others?
I dont think it is surprising that not much got destroyed, because it wasnt the intention of the US.
They informed russia in advance and didnt even touch the runway.
This might just be a test of russias air defense in syria before the storm starts.
I want to know if the US Military want to pave way for an ISIS victory in Syria or what. I am still certain that the USA founded and is funding ISI, every horrific acts that they are doing is on them.
How do you know how many missiles hit the target?
Give me Your data.
How do you know how many missiles hit the target? What showed on TV is not what it says. This shot Russian , and who believes them?
Russians are good at lying!
How much BGM-109 Tomahawk have hitted the target?
One of missiles have started not at all.
in their operation
What is the "operation"?
59 missiles BGM-109 Tomahawk on 2 ships, usually carried each 16 of them.
This action is premiditated, and the result of this long work is a epic fail.
in their operation
What is the "operation"?
59 missiles BGM-109 Tomahawk on 2 ships, usually carried each 16 of them.
This action is premiditated, and the result of this long work is a epic fail.
A large part of the Syrian Air Force's offensive capability against the ISIS is now neutralized.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzMRwtMVhZ4 (In Russian)
The 9 destroyed aircrafts are a large part of 5 not destroyed.
As You see in the video, there is old crap from 1970 / 1980.
There are no damages on Runway.
In this way only 1/3 part of BGM-109 Tomahawk goes to hit the target.
This is a epic fail.
It doesnt matter anymore if America succeeded or not. Though if we look at the value of the Tomahawk missiles it will make you go jumping when you find out. Normal people would tend to react that it is a failure since America has wasted millions of dollars and ended up a failure. But technical person will understand as to why they did not succeed in their operation since there are many technical issues along the way that makes the operation to go the way we expect it to go. Though they not succeed in their operation but there are always a second time around and as long as they will not give up soon they can end the terror brought by Isis.
A large part of the Syrian Air Force's offensive capability against the ISIS is now neutralized.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzMRwtMVhZ4 (In Russian)
The 9 destroyed aircrafts are a large part of 5 not destroyed.
As You see in the video, there is old crap from 1970 / 1980.
There are no damages on Runway.
In this way only 1/3 part of BGM-109 Tomahawk goes to hit the target.
This is a epic fail.
You are mistaken. A large part of the Syrian Air Force's offensive capability against the ISIS is now neutralized. The ISIS has reported gains against the SAA in the province of Homs, where the attack occurred. The Americans have succeeded in shifting the momentum back to the ISIS.
What is the price of 59 BGM-109 Tomahawk to hit with 23 of them the Syrian canteen in desert?
$500.000.000
Experts are amoused about this large number of BGM-109 Tomahawk on 2 ships.
http://www.reuters.com/article/mideast-crisis-syria-airport-idUSL8N1HF5PT
Airport is operating, as reported.
$500.000.000
Experts are amoused about this large number of BGM-109 Tomahawk on 2 ships.
http://www.reuters.com/article/mideast-crisis-syria-airport-idUSL8N1HF5PT
Airport is operating, as reported.
Jump to: