DontBeThatGuy
Member
A neutered, very expensive PR move that's already working.
A neutered, very expensive PR move that's already working.
maybe this is a stupid question, but if the idea was to prevent them from carrying out airstrikes, why not target the runway as well?
Bombing an empty airfield and then bragging about it as planes launch from that airfield continue to bomb people sounds like something North Korea would doif they had the ability to actually hit anything with their missiles
It makes you wonder if it wasn't in fact Russia who orchestrated it all and authorized puppet orange turd to call for the airstrikes that did nothing.What a precision strike...50+ missiles...most of them missing target...nice job...oh and thanks for letting them know that US will be sending missiles beforehand, so they could take all measures to avoid strikes
If US really wanted to take down the base, I am sure they could have done it 100%
All the sarcasm aside, if chemical weapons don't get used again... ?
Might be a good chance he'll do it again, but that's what this message was about, not demobilising the whole country and preventing Syria ever flying/bombing ever again.
They can't get lunch anymore.
an army marches on its stomach
Russians said only 29 missiles reach target and most missed the airfield.
US said all missiles hit target and caused a lot of damage.
Syria uses said airfield right after missile strike.
Who's right...
@Reuters
JUST IN: Syrian warplanes take off from air base hit by U.S., carry out strikes in Homs countryside - Syrian observatory for human rights
maybe this is a stupid question, but if the idea was to prevent them from carrying out airstrikes, why not target the runway as well?
Should have just dropped 50 ferraris out of a plane on top of the base.
A cruise missile couldn't crater an airfield anyway
maybe this is a stupid question, but if the idea was to prevent them from carrying out airstrikes, why not target the runway as well?
Oh, they were precise alright.Wait, what? what happened to precision?
A $94 million message that us tax payers have to pay for. I would have rather they actually, you know, hit some stuff to prevent him from carrying out any strikes from that base.
Otherwise, one missile into a blank area in the desert could have sufficed, and saved us a lot more money.
Mr Trump's National Security Adviser, H R McMaster, said measures had also been put in place to avoid hitting what were believed to be stores of Sarin at Shayrat, so that it "would not be ignited and cause a hazard to civilians or anyone else".
Well if your main concern is not enough damage done
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39531045
Again it's not about outright stopping any airstrikes again, not at this stage, it's about never seeing Assad use chemical weapons again. Or at least that's what the threat is an attempt towards.
how much does 1 Tomahawk cost?
All the sarcasm aside, if chemical weapons don't get used again... ?
Might be a good chance he'll do it again, but that's what this message was about, not demobilising the whole country and preventing Syria ever flying/bombing ever again.
Maybe that wasn't the intention.Wait, what? what happened to precision?
65431324163524d chess
So what was the point?
Has there been reports of the damage done yet from the 59 TLAM strikes at this base? If not and this place is still functioning, that makes us look bad lol.
Oh, they were precise alright.
Maybe that wasn't the intention.
No cratered runways and no degradation of capabilities?McMaster said last night this "attack" doesn't take away an capability from Assad
they only got 6 broken migs and a mess hall in the strike. what a joke.
Seems this is where they went.
https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/850425431899680768
Trump cannot even bomb bases correctly. I give up.