ElRenoRaven
Member
Guess we'll just have to increase the amount this time. 1.5 million Tomahawks incoming to said airbase.
No cratered runways and no degradation of capabilities?
So this was a very loud "cut it out!"
with 70 missiles? you fucking kidding me.
Which has now backfired and made them more emboldened.
I don't get this argument ... 'well at least the babies and kids are not getting killed by chemical weapons...but with less horrible weapons...that's a clear WIN!!!!'
Yes I understand using chemical weapons is worse and horrible but Assad's atrocities and murdering rampage has been going on for so long, 1000s of innocent kids/women/men have died before this chemical attack...less horribly but still, those people are dead, murdered. In my mind a murder of an innocent is a murder, and US as it pretends to be the world's police force, should have taken measures against this a-hole long time back and crippled his army. We bombed the shit out of Iraq for no good reason, at least here there was a good reason to do so.
I wish Hillary were president right now... instead we're stuck with this bimbo.
Speaking to the New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, Mrs Clinton said she believed the US had been wrong not to have previously launched such an offensive.
She said: "Assad had an air force, and that air force is the cause of most of the civilian deaths, as we have seen over the years and as we saw again in the last few days.
"And I really believe that we should have and still should take out his airfields and prevent him from being able to use them to bomb innocent people and drop Sarin gas on them."
Imagine trump's tweets today if this happened with Hillary in office. "CROOKED HILLARY SHOULDVE NEVER ATTACKED SYRIA! BAD NEWS FOR THE US! #LockHerUp @foxnews @fbi"I wish Hillary were president right now... instead we're stuck with this bimbo.
Fighter jets can cost like several million each. Some are like 10-20m each, though I dunno how much migs cost.According to the US Department of Defence's annual budget, a single Tomahawk missile costs $1.59 million.
59 missiles x 1.59$ mio and you get arond $94 million.
How much do 6 migs and a mess hall cost?
Almost as much as a trip to Mar a Lago!It's dumbfounding the fact that each missile used in the strike costs around 1 million a piece, that equates to 59 million dollars tax payers are going to cover to replace the stock, fucking insanity, for a strike that accomplished as much as Trump has in his 2 months in office.
If you're talking about this sole issue (chemical weapons), Hillary Clinton is in favour of air striking bases.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...rbase-cruise-missiles-tomohawks-a7671861.html
Now we have hangry lunatics with chemical weapons. #WWIIIThey can't get lunch anymore.
I wish Hillary was president right now... instead we're stuck with this bimbo.
You realize she wanted to strike as well, correct?
It's dumbfounding the fact that each missile used in the strike costs around 1 million a piece, that equates to 59 million dollars tax payers are going to cover to replace the stock, fucking insanity, for a strike that accomplished as much as Trump has in his 2 months in office.
I mean its an airfield of course it would be used again.
They said last night they weren't specifically targeting the runway because Tomahawks wouldn't be effective.
They took out some supporting structures and vehicles.
the president who orders the strikes also guides the missiles with a Switch confirmed.Probably would've actually destroyed it.
I'm in favour of striking Syria too; in favour of doing it properly (and for the right reasons).
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".
Probably would've actually destroyed it.
"Precision"
Probably would've actually destroyed it.
I wish Hillary was president right now... instead we're stuck with this bimbo.
No cratered runways and no degradation of capabilities?
So this was a very loud "cut it out!"
I don't get this argument ... 'well at least the babies and kids are not getting killed by chemical weapons...but with less horrible weapons...that's a clear WIN!!!!'
Yes I understand using chemical weapons is worse and horrible but Assad's atrocities and murdering rampage has been going on for so long, 1000s of innocent kids/women/men have died before this chemical attack...less horribly but still, those people are dead, murdered. In my mind a murder of an innocent is a murder, and US as it pretends to be the world's police force, should have taken measures against this a-hole long time back and crippled his army. We bombed the shit out of Iraq for no good reason, at least here there was a good reason to do so.
They let Trump aim?
this is super complex
Do nothing ... Civil war, Assad kills civilians
Military Strikes/drones ... won't remove Assad ... kills civilians
Troops on the ground .. Iraq 2
Fighter jets can cost like several million each. Some are like 10-20m each, though I dunno how much migs cost.
Seriously though. 50 cruise missiles and it did that little?
Were there people that really thought this would change anything in the equation?
I wish Hillary was president right now... instead we're stuck with this bimbo.
What's the over/under on how many days until the next US strike? I'm guessing 5.
One million, five hundred and ninety four thousand, three hundred eighty seven dollars and seventy five cents..That's $1,594,387.75 - in 2014.
There are treaties and moral obligations for the world globally not to have chemical warfare in use, at all, which exists "in its own bubble" that doesn't need shot down with "but look at all this other terrible shit!". It is pretty much a singular issue in many regards which can be tackled in addition to all the other horrible shit going on.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...rbase-cruise-missiles-tomohawks-a7671861.html