OT Syrian Airstrike

[swaghauler]

Whether it was right or wrong, President Trump has drawn a line in the sand regarding the Syrian use of chemical weapons. He just launched 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles against the airfield suspected of launching the attack.

Despite all of the propaganda RT News puts out over the internet, the vaunted S300 and S400 SAMs didn't have much impact on the US Tomahawks. Google Earth images show a fair amount of damage to the airfield. I wonder what happens next?

[Olefin]

You have to wonder if the Russians even fired on the Tomahawks. If they did then clearly those SAM's arent worth a crap - thats a lot of damage

[lordroel]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

Despite all of the propaganda RT News puts out over the internet, the vaunted S300 and S400 SAMs didn't have much impact on the US Tomahawks. Google Earth images show a fair amount of damage to the airfield. I wonder what happens next?

Seems the Russians decided not to escalate by shooting the Tomahawks with their S300 and S400 SAMs despite them being labeled as being able to do so.

[The Dark]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

Whether it was right or wrong, President Trump has drawn a line in the sand regarding the Syrian use of chemical weapons. He just launched 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles against the airfield suspected of launching the attack.

Despite all of the propaganda RT News puts out over the internet, the vaunted S300 and S400 SAMs didn't have much impact on the US Tomahawks. Google Earth images show a fair amount of damage to the airfield. I wonder what happens next?

Apparently the damage was less extensive than believed, since it's being reported that Syrian aircraft have taken off from Shayrat less than 24 hours after the missile strike.

[ArmySGT.]

Looking at satellite imagery of the Al Sharyat airbase from sometime before all this began, there was extensive damage before.

The aircraft shelters, some of them, had been struck by munitions before. There were plenty of airframes parked around shelters or pulled off taxiways here and there.

I have my doubts that many operational aircraft were struck and "victory" was achieved by "destroying" many non operational heaps.

[Silent Hunter UK]

Originally Posted by The Dark

Apparently the damage was less extensive than believed, since it's being reported that Syrian aircraft have taken off from Shayrat less than 24 hours after the missile strike.

They didn't strike the runway. Also, hitting non-operational aircraft kind of prevents them from being operational ever again.

[Raellus]

It was a nice gesture, I suppose, but in terms of preventing another Syrian gov't chem attack, it was largely empty. I'm not sure what else the U.S. could have done, though. Doing nothing sends the wrong message. A riskier strike with runway penetrators or bunker busters would have put American aircrews at risk. Perhaps the TLAM strike was better than nothing.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Ii...I0&usp=sharing

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone...ase-was-a-sham

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Raellus

It was a nice gesture, I suppose, but in terms of preventing another Syrian gov't chem attack, it was largely empty. I'm not sure what else the U.S. could have done, though. Doing nothing sends the wrong message. A riskier strike with runway penetrators or bunker busters would have put American aircrews at risk. Perhaps the TLAM strike was better than nothing.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Ii...I0&usp=sharing

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone...ase-was-a-sham

Where is the Naval version of ATACMs? Though these probably do not have the range.

Trot the B2 Spirit out to remind China and North Korea those are still around... Also test the stealth versus the S400 surveillance and targeting radars.

[Olefin]

Have a feeling the planes that got hit in the shelters were operational ones - you could see that there were other planes parked around the area that were clearly non-operational that werent hit - i.e. why waste missiles on old Mig-21's that are rusting out in the open?