Didn't the Russians have air defense asset in syria? Why

>>33562566
This goy wants a shitstorm to fall upon the world. Russia had nothing to do with the chem attack and if they confront with US military alot of bad shit will happen, and russia doesnt want to endanger stability for a war torn shithole of a country. Russian s300 and s400 in syria are only for the show and testing. If lets say rebels or isis attain scud missiles it would be a great opportunity to test these systems in action, and they are mainly to protect damascus key points.

>>33562566
>Didn't the Russians have air defense asset in syria?
>Posts Syrian Air Defence, likely mostly non-operational
It is exactly because they were made aware of the attack in advance that amerishit petards got to hit anything.

>>33562603
>Russian s300 and s400 in syria are only for the show and testing
They are there to cover Russian airfields, Russian bases and Russian Air Force.

>>33562613
Doesnt matter as long as they are not for syrian army use

>>33562604
>>33562613
Good answers, let us wait and see how this situation unfolds and pass judgements after more facts are in front of us.

>>33562566

by flying under 100ft

>>33562603
>and they are mainly to protect damascus key points
Except they are stationed at Hemeimeem. Of course they still have enough range to cover Damascus, but the positioning clearly indicates the priorities.
>>33562627
Syrians do operate Pantsir though, although they aren't really good at it. I wonder if it was deployed somewhere out there and got to shoot some cruise missiles.
>>33562629
I don't quite get the hype going on right now.

>>33562566
Basically what I gathered is the missile strike was pretty much on an abandoned airbase within rebel area of influence.

>They were even warned before hand of the attack.

Also this, they could have just fucked off and not waste any ammo.

>>33562671
wut

>>33562671
What is the expiration on those 50 tomahawk missiles? Is it possible they used them because they would be defective anyways?

That could play part in why so many were launched.

>>33562688
>tfw spent gorillion dollars on the conventional weapons and cannot use it against your adversaries

>>33562688
>Is it possible they used them because they would be defective anyways?
Not sure if it's true specifically for Tomahawks, but this is generally how missiles are used, especially regarding solid fuelled ones, which is also the main reason faulty launches happen.

You can refurbished expired missiles but all loaded missiles are young. They swap them when the ships come back to port for refit.

>>33562566
Because they were jammed

File: us uav in iran cartoon.jpg (57KB, 600x418px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 600x418px

>>33562750
Nice projections.

>>33562734
Him using that many is something that bothers me as a goddamn taxpayer, especially considering hardly any mudslime were killed. But I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt, for the time being, until more information is uncovered. I want to now why they were used and what purpose he had in using that many.

>>33562736
This is why having an expiration date would help us contextualize this scenario.

>>33562739
Do they do this for every single operation or have they done something different in the past?

>>33562566
>Why didn't they take out the cruise missiles?
59 missiles launched and 9 planes destroyed, airstrip is intact. I think it's pretty obvious that some of that missiles didn't get through.

>>33562758
>Because they were jammed
>Nice projections.
That doesn't even make sense, are you implying the Tomahawk's jammed into the airbase?

Only 13 made it to the target, the rest were shot down.

File: 1l222 avtobaza.jpg (182KB, 944x629px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 944x629px

>>33562794
I am not implying anything, I am saying that thinking that Russian Air Defence assets were jammed is a projection, since in real life so far it is the US stealth drone that got jammed.

File: serbian air defence.jpg (44KB, 640x630px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 640x630px

>>33562789
>9 planes destroyed, airstrip is intact
>>33562810
>Only 13 made it to the target
If true, this is golden. Give source.

>>33562810
According to Zvezda - official channel of RuMoD - 23 made it.

So 59 missiles with a value of nearly 40 millions $$$ to destroy an obselete airbase with obsolete aircrafts MIG's 21...it was a show made by Trump to show to us The "murica First" shitthole.

>>33562566
Vatniks could have their cities reduced to rubble by American nukes and all they'd be able to talk about is about how superior russian rubble clearing crews are to American rubble clearing crews.

File: 1490505951048.png (147KB, 780x800px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 780x800px

>>33562821
59*1,6=94,4

>>33562821
>Punishing Assad for chemical weapon use - Trump is bad
>Not punishing Assad for chemical weapon use - Trump is bad and pro-russian
>Accepting that chemical weapon was not used by Assad - Trump is a Russian puppet and Putin is in the White house already

>>33562660
>Syrians do operate Pantsir though, although they aren't really good at it. I wonder if it was deployed somewhere out there and got to shoot some cruise missiles.
Doesn't matter if its not in the airbase itself. Its a Point Defence System made to defend longer ranged SAMs after all.

>>33562789
Not all of them woult target planes.

>>33562810
>Only 13 made it to the target, the rest were shot down.
23 actually.

>>33562821
Someone should tell the Syrian air force to stop using obsolete aircraft ammirite?!

File: Powell-anthrax-vial.jpg (16KB, 410x285px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 410x285px

>>33562836
>The use of chemical weapons by Assad
NTSA.

This is really fucking weird. As an actual military action it is really pretty useless, the results as of now are so pathetic that it simply cannot be a coincidence. So they were intentionally made useless. But this does not benefit trump in any way, and i doubt it will scare russians or anything. I doubt anyone will figure that shit out without a substantial tinfoil hat.

>>33562832
Dropping money would unironically be a better CI strategy than the current one.

>>33562844
Try to explain to American public that it was not Assad.

>>33562840
By "out there" I obviously mean in range, covering the air base. If the claim about 23 missiles is right it might be the exactly the case.

File: SA-2 Vietnam.jpg (20KB, 771x466px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 771x466px

>>33562566
>Why didn't they take out the cruise missiles?
1. Doing so may just provoke the US to target Russian ADS assets directly; standing down was an important deescalation
2. Considering cruise missiles fly NoE, they'd be lucky to get more that 1 or 2 of them total if they had actually tried

Air defense is fucking hard, even for a good air defense system. It's never been about stopping everything that comes out you. It's always been a game of attrition - take out enemy bombers frequently enough and they might eventually run out.

>>33562854
"We made an investigation, <someone> is to blame".
Done.

>>33562566
Maybe it's just for show.Seems a bit stupid to use ridiculous resources to damage a relatively unimportant target.

>>33562821
>So 59 missiles with a value of nearly 40 millions $

Which is literally nothing for US budget.

>>33562851
Yeah well I get when Russians complain about expensive cruise missile strike (not really, I don't, the missiles would've been spent anyway, in exercises or otherwise), but what's with Americans? It's just $100 mil, like a wannabe price of one F-35. What do you care?

Isn't either 13 or 23 rather unimpressive? Given the AA in northern Syria isn't that good against stronger opponents you would have to fire an entire SSGN worth of missiles to hope to do anything?

http://tvzvezda.ru/news/forces/content/201704071232-bv04.htm

Here russian source

>>33562873
Because people are pissed the navy just went to walmart and bought $40million+ of cruise missiles. We will need to change our budget and everything.

>>33562851
>>33562873
To be honest it is not like russians arent in the same positions here, US used expensive cruise missiles to bomb a useless asset with tiny effect, russians used expensive AA missiles to intercept US missiles to defend a pretty useless asset with tiny effect. Thats literally throwing money at each other with no impact on reality.

>>33562863
It is a show of force. The Russians were notified in advanced and only 23 of those 59 missiles made it on target. If anything, it was more of disposing of expired ordance while flexing your muscles at them

>>33562896
>russians used expensive AA missiles to intercept US missiles
Whatever TV channel is giving you this idea right now, turn it off.

>>33562903
nice meme

>>33562902
>and only 23 of those 59 missiles made it on target
Whats the source for that? Pretty funny if its true.

>>33562903
Only the cheapest of the cheapest anti-air SAMs were used for stopping pig dog American cruise missiles.

>>33562775

>Do they do this for every single operation or have they done something different in the past?

Missiles come in self-contained package and when they get old they are replaced. Unused munition end up mostly destroyed because the explosives can become unstable overtime and guidance system is obsoleted after decades.

Of course for shit like obsolete stingers they are donated to foreign government or groups that are friendly to the US.

File: unknown[1].png (646KB, 1290x719px) Image search: [Google]

646KB, 1290x719px

AA on base is intact.
It's a very strange strike.
You need to make damage but you can't hit airstrip - Russian helicopters may be there
You can't use planes with high-precision weapons - they might be shoot down or forced to land by regime\Russia causing greatest diplomatic scandal since U2.
You can't use drones because big drones will be killed and small drones can't do shit.
You can't hit airstrip, because Russian base helicopter there from time to time and there is no way to confirm that it's empty.
You need to warn Russians to prevent incident, you need to hit very limited number of targets but you need to use shitload missiles for that, because there is AA and you can't even kill or jam that AA.
SRSLY, that's why Russians have their tactical ballistic missiles - fast, accurate and uninterceptable .

>>33562912
Russians of course: >>33562880

I'm surprised he didn't say only two and a half made it through, but then again things were actually destroyed.

>>33562926
>but then again things were actually destroyed.
Not many more than two and a half senpai.

>>33562923
As far as i understand there was a cluster strike on the runway area. Which is pretty useless, but still.

>>33562923
Russian TBMs are anything but accurate, CEP is measured in hundreds of meters

>>33562950

>Russian missiles anything but accurate

>shoots down over half of state of the art U.S missiles

>minimal damage to airbase that remains fully operational


wew

>>33562918
None were used at all, retard.

>>33562968

only 23 actually made it, the other 37 were BTFO

File: 9k720 iskander-m.jpg (154KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 1200x800px

>>33562950
>9K720 Iskander
>Accuracy 5–7 m (Iskander-M)
Nigger you high?

>>33562963
Now if you weren't a retarded vatnik you would realise that the accuracy of russian TBMs is not related to this certain US missile strike, you would also realise not to trust TASS on the matter

>>33562963
Why don't you show us a drone overview of all the major targets in the airbase to prove it then.

>>33562963
>Russian missiles anything but accurate
I agree.

>shoots down over half of state of the art U.S missiles
Well, at least now we know Russians/Syrians can at least kill cruise missiles. That's of course if the glorious Russian commander is to believed, they'd never lie.

>minimal damage to airbase that remains fully operational
Because the aim was to wipe it off the face of the earth with no survivors, right

>>33562968
Can you please give me all the platforms involved, you seem well informed.

>>33562975
>Reading comprehension
It's about Russian SAMs. He thinks they were used.

Syrians have Pantsir systems. 59 tomahawks launched, less than half hit the target, overall strike was unimpressive.

US fail.

LOW EFFICIENCY

>>33562978
Majority of russian TBMs is still piece of shit Tochkas

>>33562989
Syrian IADN only took down half of the tomahawks, losing 15 planes. Huge fail for them.

>>33562978

>>Accuracy 5–7 m (Iskander-M)
Nigger you high?

the room im in is literally 10m across so that thing can drop its warhead within my room from god-knows-how-far away.

>>33562987
>I agree.
Well, you are a retard then.
>Because the aim was to wipe it off the face of the earth with no survivors, right
With $100 mil worth of cruise missiles fired at a dusty airbase in the middle of the desert you'd think exactly that.
>Can you please give me all the platforms involved
I can give you all the platforms not involved: the Russian ones.

File: 1414349288241 - Copy.jpg (54KB, 640x844px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 640x844px

Russian MOD on this strike
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeI81gj37ks#t=8m40s

Drone after look

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKtJjPypT7I

>>33562998
No, most are now Iskander

>>33562963
Not that I dont trust Russian state-run media...but well....gonna hold of on trusting any info coming out regarding this for some time

>>33562989
There is no proofs that Pantsirs were deployed there. Video shows SA-6 on base.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RaLALdwnkbw
Russians probably will give full report later, they already published UAV video from base.

>There are 300M people in the US

>this strike costs $100M

>so each person in the US contributed $0.30 to this strike

give me back my 30c lol

>>33563018
kek

>>33563003
I think he's talking miles.

>>33563018
You aren't American though.

>>33563018
Tomahawks are already sunk costs. Unless they go on a massive spree those missiles have already been paid and would have to be scrapped when their self life ends.

>>33562840
>>33562820
where's the source for this?

>>33562998
"Piece of shit" Tockhas' CEP is not measured in hundreds of meters either, furthermore its conventional warhead covers the area of 2 ha. Stay mad.
>>33563003
That's how guided missiles work.
>>33563023
I think there is not reason for you to be this upset.

>>33563040
A tochka carries a ~1000lb pound warhead which is not impressive if not combined with pinpoint accuracy

>>33562836
>assad used chemical weapons
dejavu.
Didnt obumbum clain the saim years ago and wanted to march into syria?

File: 3 inches.jpg (9KB, 127x161px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 127x161px

>>33563010
>59 Tomahawks
>An intact airstrip and planes
Will burgerboos ever recover?

>>33563040
I'm not upset, I'm french. I endure muslim attacks peacefully.

>>33562854
Nah Amerifats are too dumb to understand geopolitics

>>33563039
>>33563010

>>33563056
Are you in 93 nigga ?

>>33563010
Done is flir, kind of useless.

I'm waiting for the US declassified AAR.

SHOULD come in about a week.

>>33563071
Used to be. Fought a lot of maliens.

>>33563055
Tomahawks are for targeted strikes, not runway destruction.

You need planes overhead for that.

>>33563074
>US declassified AAR.
They actually do that?

>>33563076
South West is comfy.

>>33563085
I'm in the alps, it's even worse.

>>33563084
When it makes themselves look good. So, probably not in this case.

>>33563090
What's worse? Don't tell me you have shitskin colonies in the Alps now.

>>33563079
Blatantly wrong. Tomahawks with cluster munitions are perfect for anti runway work

File: 9t250 iskander-m loading vehicle.jpg (2MB, 2250x1500px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2250x1500px

>>33563050
>What the fuck are HE fragmentation and cluster munitions?
So let's sum this up. Your claim was that Russian TBMs are not accurate. You got BTFO. You moved the goalposts claiming that Tochka's CEP is measured in hundreds of meters. You got btfo. Not you are moving goalposts again, claiming its accuracy is not enough for its warhead. But you got BTFO in advance, since I already informed you in my previous post that its conventional warhead covers the area of 2 ha. Do youwish to proceed getting BTFO? MGM-140 accuracy is measured in "tens of meters", its speed sucks ass, however it is still the main TBM of the US Army. Meanwhile, Iskander exists and is in full rate production. How does it feel struggling to against with an old 1970s Soviet TBM in 2017? Come back with an actual argument or don't come back at all, cunt.

>>33563111
Dude, I thought I'd finally dodge them here, but not even. I have a muslim mob that is killing my neighboorhood and my restaurant. They break everything, yell, try to attack us.

France is dead.

>>33562986
Here you go

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKtJjPypT7I

>>33563122
And the cops do nothing, natch.

Try filming 'em and sue the cops when they fail to protect your property?

>>33563113
What kind of anti-runway clusters do Tomahawk carry? The potential between regular anti-vehicle cluster and proper anti-runway weapons are quite massive

>>33563131
Maybe all anti-runaway missiles were in that 26 that didn't reach target.

>>33563055
Not all of them targeted that area. The ones in that area targeted fuel, munitions, and hangars.
>>33562989
There were multiple targets.

t. Intel fag

>>33563115
not him but seems like;

Russians = inaccurate shit that gives big booms = big infrastructure and civilian damage

USA = Accurate shit that kills only what they want dead with minimal infrastructure damage

>>33563160
But then again, both weddings and training camps look the same from 40 000 feet

>>33563160
>USA = Accurate shit that kills only what they want dead with minimal infrastructure damage
>http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/27/middleeast/mosul-civilian-deaths/

>>33563115
Nigga what? I claimed that russian TBMs are inaccurate and Tochkas are inaccurate, You personally moved them fucking goalposts by trying to claim that a 1000lb warhead makes up for lack of accuracy of the Tochka, Iskander's are too expensive for the russkies to actually use on anything outside WWIII, and while they may be able to up the production, they are not there yet.
>>33563160
A tomahawk carries a 1000lb warhead as well for contras

>>33563169
>>33563160
Its a bit ironic desu.
You can be damn sure that whatever JDAM or similar that the US/NATO decides to drop will land where its aimed. But that is no guarantee that the Intel is bad. and that the building you are aiming at is actually a school and not a VBIED-factory, or that below the ISIS HQ resides a bunch of innocent poor fucks. Russia can get accused of bombing all over the place, but its hard to accuse them of aiming for that particular school or whatever.

>>33563160
>USA = Accurate shit that kills only what they want dead with minimal infrastructure damage until it's wedding. USA fucking hated weddings.

>>33562688
>Raytheon began producing the Block IV line of Tomahawks in 2004. These missiles have a projected "shelf life" of 30 years. But at the halfway mark in their lifespan, they must undergo recertification to ensure they'll still work as designed if they do eventually need to be used. For the oldest Block IV Tomahawks, that halfway mark arrives in 2019.
www.fool.com/amp/investing/general/2014/07/26/the-us-military-just-doubled-its-purchases-of-toma.aspx

>>33563212
Might be firing off some 13yo missiles to save the price of recertification

>>33563186
posted.... NOT HIM...

just replying to your logic. Don't drag your argument to someone else, I don't give a fuck, I'm not moving anything.

File: 1470646833937.jpg (282KB, 900x702px) Image search: [Google]

282KB, 900x702px

God, Trump bitches about his impotent predecessor then launches this fucking pride parade of a missile strike. I hope he's at least sending the repair crews gift baskets while he's at it.

>>33563220
fuck... stupid glasses

>>33563216
I'm honestly thinking this is what happened. We can all shoot back and forth about what became of the missiles that never made it to their target, and we'll probably never know. My assumption is that most simply fell into the Mediterranean. I don't think it's a matter of superior defenses or inferior missiles; it's simply what happens when you use what amounts to a pile of mothballed cruise missiles.

I mean, yeah, vatkinks are gonna be hollering about this for a while, but whatever.

>>33563237
>>33563216
Possible to save re-cert money, provide live fire training and see current IADS capability against current cruise missiles. All this while making a political showing.

>>33563237
Well, if the strike was such an abysmal failure as rt and sputnik claims, then i'd imagine quite a bit of stress at Raytheon/DoD regarding missile efficiency

>>33563260
It's an alright idea, but the problem is that Trump has now given Russia (and these fucking vatniks) a propaganda payday in terms of discrediting American military capability. Regardless of how outdated the missiles were, the fact is that a lot of missiles didn't make it through. Yes, slow, lumbering, low flying and easily detected missiles, but that's not the part people are going to care about. All they're going to see is another example of perceived American military incompetence, and for the second time Trump's the one doing the handoff.

>>33563263
Could be a good thing. Regardless of the validity of their claims, Russia and China have been talking a lot about new "hypersonic" this and "carrier-killer" that. It's about time the US had a reason to develop a proper counterpart.

File: 1478054564749.gif (1MB, 260x260px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 260x260px

>>33563263
>>33563260
> Oh no our missiles didn't work Pres TRUMP.
> WOOOO what failure
> LOL can't blow up some planes

> *Lip smacking noises*
> "wrong"
>> 150 missiles launched the same day..
>>> Maybe a goddamn nuke

>>33562827
Fucking this

>>33563186
>Iskander's are too expensive for the russkies to actually use on anything outside WWIII
They used it in fucking Georgia, retard. Stop pulling facts out of your ass.

>>33563260
Keep on explaining, burgerboo.
>m-muh live fire training

>>33562848
Nope. Bumbum drew a "Redline" and fucking Trump enforced if.

>>33563275
Yeah but let the idiots who only want to look at the base layer keep yelling the loudest.

Lets say that Russian claims are completely 100% true, either they shot intercepted most of the missiles or they failed in flight.

Cool, now we have real world data on the missiles at certain time frames of their life cycle and real world interaction with an IADS with minimal threat of retaliation. So now Raytheon/DoD can look at the data and provide efficiency upgrades or look at re-cert program >>33563212 and declare a 2 time 10-year recert program vice a 1 time 15-year program.

I would like to point out to all that Russia's Kalibr system also had an abysmal showing it's first run up into the Syrian conflict and that was against undefended targets.

>>33562854
Soooo IS has chemical bombs and the aircraft to deliver? Fuck off dicksuck

>>33562775
>want to now why they were used and what purpose he had in using that many.

Dick waving.
And to make a point: We just hit your abandoned base with a fuck ton of missiles for keks, you pull any more of the chemical shit, we'll send even more but without warning, and at places that you need.

>>33562857
This

>>33562566
US says all but one hit their target. So if that's correct 58 got through. Russia says only 23 got through.

Also report that Russia turned off their radars when they were given a heads up by the US. This may be for a number of reasons. One may be that some of the Missiles go after radar emissions.

>>33563286
Kind of see it happening and the prospect scares me
>Today I ordered a second attack on the airfield...
>Rand REEing in the distance

>>33562880
Nobody can read that gobblygook bullshit. Fuck outta here

>>33563010
what if these 30 missing were decoys?

>>33563345
According to what we know, the only things targeted were munitions, fuel, and aircraft. There is no evidence of, and no reason for, strikes against Russian or Syrian radar installations. Even if there was, as far as I'm aware the only Tomahawk variant with radar homing capability was the UGM-109D, which was an AShM that was retired in the 90s.

>>33562918
I had a hardy kek

>>33562926
kek

>>33563010
he's face at the end is like
>welp, the nukes will fly and we will all die

File: 1319231815001.jpg (81KB, 800x900px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 800x900px

So now that russia has sent further cruise missile frigates to the syrian coast what are the chances of a naval clash

>>33563395
Low, I'd suspect. Russia's Black Sea Fleet is one of the most easily bottled-up major fleets in the world. If they mobilized all of their vessels into the Mediterranean, it'd be an obvious tell. If they didn't and attacked with what's already out, they'd be wiped out and the rest would never be able to break out of the Black Sea.

Point being, I think Russia has no incentive to attack first at least. If I had to guess (and this isn't a "JOOZ" thing, it's a "how the world works" thing) Israel will be the first to strike Russian vessels, and the US would get pulled in that way.

>>33563010
>Russian in left ear and English in right
Hot damn that shit is convenient

>>33563327
>Lets say that Russian claims are completely 100% true
dude, have you seen post-strike assessment vids and pics? no fucking way all but one cruise missile hit their targets. Each is packing 1000 pound explosive warheads, no way the place isn't going to end up a smoldering pile if it was indeed hit by ~60 missiels.

>>33563327
>Cool, now we have real world data on the missiles at certain time frames of their life cycle and real world interaction with an IADS with minimal threat of retaliation. So now Raytheon/DoD can look at the data and provide efficiency upgrades or look at re-cert program >>33563212 and declare a 2 time 10-year recert program vice a 1 time 15-year program.
I don't think a more revamped verification regime is going to improve performance against enemy action.

>I would like to point out to all that Russia's Kalibr system also had an abysmal showing it's first run up into the Syrian conflict and that was against undefended targets.
They never exceeded 20% failures for a fact.

>>33563056
So you enjoy nigger cocks huh?

>>33563074
58 hit their targets. One had a gps failure and was not found.
Source: CBS News 9am est

>>33563441
>I don't think a more revamped verification regime is going to improve performance against enemy action.
If the data shows equipment failures/errors were cause of degradation of efficiency/capability that a re-cert could fix, then yes it will. Remember Patriots got a bad rep during First Gulf War due to a 1/3 second drift after 100 hours of operation.

>They never exceeded 20% failures for a fact.
And it's completely unknown if the Tomahawks were intercepted or failed or mixture of both while Kalibr's have yet to try to penetrate an actual IADS yet. 20% failure on a "premier" technology against a literally undefended target isn't "bad" but it also isn't great.

>>33562923

Bruh I don't even think those legacy SA-6 systems can even ENGAGE missiles flying nap-of-earth like Tomahawks. Plus they almost certainly nailed the early-warning radars near the base, plus any illumination radars, so the missiles never really had a chance to engage.

>>33563418
Why would israel strike the russian vessels? Bibi and Putin are buddies.

>>33562937
>As far as i understand there was a cluster strike on the runway area. Which is pretty useless, but still.

Runway denial. Now they have to carefully remove each submunition, which is basically an armed mine.

Still pointless, as the real prize was the aircraft/munitions/fuel, but it's one more fuck-you, and in the end more effective than using several missiles just to make a crater they can fill in with bulldozers in a few hours.

>>33562963

sup vatnik

>>33563395
>So now that russia has sent further cruise missile frigates to the syrian coast what are the chances of a naval clash
Its a show. If they really want to do something the strikes would be performed by stategic heavy aviation and naval bomber aviation regiments.

>>33563498
>Runway denial. Now they have to carefully remove each submunition, which is basically an armed mine.
The runway was pretty clear.

>>33563542
>The runway was pretty clear.

In that case they weren't aiming for the runway but rather the tarmacs next to the runway. Cheap way to murder any planes left out in open parking.

>>33563542
The view I saw of the runway had a burned spot

Would be based if palestine or yemen rebels used chem weapons to kill some of civilians and accuse israel or saudis of bombing, leading rusia to launch missiles on their airbase.

>>33563564
Ammo cookoff

>>33563665
Why would russia give a shit about yemen/palestine? Are you retarded?

>>33563564
>hit an airfield with 59 cruise missiles
>airstrip left intact
What the fuck?

>>33562827
God I fucking hate Russians. They're ruining my Internet. I cannot wait until their economy collapses so they won't be able to afford Internet connection anymore.

I hope Trump missile cruises the entire fucking country.

>>33562912
Russian wishful thinking. We have serious problems if only 23 made it.

>>33562821
Poorfag detected.

40 mill is like a penny on the street for us.

>>33562629
get out

>>33563993
>Russian wishful thinking. We have serious problems if only 23 made it.
You have a problem either way. What kind of shitty missiles are those they only did that much damage?

>>33563913
I heard General Jack Keane on fox this morning say that Tomahawks don't leave craters. Does this mean that he Tomahawk is airburst? I can't find any sources stating how it detonates.

>>33562566
Jidf shill here, I thought the Israeli missile defenses are the best?

>>33564075
We don't know what variants of tomahawk were used. If most were cluster munitions we wouldn't see much damage. But you're right, the damage didn't look all that extensive, granted Im no expert.

>>33563010
lol this reminds me so much of a hollywood action movie. They cannot go more than 2 seconds without a cut because they know if they show a long single shot, all the destruction will be evident.

>>33563160
>seems like
It seems wrong.
>>33563186
>I claimed that russian TBMs are inaccurate
And you were proven wrong.
>Tochkas are inaccurate
They are about as inaccurate as MGM-140.
>You personally moved them fucking goalposts
You did, since from claiming that "Russian TBMs are inaccurate" you, after being presented with an example of Iskander, moved to claiming specifically one old type of missile is inaccurate, from which now after being proven wrong even further with the example of specific characteristics of the said old missile's warhead allowing it to fulfil its task you jumped to claiming that it is hurr durr "not enough" accurate nevertheless. However, just like before, you were proven wrong in advance, since the example was provided of an American TBM with comparable accuracy. So answer the question. How exactly does it feel struggling to compete against an old Soviet missile in the year 2017?
>Iskander's are too expensive for the russkies to actually use on anything outside WWIII
They are in full rate production and were used in combat in Georgia, imbecile.
>and while they may be able to up the production, they are not there yet.
They are there, since it is in full rate production and by now constitutes for roughly one missile complex for every two Tochkas. Only that unlike Tochka, it carries two missiles. Come back with an actual argument or don't come back at all, you dumb ignorant shitposting cunt.

>>33563395

0 because Ruskies know how hard they would get fucked.

>>33563327
>Russian claims
>they shot intercepted most of the missiles
Where the fuck did you hear them claiming they shot the missiles or even aimed to do so on the first place?

File: 1491583508586.jpg (1MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x1836px

>>33562789
You would be mistaken.
Minimum of 44 targets visible here.

>>33563327
>I would like to point out to all that Russia's Kalibr system also had an abysmal showing it's first run up into the Syrian conflict and that was against undefended targets.
As proven by unsourced claims of someone somewhere in the middle of nowhere in Iran hearing an explosion? Bitch, please.

>>33562810
Not accurate.

>>33562819
Its not true.

>>33562820
>>33562840
>23

44 targets visible in this image from IMGSAT. >>33565117

File: UGM-109_hits_target_on_San_Clemente_Island_1986.JPEG.jpg (224KB, 1920x1187px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 1920x1187px

>>33564090
>>33564105
Tomahawks are generally airburst. They're not meant to bunker bust or crater runways.

File: map syria sea.jpg (77KB, 720x491px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 720x491px

>>33565093
Doesn't quite corresponds with real life where Russians cockblocked the USN from Syria.

>>33565165
You are now aware that the Russians only have three surface combatants in that pic.

File: see what happens.png (133KB, 2378x1124px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 2378x1124px

>>33565186
You are now aware that this was enough to cockblock the USN from Syria.

>>33565186
Cool, you wanna fire on 'em tough guy? Didn't think so.

>>33565198
It's almost as if the US doesn't have any interest in sinking Russian ships for no real reason.

>>33565198
Which is why they were unable to fire cruise missiles into Syria.

Or wait...

>>33565212
It's almost as if it is exactly because of that they got cockblocked from Syria.

>>33565203
Nah. Don't need to. As shown last night, the US can inflict its will in Syria.

>>33565223
Yep, the USN was so cockblocked that they shot 59 cruise missiles over the Russian "fleet" anyways.

>>33565219
I'm pretty sure it was before they got any agreements on Syria. could be even before the ISIS popped out, actually.

>>33565242
Too bad they didn't get much of them to the actual targets.

>>33565256
I see at least 44 in this image. >>33565117

>>33565261
>Fox
Very interesting, please proceed.

>>33565256
What Vlad actually thinks kek

>>33565275
Not an argument

>>33565308
Neither is Fox.

>>33565399
Ad hom logical fallacy.
Try again.

>>33565429
Argumentum ad populum mixed with argumentum ad verecundiam.
Try harder.

File: Powell_UN_Iraq_presentation,_alleged_Mobile_Production_Facilities.jpg (57KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 600x450px

>>33562854

Good point, they're too retarded.

They already forgot about pic related, and that was just like 2003.

>>33565549
Its not an appeal to popularity. Nowhere is that stated.

Appeal to authority is only a fallacy if the appeal is to someone that is not an actual authority.
It is safe to assume that the satellite imagery analysis company that analyzed the image is an authority on analyzing imagery.

>>33563331

>Implying there was any chemical agents at all.

Hi Mr. Cheney.

>One may be that some of the Missiles go after radar emissions.

lolno

>>33565583
It is safe to assume that whatever Fox posts is bullshit.

>>33565603
Fox is not the source of the image.

Also, yet another ad hom.

>Why didn't they take out the cruise missiles?
The US has escalation dominance in Syria. It can up Russia not by 1, but by 100, if they dared interfere.

>>33565619
Then post the source. also, it's not ad hom when it's true. It is argumentum ad populum mixed with argumentum ad verecundiam when you post an image from Fox claiming it is true based on that a popular brainwashing outlet posted it.

>>33565655

I think America has more to lose, in general.

A nuclear winter in bare cement husks of buildings for most Russians would not be different from their current living conditions.

>>33565655
>Why didn't they take out the cruise missiles?
Why the fuck would Putin want to make himself look like he is defending the usage of chemical weapons?

So many autistic idiots here. Sad.

File: 20809181.png (1MB, 1024x586px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1024x586px

>>33562566
>Why didn't they take out the cruise missiles?
because Trump warned them before the attack

>>33565672
>Then post the source.
Its in the image. Do you need me to find it for you? Does the image upset you so much that you cant even look at it for more than a few seconds?


>it's not ad hom
It is when you are attacking the source (or what your stupidly think is the source because you can't bare to look at the image because it hurts your fee fees) and not the actual argument.

>>33562836
This.

He called the media's bluff. I bet they already had millions of dollars worth of propaganda featuring dead gassed children, all queued up and ready to continue their Russia narrative.

>>33562810
>Only 13 made it to the target, the rest were shot down.
>the rest were shot down.
>shot down.

... really ?

>>33565731
No, considering pretty much all of functional air defence is ~150 km away.

>>33565693
The image from Fox with some circles.
>It is when you are attacking the source
It's not when the source is Fox and the image is just some circles on a map.

>>33565731
no. The slavs have backed off this claim now that the images of the post strike are out.

>>33565749
Anon.
Look in the top left corner of the image.
Learn to read.
Then you can see that fox is not the source of the image.

It's really too bad that I had to hold your hand to show you how to find attribution in a news article.

It makes me question your cognitive faculties.

>>33562775
10 tomahawks got launched for each Syrian killed. The US really spares no expenses. Like the 500 millions that got spent to train and equip a gigantic army of 120 rebels - who donated half their equipment to Al Nusra before getting bombed by Russia.

>>33565749
For all your time spent being dumb, you could have gone to ImageSat International and see the zoomed in before and after image.

Fact: US precision weapons are unmatched and Russian propaganda can't deny satellite images.

>>33565774
>ImageSat International
And considering that the name of the source was in the image the entire time, its even more pathetic that the slavs can't figure it out.

>>33565741
I think people just overestimate the effectivness of anti high quality anti air system.

They CAN intercept cruise/ballistic missiles. But they also suffer from extreme deployment costs, logistical nightmares and are parts of multiple level networks that all can fail and fuck up the effect of your AA network in totality. A command screw up, software missing a milisecond every hour the system is online, false positive verification increasing response time etc.

All happened before, all will continue to happen.

>>33565862
Well, the main issue that it has to be near the object it is supposed to guard, and it must be pretty dense. If you have just several radars and launchers 150 km away from the target that is supposed to be hit you can do propaganda claims about controlling the airspace as much as you can, you wont be able to hit a target that is below radio horizon from your perspective.
A pretty useless attack, but at least they will teach russian propagandists to be more realistic

>>33562832
>redpanels
get the fuck out

>>33562812
>since in real life so far it is the US stealth drone that got jammed.

There's no evidence that it was jammed. Could have crashed

>>33565774
>Fact: US precision weapons are unmatched
Are you the same retard that claims Russian TBMs have CEP measured in hundreds of meters?

>>33563129
This, put the heat on them Frenchman.

File: Ronald-trump.jpg (19KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 480x360px

okayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy russian mil = 1970

LETS DO IT

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0I8RdUCBwjE

>>33565962
cry more, bitch

>>33562566
>why didn't they just shoot the missiles down with other missiles
That's not how missiles work pham

>>33563054
yes he did, turned out it was ISIS throwing chems around

>>33569352
but they do work like that :l

>>33562688

>we spend trillions on weapons
>some are going bad
>do we just dismantle them... or just fire them at some people?

America ladies and gentlemen.

How do we know how many missiles actually hit their intended targets?

The entire globe's media is saying different things. Unless you were at the airbase there's no possible way of knowing

Pro USA sources say 58-59/59 missiles hit their targets

Pro Russia sources say anywhere from 0 to <half hit

And I've read no sources so far saying that any missiles were shot down.

It's the worst when all this hype is happening and you can't even be certain it actually did

>>33562566
First, it's not worth it. Gives US valuable info about your capabilities. Second, being told after they're launched doesn't help when you can probably detect the launches anyway. Especially if it's 60 launches. Third, it's an airfield that can be repaired in a few hours. Not as big a deal as people are making it out to be

>>33569573
As a general rule, I'd say ignore the Russian state media.

At the same time, I wouldn't completely trust US reports just yet, at least until some third party can confirm or they can provide some solid pics that show the damage. My big concern is more that I'm not seeing any numbers corroborated anywhere else - every source I'm seeing just says 59 were launched and nothing about how many hit. The most I've seen anywhere from reliable sources about the results of the strike cite Israeli intel saying that 14 Su-22s were destroyed.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/us-cruise-missile-strikes-target-syrias-su-22-fleet-436034/

you dont see total destruction because out of the 59 that hit 4 or 5 probably hit the same spot.

>>33564090
Different variations of the tomahawks can fulfill different missions. Some have sub munitions, others delayed fuse perpetrators.

Because that missile attack was so sudden.

>>33569573
>>33569601
Image Sat International has published before and after satellite photos that show a minimum of 44 targets destroyed, and if some of the missiles carried submunitions for area denial and repair denial, those missiles are basically impossible to account for by satellite, and there might have been redundant tasking for important targets like the fuel storage, munitions dump and repair stations.

The official Russian claim is 23/59, the preliminary US claim is 58/59, and the minimum 3rd party verifiable number is 44/59, but this is a minimum, and other targeting factors may have masked 14 successful strikes pretty easily.
>>33569590
The airfield can be brought back into service reasonably quickly, yes, but repaired is more difficult, the infrastructure of the base, in terms of refueling equipment and repair facilities has been very strongly damaged, and even though no physical factor (unless missiles seeded the strike area with submunition mines) might prevent the repair, the state of Assad's airforce, engineering, and logisitical corps might mean that this base is going to be kept out of action for some time. Not everyone can afford to spend the money needed to replace their stuff when it gets smashed by war.

File: 3F0839D400000578-4391446-image-m-42_1491592518263.jpg (165KB, 962x679px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 962x679px

>>33569850

Tomahawk missiles cost about 1 million USD each. Not to mention the cost of now having to reload the ships they came from. Port time. Staffing. Shipping. etc.

Think what was hit? A few guys left at the base, 6 Mig 23s in for repair that cannot fly. 3 other aircraft not mentioned (or confirmed). old ass airbase buildings.

Now think of the cost for the AA items the Russian have. Totally not worth the cost to even attempt to take them down.

>>33569893
Except the airstrip and flightlines are fucked and unusable now. So this effects their ability to bomb ISIS. So this is a big deal, because it hurts Assad's ability to conduct airstrikes.

>>33569893
>6 Mig 23s
14 Su-22s put out of action according to Israeli intel, and from images pushed by every narrative there didn't seem to be anything but Su-22s at the base.

>>33570139
>SU-22

Would it be easy to mistaken SU-22s from far away as MiG21s?

File: su22m4_kp.jpg (132KB, 950x715px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 950x715px

>>33570158
Definitely.

File: su-17 & su-25.jpg (197KB, 1152x780px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 1152x780px

>>33570158
Depends on the angle.

File: su-17m4 (10).jpg (162KB, 1280x853px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 1280x853px

>>33570580

>>33570042
>airstrip and flightlines are fucked
They are not and it is clearly visible from any source and picture.

Believing russian media while calling fox news unreliable is hilarious. Russian media is worse than fox news on it's craziest of days. Not that you can expect complete honesty from them or other american media, they've got business relations to maintain. Just wait a few weeks for the official story to slowly be cross verified between multiple relatively uninvolved parties.

>>33570595

otherwise superficial damage to the airstrip might ground planes for weeks if Syria/Russia gave a shit about safety, but that's highly unlikely.

The more damaging factor is the fact that somewhere around 44 planes were destroyed/disabled by most 3rd party accounts.

Russia may be backing Syria but that's still a lot of goddamn money to replace or repair all those planes. And they don't have the US defense budget to just shit money on these things.

My guess is that those planes don't get replaced period.

>>33571025
They were all old old birds.

Did you know that the Russian VVS is decommissioning 1/3 of its airframe stockpile too free up funding for its newer generation of aircraft (Su-50 and MiG-35) purchases.

I bet Syria might get a pile of old VVS stock, much like how they got all those T-62M tanks a few months ago. Nothing new or refurbished, just a bunch of old birds in a new nest.
China could do it too, they have a lot of old PLAAF airframes to get rid of.

>>33569888
All that black on the main runway.. is that put there by DigitalGlobe, or did they already put new asphalt on it??

>>33571025
44 planes now? I thought it was just 14 or so? Did new info come out?

>>33562566
>Didn't the Russians have air defense asset in syria?
>Why didn't they take out the cruise missiles?
>I thought the russians had the best ADNs in the world?
>They were even warned before hand of the attack.

Are you retarded or just trolling?

Russian AA systems in Syria are for protecting the Russian airbase, personnel, and equipment NOT Syrians.

They didn't intervene when Israel bombed Syria. Why would they intervene when the U.S. bombs Syria?

It's not rocket science.

>>33571289
Not 44 aircraft, 44 "targets". >>33571025 made a typo.

The base only had approximately 15 (museum quality) aircraft stationed there, and whatever helicopters that were coming in and out daily.

>>33563469
yeah,
cause the first 36 were targeted to hit syrian anti-air missiles. they got hit by their target alright.

>>33563556
>my ability to rationalize a predetermined viewpoint knows no bounds!

>>33562566
>SA-5
Only ever going to be useful against B-52s
>SA-2
Can't track cruise missiles
>SA-6
Can't track cruise missiles
>SA-3
Useless regardless
S-400
Russians didn't have them activated

>>33571332
>It's not rocket science

It literaly is.

>>33562566

>They were even warned before hand of the attack.
You answered your own question.

File: pantsir blown up.jpg (106KB, 960x509px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 960x509px

>>33573085
what about this?

>>33573085
>>33575251
normally it looks like pic related, and according to vatniks it is undeadable by cruise missiles.....

>>33562566

Because it cost money to take out missiles...

It does not make sense to shoot them down from a tactical point of view...

>>33572901
The only interaction between tomahawks and SAMs was tomahawks destroying this airbase's air defense network.
>>33575212

File: pantsir.jpg (216KB, 960x643px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 960x643px

>>33575254
ooops, forgot the pic

>>33562566
I thought only 23 of the 56 missiles got through, and Russian air defense vehicles can destroy up to 33 threats. so they did? no?

>>33575399
58 missiles hit the base, this was confirmed by civilian satellite photo companies.

>>33569850
>US claim is 58/59

59/60.

They launched exactly 60, one failed, hence the 59 number.

>>33562566

> What is "political theater", Alex?

>>33575454
Isn't it 60 attempted launches. One decided to just chill in its tube. 59 flew out but one got problems with his satnav and ditched the mission so 58 reached the target.

>>33575251
This isn't a pantsir autismo.

>>33573762
Not that anon but no, it's not rocket science. It's protocol.

>>33575510
It pretty obviously is.

ITT: Children who dont know what a 'show of force' is

>>33575558
It's not, there's a whole thread about this somewhere.

LOL at all these vatniks that are claimiing only a few missiles made it to the target. 60 missiles launched, 59 made it to the target. One had a hardware failure and crashed before it made it to the target.

>>33562603
immediately the shills call you goy if you even hint of disliking anything to do with Russia. Russia got cuked plane and simple. No amount of damage control can change that putin COULDN'T do shit against the US military actions.

Kremlin shills are flooding the chans, this is Russia's only comeback, to flood us with pro russia propaganda.

>>33565136
>>33565134

These things only destroy pro russian arguments, please stop with the truths. You're making it hard for the putin shills to operate

>>33562566
The real reason is obvious. They were asleep.

>>33562923
the radar system was destroyed though. And thats a pretty big key component.

>>33575510
then what is it? Because it sure is the Chasis of a Pantsir, and one was deployed at the airbase; hence, it is a pnatsir but you don't want to admit that it couldnt even engage tomahawks.

>>33575646
Also in the threads I've found it is determined that it is a pantsir, the vatniks just claim it either wasn't turned on or crewed by syians, so it doesn't count.

File: af467-zel.png (255KB, 498x577px) Image search: [Google]

255KB, 498x577px

>>33576049
In the other thread it's pretty obvious it's s mercedes truck similar to this one. Just look at the stabilizer placement.

>>33575558
>>33576049
See >>33574137

>>33563331

You are an idiot if you believe the white helmet and nigger that claimed the chemical ordinance came from a rocket fired by a plane.

>>33562566
>Why didn't they take out the cruise missiles?

They knew their AA would be saturated and they couldn't intercept all of them or even a majority, so instead of failing at defending the base (which would make them look incompetent) they decided to play it off as "not wanting to escalate the conflict" and "preventing a nuclear war" which sounds much, much better than "we did our best but there were just too many of them... by the way you'll still buy these S-300/400 from us, right?"

http://www.pravdareport.com/hotspots/conflicts/07-04-2017/137411-russia_usa_nuclear_war-0/