MUH HARPOON MISSILES

>>33562797
>MUH HARPOON MISSILES
wat?

>>33562797
>believing Ruskie MoD statemens
>ever

Shiggy diggy doo!

File: b26075_5885067.jpg (28KB, 900x495px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 900x495px

>>33562797

>harpoon
>migs

90 Million Petrodollars

and this is the power of the USA

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


HAHAHAHAHAH

>>33562797
>t. RussiaToday

kek

>>33563026
10 rubles have been deposited in your account.

>>33562874
This

File: 1362244018491.jpg (18KB, 300x233px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 300x233px

>burgermissiles underperform vatnik ones

>>33562874
>>33563032
My country owns Harpoons and I think we should've went with Klubs instead

Sorry Vlad but the score is 59 launched, 58 hit their targets, one lost due to gps failure.

>>33563598
>59 launched, 58 hit their targets, one lost due to gps failure.
>This is what burger believes

>>33563598
>gps failure
how? they cant even add proper gps functionality to a missile more expensive than a large house?

>>33563607
Nothing on the planet is going to have a 0% failure rate.

>>33563607
Military equipment works under extreme conditions and brakes all the time, 1/59 is an ok rate

>>33562797
We have a thread for this already you mongoloid

>>33563609
okay what is the gps failure rate for smart phones? and they pay how much for the gps? cant find exact numbers on shitty search engine but probably not even 5 bucks

>>33563616
yeah sure but the fucking gps failed, not some more sophisticated component which is exposed to great stress

File: 1487201760029.gif (871KB, 245x230px) Image search: [Google]

871KB, 245x230px

>>33562797
>harpoon

>>33563634
>not some more sophisticated component which is exposed to great stress

Why are you on /k/ when you clearly don't know anything?

The entire missile undergoes high stress during launch.

>>33563634
>a phone is comparable to a cruise missile

>>33562797
>>33563026
>>33563541
>>33563598
>>33563603
>>33563607

LMAO.

Guys, Google "the average Russian home" or "Russian standard of living" or "Russian life expectancy"

Then you'll understand why this dude is taking peanuts from the government to shitpost online.

In the 80s, his government had to hide the fact that the average American owns their own HOUSE and car.

Most Russians live in the same shitty apartment blocks and ride the same shitty bus, trolley, or van they always have.

The average Russian who thinks they're "middle class" has a worse standard of living than the average African American living in a ghetto

>>33563656
>>33563684
okay then go ahead and explain to me why gps system of all possible components would fail?

File: 1474396730700.png (18KB, 280x280px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 280x280px

>>33563712
The same reason any other component would fail?

>>33563712
You have never had your phone GPS have you in the wrong position for a few moments?
Then I don't believe you have a phone.

>>33562797
59 made it though, the Russians didn't get any of them.

>>33563711
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2014/03/numbers-vladimir-putin-doesnt-want-you-to-see

File: 1491543173256-1.png (68KB, 758x548px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 758x548px

>>33563711
/pol/ has been shit since the attack

pic related for anyone who doesn't understand what is happening

Trump isn't a full retard.

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

File: C8zuzAEWsAAkYzZ.jpg (149KB, 965x633px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 965x633px

>>33562797

File: C8y-Qy_VwAAv9Gj.jpg (76KB, 1024x578px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 1024x578px

>>33563838
>>33562797

>>33563607
The thing you're confusing is the difference between quality and cost in military weapon systems. Everything is made by the lowest bidder, who are still gonna charge 2-3 times more than the actual cost, because the military is full of idiots who will pay it.

File: murican-one-million-dollar-rocket.jpg (101KB, 1345x556px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1345x556px

>>33562874
They released drone footage.
There is no way that 60 missiles hit that air base.

I mean... except if your missiles aren't more powerful than hand granades.
But then your missiles would be really really shitty too.
Pic related is the result of a Tomahawk missile. The nex rain will clean this.

File: 1491084019732.jpg (9KB, 250x242px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 250x242px

>>33563828
>Trump isn't a full retard.
but he is

>not using tomahawks to blow up white helmets who staged attack
>attacks based Assad instead and poor Migs who dindu nuthin

what a fucking tool.

and you retards voted for him, not that Hillary would have been any better but this here is proof that voting doesn't fucking work at all because all candidates are puppets.

>>33563838
>>33563852
> need 60 missiles to do this
Pathetic

>>33563891

>Pic related is the result of a Tomahawk missile.

No it isn't. Stop deluding yourself.

>>33563918
>tomacuck missiles can't even blow up all the planes

lol and you losers keep paying Raytheon.
fucking cuckolds mang

>>33563822

This. What happened to the vaunted Russian air defences? They couldn't shoot down a single slow moving tomahawk...

>>33563541
How do Klubs compare against Harpoons tho ?

On another note: How effective was the cruise missile strike, and what did it do ? Did it achieve what the USA wanted it to ?

>>33563899
Not that big of an airbase famalam

>>33562797
>contrl + F
>nobody mentions that could have actually happened.

I want to propose this theory:

It was a SEAD mission against air defenses, against the s300's

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suppression_of_Enemy_Air_Defenses

But it basically means that one must overwhelm the air defenses as they have limited counter measure missiles in them.

It also explains why the radar station was destroyed.

those missiles that didnt hit could have been intercepted by the russian air defenses.

I will copy paste this a bit if you guys dont mind it as I think this is a pretty gud theory which fits in well with the military lore. Additionally, there could have been an ace in the whole of electronic warfare somewhere that fucked with their guidance systems.

You guys even taught me about this, wtf /k/

>>33563891
I mean, that's not a tomahawk impact, but keep trying.

>>33563896
>white helmets are evil meme
/k/ is not accepting refugees from /pol/.

File: serbia-stealth.png (139KB, 509x327px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 509x327px

>>33563918
It is.
Stop sucking the dick of the US military.
Your Tomahawk missiles are just as pathetic as your stealth fighters.
At least the US did not produce more than a few of pic related, because they realized that they are shit.
But your Tomahawks are in every single battleship you have, it is what the us military is currently using, they have no better system.
How pathetic can you be?

This is the drone footage of the airbase after 60 tomahawks tried to destroy it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I9oF8nGgmo

>>33563918

There's drone footage of the base after the attack. Look at the intact runways and taxiways. "Utterly destroyed" says MSM. What the fuck.

This doesn't add up.

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

>>33563931
>How do Klubs compare against Harpoons tho ?
They dont, Russian Harpoon is Kh-35.

>>33563931
>How effective was the cruise missile strike, and what did it do ?
The base is significantly degraded and probably unable to conduct any sustained operations for the foreseeable future.

>Did it achieve what the USA wanted it to ?
Yes. It sent a message to Assad that further use of chemical weapons will result in further action.

>>33563934
>I mean, that's not a tomahawk impact, but keep trying.
It is, it is one of the >50% of missiles which failed. This one didn't explode, it just crashed.
But most of the other failed ones did not even hit their target.

File: maddog tommahawks.jpg (24KB, 499x460px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 499x460px

Mad Dog is just getting started.....r-right guys?

>>33563940
>literally posting Russian propaganda

>posting the serb 117 meme

God, you're not even trying to be subtle are you?

>>33563711
I was born in a certain place and enjoy it as my own tribal creation even though I've contributed next to nothing, yet I harbor a feeling of superiority

>>33563940
Your damage control is hilarious.

Ultra powerful Russian IAD let though twenty three (23) subsonic tomahawks.

Absolutely fucking pathetic.

>>33563941
>believing anything Russian
lol nope.

>>33563941
I see the fuel system on fire, and I see 2 of the 22 HAS.

You don't have to crater a runway to take the airfield out of operation.
Hitting the infrastructure that supports sustained operations is harder to replace and repair.

>>33563946
>The base is significantly degraded and probably unable to conduct any sustained operations for the foreseeable future.
It is perfectly functional for 99% of thigs it was used before the strike.
>Yes. It sent a message to Assad that further use of chemical weapons will result in further action.
It is pretty clear it was not Assad who used chems. He has exactly zero reasons to do so and about 9000 reasons not to.

File: 14615683097050.jpg (74KB, 633x640px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 633x640px

>>33563953
Burgerclap triggered by their superweapons being trash

>>33563964
Operations are already running again at that airbase.

>>33563959
So you think its fake drone footage? And fake pictures of the airbase?

>>33563965
>It is perfectly functional for 99% of thigs it was used before the strike.
It can't fuel planes.
It can't arm planes.
It can't repair planes.

I guess you can use it as a divert field or something.

>It is pretty clear it was not Assad who used chems
Only in the delusions of morons.

>He has exactly zero reasons to do so
Force a rapid conclusion to the war.

>>33563971
Wouldn't be the first time Russians faked something to do with aircraft :)

>>33563969
I would hope so, but they can't replace as easily the buildings wreckt and the 15 lost planes (the biggest loss)

>>33563934
>/k/ is not accepting refugees from /pol/.
Here are your White Helmets:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zgl271A6LgQ
Doing their job at faking videos.

>>33563968
>b-burgers are triggered right tovarish?

kek

How mad are you Ivan? Mad about Putin unable to prevent a strike on his ally? Or mad that the S-300 and 400 system is just a meme?

Or both?

>>33563969
If by operations you mean landing of planes and watching them take off again, sure.

You can't refuel them.
You can't arm them.
You can't repair them.

File: 5b002c1e3159d30024dc2ef9abd9ea6ff4b062a85dcfec68427f3cf905368998.jpg (29KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 400x300px

>>33563940
>But your Tomahawks are in every single battleship you have
You are either mischaracterizing guided-missile cruisers as being battleships and thus illiterate when it comes to basic Naval terminology, or you think that the Iowa class BBs are still combat ships. Either way, your opinion has been duly discarded.

>>33563985
This.

Again showing the absolute meme of Russian IADN, yet this time they can't pull the monkey model card. Russian equipment manned by Russians.

thats why they are in full damage control.

>>33563977
It can fuel planes, it never armed or repaired planes. It was used as a divert field and to refuel russian helis.
>Only in the delusions of morons.
Any reasons?
>Only in the delusions of morons.
By using chems? Are you dumb? Chems arent much more effective than normal bombs, he could kill all those people with 5 or 6 well placed conventional bombs and no one would have given a single fuck. This attack has achieved nothing except Trump chimpout.

>>33563985
Let them wallow in their irrelevance, that kills the vatnik.

>>33563958
If not more. The truth is normally somwhere between the two claims. I'd say somewhere close to the 40 side of thirty.

>>33564001
>It was used as a divert field and to refuel russian helis

Syrias 3rd largest airbase is for diverts only.

OK kid, go sit in a corner.

>>33563985
>HAHAHA YOU DIDNT SHOOT DOWN A BUNCH OF POORLY TARGETED FIRECRACKERS
>AMERICA #1
Why dont you rascal scooter your way over to CNN and get fed your fake media, cuck.

>>33563953
> Muh, b-b-but Russian Propaganda!!!!!!
How triggered are you?
>>33563958
>Ultra powerful Russian IAD l
The S-400 did not even fire!
The S-300s of the Syrian Army were enough to intercept >50% of modern day missiles the US military is currently using.
The S-300 is from the 70s and doesn't even get produced anymore.

Old Commie weapons can intercept your most modern missiles. Syria just has to buy a few more old outdated S-300s and they are totally safe.

> fire 60 million USD worth missiles
> over 50% fail

>>33564015
Yes, considering it was home for 3.5 su-22s and one Mig-23 that flew approximately 0.009 sorties per week.

>>33564007
muh sides
0>

>>33563992
> b-b-but you should have said guided-missile cruisers instead of battle shit!
> Hahahaha, got you right there, buddy! Your whole argument is invalid now and it is completely irrelevant that the most advanced missile the USA is using has a >50% failure rate.
ok

File: IMG_4019.png (729KB, 750x1334px) Image search: [Google]

729KB, 750x1334px

>>33563986
>many Hangars still intact
>even stuff lying outside still intact
>just drive a fuel truck and ammo truck their or fly in supplys via Antonovs or Helis

wow such effective attack.
Tomacuck cruise missiles are shit tier.

File: 4032.jpg (92KB, 620x372px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 620x372px

>>33563921
>>33563940
>>33563941

So what you people are trying to tell me is that a 3000lbs missile travelling at 550mph crashing into a concrete surface at quite an steep angle, assuming the warhead failed to explode, would leave behind only a bit of soot?

Did you guys all skip physics class?

Pic related is the impact crater of the much smaller chemical munition that hit khan sheikhun.

>>33564001
>it never armed or repaired planes.
Funny.
Because I can see the fuel system burning in this edited Russian drone footage. And I can look on google maps and see plenty of ammo shelters as well as the maintenance facilities.


>Chems arent much more effective than normal bombs,
They are if you want to suppress rebel support among your populace.


>>33564032
>I don't know what logistics is.
Great post.

File: fa744d933620dbc8d6e8ec1964176028.jpg (116KB, 736x1218px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 736x1218px

>>33563950
sure, if they are using baby tomahawks. that blast mark is way too fucking small to be caused from a tomahawk impact.

>>33564018
$0.50

>>33564019
>The S-300s of the Syrian Army were enough to intercept >50%
LOL. bullshit.

>>33564036
Logic is lost upon the vatnik, all it knows is Putin.

>>33564019
>The S-400 did not even fire!

Pathetic. Both the fact you say this as an argument and how it was unable to fire.

>The S-300s of the Syrian Army were enough to intercept >50% of modern day missiles

S-300s are still in use in the Russian military. Can't fucking stop all the tomahawks. Absolutely pathetic. You don't get an easier target than a subsonic drone following coordinates.

>The S-300 is from the 70s

So is the tomahawk missiles.

Can't. Stop. Subsonic. Drones.

Fucking 100% pathetic.

>hit 23 targets with 2-3 missiles per target
>O-ONLY 23 MISSILES HIT, BURGERS BTFO!!!

Vatnik please.

>>33564019
>The S-300s of the Syrian Army were enough to intercept >50% of modern day missiles
According to the Syrian Army, who would have no reason to lie, right?

>>33564025
That's odd, considering how 15 planes were destroyed, according to the Russians. Yet only 4.5 planes were there.....hmmmmm....

Corner. Now.

>>33564043

Look at the Russian drone footage, very minimal damage, runways fully intact, aircraft hangers untouched.


The U.S got BTFO, 60 cruise missiles, only 23 make it and the russian battery didn't fire a shot, this was all rusted to shit Syrian equipment.

>>33564037
>Because I can see the fuel system burning in this edited Russian drone footage.
There are no "fuel systems" it is an old ass Syrian airfield built by soviets. Planes are refueled by fuel trucks.
>They are if you want to suppress rebel support among your populace.
They simply arent. They are less effective and piss people off more, AND piss europeans and US off.

>>33564036
super sekrit russian concrete runways too strong for capitalist pigs xa xa xa xa

>>33564019

A f117 was shot down with a 1950's surplus missile system, american tech is garbage.

>>33564036
> implying a steep angle
> implying that engine was still working
> implying that it did not just fail mid air and trundled down
> implying that all drone footage of the airbase is fake
> not providing own satellite images of the USA
> not thinking about why the USA did not publish any imaginary of the destruction at all
Try again, buddy.

>>33564082
>not thinking about why the USA did not publish any imaginary of the destruction at all

Declassified AAR's are done about a week after strikes, newfag.

>>33564062
>Look at the Russian drone footage, very minimal damage, runways fully intact, aircraft hangers untouched.
I have watched the edited drone footage.
I can see the fuel system on fire. I have seen pictures of the HAS burned out. Some are in this very thread.

>>33564063
>There are no "fuel systems" it is an old ass Syrian airfield built by soviets. Planes are refueled by fuel trucks.
You relaize that you don't store fuel in trucks for extended periods of time, especially in the desert, right?
You realize that there is a large fuel storage system that holds the fuel until it is distributed to the aircraft, right?

>>33564063
>They are less effective and piss people off more, AND piss europeans and US off.
There have been dozens of suspected uses of chemical weapons since 2012.
There has not been a response until now.
Why would you think that the Europeans and US would care when the warring parties in the region have been using them for years with no response.

OK VATNIKS!

Which is it?

>Russian SAM's did not fire on the tomahawks

i.e, Russia cucks itself out to the US.

>Russian sams failed to intercept all the missiles

i.e, Russian Sams are shit tier, which cant hit the most easy of targets.

Rev up that damage control!

>wasted millions
>barely did any damage
>warned russians beforehand
lmao americucks

File: RIAN_3067958.jpg (292KB, 600x399px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 600x399px

>>33564096
>You realize that there is a large fuel storage system
Not very large. Picrelated, mostly.

>>33564102

No child. No. They dont use 55 gallon drums as a primary means to store fuel for aircraft with multi 1000 gallon capacities

Let's face it, if it was any other nation that had launched those missiles and over half of them failed to do hit the target, with the ones hitting the target blowing up a portapotty and a dining hall - Americans would be on /k/ every day for a year talking about it.

But because it was a failed American operation, they talk about how rich they think they are and Muslims.

>>33564102
LOL, Are you fucking kidding me?

Do you have any idea what you are talking about or are you a real idiot?

Do you really need me to explain why you don't store thousands of pounds of aviation fuel in drums?

>>33564107

Lets face it, any IADN that fails to shoot down subsonic targets is 100% pure shit.

>>33564107
>and over half of them failed to do hit the target,
According to the Syrian Army, which has no motivation to lie, am I right?

>>33564052
>Russia didn't fire at an US military missile
>implying that this is because it was unable to fire and not because they just want to avoid WW3
>S-300s are still in use in the Russian military.
But they are not the current state of the art technology they are using. They already get replaced and they have a better one.
While the pathetic Tomahawk shit is still used in the whole US military and there is no real successor in the next 10 years.
>The S-300 is from the 70s
>So is the tomahawk missiles.
S-300 does not get build anymore, The last S-300 was built 2001.
>>33564060
>According to the Syrian Army, who would have no reason to lie, right?
So then were did the 37 missiles of the US went?
Do you want to tell me that they all just failed and were not intercepted?
Then this is even more pathetic.

> be murica
> spend > 600 billion USD per year for the military
> your military is still not better than old commie stuff

File: RIAN_3067978.jpg (222KB, 600x399px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 600x399px

>>33564104
Well, first of all they do, drums are primary fuel storage unit in a country with shit logistics. The only thing that looked like a fuel storage was picrelated, that holds, like, three sorties worth of fuel? Five? Considering drums are nearby and considering primarily the base was used to refuel russian helicopters... it is perfectly functional.

>>33564100
It was all to send Assad and Putin a message that certain things are not acceptable. President Obama drew that stupid "Red Line" at chemical weapons use and did nothing. Chemical weapons were used again and Trump acted in response to it in days.

Get rid of some old missiles, send a powerful message, and put a huge hole in the "Trump is working with Russia" claims.
Trump won that in every aspect. Syrian Civil War will continue but if more chemical weapons are used (or civilians directly targeted) then there will be more strikes. This was a warning.

>>33564093
>Declassified AAR's are done about a week after strikes,
> Take a week to fake pictures
Why is the US military so pathetic?
Why is Russia able to release their images (you claim them to be fake) now?

>>33563623
No, that thread is for the Tomahawk strike. OP specifically mentioned Harpoons.

I want to see where this thread goes. It promises to be entertaining, as OP and his hired friends demonstrate the benefits of an extra chromosome.

>>33564115
>So then were did the 37 missiles of the US went?
Are you aware that targets do not get assigned one missile right?
Some will get two, or even three.
This is common sense.

>>33564127
>Why is Russia able to release their images (you claim them to be fake) now?
They aren't satellite photos but cherrypicked images.

>>33564115

>shooting down unmanned tomahawks will cause WW3

HAHAHAHAHAHAH, Thats fucking retarded. Fuck if, if you want to go that route, fine. So russia is a US cuck then. Im ok with this.

>But they are not the current state of the art technology they are using.

They are not the same system exported in the 70's.

>They already get replaced and they have a better one.

That was completely unable to fire even a single shot against such basic targets.

>While the pathetic Tomahawk shit

The same pathetic tomahawk that penetrated the russian state of the art S-400 backed Syrian IADN like the 3 dollar whore it is?


>S-300 is not built

But it is still widely used.

>>33564140
French released cherrypicked satellite images already.

>>33564125
> b-b-but we never wanted to destroy the air base!!!!
> i-i-it was just about sending a message!
> w-w-w-we planned this! W-w-we wanted that the whole world knows that our most modern missile system has a >50% failure rate against a country which is using weapons from the 60s!

>>33564154
link?

>>33564140
what about the drone footage which shows the whole base?

>>33564127

MMMMMM, yes. I cant wait for your damage control when it comes out.

Russia itself says syria lost 15 fucking planes. Thats well over 90 million dollars worth of shit right there.

The lost Su-27 is 30 million alone.

>>33564168
>Russia itself says syria lost 15 fucking planes. Thats well over 90 million dollars worth of shit right there.
Su-22 and MiG-23? Nope.
>The lost Su-27 is 30 million alone.
Facepalm.jpg

>>33564125
Pretty much spot on

>>33564129
kek

So does this mean another american invasion happening soon?

You guys do realize that this is russian turf and they will fight back.

>>33564147
>HAHAHAHAHAHAH, Thats fucking retarded. Fuck if, if you want to go that route, fine. So russia is a US cuck then. Im ok with this.
So in your opinon Russia should have shot them down and should have fired an ICBM at Washington, right?
Damn, why is /k/ so pathetic? Are you all just US military cock suckers?
> They are not the same system exported in the 70's.
Just like the Tomahawks are not the same as they built in the 70s, right?
So, now could you please google when the last Update of the S-300 got released? And compare that to the pathetic shit which is called Tomahawk.
> That was completely unable to fire even a single shot against such basic targets.
Why should they? If the old S-300 is able to down most of the pathetic US missiles, why should they risk WW3?
>But it is still widely used.
Yes, from 3rd world countries.
3rd world countries can intercept the most modern American missile.

You are just behaving like a 10 year old child now.
> muh, muh, but the US is best!!!!!
> it is totally impossible that the US is producing shit like always!!!!!

>>33564163
>whole base
It wasn't. Just a couple of images of some missed hangars and the runway that wasn't targeted.

>>33564155
Typing like a retard does not validate your point.
You need to read up on your military history on things like the Doolittle Raid and Operation Black Buck. It's not about damage, it's about asserting yourself and showing you are willing to use force and about making your opponent reevaluate things.

But leave it to a Slav/Slavaboo to not understand nuance and go straight for the sledgehammer when they see a fly buzzing around.

>>33564163
This drone footage is from Russia and /k/ thinks that it is fake, because they can't believe that 60 Tomahawk missiles weren't even able to completely destroy one single airbase.
/k/ is just sucking the US cock.
They can't believe anything which could be slightly negative for the US military. It has to be fake.

>>33564207
If you want to show force you destroy the airbase instead of pretending to destroy it.

>>33563634
>how could a GPS on a missile traveling at 550mph, constantly vibrating like fucking crazy possible fail
>compared said GPS to your nice stable otter boxed phone that mostly going 0-3mph with up to about 70-80mph on the high way for straight lines.

Gee I wonder how these could possibly be different.

>>33564203
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKtJjPypT7I

>>33564173
Need 60 missiles to destroy 15 planes.

So basically Tomahawks are not more powerful than old WW2 V-2 Nazi rockets.

File: Vatnik 2.jpg (312KB, 1100x1700px) Image search: [Google]

312KB, 1100x1700px

>We're going to launch 60 cocks at your face!
>Blyat!
>I'm telling you now you muslim loving shit bird, there's some big cocks on your way!
BOOM!
>Haha!
Boom! BOOM!
>Ha! I only took 29 cocks to the face yanky pig!

>>33564214
Things are still early and we don't know what were on the Tomahawks. Were they armed with cluster munitions or single warheads?
We all know Tomahawks can really fuck a target up with a direct hit. Some hangars definitely took direct hits but other missiles may have been airbursts which could explain the lack of craters and scorches on the ground.
Another question is if any were intercepted, for which there are two wildly different answers.

>>33564214

>because they can't believe that 60 Tomahawk missiles weren't even able to completely destroy one single airbase.

You know that an airbase isnt just a runway, right?

That airbase is destroyed. Most if not all support facilities are gone. It will not support any meaningful air operations for quite some time.

>>33564207
> b-b-but you are stupid!!!
> y-y-you should read a book from some US-military cock sucker!!!!!
Nice argument you have here, /k/uck

Yeah, the USA did send a message.
The message that their current missiles are complete shit and that no country should buy them.
This message was pretty clear. Congratulation, USA! It was a success, i guess!

>>33564243
What support facilities? A fucking fuel truck?

>>33564199
>So in your opinon Russia should have shot them down and should have fired an ICBM at Washington, right?

>shooting down drones means that its time to lob nukes

Fucking Russians damage controlling for their failure of a system.

We get it, you are US cucks.

>So, now could you please google when the last Update of the S-300 got released?

S-300VM- desgined 2000, inservice 2013

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-300VM

>And compare that to the pathetic shit which is called Tomahawk.

>Tomahawk Block IV[9][10][11] introduced in 2006

Thats it, beyond a new warhead in 2010.

Either way, S-300 is still newer.

> If the old S-300 is able to down most of the pathetic US missiles

Close only counts in horsehoes and hand grenades.

Fact is, the system failed.

>3rd world countries can intercept the most modern American missile.

Oh boy, it can intercept a subsonic drone, and worse, it cant even intercept all of them.

PATHETIC.

>You are just behaving like a 10 year old child now.

Nope, just funny watching your absolutely terrible damage control.

Try harder

>>33564229
>Footage of runway and two hangars zoomed in
Like I said?

>>33564243
But Migs and other stuff is still intact
Runway is intact
Fuel and Ammo is probably hauled back to it right now.

Americucks are fucking failures, can't even blow up some shitty base lol

>>33564251
Gas lines and storage depot

>>33564261

>Runway is still intact!!!!

>>It was not even targeted, furthermore it would be retarded to do so with unitary warheads

Hahahhahah, russians are fucking meme gold.

>Americucks are fucking failures,

Says the owner of the an IAD network that got penetrated like a russian mail order bride.

>>33564243
There are still hangars and planes left.
AFTER 60 FUCKING MISSILES!
Whast do you think how many Hangars they have? Not even 20!
So they shot 3 missiles per hangar and they still were not able to destroy everything.

>>33564267
There are no fuel lines there, fuel is transported by trucks. Storage depot that contains a couple of hundred 250-kg and 500-kg bombs would have left a massive crater.

>>33564280
>fuel is transported by trucks

LOL, such pathetic damage control. There are pictures of damaged fuel tanks in this very fucking thread.

>>33564242
>Things are still early and we don't know what were on the Tomahawks
So you are not watching the current footage and you wait for the US military to get their propaganda right?

>>33564273
>>It was not even targeted, furthermore it would be retarded to do so with unitary warheads
>a missile can penetrate meter-thick concrete hangar wall but cant do anything with the runway

>>33564244
Stop typing like stuttering schoolgirl you stupid fuck. Unless you're emulating someone who has had a stroke.

I guess Russian AA systems must be fucking awful then if they couldn't intercept such shitty missiles.
That or Russians are the terrible allies who won't even lift a finger to assist you when you're under attack.
Which is it?

>>33564296
Sure, they have to refuel trucks somewhere. You do realize that the tank is fucking tiny and that there are also photos of fuel drums?

>>33564261

>But Migs and other stuff is still intact

Not even russian propaganda outlets agree with you.

https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201704071052388439-syria-shairat-planes-damage/

>>33564297
I'vve watched the video and looked at the images on Sputnik. I'm not waiting for some biased claim from either side, I just want to get the full picture.
Some of those missiles definitely did what their reputation claims and knocked out hardened hangars and the aircraft inside, others seemingly did not. Also no craters in the runway. I'm curious as to why.

The retard battle rages on.

File: RIAN_3067731.jpg (270KB, 600x399px) Image search: [Google]

270KB, 600x399px

>>33564321
There are three or four intact Su-22 on their own photos.

>>33564305
>>a missile can penetrate meter-thick concrete hangar wall but cant do anything with the runway

>A fucking single hole in the runway is a problem, even for arabs.

You idiot.

Destroying runways from the air takes a fuckton of unitary bombs (hundreds), or for competent nations, a special bomb like JP233 (which uses bomblets) or the Durandal, which tunnles under the runway and explodes displacing entire slabs.

>>33564334
>I'm curious as to why
General Jack Keane said on fox this morning Tomahawks don't leave craters. That leads me to believe they're airburst? Anyone have inside info on the tomahawk?

Also, could have mostly been cluster munitions.

>>33564257
> last update of Tomahawk was 2010
> S-300 factory closed 2001, last Update 2000
So the most recent S-300 is still 10 years older than the last UPDATE of the Tomahawk. The Tomahawk still get built.
And: There is no real successor of the Tomahawk. But there is already a successor of the S-300.

>Either way, S-300 is still newer.
Your denial is astonishing.

>Fact is, the system failed
Yes, fact is, the Tomahawk failed bad.
Fact is, the most used current missile of the 600 billion USD per year US military can be intercepted buy an S-300 which is from the 70s and is already outdated.

>>33564315
>Sure, they have to refuel trucks somewhere.

No shit.

>You do realize that the tank is fucking tiny

Goalpost moving

>that there are also photos of fuel drums?

Are not completely unused, but not the sole means.

Damage control is terrible

>>33564309

it's over a 50% failure rate for the U.S, thats horrendous, U.S navy's gonna get BTFO with failures rates like that if other U.S equipment is this shitty.

File: 1461012185782.jpg (295KB, 1200x892px) Image search: [Google]

295KB, 1200x892px

>Americuck weaponry

>Less reliable than Vatnik missiles welded together from corrugated sheet metal in a shed

>While Americuck defense spending is like 1000x higher

I hope being the servile unquestioning muscle for Israel was worth the embarrassment, burger blasters.

>>33564343
KEKE
>american missiles

>>33564243

It's operational right now, runways are untouched and what ones did hit them didn't explode going from the pics, and hangers and planes remain untouched.

>>33564354
>No shit.
?
>Goalpost moving
You said there are fuel lines. Now you say there is a tank. And i am a goalpost mover.
>Are not completely unused, but not the sole means.
Sure, there are other ways to transport fuel in a war torn countries.

>>33564315
ITT: I learned that idiot Slavs think that you store thousands of gallons of avgas in drums and trucks. Even in a desert.

>>33564309
> b-b-b-but the old outdated S-300 from the 70s could just intercept half of the most modern US missiles.
> t-t-this means that basically the US won!
> the 600 billion USD per year US-military is better than 2 million USD per year Syrian military which is at war for 6 years now!

>>33564352
Cluster munitions.

>>33564375
Surely there must be some sign of thousands of gallons of avgas being blown up. Like, a massive fire with a smoke plume that covers the whole fucking base for tens of hours. So either it was not destroyed or it was not there.

>>33564353
>So the most recent S-300 is still 10 years older than the last UPDATE of the Tomahawk

False, as proven here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-300VM

>Produced: 2013

> There is no real successor of the Tomahawk

Clearly does not need one, as it penetrated the S-400 augmented state of the art air defense network.

>Your denial is astonishing.

>Last update of the Tomahawk was 2010
>Last update of the S-300, (S-300VM) was produced in 2013

Im sorry, your damage control is astonishingly bad.

Do you need a picture? I will even circle it for you. Simple minds need simple help.

>Yes, fact is, the Tomahawk failed bad.

By fucking the state of the art S-400 backed Syrian IADN with about 20 dicks?

Yep, sure sounds like a failure.

>>33564368
Runway wasn't targeted and more than 15 aircrafts were destroyed not including fuel.

>>33564385

striking a airfield? as in hardend bunker targets, not a chance, shitty missiles are shit and didn't explode.

>>33564382
>just intercept half of the most modern US missiles.
Things that didnt happen.


>>33564389
there is a massive fire in the Russian Drone video.

>>33564358
>it's over a 50% failure rate for the U.S.
Says who? The Russians? If you're going to say the US claim of 58/59 hits is bullshit, but then believe Russia's claim (Which doesn't seem to account for multiple missiles per target) then you are being foolish.

>>33564370
>You said there are fuel lines.

Nope, not me.

>?

No shit, they dont use only fuel trucks and barrels.

>Now you say there is a tank.

No, i said there WAS a tank, and there was. Its blown up now. Try to keep up.

>Sure, there are other ways to transport fuel in a war torn countries.

There are other ways to store fuel. Other ways that WERE used.

>>33564343
> be >600 billion USD per year US military
> launch missiles at a country which is at war for >6 years now and had 2 million USD per year military spending
> Half of your missiles get intercepted
> can't even destroy one single air base

>>33564403
Not nearly massive enough for thousands of gallons.

>>33564353
...if the Tomahawk failed nothing would have hit that airfield

>>33564407
>Which doesn't seem to account for multiple missiles per target
notice that none of the slavaboos ITT can address this

>>33564403
>Things that didnt happen.
So were are the lost 37 missiles?
Are you claiming that they all just failed and did not get intercepted?

> be US military
> fire 60 missiles
> 37 of them just fly somewhere else, explode mid-flight or don't explode at the target
kek
/k/ucks will defend this.

>>33564411
sure it is.

>>33564408
>No shit, they dont use only fuel trucks and barrels.
There are no fuel lines, dumbass, its a soviet style airfield. You have fuel storage and you have fuel trucks that ferry fuel from storage to planes.
>No, i said there WAS a tank, and there was.
Holy shit, that tank holds three sorties worth of fuel for a Su-22.
>There are other ways to store fuel. Other ways that WERE used.
There arent any. Or they werent hit.

File: pvo.webm (2MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x720px

>>33564276
C'mon, all 50+ Tomahawks are around 18-25 tonnes of TNT combined. Given that less than 50% made it to the airfield you get what you get.

>>33564385
So they fly over and drop bomblets and then the missile just crashes somewhere?

>>33564398
Aircraft clearly weren't the target since they gave warning.
The Syrians and Russians scrambled some planes into the air or quickly moved them into the grass away from the airstrip. The photos posted by Sputnik (>>33564321) show some hangars were definitely penetrated and the aircraft destroyed.

>>33564427
>So were are the lost 37 missiles?
Not lost.
Each target his had multiple missiles targeted on it.
Are you a moron?

>>33564412
> if >50% of the missiles never reach their target, it's a success
This is what /k/ucks think.
Aren't you busy letting a nigger fuck your wife?

>>33564428
Sure its not. Even a fucking

>>33563950
Where is the fucking source? Fuck all of you, your word isnt shit

>>33564429
>There are no fuel lines, dumbass, its a soviet style airfield

Again, i never said there was.

>Holy shit, that tank holds three sorties worth of fuel for a Su-22.
>There arent any. Or they werent hit.

THis fucking cognitive dissidence. "NO SHIT, THERE ARE TANKS!......WHAT DO YOU MEAN THERE ARE TANKS? THERE WERE NOT ANY, OR THEY WERENT HIT CYKA BLAAAAAT"

>>33564429
>that tank holds three sorties worth of fuel for a Su-22.
Bullshit.

>>33564436
>So they fly over and drop bomblets and then the missile just crashes somewhere?
Yes.

>>33564439

>Aren't you busy letting a nigger fuck your wife?

Dont worry, Russians only stopped 30 out of 60 nigger dicks. Their wife is basically untouched!

>>33564430
Ok, lets calculate this a bit different:
15 planes got destroyed.
So the USA needed 4 missiles for every single parking non-moving plane.

File: RUSSIAN-FAKE-EXPOSED-EXAMINER-238.png (1MB, 1314x1008px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1314x1008px

>>33564382
>>33564409
>>33564427

>trusting anything the russian MOD says.

Its not like they have ever been caught blatantly lying and making stuff up, right?

>>33564439
See: >>33564438


>>33564440
Your translation software took a shit.

>>33564446
>THis fucking cognitive dissidence.
No there is not. You say airfield is not functional because a tiny tank was destroyed. You are wrong.

>>33564448
>Bullshit.
Look at its size, retard.

>>33564439
Did you never learn to read?
>multiple
>missiles
>per
>target

>>33564456
>Its not like they have ever been caught blatantly lying and making stuff up, right?
you mean like 9/11 and muh WEAPONS OF MASS C U C KSTRACTION

>>33564461
>Look at its size,
I did.
Its plenty big enough.

>>33564456

trusting the U.S government, ever.

>>33564461
>You say airfield is not functional because a tiny tank was destroyed

You say "fuel is transported by trucks", when its not the only form of fuel storage there.

Now you claim that was the only tank damaged.

heheheheheheh, this shit is fucking gold. You russians are terrible at damage control.

>>33564407

whats pictured is not 60 cruise missiles worth of damage, damage is minimal to none.

>>33564462
>no
>russian
>casualties
>no
>massive
>SAA casualties
lmao
>americucks and their ((((missiles))))

>>33564438
>Each target his had multiple missiles targeted on it.
There were not even 20 targets.
So 3 missiles per target.

If we calculate that a Tomahawk should have a 5% rate of failure (thats what the US military said), this means that there was a 99.875% chance that the target got destroyed.
But 4 targets were not destroyed and the rate of failure was >50%.

/k/ucks will defend this

>>33564473
>9/11 was a lie
oh no, not another one of these faggots

>>33564492
>But 4 targets were not destroyed

This russian cuck thinks he knows what was a target and what was not.

Do you need america to tell you that too, so you can fail to prevent it?

>>33564493
you mean when barack obama wanted to veto the lawsuit against the saudis for 9/11? yeah totally not real.

>>33564493
My favorite flavor of stupidity. Especially those who will say "There were no planes" and "those flight maneuvers are too hard for novice pilots" in the same post.

>>33564490
>casualties
>weren't
>the
>goal

>>33564489
Based on your experience as a cruise missile damage expert?

>>33564508
>you
>did
>jack
>shit
>and
>assad
>is
>still
>gassing
>his own
>mudslimes

File: powell-point4.jpg (33KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 600x450px

>>33564456
>trusting anything the USA says
LOOK AT THOSE ALUMINIUM TUBES!
THATS PURE HORROR!
WE SHOULD INVADE IRAQ NAU!

>>33564492
>But 4 targets were not destroyed and the rate of failure was >50%.
Thats not how math works.
do they teach you idiots math?

>>33564492
they put the miss in missile

File: 202285-9bccb092b85317e23c3618476bb2e1e8.jpg (169KB, 600x388px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 600x388px

>>33564489

>damage is minimal to none.

"Needs just a lick of paint mohammed, tomorrow we are flying again!"

File: al-quaida-caves.jpg (28KB, 585x448px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 585x448px

>>33564517
LOOK AT THOSE SECRET AL-QUAIDA CAVES!
IT'S JUST LIKE IN JAMES BOND!

Yes, goyim, believe everything the US government says!

>>33564516

I disagree. Causing the russian posters on /k/ to go full fucking damage control is worth every fucking dollar.

IADN once again fails to stop a coordinated, specific strike.

>>33564525
That's not missile damage, that's just typical Arab Air Force maintenance quality

>>33564519
Yeah, thats right 37 failures out of 60 is not 50%, it is 62%.

I apologize for using calculations which let the US look a little bit less pathetic.

File: russiatoday.png (108KB, 630x394px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 630x394px

>>33564456
>>33564473
>>33564481
>conveniently leaving out surface-to-air to push the shot down by an Ukrainian fighter narrative

>>33564517
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and suggest that neither may be entirely reliable.

Though Russian authorities currently seem a bit less worried about uttering obvious lies than their US counterparts, apart from the US president and his closest.

>>33564525
>ceiling and walls intact
lmao nice ((((missiles)))) dont forget to sell them to israel or the saudis

>>33564543

>PLEASE IGNORE THE CHARRED FUCKED TO DEATH PLANE, AT LEAST THE WALLS ARE OK!

Hahhahahahahah

>>33564541
and you amergoys cant even give ukranians any weapons. BUT SURE ARM MUDSLIMES AND ISIS TO REMOVE (((((DICTATORS))))

>>33564517
>Read the tube
>"RBK-500"

You're one Google search away from finding out that anon isn't lying.

>>33564502
> w-w-we did not want to destroy the air base!
> i-i-it was intentional!
> w-w-we wanted to let our military look incompetent!

>>33564540

prove it

>>33564549
>5$ planes vs several millions of $
AHAHAHAHHA I THOUGHT TRUMP SUPPOSE TO SAVE MONEY NOT WASTE THEM

File: RUSSIAN-FAKE-EXPOSED-EXAMINER-91.png (697KB, 1313x936px) Image search: [Google]

697KB, 1313x936px

>>33564473
>>33564481
>>33564517

Deflection at its best, never change vatniks.
Pic is of more russian mod lies.

>>33564549
>tomacuck missiles are sooo powerful they cant destroy walls made of mud
lmao

>>33564539
kek

>>33564543
>missiles blow a concrete bunker to smithereens and don't just leave a hole in the ceiling guys

>>33562797
Has anyone noticed how the vatniks cpme out and try to discredit anything that america does WITHIN 12 HOURS of something?

Go holme, ivan, you're 12 rubals arnt goi g to buy you a vodka. Come move to america, one hpur on the streets and you could buy yourself 12 vodkas.

>>33564540
>Yeah, thats right 37 failures
they werent failures. They hit their targets. You just think that one target gets one missile.
This is just simply not true.

>>33564560
>t...the b...bunker was protecting th....the......the bunker of course!

kek

>>33564569

90 million to show how terrible russan state of the art air defense systems are?

Fuck, i would gladly have my country pay triple that.

Your damage control is priceless though.

>>33564577
how about giving weapons to ukranians? hmmm? oh noes but ukraine is destroyed enough and dont have oil so lets arm ((((((((((moderate))))))) rebels instead. ukranians are dying and you amerigoys cant even help them other than put lame ass sanctions that dont even harm putin. nice ((((politics)))) goy.

>>33564599
>90 millions
>but lets cut meals on wheels
lmao dont forget to pay billions to Israel that will annihilate putin. he will have a heart attack right there.

>>33564078
That "garbage" murders people all over the world, almost the same as the Russian "garbage".

Don't get wrapped up in the Yankees' and Russians' pissing matches over whose explosive penis is bigger. Both countries are using smaller nations as test beds for weapons, and they are killing people by pushing a button 1000s of kilometers away

>>33564623

>T....THINK ABOUT THE CHILLENS!

No.

More money to making russia look like impotent cucks. All of it, if possible.

The results are just too fucking spicy.

>>33562797
idk how can you people keep deffending russians if they allowed us to strike there ally

>>33564604

>how about giving weapons to ukranians?

Seems like western gov. are starting to like that proposition.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ukraine-canada-weapons-1.4055626

So is tomahwak confirmed for a meme missile?

>>33564604
A) Our aid to Ukraine under Obama was well in the billions, barring lethal weaponry, or tech they couldn't integrate anyway.
B) The Executive is young, and the night is long.

Russians had one hour notice
Target list according to Imgsat imagery.
20 lost AC
SA-6
13 HAS
10 Ammo
Fuel reservoir

Other info.
Tomahawks loitered over the airfield until they all attacked.
Version used was E

>>33564646

>So is tomahwak

The only thing thats a meme is the S-400 integrated air failure system.

>>33564627
>Both countries are using smaller nations as test beds for weapons,
Yes, and the US weapons look like shit right now.
But /k/ucks are in complete denial and don't get it that 37 failed missiles out of 60 is pathetic for someone who gets >600 billion USD per year.

>>33564660
>37 failed missiles out of 60
More than one missile per target.

>>33564652

Sauce me, sir sauceman!

Or did you get your hands on an AAR?

File: Moscow air defense.jpg (335KB, 960x1057px) Image search: [Google]

335KB, 960x1057px

>>33564538
>go full fucking damage control
No surprise. Air defense systems like S-300 / S-400 has always been Russia's holly cow. Don't you fucking dare to even imply it is not efficient.

File: d5c.jpg (36KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 625x626px

>>33562797
>Harpoon
>>>33563952
>*Tommahawks* filename

>>33564670
The target list if from Imgsat international which had images from before and after.

Other info is from the Pentagon.

>>33564675
>. Air defense systems like S-300 / S-400 has always been Russia's holly cow.

>has

Indeed. Without it russians have nothing, and they know it.

>>33563607
US accepted dud rate is ~10%. Its across all ordnance. Just the cost of doing business, there are too many variables to account for. The actual dud rate today is much smaller than 10% but they still throw out 10% so it looks like we're doing awesome.

>>33564691
Aside from the thousands of nukes they have.

File: RUSSIAN-FAKE-EXPOSED-EXAMINER-207.png (1MB, 1289x1008px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1289x1008px

>>33564660

>Trusting the russian MOD

How many more of these do you want me to post?

>>33564687
>The target list if from Imgsat international which had images from before and after.

I looked on the site, found nothing.

>Other info is from the Pentagon.

I belive it, but without proofs its pointless to Russians.

File: eck1000.gif (3MB, 360x270px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 360x270px

>>33564525
>Puddles of molten aluminum

>>33564669
This doesn't change the fact that 37 of 60 failed.
Of course, if your technology is complete shit, you can make up with it by just launching more of them.

And this was a huge airbase!
If a missile would fail her target by 200m, it would still count as a success.

Just imagine if you would want to hit one single building in a city with those shitty missiles.
You would have to send 100 of them and 90 of them would just hit the surrounding city.

File: 1483050967974.jpg (45KB, 740x721px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 740x721px

>>33563891
If you honestly think that that is a picture of a Tomahawk impact, you are too stupid to insult.

>>33564705
>This doesn't change the fact that 37 of 60 failed.
Yes it does. Because the missile you think failed actually hit their targets.

>>33564701
All of them.

>>33564660
Then feel free to kick off a hot war with the Yanks then, since you're obviously not scared of their armaments. Just please do it far away from Europe.

File: powell-point.png (274KB, 600x449px) Image search: [Google]

274KB, 600x449px

>>33564701
> Trusting the USA
LOOK AT THOSE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!
THEY GET PRODUCED IN LKWs!!!!!

You do know how many pages the Powell points have?
Do you want me to post all of them?

>>33564696
>Using nukes
Have fun sitting on them while everyone else pushes their agenda.
Nukes are essentially pointless outside of the most dire nat'l security circumstances, and even then are a very cumbersome tool. Unlike something like a sophisticated air-defense system, which is much more useful, and frankly, credible.

Suggested reading:
http://www.upenn.edu/pennpress/book/15090.html

>>33564705
>This doesn't change the fact that 37 of 60 failed.

What fact, and from who?

Furthermore, the fact that 23 subsonic drones got though is absolutely side splitting hilarious.

How fucking shitty is russian S-400/300 system?

Dont worry, you only came 23 times into my GF, she is still a virgin! - Russians

>>33564705
>fact
>37 of 60 failed
Why do you contradict yourself in the first sentence of your post?

>>33564702
It was reported by Catherine Herridge just a few moments ago.

>>33564731
>from who?
Syrian Army.

They have no reason to lie, amirite

>>33564701
>you can't store oil in tanks now!

File: powell-point2.jpg (34KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 600x450px

>>33564701
What the hell.
I just looked at your picture.

Storage containers for oil can look similar to the storage containers of grain.
What the hell is this shit?
How did you prove anything wrong with that shitty pictures, don't you have something better?

Like pic related.
The USA told us that Saddam would use that drone to spray chemical weapons over civilians.

>>33564740
On fox's channel itself?

If so, cool, it will be posted soon then.

File: 1407067791314.jpg (147KB, 838x740px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 838x740px

>>33564691
>Indeed. Without it russians have nothing, and they know it.
True, yet you aren't happy but still mad because they are nevertheless able to nuke you back into the stone age and the fact that they won the space race.

>>33562797
delete this

Wow less than half landed?That's pretty pathetic for that budget desu senpai.

>>33564749
Yeah she was just on live. Shes a good intel correspondent, always goes into details that most other correspondents don't.

>>33564731
Russian Army and Syrian Army
And they provided drone footage to prove it.

While the US provided... nothing..... they have to fake their pictures first and make up stories.

>>33564754
Use your critical thinking skills.

>>33564748

Saddam did gas civilians though.

File: fqtfk.jpg (18KB, 409x393px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 409x393px

>>33564731
>Dont worry, you only came 23 times into my GF, she is still a virgin! - Russians

holy shit My sides

File: RUSSIAN-FAKE-EXPOSED-EXAMINER-206.png (2MB, 1289x1008px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1289x1008px

>>33564721

>All of them.

Gladly.

>>33564761
>And they provided drone footage to prove it.

I saw the burning shit piles on the drone footage. Russian MoD reported 15 planes gone, plus base damage.

File: 1478284827280.jpg (24KB, 321x322px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 321x322px

I like how there are a few completely blown out raging Vatniks in this thread that aren't refuting any of the Russian MOD's blatant lies, merely saying the US does it too

How is that relevant in the Russian's claim that half missed?

They actively have an interest in downplaying the effectiveness of this strike after being wholesale embarassed it took place to begin with, and you expect me to believe their estimate? hilarious.

File: powell-point3.jpg (60KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 600x450px

>>33564770
Where is the proof?
What are your sources?
Twitter Accounts of Al-Qaeda terrorists?

>>33564751
delicious picked cherries

>>33564785

The best part is, they are claiming the fact that 23 fucking missiles got through as a victory.

How fucking retarded do you have to be to think THAT is a victory?

You only shot me 23 times out of 60! I WIN!

>>33564781
> 60 rockets destroyed 15 planes, 4 still intact.
What a huge success, /k/uck
>>33564785
> b-b-but the Russians are lying!
> l-l-l-lets wait for the US propaganda! Lets wait for Powell to make some awesome Power Point Presentation! This is totally trustworthy and the truth!
MUH INCUBATORS!

>>33564790
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_chemical_attack

>>33564798
Best part is

>things widly used today
>animals in space
>robot on the moon

BUT MAN ON THE MOON DOES NOT COUNT!!!!

>>33564806
>What a huge success
>>33564652

>>33564806
> l-l-l-lets wait for the US propaganda!

Never said that either, vattyboy. But you sure are mad about it aren't cha

>>33564806
> 60 rockets destroyed 15 planes, 4 still intact.

Out of 19 planes, 15 are gone. Yes, that is a good sucess, along with base damage.

Oh, and they did it with subsonic drones with zero EWAR.

Im sorry vatnik, your country is the cuck. Told the bull was coming and just offered your GF right up.

>>33564765
And?You don't think less than half is pathetic hit rate for million dollar worth missile?Do you think Syrians/Russians are bullshiting about the percentage of hits?

>>33564806
Shit. I'd launched a Tomahawk at those goal posts, but you keep moving them. Not sure such shitty missiles could track them )))))

>>33562797
Nice 'before' picture.

>>33564806
>What a huge success, /k/uck
Wanted to reply to some other post, but who cares.
All people who think that it's a success when a country which has not even 1% of your military spending and is at war for >6 years now is able to shoot down 62% of your missiles, are /k/ucks.

>>33564822
>Do you think Syrians/Russians are bullshiting about the percentage of hits?

Highly likely considering they lie all the time and have a vested interest to do so

>>33564822
>You don't think less than half is pathetic hit rate

Its not about a hit rate, its the fact that about half made it though a Russian backed with russian equipment IADN.

These are not special snowflake missiles either, just run of the mill subsonic tomahawks. God forbid we use something with stealth, like the JASSM-ER

>>33563891
That's from a part falling off a MiG.

File: proofster2.jpg (9KB, 326x215px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 326x215px

>>33564807
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_chemical_attack
Hey, look at this wikipedia article which does not provide any proof!

>>33564826

Dont worry, half of your tomahawks hit his goalposts, so he wins!

>>33564822
>You don't think less than half is pathetic hit rate
Thats not what happened.
Each target had multiple missiles aimed.
The entire Russian claim is based on the number of targets hit.


Let me ask you, where are the pictures of downed Tomahawks or their debris?

>>33564785
>>33564800
Its actually really easy to know who is actually lying- the US said only 1 failed, then it stands to reason the other side only has to find more than one that failed. They already found one near Homs, the one with the warhead, they only need to find another...

>>33564855
They can get drone footage and pics of HAS.

But they can't get pics of the numerous downed/crashed Tomahawks?

File: 1394898135001.jpg (174KB, 820x500px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 820x500px

>>33564800
>23/59 = 39% hit
>You are eating 39% of jizz out of your own dick and someone says "MAN, YOU CAN DO MORE!"
USA! USA! USA!

>>33564855
How would they know 36 missed or were intercepted, but not already know the location of every tomahawk?

>>33564879
> and someone says "MAN, YOU CAN DO MORE!"

No, that Russian is saying, "MAN, ITS LIKE YOU ARE NOT EVEN EATING JIZZ!"

>>33564875
>They can get drone footage and pics of HAS.
>But they can't get pics of the numerous downed/crashed Tomahawks?
Much easier to film a whole airbase than a bunch of desert.

>>33564853
>Each target had multiple missiles aimed.
nuh-uh. A couple of HAS each only have one holes punching their tops. Some outside targets only have one crater too, with fire and explosion damage consistent with a just the one impact.

>>33564875
https://mobile.twitter.com/btelawy/status/850286232890474497
This is an alleged pic of one.

>>33564893
>How would they know 36 missed or were intercepted, but not already know the location of every tomahawk?

OOOoooo

The lies come tumbleing down, vattys!

>>33562797

Why are Russiaboos so embarrassing? They're acting like whiny little kids in online games that scream about how many shots it took you to kill them while you teabag their body

>>33564879
>>23/59 = 39% hit
All but one hit.
You are thinking that each target only gets one missile. Thats not accurate.

>>33564893
They counted the potholes and they don't add up to 60.

>>33564897
>nuh-uh
Yes. Thats normal doctrine you idiot. If you don't even have a basic understanding of this issue then why are you even offering your opinion?

>>33564893
>How would they know 36 missed or were intercepted, but not already know the location of every tomahawk?
There were people in the airbase recording the incident and counting strikes. Some died, so there should be a few that lived to tell the tale.

>>33564896
>>33564879
In defence of the rooskies they didn't get the real cruise missile counter in the MiG-31 Firefox in play. That and their A-50 AWACS which are both tailor made for just this sort of thing.

File: 1491578935115.png (224KB, 581x612px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 581x612px

>>33564841

>>33564911
>Yes. Thats normal doctrine you idiot. If you don't even have a basic understanding of this issue then why are you even offering your opinion?
Then why are you saying they fired multiple weapons per target? do they just magically fail and ensure only one missile for the majority of damages we seen actually hit?

>>33564893
HOW CAN YOU BE SO FUCKING STUPID
THIS are the people who suck the US cock at /k/. This are your posters.
Damn, you people are really stupid.

But to answer that question:
Maybe if they count the ones who reached their targets?
You know, just standing there and counting how many times you hear *boom*
Just 7 or 9 people died.
I think that we can say for sure that there were more people on the base and in the surrounding than that.
And a smart soldier would count the *booom*s.

>>33564925
>Then why are you saying they fired multiple weapons per target?
Because thats the normal doctrine.

>>33564906
Which would line up with multiple tomahawks cued to a single target

>>33564836
You are right they do bullshit a lot.

>>33564837
I see what you are saying

>>33564853
So you are saying 23 targets were hit with 59 missiles and that's why it sounds like more than half the missiles didn't even make it?Seems possible.

File: jitter.gif (940KB, 627x502px) Image search: [Google]

940KB, 627x502px

Disclaimer: I do not know shit about air defense networks, etc.

So, apparently we cannot fire cruise missiles at Al Shayrat without traveling over Syria's coastal defense network. And those are supposed to be S300/S400 batteries from Russia, correct?

What is the expected shoot down rate? If we assume the array shot down 50% of the 60 missiles, is that good or bad?

>>33564933
>Secondary explosions
>Actually counting explosions in that mess

Oh so its whats formally known as "a guess"

>>33564953
If S-300s were engaging tomahawks and they only sustained 50% attrition rate, that would be fucking terrible for the IADs.

Tomahawks are slow, predictable and subsonic.

>>33564934
>Because thats the normal doctrine.
what's not normal is the other weapons designated for the same target failing and leaving only one missile. If the failure rate is say 10%, and you there's like 3 missiles fired per target but only 1 succeeded, that;s 0.9*0.1*0.1= 0.9% chance of happening- even more unlikely when the same thing has occureed a couple times.

File: SyrianStrike070417.jpg (116KB, 1200x788px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 1200x788px

>>33564925
The DoD is explaining how multiple missiles hit each target.


Let me tell you how this is going to go.
Soon enough, what the DoD is reporting now will soon be available widespread.

>>33564956
> secondary explosions
This would mean that they count more, but not less.

There were soldiers, of course they would know that it is smart to count the *boom*s.
And if out of 200 soldiers (we can be sure that more than that were near the base), just 20 count, we have close enough numbers.

>>33564933
> Count the booms

If you don't know the answer, you don't have to say anything.

>>33564980
Almost like they are completely incompetent Syrians and pathological liars in an embarassing position and an interest in downplaying the event or something, Vatni- anon!