So what was the point of these if they were never going to use

>>33573745
Russia doesn't want to start shit with the US, so they didn't intercept the Tomahawks.

>>33574097
Yeah, why would they want to demonstrate how effective their weapon systems are in a war they're essentially using as a commercial to showcase their alternatives/counters to NATO/American weapons?

Makes no sense to me either.

>>33573745
The point of these is to cover Russian airfields, Russian bases and Russian Air Force.

>>33573745

chemical weapons, deconfliction, mutual understanding, credibility, norms

>>33574108
Yeah, because our media doesn't already have the scent of blood from a relatively neutral anti-chemical-weapons strike, let the Russians deny it, that way the Washington Post can tell us to invade Siberia.

>>33574144
I truly wonder what the world looks like through your eyes.

>>33574144

Putin pls.

>>33574144
This.
Its not even the first time that rebels have used chemical weapons and the blame has been heaped on Assad. When UN observers found no evidence of SAA wrongdoing (at least regarding chemical weapons), they dropped that story like a rock. Seems apparent that somebody in the USgov desperately wants the US to go into Syria, so it is wise of Russia not to push the issue if they can help it. Bit disappointing that Trump has gone back on his anti-world police stances, that was the reason I liked him.

Russian equipment not working as advertised
Oh no the surprise!

They are going to use them when they will be able to use them. You cant use them if the target under attack is 150km away behind a mountain range.

>>33574170
23/59

>>33574108
You really think that Russia wants to deal with the fallout from shooting down American missiles just to sell a few more units?

File: IMG_3724.jpg (72KB, 729x400px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 729x400px

>>33573745

>>33574224
What fallout? What do you kids think would happen?

>>33574228
>mental gymnastics

>>33574228
Please tell me you unironically believe this.

inb4: muh three dimensional chess

>>33574237
International incidents that could potentially cause World War III are so fun.

>>33574265
>Shooting down missiles launched at the military of a soveriegn state in an act of (undeclared) war in violation of a number of international treaties and ROI
>Bad
[Ree]

>>33574276
This is what vatniks believe

>>33574277

Well what do fatniks believe?

That half the tomahawks can't hit targets or that Russians can easily shoot down your tomahawks (which they can).

Russians wouldn't shoot down the missiles that they were warned about and that were going nowhere near their assets.

They still suspended the memorandum which was in place between the US/Russia in Syria, and since Trump anyway hinted at this being a one-off strike, no harm is done and nobody really loses face.

OBVIOUSLY, the media and "whoever" desperately wants to pin shit on Assad through the rebels, is still going to continue doing what they're doing, because it seems nobody cares how these weapons obviously came from Turkey (who have ALREADY been busted smuggling this shit into Syria, MULTIPLE times), so what can Trump do in this situation?

Give a warning, not much else. The outcome is still strange and Russians will not miss a chance at showing how "effective" the US military is, but what can you do.

Politics, nigger.

Obviously it'd be very nice for US/Russia to bomb the fuck out of Turkey, but hey

>>33573745
>OUR GLORIOUS MOTHERLAND MADE S-9000 WILL STOP ANY CAPITALIST AGGRESSIONS
>only against our personnel though btw
They're there just for show apparently. Putin is fine watching his allies quite literally get BTFO.

>>33573745
To perpetuate the hyperbole and the myth. If it does not work, then Russia is conventional paper tiger.

For those who say that Russian personnel weren't threatened - they unequivocally stated in October that Syrian air is closed to any US intervention.

Russia is bullshit. Putin is a petty thief bolstered by public relations and admiration of western cretins.

>>33574296

> get BTFO

Syria released videos of their bombers taking off from the same airfield, today.

>>33574299

> putin told about strike that's meant "for show"
> what to do what to do (t.putin)
> shoot down the missiles (which are not gonna hit anything), or use event to make america seem aggressive, draw a bunch of parallels to colin powell and his epic proofs AND banter shitty tomahawks from the 70s

It's funny, because now we can "compare" how Russia and US use their cruise missiles, because both countries have done cruise missile strikes around the same period, in the same country.

From a marketing perspective, the tomahawk got dragged through the mud, especially in comparison to what Russians did with their Kalibrs.

Top Kek

>>33574301
Well, seeing as how the airfield and a few hangars were unharmed I'm sure their propaganda feelsgood video was easy to shoot.

>https://youtu.be/LfWcXkgyzio?t=4m51s
All merely a flesh wound comrade! Our base is better than ever at 110% operating efficiency.

>>33574314
>vatnik delusions intensify

I love it

>>33574151
>>33574154
I wonder what it's like to knowingly support ISIS.

>>33574228
> destroyed half of Assad's air fleet
> killed 7 guys
> took out several anti air assets
> crushed morale in his army
> increased rebel morale

>>33574319

Buddy, planes are taking off that airfield.

Now you and I both know, that when you do a mass strike (50+ missiles) on some 3rd world airfield, nothing is expected to even be moving afterwards.

ANNAnews has a narrative for their niche audience, and for them the key is showing the angle of US attacking an airfield that did NOT have chemical weapons.

Switch over to footage from RT, and you're gonna see 5cm "potholes" in a runway and bombers taking off with the (25 out of 50 missiles HIT) in all caps.

The Russians had no reason to target US missiles. They knew that damage from the strike would be minimal in the grand scheme of things. They were forewarned of the attack so there was no real danger to their personnel or their assets. What does shooting down the missiles get them? Possible US retaliation against SAM sites, further erosion of relations between Washington and Moscow in Syria, etc. While I don't agree with the President's decision to attack the Syrian government, I do believe that the Russians did the right thing. Pushing the envelope only increases the chances of hostilities between the US and Russia which neither side is eager to get into.

Also, 95% of the posts in this thread are fucking stupid. You have all the faggot Russians who think Tomahawks don't work and are shitting on the US military. Then you have all the braindead people in the US who are too fucking lazy and stupid to look at a situation in a geopolitical context. You are the reason people think that all Americans are fat and stupid.

>>33574294
>That half the tomahawks can't hit targets

>russians mocking the CEP of american missiles

oh I am laffin

>>33574335

When was Assad's air fleet ever a big factor in that war? He had that fleet when ISIS was about to zerg him on all fronts. These guys drop some barrel bombs here and there, but that's about it lmao. Another amazing strike by the US military.

>>33574294
>That half the tomahawks can't hit targets

Can you guys stop this bullshit? It might work on /pol/ but we've seen the aftermath photos and we know that all except one tomahawk reached its target.

I'm not even American but I hate how so many people go "USA's gear suck!" because people spread false information.

>>33574187
Proven false with sat imgs, lurk more.

>>33574350
>>33574352

Are you people illiterate?

>>33574353

You mean the sat images that show a pothole in a field close to the airfield as a legitimate target?

>>33574358
Your right, defenses only exist on the airfield itself.

>>33574354

>source is RT

in an case I was just amused because the Russians are throwing stones from glass houses when it comes to missile accuracy and TERCOM quality

>>33574358
No?

>>33574328
Pretty good, why?

>>33574366

Russians have shown the aftermath of their missile strikes in Syria.

US have shown the aftermath of their missile strikes in Syria.

One country blew up a whole lot of stuff, the other had 25 missiles hit nothing and somehow ended up not even disabling the airfield or taking out planes that were in service.

>>33574341
Being as how the runwaY was not targeted, congrats on eating a bunch of propaganda.

>>33574374
>Russians have shown the aftermath of their missile strikes in Syria.
Thanks RT.

>US have shown the aftermath of their missile strikes in Syria.
Thank you RT.

>One country blew up a whole lot of stuff, the other had 25 missiles hit nothing and somehow ended up not even disabling the airfield or taking out planes that were in service.
Courtesy of RT.

Never change.

>>33574374

>25 missiles

Shill

File: american propaganda.jpg (88KB, 800x815px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 800x815px

>>33574352
>>33574350
>59 tomahawks launched at an airfield
total casualties include like 10 enemy combatants, 6 jets, a few hangars and fuel depos.
>runway left uncratered
>airbase resumes operations less than a day later.

Either the US Navy is incompetent as fuck and can't knock an understrenght airbase with skeleton airdefences out of commission, or Tomahawks just suck ass because they can be shot down by a below peer level adversary's understrenght and archaic air defenses.

You tell me, senpai.

>>33574385
>>33574386

So what we have here is 2 complete bitchboys just cuckpedaling around each other.

> we didn't wanna hit them

ok

> but we DID strike the targets we needed, don't fall to russian propaganda

ok

> also there's no proof of chemical weapons being at that airfield, but we bombed it anyways

ok

> and BY THE WAY our missiles are NOT SHIT

ok

> pfff, all these stupid russians with their propaganda, why didn't you shoot down our missiles hahahahaha

ok

> but we weren't actually attacking anything and we warned the russians, but still they SHOULD have shot us down, because what this means is that Putin lets his allies get BTFO

ok

> and if you didn't forget, it's 2017 and we still openly support ISIS despite being "against" them

OK

>>33574400
>total casualties include like 10 enemy combatants, 6 jets, a few hangars and fuel depos.
Courtney of RT

>>33574400

You know what would be real incompetent?

Cratering a runway with unitary explosives

what happens when Russia does stuff in the region

> jihadis jack oil refineries
> refineries get cruise missiled to shit
> jihadis start smuggling crude in trucks
> trucks get bombed to shit
> jihadis try to have a war
> all frontlines get broken and jihadis set up a suicide watch and start gassing themselves

what happens when US does stuff in the region:

> jihadis gas themselves so the world gets shocked about WMDs or some shit
> USN tickles a runway

top kek lads

Why are americans fighting with a bunch of barrel bombers? Do you really have nothing better to do? Do you wake up in the morning feeling sad about some jihadi who got barrel bombed and start writing a letter to your congressman?

File: 17098401_1471724556206079_7299204158835017063_n.jpg (99KB, 918x880px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 918x880px

>>33574187
>literally sourced from fucking RT
Lmao, try harder

>>33574351
>when was assad's air fleet ever important
When he started gassing civis with them you fucking retard.

>>33573745
>So what was the point of these if they were never going to use them?

because the US could take it as an act of war, and the situation would escalate

File: 1461938761258.png (262KB, 680x573px) Image search: [Google]

262KB, 680x573px

>>33574486

http://i.4cdn.org/wsg/1491592237666.webm

The last thing Russia would want is to start a direct 1v1 war on foreign soil with the US.

It wouldn't turn out well for them.

http://i.4cdn.org/wsg/1491591893184.webm
http://i.4cdn.org/wsg/1491591974071.webm
http://i.4cdn.org/wsg/1491592237666.webm

russian viewpoint translation, courtesy of /sg/

why do RT shills think the USN would use non-cluster TLAMs against a runway?

>>33573745
Because they have to do things right. It's part of normal procedures.
You can't just say yeah no we'll never ever get any kind of airborne threat therefore no need to bother with bringing AA.

>>33574400
You FUCKING niggers can't have it both ways. Hurrrrrr America weak can't do shit, can't even crater an airstrip lyke we could...... Hurrrrrr America why did you do this terrible damaging thing to Assad now Isis will win. You attack from both sides because full details haven't come out you retarded hopped up nigger. All we know is that 59 missiles launched and relatively minor damage occurred as Assad is now flying missions from the same base. Trump seems to indicate this is a one off. And Russians were forwarned so likely even in the damage that DID occur neither assad or Russia lost important assets.

We Don't even know what block the tomahawks were block iv being 500 to 600k and having retrofits due in 2019 to be operational.

We took potshots at somebody, which admittedly from what I know looks somewhat unesscessary. But why speculate on that when its still very early days. Maybe trump killed a flase flag un investigation in the cradle. Maybe the military wanted to for off ageing ordnance or just test/show capapbilty or presence. Maybe they failed at that or maybe they aimed for minimal targeted damage...

It's almost like people don't know that runways can be repaired really quickly meaning that the best course of action is to strike the airfields' support services and aircraft

>Some affirmative action hire led to half the TLAMs not actually getting armed

I'd laugh my ass off

>>33574525
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nm4EdHTqLhQ

Russian viewpoint translation, courtesy of 20th Century FOX