[Mac94]

This makes no sense ... SCUDs against what basically is a light infantry force? Unless they were chemically tipped there is zero military sense here. Those type weapons would be for fix large strategic targets and not for use in a conventional way against light infantry.

So if it happened there’s mre to this than is being reported or the government is pushing something for political ends knowing the word “SCUD” would get a reaction from the public.

[buwaya]

I have heard of this before.
The pro-Soviet Afghan army did the same when it was in its last days.
Its a desperation move I think. Make some big bangs, even if pointless militarily, in hope of demoralizing some of the opposition. Or shoot with whatever is left, if no better artillery is in range.

[USAF80]

Is SCUD slang for potato?

[justa-hairyape]

The problem is that the terrorist insurgents (Jabhat al-Nusra) have overrun at least two WMD faclities in the north. And since our great Fuhrer has decided to label Jabhat a terrorist organization, that gives Assad the green light to fire everything he has at them. So scuds will work in a situation where terrorist have control of a WMD facility and the US/NATO are providing air cover. Which they probably are now in the north. At least within the range of the Patriot batteries.

[Vermont Lt]

Talk about taking a hammer to an ant. It’s not like you could direct these things either. They are just V2’s with better gas mileage.

[PghBaldy]

I thought it seemed odd too.