Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

On target: US claims 100 percent success as 59 missiles hit 59 targets at Syrian airfield
Washington Examiner ^

Posted on 04/07/2017 3:23:43 PM PDT by springwater13

The Pentagon says the highly-accurate satellite guided missiles, launched from two ships in the Mediterranean sea, hit every target with pinpoint precision.

It took launching 61 missiles total to put 59 on target. One missile failed, and another had to be aborted. In both cases another missile was launched to take its place.

The Pentagon released imagery that shows hardened shelters were no match for the cruise missiles. Each of the targeted shelters had a hole in the top, and charred airplane wreckage scattered nearby.

The U.S. is still doing a more complete assessment, but estimates 20 Syrian warplanes were destroyed either in bunkers or in the clear.

In addition, a Russian-made surface-to-air missile site and its associated radar was destroyed, essentially rendering the airfield unprotected against a future attack, at least in the short term.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: syria; syriabombed; tomahawks
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141 next last
To: Emergencyawesome

“bombing a country “

You should read some history on the Pacific war in WWII. The US military would bomb Jap airfields, sending 50 or 100 planes at a time, only to have the Japs using it again 8 hours later.

Stop looking for ways to put Trump down. If you can’t come up with anything better or some facts to support your garbage, then.....get the hell out of here!!


101 posted on 04/07/2017 5:34:57 PM PDT by MaxistheBest (...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege

“Care to guess what a fighter jet or a radar unit costs?”

I did a back of the envelope calculation on the raid....easily $600 million in damage...not bad for $80 million worth of older Tomahawks that the Navy wanted to replace anyway...they have newer and much better versions.


102 posted on 04/07/2017 5:37:41 PM PDT by MaxistheBest (...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: MaxistheBest

“Stop looking for ways to put Trump down.”

Two days ago those planes were killing Jihadis, today they are not


103 posted on 04/07/2017 5:38:48 PM PDT by Emergencyawesome
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: springwater13
According to the Pentagon, the runway was hardened and could have been patched up within days.

If 59 cruise missiles can't destroy a runway, then I'd say they're pretty damn useless. Isn't the whole purpose of a first-strike weapon to incapacitate enemy military infrastructure like a runway? LOL.

104 posted on 04/07/2017 5:43:57 PM PDT by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Emergencyawesome
So no way ISIS staged this?

No. The intelligence is from credible sources. What you have seen from the Pentagon briefs is all credible from systems that are very capable of following and analyzing these events.

105 posted on 04/07/2017 6:02:41 PM PDT by Magnum44 (My comprehensive terrorism plan: Hunt them down and kill them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

“I’d say they’re pretty damn useless. Isn’t the whole purpose of a first-strike weapon to incapacitate enemy military infrastructure like a runway? LOL”

Stop pretending you know anything about military issues. They didn’t try to hit the runway and they can’t do it with this cruise missile. They destroyed over $600 million worth of military hardware and sent a strong message.


106 posted on 04/07/2017 6:03:52 PM PDT by MaxistheBest (...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Magnum44

“The intelligence is from credible sources”

LOL, are you serious?


107 posted on 04/07/2017 6:04:37 PM PDT by Emergencyawesome
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: panaxanax; Emergencyawesome
Not if we have plans to use it in the near future for our own jets

We are not planning on using this field or invading Syria. We don't bomb a runway because its easy to patch and not a high value target. We took out the means to support aircraft operations at the field. The field is out of action and that was the goal. At the same time we destroyed a significant chunk of the Syrian air force. No more threat and message sent. We pissed of the Russians just enough for a verbal scolding.

108 posted on 04/07/2017 6:08:36 PM PDT by Magnum44 (My comprehensive terrorism plan: Hunt them down and kill them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Emergencyawesome
Not if ‘we’ intend to use it in the future if necessary.
109 posted on 04/07/2017 6:09:47 PM PDT by Theoria (I should never have surrendered. I should have fought until I was the last man alive)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Emergencyawesome

In addition, a Russian-made surface-to-air missile site and its associated radar was destroyed....

Er, wasn’t the radar supposed to detect incoming missiles?

I thought that was the whole point of radar :)


110 posted on 04/07/2017 6:10:44 PM PDT by dp0622 (The only thing an upper crust cIonservative hates more than a liberal is a middle class conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: springwater13; All

Might be just me but it seems the ones banging the war-drums and hootin’-n-hollerin’ in favor of starting a war w/ Syria, using the pretext of ‘vital national interests’ (whatever THOSE might be), would be the same decrying the Socialist use of ‘compelling govt interest’ to infringe upon our Rights...

Deja vu, no? Didn’t we have a pResident ‘winning hearts and minds’ w/ the ‘religion of peace’ (but promising NO ‘national building’....while nation building)? Damn the public mind has gone to sh!t, it can’t seem to remember anything past last week, let alone over 8yrs.

What a squandered opportunity: to shutdown the UN as the feckless quagmire that it is, pull the U.S. *OUT* and THEN show the World leadership by gathering an international coalition. Instead, we seem to have an intact runway, $$$ lost in 60’ish missiles on less than 24hrs of ‘intel’, from a prior-cnadidate who ran on staying OUT of areas the U.S. has not reason being...


111 posted on 04/07/2017 6:15:31 PM PDT by i_robot73 ("A man chooses. A slave obeys." - Andrew Ryan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Well, what’s done is done.

I don’t want more attacks. I didn’t want this one :)

But we got our supreme court justice and a lot more.

No point in crying over a decision that is over.

Who knows, maybe in a week’s or month’s time, I’ll look back and see that the pros outweighed the cons.

What’s next on the agenda?


112 posted on 04/07/2017 6:16:26 PM PDT by dp0622 (The only thing an upper crust cIonservative hates more than a liberal is a middle class conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Emergencyawesome

Yes, I am and I know exactly of what I speak. I can lend my service history to my statement here, but you can either believe me or not, I don’t care. I don’t do loose lips. I just speak truth.


113 posted on 04/07/2017 6:17:14 PM PDT by Magnum44 (My comprehensive terrorism plan: Hunt them down and kill them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Magnum44

“believe me or not, I don’t care.”
Well it’s good then you don’t care


114 posted on 04/07/2017 6:19:23 PM PDT by Emergencyawesome
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Emergencyawesome
If your bombing a air base shouldn't you bomb the runway?

Not if in the short term you plan to use it.

115 posted on 04/07/2017 6:20:58 PM PDT by publius911 (I SUPPORT MY PRESIDENT?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: publius911

“Not if in the short term you plan to use it. “
There is a Russian special forces unit stationed there, I’m pretty sure we won’t be using it


116 posted on 04/07/2017 6:23:27 PM PDT by Emergencyawesome
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Terry Mross
Supposedly our intelligence on the ground knows all.

Keep your day job.
All your observations seem juvenile.
How old are you?

117 posted on 04/07/2017 6:28:21 PM PDT by publius911 (I SUPPORT MY PRESIDENT?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Emergencyawesome

I would guess for a one time attack, or at least in a way that you aren’t going to send a missile at the runway everyday would make no sense. A runway is probably very easily repaired, better to take out the planes and command and control.


118 posted on 04/07/2017 6:33:26 PM PDT by Almondjoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Teacher317

And you are 100% sure that this CW attack happened the way that it’s been reported?


119 posted on 04/07/2017 6:38:21 PM PDT by Eagles6 (My weapons are lubricated by liberal tears.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: publius911

Old enough to recognize when a punk tries to post something cute and fails.


120 posted on 04/07/2017 6:38:38 PM PDT by Terry Mross (Liver spots And blood thinners.,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson