The attack on Syria

[Broken_Erika]

Think of him as a very spoiled, not too bright, not too educated, short-tempered 4-year-old boy

FTFY

 

[Zkribbler]

Tomahawks are also Soviet-era technology.

That was true of the Tomahawk Block I.
Since 2006, the US has had the Tomahawk Block IV.

 

[red_elk]

We don't know what exactly was used by the US. And we don't know what upgrades Syrian air defense received.
Cruise missile is relatively slow-moving target which is not exceptionally difficult to intercept.

 

[red_elk]

Syrian opposition is unhappy
They called the US-led attack on Syria "farce"
https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/n...position-say-western-strikes-on-assad-a-farce

 

[Thorgalaeg]

I will wait to western numbers to make my numbers.

 

[EgonSpengler]

We don't know what exactly was used by the US. And we don't know what upgrades Syrian air defense received.
Cruise missile is relatively slow-moving target which is not exceptionally difficult to intercept.

They're not difficult to shoot down - I think you might be able to hit one with a rifle - but they're very difficult to detect. They can hide from radar using low altitude and terrain, and these attacks tend to be conducted at night, making it essentially impossible to see the missiles with the naked eye. Even with night-vision gear, you would need to know that they're coming and from which general direction. I think their engines are muffled from the front, making it hard to figure out where they're coming from. I haven't ever seen a Tomahawk in person, but I've seen an A-10 Warthog in person, which use a similar "low and slow" approach, and they're surprisingly quiet as they're flying towards you (they're louder after they've flown past).

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Uk/France use the StormShadow/WatheverTheyCallItinFrance which is very stealthy AFAIK.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

"The Pentagon insisted that no missiles were intercepted by Syrian defences and that the raids were “precise and overwhelming” while claiming the Syrian air defences remained “largely ineffective”.

At a briefing, Lt Gen Kenneth McKenzie said that Syrian air defences fired 40 interceptor missiles in an attempt to thwart the barrage but failed to hit any of their targets. He said most were fired after the last incoming missile had struck its target. There was no indication of any involvement by Russian air defences, he added."

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2...ssian-and-syrian-claims-of-shot-down-missiles

 

[Bamspeedy]

Perhaps Syrian officials were less specific, but last time I checked 13 out of 110 wasn't a majority:

I know Syria said 13 missiles, but on further research beyond reading headlines, it was 13 'over Damascus'. If any are going to be shot down it would be over Damascas, not some remote laboratory. The '71' number doesn't seem to appear until after consultation with Russia.

 

[Oerdin]

Syrian opposition is unhappy
They called the US-led attack on Syria "farce"
https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/n...position-say-western-strikes-on-assad-a-farce

It pretty much was. They bombed three empty buildings. Reports are the Syrian government evacuated people and equipment out of those buildings on Weds and Thursday so it seems someone, probably Trump, spilled the beans and told Russia what the targets would be and that it would only be one strike not a sustained campaign. Earlier Russia was threatening to intercept planes and missiles and fire on where ever they came from but Russian forces actually stood down while Allied planes stayed out of Litakia. So it sounds like Putin and Trump made a deal which made the strikes meaningless posturing.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

It pretty much was. They bombed three empty buildings. Reports are the Syrian government evacuated people and equipment out of those buildings on Weds and Thursday so it seems someone, probably Trump, spilled the beans and told Russia what the targets would be and that it would only be one strike not a sustained campaign. Earlier Russia was threatening to intercept planes and missiles and fire on where ever they came from but Russian forces actually stood down while Allied planes stayed out of Litakia. So it sounds like Putin and Trump made a deal which made the strikes meaningless posturing.

Air strikes almost always "bomb empty buildings." They are done at night to minimize casualties. The after the fact claims that equipment was evacuated are unconfirmed and will probably remain unconfirmed. There are a number of possibilities, and one certainly is that Trump informed his Russian masters regarding the target list. Another would be that as a general reaction to his attempted 'diplomacy by twitter' Syria would move all of their research and storage operations to new quarters as quickly as possible. It's also possible that the damage was extensive but the Syrians are putting a 'best face' on things to claim they outwitted the evil westerners once again.

@Red Elk...once again the question of credibility presents itself. The offhand claim that 71 missiles were intercepted, hours after the offhand claim that 13 were intercepted, coupled with both sides acknowledging that the target areas were conveniently away from the areas where actual Russian air defenses are deployed, makes it look like the Russian propaganda machine is trying to blow smoke. To sell missile defense systems there is going to have to be evidence of effectiveness, not just an assortment of self contradictory claims. The US will be presenting photos of targets prior to raid and photos after the raid when they want to sell tomahawks...and I expect tomahawks will continue to sell very well. The only pitch that Russia is going to be able to make off of this is "if you give us a long term lease to a base in your country the westerners won't shoot too close to it when they target you." That doesn't seem like much of a product.

 

[red_elk]

The Russian government's recent protestations that the alleged chemical weapon attack in Douma was in fact a plot by the United Kingdom is equally laughable. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof

Why all of a sudden? Six weeks ago nobody needed extraordinary proof that Russia organized chemical attack on British soil.
A flat-out lie of British FM that they established origin of poison was enough.

To sell missile defense systems there is going to have to be evidence of effectiveness, not just an assortment of self contradictory claims. The US will be presenting photos of targets prior to raid and photos after the raid when they want to sell tomahawks...and I expect tomahawks will continue to sell very well. The only pitch that Russia is going to be able to make off of this is "if you give us a long term lease to a base in your country the westerners won't shoot too close to it when they target you." That doesn't seem like much of a product.

I think advertising of its SAM system wasn't among major reasons of Russian involvement in Syria.
Speaking of which, Turkey is quite eager to buy S-400.

 

[innonimatu]

One R&D facility; two storage facilities.
None of them anywhere near Russian AA defenses.
Anything hit by Syrian AA defenses were probably jet-powered cruise missiles.

What I find most curious is the lack of firm evidence that the triggering atrocity was a nerve-gas attack. Most likely, it was a chlorine-gas attack. But 23 previous chlorine gassing drew no response. Why now?

Perhaps because the Saudi crown prince, the animal (to use current diplomatic terms...) who has been killing yemeni (the worthless kind, you know) children by the thousands, has been making the rounds of London, Paris, Washington, for the past month, and signing fat contracts?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Speaking of which, Turkey is quite eager to buy S-400.

I'd guess less so after this demonstration.

 

[innonimatu]

You realize that the worst of the "rebels" were prisoners who were PURPOSELY freed by Assad so he could claim "it's me or ISIS", right ?

I realize you read that claim somewhere, and immediately believed it because it fit your preconceived idea. As in the past about Libyam you made up your mind based on propaganda a long time ago.I'd like to know where it came from.

How about over "what seems like there is a sliver of a chance that maybe it was a false flag attack"?

Chlorine having bee used was easy conceivable. But a nerve agent? The one thing that was sure to provide the excuse for an attack? In the wake of the "Skripal affair" , which had already been used to influence the public in those western countries eager to continue interfering in the syrian war?

As I've said in the other thread about the UK's poisoning, it stinks of false flags, propaganda warfare. I'm still waiting to see what comes out of that one. So far it's obvious that the UK's government is hiding things, starting with the alleged victims themselves.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I realize you read that claim somewhere, and immediately believed it because it fit your preconceived idea. As in the past about Libyam you made up your mind based on propaganda a long time ago.I'd like to know where it came from.



Chlorine having bee used was easy conceivable. But a nerve agent? The one thing that was sure to provide the excuse for an attack? In the wake of the "Skripal affair" , which had already been used to influence the public in those western countries eager to continue interfering in the syrian war?

As I've said in the other thread about the UK's poisoning, it stinks of false flags, propaganda warfare. I'm still waiting to see what comes out of that one. So far it's obvious that the UK's government is hiding things, starting with the alleged victims themselves.

I realize you read that claim somewhere, and immediately believed it because it fit your preconceived idea.

 

[red_elk]

I'd guess less so after this demonstration.

Out of curiosity, I checked how many countries currently use S-400 and Tomahawk missiles.

S-300 is being used by 18 operators.
S-400 by 4 (Russia, Belarus, China, Algeria) and three more countries (Turkey, India, Saudi Arabia) have recently signed contracts to buy.

Tomahawks are used by USA and UK only.
Netherlands and Spain cancelled orders to buy them in 2007 and 2009 respectively.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Out of curiosity, I checked how many countries currently use S-400 and Tomahawk missiles.

S-300 is being used by 18 operators.
S-400 by 4 (Russia, Belarus, China, Algeria) and three more countries (Turkey, India, Saudi Arabia) have recently signed contracts to buy.

Tomahawks are used by USA and UK only.
Netherlands and Spain cancelled orders to buy them in 2007 and 2009 respectively.

Well the F-15 has only been bought by 4 countries while the mig-23 was bought by half the countries in the world and nobody really discuss which one is the best plane. It is a complicated matter where politics, economics all kind of implications are involved. And if that happens with similar systems imagine with very different ones. And I am not saying Tomahawk is good and Russian SA missiles are bad, only that such comparison is rather irrelevant.

 

[uppi]

Out of curiosity, I checked how many countries currently use S-400 and Tomahawk missiles.

S-300 is being used by 18 operators.
S-400 by 4 (Russia, Belarus, China, Algeria) and three more countries (Turkey, India, Saudi Arabia) have recently signed contracts to buy.

Tomahawks are used by USA and UK only.
Netherlands and Spain cancelled orders to buy them in 2007 and 2009 respectively.

Cruise missiles are an expensive way to blow up tents. Not everyone has a need for that.

 

[red_elk]

Well the F-15 has only been bought by 4 countries while the mig-23 was bought by half the countries in the world and nobody really discuss which one is the best plane. It is a complicated matter where politics, economics all kind of implications are involved. And if that happens with similar systems imagine with very different ones. And I am not saying Tomahawk is good and Russian SA missiles are bad, only that such comparison is rather irrelevant.

I'm not comparing apples and oranges. Tim's argument was that USA is allegedly better in advertising and selling its tomahawk missiles to other countries.