Another Military Fail Of Trump Administration?

Donate

Thirty six Tomahawk cruise missiles worth $110.271 million, fired by the US Navy on the night of Friday, did not reach the Ash Sha’irat airbase.

Photo: US Navy

The Russian Defense Ministry has assessed effectiveness of the missile strike, carried out by the US Navy on the Syrian Ash Sha’irat airbase, as extremely low. According to spokesman for the Russian Defense Ministry, Major General Igor Konashenkov, only 23 missiles, launched by US Navy destroyers, reached the airbase, while in total, 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles were fired.

“On April 7, between 3:42 and 3:56 am Moscow time, a massive missile strike with 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles was carried out on the Syrian base of Ash Sha’irat (Homs province) by two US Navy destroyers (the Ross and the Porter) from the Mediterranean Sea in the area of Crete island. According to data of Russian means of objective control, only 23 missiles reached the Syrian airbase. A place of the fall of the remaining 36 cruise missiles is unknown,” Konashenkov said.

The spokesman of the Russian Defense Ministry noted that a warehouse with material-and-technical stuff, an educational building, a canteen, six Mig-23 aircraft, which were in repair hangars, as well as a radar station, were destroyed in the attack.

The Tomahawk cruise missile (Photo: fas.org)

President of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, Doctor of Military Sciences Konstantin Sivkov, noted that the cost of the US missile strike on the Syrian airbase is financially incommensurable with the inflicted damage.

“To be honest, I’m surprised – if only nine aircraft were destroyed as a result of the launch of 59 missiles, then this action of Washington is absolutely meaningless. This is just a waste of the US defense budget, as these missiles cost twice as much as the old MiG-22 and Su-22 that were in service in the Syrian Air Force,” the RIA Novosti news agency quoted Sivkov’s words.

The expert reminded that during the US military campaign in Iraq, the US Army used only 10-15 missiles of such a class to inflict the same amount of damage to the enemy.

“It turns out that this action turned out to be a total failure. I had a better opinion about the US Armed Forces,” Sivkov said.

Indeed, according to the Program Acquisition Cost by Weapon System of the Fiscal Year 2017 Budget Request of the US Department of Defense, the cost of one Tomahawk cruise missile is $1.869 million. In this way, for the past night, the US Navy fired 59 missiles worth $110.271 million. As 36 cruise missiles did not reach the target, $67.284 million were wasted. It is obvious that the damage, inflicted by the Tomahawks, cannot be be commensurate with the cost of the missiles’ launching.

On the night of Friday, two warships of the US Navy launched dozens of cruise missiles from the eastern Mediterranean Sea at the airbase, controlled by the Syrian government forces, in response to an alleged poison gas attack in Idlib province. According to the Pentagon, in total, 59 missiles were fired. The US missiles targeted the Shayrat airbase, from which, according to the US government, the chemical attack was carried out on Idlib.

Photos, showing the destruction, inflicted by the Tomahawk cruise missiles, launched by the US Navy:

Consequences of the US missile strike on the Ash Sha’irat airbase in Syria (Photo: RIA Novosti / Mikhail Voskresenskiy)

Consequences of the US missile strike on the Ash Sha’irat airbase in Syria (Photo: RIA Novosti / Mikhail Voskresenskiy)

Consequences of the US missile strike on the Ash Sha’irat airbase in Syria (Photo: RIA Novosti / Mikhail Voskresenskiy)

Consequences of the US missile strike on the Ash Sha’irat airbase in Syria (Photo: RIA Novosti / Mikhail Voskresenskiy)

Consequences of the US missile strike on the Ash Sha’irat airbase in Syria (Photo: RIA Novosti / Mikhail Voskresenskiy)

Consequences of the US missile strike on the Ash Sha’irat airbase in Syria (Photo: RIA Novosti / Mikhail Voskresenskiy)

Consequences of the US missile strike on the Ash Sha’irat airbase in Syria (Photo: RIA Novosti / Mikhail Voskresenskiy)

Consequences of the US missile strike on the Ash Sha’irat airbase in Syria (Photo: RIA Novosti / Mikhail Voskresenskiy)

Consequences of the US missile strike on the Ash Sha’irat airbase in Syria (Photo: RIA Novosti / Mikhail Voskresenskiy)

Consequences of the US missile strike on the Ash Sha’irat airbase in Syria (Photo: RIA Novosti / Mikhail Voskresenskiy)

Consequences of the US missile strike on the Ash Sha’irat airbase in Syria (Photo: RIA Novosti / Mikhail Voskresenskiy)

Donate

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • Daniel Castro

    Want a proof the missiles really failed?

    Not a single word about this on MSM.

    • Bill Wilson

      I think they went further inland to hit ISIS positions whose locations were provided by the Russians. We haven’t heard anything about that since ISIS doesn’t like to reveal losses.

      • Hisham Saber

        Get a grip man, the Tomahawks got blinded and rendered useless by Russian electronic countermeasures. Just like Israeli jets did experience cock-pit blackouts on multiple occasions. The Russians turn them on and off, on and off, so U.S./Israeli evesdropping can not figure out what the Russians are using/or up to. Tpomahawks are of yesterdays technology. Now the Tomahawks that went astray will be surgically dissected by China, if that’s not already happening as we speak. Who knows, maybe , just maybe Hezbollah can reverse engineer them, so they can give another ass whipping to Israel soon. I await the day, and its coming soon. Thanks Trump.

        • Bill Wilson

          LOL! Those cruise missiles have their routes downloaded into their computer systems before being launched so aren’t affected by electronic countermeasures. They’ve also have undergone several upgrades over the years.
          Hezbollah will come out of this conflict much weaker due to combat deaths and injuries. Those whack-jobs aren’t very well liked in Lebanon either so Israel may get assistance from the Lebanese Army to wipe them out if the two tangle again.

        • StaggerLee360

          No one’s falling for your b.s., Mohammed. Your inability to write English betrays you.

  • Caillasse

    This article is below your usual level and could be seen as propaganda.
    You must already know that Russia, and thus Syria, received forewarning of the attack.
    The damage cannot be assessed at the material level, but rather at the political level.

    • Antikapitalista

      … which only underscores the greater magnitude of the failure.

  • §âm

    So u telling me the missiles flew over the Russian air defences on the coast and reached their target? Talking about Russian anti missile defence fail..
    If they couldn’t intercept those “low quality” missiles i think their S-400 is bullshit

    • chris chuba

      The Russians were too scared to intercept unmanned missiles fired into Syria because it would be perceived as aggression against the U.S. They miscalculated.

      1. To the Neocons this confirms that Putin is guilty of war crimes because he reacted like a chastened bully which fits their stereotypes.
      2. Appeasing the Neocons will only encourage future aggression, ala Munich, the analogy they worship and learn from.

      The Russians will come to regret this as well as letting the rebels control the forensic evidence in Idlib.

      • Antikapitalista

        The article itself is precisely about the point that it would be foolish to expend relatively expensive anti-aircraft rockets against relatively cheap cruising missiles aimed at even cheaper targets.

        It would not have been perceived as aggression (as it would have been the purest example of self-defence), but it would have been foolish.

        • chris chuba

          Really, it would be foolish to take out the 23 that hit the Syrian air base that destroyed infrastructure? It’s not like Syria has money to throw away to replace the jets and the 6 or so people they lost. Also the Russians have S300SV’s which are specialized to take out cruise missiles. They didn’t have the nerve.

          • Daniel Castro

            It’s cheaper for russia to reconstruct the destroyed cheap infrastructure and replace junk aircraft than to use expensive s400 missiles, that’s the point. Money won’t bring back the 6 lost lives though…

          • Solomon Krupacek

            no bro, russias reputation has gone. for long, long time. russia in syria was not able to defeat ISIS (the official goal!!), can not guarantie the safety of this “allied” country. btw invited turks into syria …
            so, no country will trust russia, no country will be allied with russia. remember my words. russia will pay for at least 2 decades and will lose lot.

          • Daniel Castro

            They are avoiding the mistakes they did on afeganistan, there is no point in wasting all your resources on war, the broader conflict has too many sides. In my opinion we both do not have enough information to judge the action of all this states, armies and secret services, we can only guess and wait for the end result, only thing is clear for me is this is a war of resistance, none of the sides has the conditions to fight full conventional war, both are depleted, and both need to avoid nuclear exchange by any means. However, the fact the west keeps pushing for confrontation tell us they are the ones running against time. East gains from peace, west gains from war.

          • Bob

            That comment seems somewhat alarmist. Realistically, Russia has defined strategic goals in Syria. To stabilize the SAA’s military front and reverse the Islamist gains from 2015 – it is not an open ended commitment to fully fight another country’s war.

          • Solomon Krupacek

            no, russia oficially told (i saved putins speeches) that they want to destroy isis end free these regions. you simply lie.

          • grumpy_carpenter

            I wouldn’t be so fast to jump to that conclusion. 23 missiles hit their targets and 36 are unaccounted for. We don’t know what happened to these 36 missiles or what their intended targets were. For a well worn weapons platform like the Tomahawk cruise missile a 38% success rate is not normal or expected.

            If Russia was capable of shooting down the missiles targeting the Syrian airbase what then? Would the USA just tuck their tails between their legs and go home? If this attack failed might there have been an escalation that led to a real war instead of hurt feelings and a few aircraft lost?

            IMHO I believe the Russians took out the missiles that could have caused real strategic damage to Russia or Syria and let the few missiles through targeting Syrian expendable assets. That way the USA get their “message” across without doing real damage or raising the stakes and the Russians showed they are still in control of the air space without the USA losing face.

          • Solomon Krupacek

            “I believe the Russians took out the missiles that could have caused real
            strategic damage to Russia or Syria and let the few missiles through
            targeting Syrian expendable assets”

            ohohooo, so, russian know, how is porgrammed each tomahawk???? if it is so, they can declare war and tomorrow clen the world form america.

          • Bill Wilson

            Heck, I think Russia asked the US to hit ISIS positions with some Tomahawk missiles since they were going to send some in to blow-up the boneyard. They might of targeted ISIS outside Palmyra and the world doesn’t know anything about it if ISIS decided to keep quiet over the attacks.

          • Hisham Saber

            Bill Wilson, your just here to spout non-sense and troll with your most ridiculous comments. Either that or your smoking some potent shit.

          • StaggerLee360

            Another foreigner posing as an American. Keep practicing your English, Mohammed.

          • StaggerLee360

            Your crappy English gives you away, towelhead. You are America’s enemy. Look up. That tomahawk missile may be targeting your shithole village.

          • Bob

            Or, those SAM’s are designed to protect Russian air assets campaigning in Syria. Using their SAM missiles against 50 odd cruise missiles means need to ship more SAM missile ordnance from Russia by sea, and leaves Russian assets in an exposed window. The Russians do not want to waste valuable SAM’s on this, nor illustrate all their technology for such little return – they are for air base protection and covering of Russian military aircraft currently operating inside Syria.

          • Hisham Saber

            No SAM’s, electronic countermeasures. Same technology that rendered the U.S.S. Donald Cook inoperable in the Baltic Sea. The Pentagon and Israel are literally freaking out on what this new technology is and how it works, exactly. But the Russians are smart, they cycle the countermeasures, turning them on for seconds, then off, rinse and repeat. Israeli pilots have seriously complained about -cock-pit black-outs’ over Syria. Its a new age, a new type of warfare were talking about here. Why waste S-400’s when you can just pull it off with a few flicks of a switch. Now the Chinese are in Syria surgically dissecting the Tomahawks with Russian specialists. Beautiful indeed, if it were not for the people killed by the ones that made it.

          • Bob

            Interesting.

          • Hisham Saber

            Chris, for every bullet, rpg, gun, tank, apc or plane Syria loses, Russia replaces in no time. There is a shipping express line straight from Russia to Syria, 24/7, 365. And the Russians give the stuff to Syria on credit, if not for free, or the Chinese pick up the tab. Be serious man.

            The whole world has now seen how effective Russian electronic countermeasures are. And the world came to realize that Tomahawks are truly yesterdays technology.

        • Solomon Krupacek

          are you normal???

      • John Whitehot

        you gotta be turkish.

      • Brockland A.T.

        Remember that the Chinese President is visiting President Trump at Palm Beach, Florida – yet any serious defense/retaliation beyond cruise missile jamming would inevitably involve China.

        This was a great time to strike as China is ‘soft decapitated’, with its President and many top advisors stuck in the U.S.. More or less as hostages.

        Very well-timed indeed.

        • Solomon Krupacek

          do not dream. chines president is puppet. without any doubt would be obeyed, if necessary.

          • EL ZORRO

            The Chinese President is in the back pocket of the BIS/IMF and overlapping NWO operative.

      • Hisham Saber

        Troll? Of the Hebrew persuasion? Sound like one with your silly, way off mark comment. Please.

        • StaggerLee360

          Another sack of shit pretending to be an American. Keep practicing your English, Mohammed. It’s obvious who’s the troll.

    • Rodger

      Why would Russia want to prevent the US from making the Syria government more dependent on Russian help? What was lost anyway?

      • Brockland A.T.

        Lives are irreplaceable. Nine civilians including four children plus six Syrian soldiers, according to some reports.

        • Rodger

          Zero Russian lives. And those are the ones the Russian government has to protect.

          • Brockland A.T.

            Point taken, but there were Russians at that base, who may have escaped harm only by happenstance.

            My guess is, those that hit were the first ones fired, before the jammers kicked in. Without more active measures, there was no stopping them.

            A good test of the existing system, anyway.

    • sagbotgamot

      For now, the target was not the russian air base… but a syrian air base. there is a memorandum of understanding between russia and the US. russians are not their to shoot down US missiles but help fight Syria’s war against US-sponsored terrorist. Now that MOU has been scrapped by russia after the attack. I expect US tomahawks will target russian bases in Syria. if it does happen… WWWIII is on.

    • NeoLeo

      Who said they “couldn’t intercept them”? It’s not a military, nor technical problem, it was a political decision. Good or bad, that’s debatable.

  • The Russian AA missiles are intended to protect the Russian bases in Syria, not the Syrian territory. They didn’t aim at Israeli planes or Turkish planes and also not at US missiles targeting Syrian airports. Because Russia still has professional diplomats (not like the US), it knows that it would have been an escalation to shoot down the US missiles. It would have been a direct confrontation US against Russia. Nobody wants this. So they are taking only small steps in escalation. Unfortunately Trump has no idea of diplomacy and he doesn’t understand the consequences of his actions.

    • Thegr8rambino

      no, shooting down the missiles would have been an act of pure self-defense. shooting at the ships that launched the missiles, or other US forces would have been an escalation

      • grumpy_carpenter

        Shooting down missiles targeted at Russian assets would have been self defence. Shooting down missiles targeted at Syrian assets could be seen as contentious and a potential for escalation though. That would have led to embarrassment for the USA and forced further attacks.

        What happened last night seems to be one part kabuki theater and one part aggression. Russians and Syrians were warned of the attack ahead of time allowing them to protect some valuable assets and manpower hence the relatively low causality rate. It’s like Trump felt he had to do something but he didn’t want to burn his bridges either.

        Trumps is the fool in all of this though. This will be used as part of the mounting evidence to remove him from office. As of today Trump is owned by the borg.

        • Solomon Krupacek

          hah! but in taht case russia is not ally of syria! did you hear, what told trump? with all forces will defend south korea and japan before north korean agression. THIS IS FRIEND? THIS IS ALLY!!!!!!

          russia is shit on shit! they betrayed allies in 80ies and 90ties. now simply continue.

          • EL ZORRO

            When the Cuban crisis the Russian abandons the Cubans and the Cubans NEVER forget that.

          • Thegr8rambino

            Not exactly the same situation

          • Solomon Krupacek

            i know it. and several times remebered in this forum. BUT! russia betreyed cuba twicw. bigger betray was in 90ties. totallya abandoned cuba and also vietnam. in these countries rusia will never come back. and so russia lost all friends and is alone in the world.

          • NeoLeo

            But they did not actually, Cuba was never invaded by USA, americans never tried another Pigs Bay invasion, it was all part of the deal.

          • NeoLeo

            Friends and allies? LOL You are so naïve. They bombed, incinerated and nuked them twice, then occupied their territory for 70 years, and they are still there, ‘defending’ them from imaginary threats (and occasionally r4ping japanese girls in Okinawa, like good friends and allies).
            How many bases Japan and South Korea have in America? It’s not partnership, its – vassalship, one-sided relationship (master/slave), basically an endless occupation… Japanese and SK armies exist only to support the US troops, americans will use their territory as a battlefield for their own aggression against NK, and Japan/SK should be thankful for that? “hey we’ll attack Kim and if he retaliate and nuke you, well sorry, we’ll nuke him!”. Japan (and SK) have enough money and technology to defend themselves from shitty NK, but their only purpose is to be a cannon fodder/cheap auxiliaries for the Empire. Friends my ass. They are doing the same shit in Europe, entire EU can’t defend itself from Russia (another imaginary BS), instead the yankees must defend Europe? No thank you. Let them defend Alabama.
            There are no friends in politics (domestic or international), only interests.

          • NeoLeo

            Friends and allies?! LOOOL you’re so naïve. They bombed, incinerated their cities and nuked them twice, then occupied their territory for 70 years – and they are still there, “defending” them from imaginary threats (and occasionally r4ping japanese girls in Okinawa, like good friends and allies!)
            How many bases Japan and South Korea have in America? 0. It’s not partnership, its – vassalship, one-sided relationship, basically an endless occupation… Japanese and SK armies exist only to support the US troops, americans will use their territory as a battlefield for their own aggression against NK, and Japan/SK should be thankful for that? “hey we’ll attack Kim and if he retaliate and nuke you, well sorry, we’ll nuke him!”. Japan (and SK) have enough money and technology to defend themselves from shitty NK, but their only purpose is to be a cannon fodder/cheap auxiliaries for the Empire. Friends my ass. They are doing the same shit in Europe, entire EU can’t defend itself from Russia (another imaginary BS), instead the yankees must defend Europe?! No thank you. Let them defend Alabama.

            There are no friends in politics (domestic or international), only interests.

          • Solomon Krupacek

            you are crazy! what was during ww2 is 1 thing, after 1 another. now are allies. and taiwan, s.korea, too.

          • NeoLeo

            And you are an idiot, sick russophobic, braindead nazi troll who worship his yankee masters. A dumb, clueless slave. Sorry, it’s fault: no pearls before swine. So go eat shit instead.

          • Solomon Krupacek

            hoohoohoo :)))

            you know, who am i? :)))

            but you are right. i am throwing pearls before swine, and swine write me, i am russophobic troll. :-O

          • NeoLeo

            Yeah, piggy, I know who you are: a worthless little troll. Now keep oinking :D

        • Antikapitalista

          Well, you peddle outrageous bullshit.

          A cruise missile is a piece of ammunition and enjoys no legal protection; actually, it is a piece of infringement in itself.

          What you claim is as absurd as claiming that putting a helmet on you friend’s head (which stopped a bulled fired at his head) or putting a bullet-proof vest on him (which stopped a bullet fired at his body) “could be seen as contentious and a potential for escalation because it would have led to embarrassment to the attacker and forced further attacks”.

          Trump did burn all the bridges, made a fool of himself and put his cuntry S.A. to international shame again.
          As if the blusterous moron had not taken enough damage…

          A blusterous moron guided by his mentally unstable daughter is possibly the worst combination of all.

          • grumpy_carpenter

            So what do you think was the military intent of this cruise missile strike? Did it achieve anything militarily either tactically or strategically?

            The Russians were warned the attack was coming. 22 missiles hit the airfield and not one targeting the runways. The only aviation left on site were derelict aircraft. The Syrian air force were using the airfield the next morning and military operations weren’t affected.

            What does this tell you? The way I see it this attack was a political gesture meant to look effective but not do any real or lasting damage…. in other words theater. The Russians know this and so do the Syrians.

            So what if the Russians shoot down these cruise missiles? SAM’s are expensive weapons and if you expend your SAM’s on cruise missiles that you know are meant for show you leave Latakia and Tartus vulnerable to attack and leave the USA embarrassed on the world stage and still wanting their pound of flesh.

            So this is a situation of realpolitik vs idealism. The idealist stance leaves Syria with further attacks of increasing lethality by the USA while the realpolitik stance results in a minor asswhupping and business as usual.

            Russia has to keep from letting emotion take their eye off the target of ridding Syria of wahabist terrorists and keeping Assad in power which are not only a threat to Syria but also to Central Asia and ultimately Russia. if that means allowing the USA to satisfy their bombing fetish every once in awhile so be it.

          • Hisham Saber

            Trump ordered the attack because Israel cried to him that their Jets were experiencing cock-pit blackouts over Syria(Russian Electronic countermeasures). So the Pentagon thought the problem could be solved with Tomahawks, for two reasons, 1-That the Tomahawks could not be blinded/intercepted 2- So when the Tomahawks were in-route, Israel and the U.S. could peer into what kind of countermeasures they are exactly, so they can come up with similar technology or bypass them. Silly fools, Russia only turns on the measures for 30 or so seconds at a time.

            Well, it played into Russia hand, since now they can have an excuse to bolster their systems with more S-400’s and Pantsir’s, as well as broaden the scope of the electronic countermeasures.

            This U.S. has been interested in this new Russian technology ever since the U.S.S. Donald Cook was rendered a sitting duck in the Baltic Sea by such electronic counetrmeasures. It doesn’t help that the Israelis have ben having an increasingly hard time with them aswell.

          • PZIVJ1943

            Trump ordered the attack because he is under pressure from liberals and MSM about being to friendly with Russia. You understand the US political geography.
            Hope that your take on Russian ECM is true, it would go a long way to preventing future conflict.
            Please post your sources beyond the USS sitting Donald Duck.

        • Brad Isherwood

          https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C574_4MUsAAkDRJ.jpg
          Trump will be made to Ovey and attack Syria….Iran is next.

      • EL ZORRO

        No, shooting down the missiles the ships that launched the missiles or other forces by the Syrian/Russian air/land defenses would have been an act of self defense. Under what authority the United States attack a SOVEREIGN nation with FABRICATED accusation, like when they attack Iraq under WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION FALSE ACCUSATION, DESTROYING THAT COUNTRY? As a matter of fact the UNITED STATES MUST BE CHARGED WITH CRIMES AGAINS HUMANITY AND AGGRESSION AGAINS INNOCENT PEOPLE.

        • Thegr8rambino

          True

      • Antikapitalista

        No, even shooting at the ships that launched the missiles would be in within self-defence; it would not be an escalation but a necessary consequence of the right to self-defence.

        • Thegr8rambino

          So why didn’t they do it? Hope next time they do it

    • Gabriel Hollows

      Yeah just let the yankees destroy syria and kill Assad. Wouldn’t want a scary ‘escalation’ now would we?

      Fuck off. The only reason US warplanes aren’t being shot down right now is because the ‘show of force’ was a shambolic attempt of intimidation in which no important assets were destroyed. In fact, the base has already resumed operations.

    • Hisham Saber

      Wrong, Israeli pilots have complained that they experienced cock-pit black outs over Syria. So the U.S. figured Tomahawks could do the trick, they were wrong. Electronic countermeasures took care of over 50 % of the missiles. The res did insignificant damage.This is a new era.

      The Russians turn on their measures for 1 minute at a time, so the Nato/Pentagon/Israel would not be able to crack the measures. Its the same technology that rendered the U.S.S. Donald Cook inoperable while Russian Su-24 made precise, low level belligerent passes on her while she was a sitting duck.

      Russia has personnel all over Syria, so their S-400’s and Pantsir systems cover all of Syria.

      And this attack was actually heaven sent, since now Russia has suspended all cooperation with Washington, and they will now bolster all systems and now all bets are off.

  • zman

    I’m still curious about where those 36 Tomahawks ended up. Were they taken out? Did they malfunction(not likely)…were they deliberately disabled? Strange.

    • Thegr8rambino

      im wondering this myself, although id like to think russia took care of them lol

      • Nuno Cardoso da Silva

        The most likely explanation is that electronic warfare made those 36 tomahawks fail their target. It may have happened while they were still flying over the Mediterranean, and thus will never be found. I doubt the Russians would want to boast that they have the means of bringing down the precious American CM’s…

        • cortisol

          Could the Russians have known they are coming?

          • Real Anti-Racist Action

            They 100% knew at least 20 minutes before they impacted.
            Tomahawks are slow, and Russian radar on their ships detect things all the way to Creet.
            Also the Russian S-400 system scans like 1/3rd the distance to Greece or a little more.
            Russia knew, Syria may have also detected them as well 10 mins before impact.

          • Brad Isherwood

            Russian EW/Jammers and Syrian Cellphone towers jamming GPS.
            Maybe some Syrian point defence got in on Tomahawks fight route.
            Everything from 23mm mobile to Various Syrian mobile SAMS
            http://spioenkop.blogspot.ca/2016/08/photo-report-syrian-arab-air-defence.html

          • StaggerLee360

            Are you an idiot? Or is this how they teach English at your madrassa?

          • Ted

            Of course they did. If not well then they should pack up and head home. If they did not detect the launch and flight of a WW2 fighter with a 35 min flight path thats pretty pathetic.
            All these keyboard warriors going on about how only 23 made it out of 59? Really so Russias super electronic warfare countermeasures and s400 can only take out 36 of 59 ww2 era speed demons? Never mind the radar cross section of a 747.

            All theater. And Syrias Pantsir were toasted as well, ANNA video clearly shows them burnt to a crisp. All theater!

          • Bill Wilson

            There’s reports that the US gave the Russians fair warning so they could remove aircraft, equipment and men before the missiles showed up.

        • Hisham Saber

          Same countermeasures that blinded Israeli jets, thus making them ineffective. Israel cried to Trump, and Trump thought that cruise missiles would do the trick.

      • Bill Wilson

        I wouldn’t be surprised if the Russians and USA planned this “attack” for various reasons: 1. Good excuse to install more ground radar and air defense missile systems to fuck with Turkey 2. To have 36 Tomahawks hit ISIS targets in the Palmyra region to assist the advance of SAA forces. 3. So Trump could shut-up the European leaders who are wringing their hands over the gas incident.
        There’s reports that the US gave Russia early warning of the attack so they could remove valuable equipment and personal from the airbase, which reported was a boneyard for old aircraft.

        • NeoLeo

          I doubt they planned it… however, less then 40% efficiency is actually worse than german V2 rockets 70 years ago! Something is strange here, and there are only 2-3 logical explanations: 1) they were half-broken, rusty junk (honestly I doubt it); 2) Russians somehow jammed them without actually firing at them (they supposedly have some interesting new electronic warfare systems); 3) americans deliberately targeted desert/sea/moon/whatever (Trump is trying to appease neocon warmongers but not to completely and irreversibly destroy relations with Russia). We’ll see soon anyway.

        • Thegr8rambino

          That would be interesting if true, but I read conflicting reports, that the Russians were not warned, and that they were but very short notice, and that the airbase was the busiest for the SyAAF, and that it was just a boneyard as you said

    • Antikapitalista

      It appears that some of them must have been taken out…

    • Hisham Saber

      They were blinded by Russian electronic countermeasures. Israeli jets encountered the same measures, thus the U.S. resorted to cruise missiles instead of its traditional reliance on jets.

      The ones that went astray, are being dissected by the Chinese as we speak. Somewhere in Syria, Chinese and Russian specialists are having a surgical look into them, even though the Tomahawk is of yesterdays technology. Still, invaluable insight can come out of them. And now, Russia has suspended any cooperation of memorandum with the Pentagon, which means that Russia will bolster its air defense assets in Syria and say its for priority defense, thus making future strikes by Israel and the U.S. ineffective and quite embarrassing when/and if they do , will be shot down, or blinded for the whole world to see.

      Also, the Chinese are taking this as a slap in the face, that Trump would authorize an illegal strike while President Xi is on a State visit to Washington. They are no doubt very insulted and not happy. This will be interpreted as a warning to Russia, China and Iran, besides just Syria.

      I imagine the Russians will start undermining the U.S. efforts with the back-stabbing Kurds.

  • Jakke1899

    6 old MIG 21 lost? Over 10.000 were made, dozens are probaly still stored by the former Warschaupact countries and are easily replaced.

    • Bob

      More likely Su-22 and Mig-23 models that SyAAF operates. Syria does have finance issues as US regime change operation against Syria includes economic sanctions imposed years ago – which have frozen a range of Syrian state offshore financial accounts.

      • Hisham Saber

        Whether Syria looses a plane, tank, gun, truck…Russia has a replacement in a few weeks. There is a express shipping line from Russia to Syria. Believe me, Syria is not strapped, nor hurting for weapons.

  • grumpy_carpenter

    The $110M is just for the bare cost of ordinance. How about the cost of planning the attack and the cost of having those naval assets in the Mediterranean along with all the air and naval assets to keep them safe? American taxpayers are idiots when it comes to defence.

    • Jenny Rau Gagliardi

      You must not pay taxes or you wouldn’t say this about taxpayers

      • grumpy_carpenter

        Oh I’m a taxpayer and I generate a lot more than my share through business but not an American tax payer.

    • EL ZORRO

      Money? not problem, they speedup the money printing press, it’s just paper that people around the world accept as money.

  • kraaiiii
  • Douglas Houck

    Here is my question. After all this hoopla what has fundamentally changed?

    If this attack finishes the recent chemical attack incident then good. I’m assuming that no more Sarin attacks can be ascribed to Assad as the US supposedly destroyed it all.

    That means the opposition has exhausted it’s most valuable weapon, world public outrage.

    I’m not seeing much in the way of no fly-zones being discussed. That leaves the peace negotiations. Are we back to demanding Assad’s removal before elections (HNC’s position)?

    If so then the negotiations are doomed until the jihadist fighters are further defeated.

  • Ted

    All these great keyboard warriors droning on about how only 23 hit there target due to Russias air defense. Yet there will never be proof because they all fell into the ocean never to be seen.

    What you should be asking yourself is how did Russias super air defense and electronic countermeasure let 23 missile that are no faster then a ww2 fighter that were in the air for nearly 40 min and with a rcs of a 747 created five decades ago get by them?

    Its because Russia sat back and did nothing. The whole things a farce.