US Ships launch 60 cruise missiles at Syrian air base

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Kovnik Obama**

Frazzled wrote:
KTG17 wrote:
If they signed up to serve to defend America's interests, then yes.

But they aren't defending US interests. They are defending your feelz.

Or, alternatively, they would be taking responsibility for the actions of your government, which, over the last 60 years, as at least plotted 3 times to overthrow the established syrian government, only to either fail utterly, or install a psychopatic monster instead of the previous government.

**Grey Templar**

CptJake wrote:
The strike (right or wrong) was NOT designed to destroy Assad's war fighting capability, or even to significantly hurt it.

Though as I have heard it, the damage amounts to around 20% of Assads airforce. That's definitely what I would call significant, at least from his point of view.

**djones520**

Grey Templar wrote:
CptJake wrote:
The strike (right or wrong) was NOT designed to destroy Assad's war fighting capability, or even to significantly hurt it.

Though as I have heard it, the damage amounts to around 20% of Assads airforce. That's definitely what I would call significant, at least from his point of view.

Syria was estimated to have about 460 combat aircraft at the start of the war. They'd have had to have suffered more then 75% casualties before this strike, for that number to reflect accurately. 75% casualties is basically a dead force.

**Grey Templar**

Well I wasn't sure about the accuracy of that report, just that I had heard it and if true it would be significant.

Of those 460 aircraft, how many are actually operational?

**djones520**

Grey Templar wrote:
Well I wasn't sure about the accuracy of that report, just that I had heard it and if true it would be significant.

Of those 460 aircraft, how many are actually operational?

All of them.

**Co'tor Shas**

Picture of Russians deaing with some of their own chemical weapons in 2015.

Picture of the suspisousy similar contrainers in the aftermath of the strike.

But it was totally the Syrian resistance who used the gas.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

djones520 wrote:
Grey Templar wrote:
Well I wasn't sure about the accuracy of that report, just that I had heard it and if true it would be significant.

Of those 460 aircraft, how many are actually operational?

All of them.

Hey, we got at least one!

Spoiler:

**jhe90**

Co'tor Shas wrote:
Picture of Russians deaing with some of their own chemical weapons in 2015.

Picture of the suspisousy similar contrainers in the aftermath of the strike.

But it was totally the Syrian resistance who used the gas.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

djones520 wrote:
Grey Templar wrote:
Well I wasn't sure about the accuracy of that report, just that I had heard it and if true it would be significant.

Of those 460 aircraft, how many are actually operational?

All of them.

Hey, we got at least one!

Spoiler:

To be honest trey look like they where piled like scrap metal or dumped outside and signs of rust?
There not stored pr look like you would store precision military parts to hold basicaly deadly chemicals and use them with rust piled outside a hanger.

They could be old containers. Active ones would not have rust on them surely. If you wanted to hold things as deadly as sarin...

**Iron_Captain**

jhe90 wrote:
Co'tor Shas wrote:
Picture of Russians deaing with some of their own chemical weapons in 2015.

Picture of the suspisousy similar contrainers in the aftermath of the strike.

But it was totally the Syrian resistance who used the gas.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

djones520 wrote:
Grey Templar wrote:
Well I wasn't sure about the accuracy of that report, just that I had heard it and if true it would be significant.

Of those 460 aircraft, how many are actually operational?

All of them.

Hey, we got at least one!

Spoiler:

To be honest trey look like they where piled like scrap metal or dumped outside and signs of rust?
There not stored pr look like you would store precision military parts to hold basicaly deadly chemicals and use them with rust piled outside a hanger.

They could be old containers. Active ones would not have rust on them surely. If you wanted to hold things as deadly as sarin...

These are not chemical weapon containers. Chemical weapons are usually stored in much more secure containers than those flimsy things. They are generic storage containers that can be found in huge numbers on any Russian airbase. They can contain ammunition, but also simple cargo, supplies or equipment. In this case, they may have contained RBK-500 cluster bomb pellets as other parts of RBK cluster bombs can be seen in the picture mixed in with the containers. That said, the Russian (and Soviet before them) air force stuffs about anything they can dream of in those containers, so it is quite possible that some of them held chemical ammunition. Either way, generic storage containers can not be used as evidence for anything.

**Desubot**

Neet.

those would make some cool scifi containers if shrunk to scale.

**aldo**

I already posted this on the ISIS thread, but may as well put it here since it deals with the US bombing, Syria and chemical weapons.

Syria released this yesterday:

Army Command: Hundreds, including many civilians, killed in int’l coalition’s airstrike on ISIS toxic materials depot

Damascus, SANA- The General Command of the Army and Armed Forces said on Thursday that hundreds were killed, including a large number of civilians, due to an air strike carried out by aircrafts of the so-called US-led international coalition against a huge depot for ISIS terrorist organization that includes toxic materials in the village of Hatla in the eastern countryside of Deir Ezzor province.

In a statement on Thursday, the General Command said aircrafts of the international coalition carried out between 17:30 and 17:50 pm on Wednesday an air strike against a position of ISIS terrorists that includes a large number of foreign mercenaries in the village of Hatla to the east of Deir Ezzor, causing a white cloud that soon turned into yellow as a result of the explosion of a huge depot that includes a large amount of toxic materials.

The General Command said that a fire erupted as a result of the strike that lasted until 22:30 pm, while hundreds of people were killed, including a large number of civilians, due to suffocation caused by the inhalation of toxic materials.

The Army’s Command noted that this incident confirms the truth of the coordination between the terrorist organizations and the countries supporting them to find pretexts and to accuse the Syrian Arab Army of using chemical weapons, adding that this incident also confirms that the terrorist organizations, mainly ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra, possess chemical weapons and have the ability to obtain, transfer, store and use those weapons with the help of well-known countries in the region.

“This is what Syria has warned of every time terrorist groups used chemical weapons against the civilians and Syrian Arab Armed Forces,” the statement added.

The command reiterated its assertion that it neither possess any types of chemical weapons, nor has it used any, warning of the dangers of continued use of chemical weapons by the terrorist groups against civilians, particularly after the messages these groups have recently received which provide cover to their actions and allow them to escape punishment.

Shaza/H. Said

http://sana.sy/en/?p=104229

**Frazzled**

Well that answers the question of where Bagdad Bob ran off to.

**jhe90**

Frazzled wrote:
Well that answers the question of where Bagdad Bob ran off to.

He found a new employer!
Maybe he got bored of working for Kim.

**Grot 6**

aldo wrote:
I already posted this on the ISIS thread, but may as well put it here since it deals with the US bombing, Syria and chemical weapons.

Syria released this yesterday:

Army Command: Hundreds, including many civilians, killed in int’l coalition’s airstrike on ISIS toxic materials depot

Damascus, SANA- The General Command of the Army and Armed Forces said on Thursday that hundreds were killed, including a large number of civilians, due to an air strike carried out by aircrafts of the so-called US-led international coalition against a huge depot for ISIS terrorist organization that includes toxic materials in the village of Hatla in the eastern countryside of Deir Ezzor province.

In a statement on Thursday, the General Command said aircrafts of the international coalition carried out between 17:30 and 17:50 pm on Wednesday an air strike against a position of ISIS terrorists that includes a large number of foreign mercenaries in the village of Hatla to the east of Deir Ezzor, causing a white cloud that soon turned into yellow as a result of the explosion of a huge depot that includes a large amount of toxic materials.

The General Command said that a fire erupted as a result of the strike that lasted until 22:30 pm, while hundreds of people were killed, including a large number of civilians, due to suffocation caused by the inhalation of toxic materials.

The Army’s Command noted that this incident confirms the truth of the coordination between the terrorist organizations and the countries supporting them to find pretexts and to accuse the Syrian Arab Army of using chemical weapons, adding that this incident also confirms that the terrorist organizations, mainly ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra, possess chemical weapons and have the ability to obtain, transfer, store and use those weapons with the help of well-known countries in the region.

“This is what Syria has warned of every time terrorist groups used chemical weapons against the civilians and Syrian Arab Armed Forces,” the statement added.

The command reiterated its assertion that it neither possess any types of chemical weapons, nor has it used any, warning of the dangers of continued use of chemical weapons by the terrorist groups against civilians, particularly after the messages these groups have recently received which provide cover to their actions and allow them to escape punishment.

Shaza/H. Said

http://sana.sy/en/?p=104229

Why stop at hundreds. It was really 1,000,000 babies, chickens, and puppies.

Breaking down that article, it is a little bit over the top even on a bad day. Information warfare at it's best. Bagdad Bob is probably the writer.

**aldo**

I know its Russia, and Russia lies and Putin is evoil, but they just released this.

http://tass.com/world/941862

Defense Ministry: No complaints about chemical incidents in Syria's Idlib
World
April 18, 14:35 UTC+3
Spokesman for Russia’s Defense Ministry says neither citizens of Khan Shaykhun nor experts of the White Helmets group have complained about poisoning

© EPA/STR

MOSCOW, April 18. /TASS/. Neither citizens of Khan Shaykhun, in Syria’s Idlib Governorate, nor experts of the White Helmets group have complained about poisoning over the past two weeks since reports about the alleged chemical attacks, official spokesman for Russia’s Defense Ministry said on Tuesday.

"The city lives its own life. There haven’t been any requests for assistance by special medications, antidotes and deactivation for citizens and also pseudo-rescuers," Igor Konashenkov said. "The only ‘evidence’ of using chemical weapons is these two videos of the White Helmets," the general said.

Konashenkov noted that neither participant of the rescue operation nor the alleged victim appeared on the American or European TV channels later. So far, no contamination zone was defined from where local citizens should have been evacuated, he said.

"At the same time, every day the number of unbiased experts grows, especially in Western countries, who ask these evident questions. These specialists, who have the knowledge and experience, cannot explain how these representatives of the White Helmets could work in the contamination zone for so long remaining alive without any gas masks and special uniform," Konashenkov noted.

"These doubts of professionals reduce to zero numerous accusations of Western politicians and diplomats, who immediately found the one to blame without simply checking the data of social networks and carrying out an impartial investigation," he said.

It is clear that those behind these accusations are not planning to conduct a thorough investigation into the incident, and this reminds of the situation in Iraq and Libya, Konashenkov said.

The incident in Syria’s Khan Shaykhun, where chemical weapons were allegedly used, occurred on April 4. Russia’s Defense Ministry said on that day the Syrian aircraft hit the workshops where terrorists were producing munitions with chemical agents. Washington accused Damascus of using chemical weapons. Following an order of US President Donald Trump, the US military fired 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles from its warships in the Mediterranean on an air base in the Syrian Homs Governorate in early hours of April 7. The missile strike targeted what Washington claims was a starting location for the chemical attack.

[joke]Wake up sheeple![/joke]

Again, Russia, so take with your prescribed amount of salt 'cause Putin and Assad are evil liars etc...

Now, what could possibly be Trumps reaction if he decides that he has been fooled by the Syrian rebels? Not if it is discovered, because truth doesn't matter anymore, but if he decides to believe that.

**Iron_Captain**

aldo wrote:
I know its Russia, and Russia lies and Putin is evoil, but they just released this.

http://tass.com/world/941862

Defense Ministry: No complaints about chemical incidents in Syria's Idlib
World
April 18, 14:35 UTC+3
Spokesman for Russia’s Defense Ministry says neither citizens of Khan Shaykhun nor experts of the White Helmets group have complained about poisoning

© EPA/STR

MOSCOW, April 18. /TASS/. Neither citizens of Khan Shaykhun, in Syria’s Idlib Governorate, nor experts of the White Helmets group have complained about poisoning over the past two weeks since reports about the alleged chemical attacks, official spokesman for Russia’s Defense Ministry said on Tuesday.

"The city lives its own life. There haven’t been any requests for assistance by special medications, antidotes and deactivation for citizens and also pseudo-rescuers," Igor Konashenkov said. "The only ‘evidence’ of using chemical weapons is these two videos of the White Helmets," the general said.

Konashenkov noted that neither participant of the rescue operation nor the alleged victim appeared on the American or European TV channels later. So far, no contamination zone was defined from where local citizens should have been evacuated, he said.

"At the same time, every day the number of unbiased experts grows, especially in Western countries, who ask these evident questions. These specialists, who have the knowledge and experience, cannot explain how these representatives of the White Helmets could work in the contamination zone for so long remaining alive without any gas masks and special uniform," Konashenkov noted.

"These doubts of professionals reduce to zero numerous accusations of Western politicians and diplomats, who immediately found the one to blame without simply checking the data of social networks and carrying out an impartial investigation," he said.

It is clear that those behind these accusations are not planning to conduct a thorough investigation into the incident, and this reminds of the situation in Iraq and Libya, Konashenkov said.

The incident in Syria’s Khan Shaykhun, where chemical weapons were allegedly used, occurred on April 4. Russia’s Defense Ministry said on that day the Syrian aircraft hit the workshops where terrorists were producing munitions with chemical agents. Washington accused Damascus of using chemical weapons. Following an order of US President Donald Trump, the US military fired 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles from its warships in the Mediterranean on an air base in the Syrian Homs Governorate in early hours of April 7. The missile strike targeted what Washington claims was a starting location for the chemical attack.

[joke]Wake up sheeple![/joke]

Again, Russia, so take with your prescribed amount of salt 'cause Putin and Assad are evil liars etc...

Now, what could possibly be Trumps reaction if he decides that he has been fooled by the Syrian rebels? Not if it is discovered, because truth doesn't matter anymore, but if he decides to believe that.

What Trump would do? Same thing he and the US have been doing for decades. Just shout "Alternative facts!" really loudly and cite say they have "evidence" (but which no one has ever seen) from unkown and unverifiable sources which we just have to trust because the US says so. The US is a bigger liar than Putin, Assad and about full half of all world leaders put together. It was the same thing in Yugoslavia, Iraq and Libya. Syria won't be any different.

**whembly**

More US actions...

US air strikes pound pro-Assad forces in Syria

The U.S. military launched fresh air strikes against pro-Assad forces in Syria, officials told Fox News Thursday.

The American strikes were the first against Assad positions since the Pentagon rained 57 Tomahawk missiles on the Shayrat air base near Homs. But the strikes confirmed Thursday were believed to be the first targeting Syrian personnel. According to the defense official, the coalition strikes targeted pro regime units operating in the vicinity of At-Tnaf. After a show of force to try to stop the pro regime forces was ignored, the strikes were mounted.

"The coalition commander assessed the threat and after shows of force didn't stop the regime forces and those forces refused to move out of the deconfliction zone, the commander on the ground called for the air strike as a matter of force protection," a senior US defense official told Fox News.

But the attack on forces does not reflect an escalation, the official said.

"There is no change in policy," the official said.

What *is* policy?

**Iron_Captain**

I think it is about time Russia puts a stop to US terrorism.

**Frazzled**

Iron_Captain wrote:
I think it is about time Russia puts a stop to US terrorism.

I think it is time Russia remembers the US is run by a wounded politician who may be looking for a wag the dog situation.

**Ouze**

Frazzled wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:
I think it is about time Russia puts a stop to US terrorism.

I think it is time Russia remembers the US is run by a wounded politician who may be looking for a wag the dog situation.

You're right, which means It's functionally impossible for this thread to continue in any useful way with the current US politics discussion ban.

**Vaktathi**

Frazzled wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:
I think it is about time Russia puts a stop to US terrorism.

I think it is time Russia remembers the US is run by a wounded politician who may be looking for a wag the dog situation.

^

Also, what exactly would Russia do? Russia is outmatched dramatically in every conceviable conventional warfare sense, meaning that Russia's only option in a conflict is nuclear escalation which would work out for...nobody.

**Frazzled**

We should also note, the Russians have been continuously bombing US backed rebels. No difference except its getting more hairy and weird there. The worry this will get out of control, increases.

But I have faith that NK will reliably interject itself right now and may get a very very nasty surprise.

**whembly**

Ouze wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:
I think it is about time Russia puts a stop to US terrorism.

I think it is time Russia remembers the US is run by a wounded politician who may be looking for a wag the dog situation.

You're right, which means It's functionally impossible for this thread to continue in any useful way with the current US politics discussion ban.

I dunno about that... it isn't like the US military all the sudden showed up.

At this point, I wish Congress would fricking claw back it's warpower act they've delegated over time to the Executive.

We're literally bombing the gak out of Assad's own troops in a Country they run...

**DarkTraveler777**

Iron_Captain wrote:
I think it is about time Russia puts a stop to US terrorism.

Totally agree. Maybe Russia can tow its smokey aircraft carrier back into the region.

**Iron_Captain**

Vaktathi wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:
I think it is about time Russia puts a stop to US terrorism.

I think it is time Russia remembers the US is run by a wounded politician who may be looking for a wag the dog situation.
^

Also, what exactly would Russia do? Russia is outmatched dramatically in every conceviable conventional warfare sense, meaning that Russia's only option in a conflict is nuclear escalation which would work out for...nobody.

Not in Syria. Russia's military position there is greatly superior to that of the US.

We could shoot down a US aircraft or two. Purely by "accident" of course. Not much the US can do back against that aside from escalating into a full war (which they definitely do not want to do) There is thousands of things you can do before it comes to full-blown war. The US does not want war with Russia, such a war would be unwinnable for the US and is dramatically not in US interests. Neither does Russia want war with the US, for the same reason. Therefore you can provoke the other side quite a lot as long as you take care not to push it too far.

A somewhat more realistic and less extreme way to send a message to the US would be for Russia to destroy the US-supported rebel forces in Syria.
Or we could supply advanced anti-air and anti-ship missiles to Syrian forces...

Of course Russia can also quite clearly send a strong message just by threatening with military force. A bit of saber-rattling will hopefully make even that dense mr. Trump think twice.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

DarkTraveler777 wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:
I think it is about time Russia puts a stop to US terrorism.

Totally agree. Maybe Russia can tow its smokey aircraft carrier back into the region.

Nah, it'd probably sink. Missiles are more reliable.

**DarkTraveler777**

Iron_Captain wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

DarkTraveler777 wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:
I think it is about time Russia puts a stop to US terrorism.

Totally agree. Maybe Russia can tow its smokey aircraft carrier back into the region.

Nah, it'd probably sink. Missiles are more reliable.

So WWIII, then?

**Iron_Captain**

DarkTraveler777 wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

DarkTraveler777 wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:
I think it is about time Russia puts a stop to US terrorism.

Totally agree. Maybe Russia can tow its smokey aircraft carrier back into the region.

Nah, it'd probably sink. Missiles are more reliable.

So WWIII, then?

A few little pinpricks won't cause a world war. Not when both sides are unwilling to commit to total war. Just a few skirmishes and highly raised tensions most likely, a limited war at worst.
But deterrence is probably more important than actual action.

**Vaktathi**

Iron_Captain wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:
I think it is about time Russia puts a stop to US terrorism.

I think it is time Russia remembers the US is run by a wounded politician who may be looking for a wag the dog situation.
^

Also, what exactly would Russia do? Russia is outmatched dramatically in every conceviable conventional warfare sense, meaning that Russia's only option in a conflict is nuclear escalation which would work out for...nobody.

Not in Syria. Russia's military position there is greatly superior to that of the US.

Hrm, even if we accept that such is true within the boundaries of Syria itself, between air and sea assets that can reach the region in hours or days, the forces in Iraq, a NATO ally next door, etc, I would suspect this would not be productive.

We could shoot down a US aircraft or two. Purely by "accident" of course. Not much the US can do back against that aside from escalating into a full war (which they definitely do not want to do) There is thousands of things you can do before it comes to full-blown war. The US does not want war with Russia, such a war would be unwinnable for the US and is dramatically not in US interests. Neither does Russia want war with the US, for the same reason. Therefore you can provoke the other side quite a lot as long as you take care not to push it too far.

the problem is that the US has unstable leadership and there are escalation measures in place that may be defaulted to by all sides in very short order.

A somewhat more realistic and less extreme way to send a message to the US would be for Russia to destroy the US-supported rebel forces in Syria.

Sure, but if this were within Russia's power they would have done so already long ago.

Or we could supply advanced anti-air and anti-ship missiles to Syrian forces...

Russia has, and could do more, but that likely would just result in Syria becoming a black smear on the map after they sink the first US destroyer. The US is perfectly able and willing to squander billions in munitions in response, and I dont think either Russia or Syria could match that.

Of course Russia can also quite clearly send a strong message just by threatening with military force. A bit of saber-rattling will hopefully make even that dense mr. Trump think twice.

Trump typically responds to direct provocation with escalation, thats a big chunk of his current problems.

**BobtheInquisitor**

Without getting too political, are you willing to wager Russia's very existence on President Trump's sense of scale and restraint?

**Frazzled**

And watch every aircraft you have in Syria accidentally explode. Or maybe St. Petersberg. Our Pres is closer to NK on the Daffy the Duck scale than to Putin right now.

**Iron_Captain**

Vaktathi wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:
I think it is about time Russia puts a stop to US terrorism.

I think it is time Russia remembers the US is run by a wounded politician who may be looking for a wag the dog situation.
^

Also, what exactly would Russia do? Russia is outmatched dramatically in every conceviable conventional warfare sense, meaning that Russia's only option in a conflict is nuclear escalation which would work out for...nobody.

Not in Syria. Russia's military position there is greatly superior to that of the US.
Hrm, even if we accept that such is true within the boundaries of Syria itself, between air and sea assets that can reach the region in hours or days, the forces in Iraq, a NATO ally next door, etc, I would suspect this would not be productive.

Said NATO ally isn't on very friendly terms with the US currently and is highly unlikely to be willing to risk itself in order to help the US out. US forces in Iraq aren't really available for re-deployment. And if needed, Russia can move reinforcements to the area much faster than the US can. Syria is not very far from the Russian border and within striking range of pretty much every bomber and missile. That gives Russia a bit of an edge when rattling sabres.

We could shoot down a US aircraft or two. Purely by "accident" of course. Not much the US can do back against that aside from escalating into a full war (which they definitely do not want to do) There is thousands of things you can do before it comes to full-blown war. The US does not want war with Russia, such a war would be unwinnable for the US and is dramatically not in US interests. Neither does Russia want war with the US, for the same reason. Therefore you can provoke the other side quite a lot as long as you take care not to push it too far.

the problem is that the US has unstable leadership and there are escalation measures in place that may be defaulted to by all sides in very short order.