This analysis of the strike last years contains some hints on to-be-expected reliabilities of US cruise missiles and Russian ones, that may give us a clue on what results to expect from the attack yesterday. I did not expect much form it at all, and this article kind of supports me. To quote from thatr last passage in that article: The US (read: Trump) is more intent on creating headlines than making an actual difference.

Good man Abdullah. Paratrooper you know.

Ummm, U.S. AND British and French fired missiles. Of course media makes it all about Trump, very convenient for European leaders. Makes a great distraction hiding their participation. But if I'm not mistaken Emmanuel Jean-Michel Frédéric Macron and Theresa Mary May partook in the attack too. What were their reasons, headlines as well? Then there's the German Syrian response as one headline states "... Their strategy: Delay an intervention and remain vague."

The Middle East is a decades long debacle where major powers have been vying for the strongest position (or not) at the expense of the local population. The Major players involved are China, Russia, Turkey, Israel, Sunni, Shiite, U.S. And yes you too Europe don't ever let it slip your mind, you are just as involved and lent just as much a hand in making the middle East into what it is today.

But lets make it all about Trump. How convenient.

I remember Trump in his campaign for the presidency said he didn't want to do this. Now we're in it again, makes me wonder who is following who?


PARIS - French President Emmanuel Macron on Sunday said he had convinced U.S. President Donald Trump to keep troops in Syria, as he defended joint air strikes he said were legitimate and allowed France and allies to regain credibility.

Its Europe, so what did you expect?

My general criticsm of this operation however stands - no matter who participated and who not: the operation is pointless, and a waste. And the US took the major share and the leadership, didn't it? And the Donald leaned himself out of the window like noone else, didn't he? ;)

Great news, it's all over
 

Nothing to worry about folks.

Trump tweeted "mission accomplished"

Now where have we heard that before.....

One of my concerns being....had Russia not been forewarned and instead been on a state of alert, the aircraft used during the attack could have been in serious harms way.

Having said that, I doubt aircraft would have been sent in, only missiles.

I believe the aircraft that were used didn't go into Syrian airspace but launched cruise missiles from far away.

Let's hope that what came after that first proclamation isn't repeated.

Launching 59 cruise missiles at once kinda tells me we probably knew well in advance about the Russian counter measures. I'm also quite sure we gathered substantial intel on how well they work too. :D

Now because of the lessons learned we're both busy developing faster bigger better missiles and new strategies and tactics to counter the counter measures.

^ This.

According to Wikipedia, Storm Shadow has a standoff range of around 450 km, Tomahawk roughly around 2500 km.

The mere purpose of cruise missiles is that it is the the missile "cruising in" - not the carrier platform.

Perhaps we will be told that the Syrian forces are just a bunch of Dead-enders and that everything will be over by Christmas.

That's right, deliberate obtuseness. The Democrat media machine has decided that no Republican can ever use those two words for any situation.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...-not-done.html

when will the us learn not to warn before just do it and hit hard

Because we don't want to start world war III. Keep in mind it wasn't about harming Russia, Russian soldiers or advisors. It was about, if you believe it, the use by Syria chemical weapons, manufacturing and storage facilities.

Look on the bright side both Russia and the U.S. learned a little about each others weapons systems. win win