U.S. Launches Millitary Strike Against Syria (merged)

[OuterBanksVol]

Can you link a report that says we have?

Foxnews.com report this morning:

Three days after a chemical weapons attack killed dozens of civilians in Syria, the US reacted by launching its first direct military strikes against the Syrian regime.

The US launched 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles from its warships in the eastern Mediterranean early Friday, taking aim at the Syrian airbase it believes houses the aircraft that carried out the attack.

But it’s not just Syria that uses the Shayrat airfield — Russia, its key ally, has forces based there too.

What we know about the base

Russia has had forces deployed at Shayrat since late 2015 as part of its current operation in Syria, and has used Shayrat to launch attacks against ISIS in the battle for the city of Palmyra.

Russia uses it as a forward operating base for attack helicopters and has invested a lot of money in updating and upgrading the base, though it has now been severely damaged by the US military.

Despite being warned of the attack in advance, it appears Russia did not deploy surface-to-air missiles, which are capable of taking out US Tomahawk missiles.

 

[Orangedogsrule]

There was no request for approval by trump to congress was there?

Why should there have been? Several presidents have authorized similar actions going back to Reagan. Virtually every congressman interviewed this morning agrees with the concept of swift action. All agreed it was legal.

 

[orangeluvr]

Russian frigate Admiral Grigorich leaving Black Sea on its way to Tartus, Syria. Ostensibly to shore up Syrian air defense against further attacks. Russia also abdicates Syrian airspace accord with US to prevent arial collisions.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...e/news-story/3a8c5bae901418be49d3ceed70a77e3b

Really hope putin thinks Syria isn't worth a potential WWIII.

 

[05_never_again]

Why should there have been? Several presidents have authorized similar actions going back to Reagan. Virtually every congressman interviewed this morning agrees with the concept of swift action. All agreed it was legal.

Yeah. Not the best line of attack from people wanting to be critical of the strike.

I'm as much of a Constitutionalist as anyone but a President has the authority to do this, a limited, narrow strike.

 

[hog88]

Again, I stated that Russia exaggerated the number of misses. But the video proof undeniably shows that a fair number of targets were untouched. (queue entry left by conspiracy theorists who will argue the Russian and Syrian footage now available is "fake")

They weren't targets if they were untouched.

 

[Orange_Vol1321]

I'm claiming you are a fool for thinking we had over a 50% failure rate on those missiles. Because it's happened so often before, you know.

But I bet it's Trump's fault regardless.

Agreed. Tomahawk missles do not miss.

 

[Grand Vol]

Agreed. Tomahawk missles do not miss.

There's no such thing as a perfect weapon. One or two maybe having problems, but over half?

Methinks said poster is still a moron.

 

[OuterBanksVol]

They weren't targets if they were untouched.

Curious. So, we intentionally didn't try to hit all of their planes? Why would we do that?

Dude... just watch the video. You'll see a number of their jets untouched and bunkers intact. There is no reason we would willingly not try to destroy them.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/201...ideo/playlists/military-strike-against-syria/

 

[Orange_Vol1321]

Again, I stated that Russia exaggerated the number of misses. But the video proof undeniably shows that a fair number of targets were untouched. (queue entry left by conspiracy theorists who will argue the Russian and Syrian footage now available is "fake")

Who says all 59 tomahawks was going at planes and who says all 59 was going to this single airfield?

Thinking you need to know all the targets and then believing that even 1% missed is laughable.

 

[orangeluvr]

Why should there have been? Several presidents have authorized similar actions going back to Reagan. Virtually every congressman interviewed this morning agrees with the concept of swift action. All agreed it was legal.

Congress will want to approve any further action, separation of powers . This has been a battle that's been brewing through out the bush and obama admins.

 

[Orange_Vol1321]

They weren't targets if they were untouched.

Ding ding ding.

 

[DancingOutlaw]

The real tragedy is that Brian Williams had to cut off Rachel Maddow to mansplain what was going on.

 

[OuterBanksVol]

There's no such thing as a perfect weapon. One or two maybe having problems, but over half?

Methinks said poster is still a moron.

LOL. OK, champ. You might want to go buy yourself a new pair of designer glasses to coordinate with your fashionable scarf collection.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/201...ideo/playlists/military-strike-against-syria/

 

[OuterBanksVol]

Who says all 59 tomahawks was going at planes and who says all 59 was going to this single airfield?

Thinking you need to know all the targets and then believing that even 1% missed is laughable.

Just watch the video.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/201...ideo/playlists/military-strike-against-syria/

 

[UT_Dutchman]

So if your jerk neighbor tells you in advance that he's gonna run over your mail box with his car, and then he gets in his car and runs over your mail box, you're OK with that because he gave you advanced warning? :thud:

That is one pathetic analogy.

 

[Mick]

Why should there have been? Several presidents have authorized similar actions going back to Reagan. Virtually every congressman interviewed this morning agrees with the concept of swift action. All agreed it was legal.

I think you are off base on my perspective. I have no problems with the response.

 

[hog88]

Curious. So, we intentionally didn't try to hit all of their planes? Why would we do that?

Dude... just watch the video. You'll see a number of their jets untouched and bunkers intact. There is no reason we would willingly not try to destroy them.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/201...ideo/playlists/military-strike-against-syria/

As I said in another thread, this was a message not a kill shot.

Tomahawks seldom miss.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

Just watch the video.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/201...ideo/playlists/military-strike-against-syria/

So do you think that Syria and/or Russia would release any images of any real destruction or do you think, and I'm just spitballing here, that they might want to portray the US as inept?

 

[Orangedogsrule]

Really hope putin thinks Syria isn't worth a potential WWIII.

Putin's claim is it was an ISIL/ISIS/Syrian Rebel setup perfectly timed and made to appear as if Assad's regime gassed Syrians.
Russia has had to deal with Islam and Islamic fundamentalists far more directly than the US ever has. Now Russia (Putin) has chosen to back Assad. Why?

Unassailable proof of a rebel plot to use sarin and blame the current Assad regime, as is what Putin alleges, would have to be exposed for Putin to come out of this without losing face in the international community. He now has to produce or Russia appears complicit or just damn stupid.

 

[Orangedogsrule]

I think you are off base on my perspective. I have no problems with the response.

OK

 

[BearCat204]

Curious. So, we intentionally didn't try to hit all of their planes? Why would we do that?

Dude... just watch the video. You'll see a number of their jets untouched and bunkers intact. There is no reason we would willingly not try to destroy them.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/201...ideo/playlists/military-strike-against-syria/

You're assuming, ignorantly so, that the purpose of this strike was to disable this airbase.

 

[hog88]

So do you think that CNN would release any images of any real destruction or do you think, and I'm just spitballing here, that they might want to portray the US as inept?

fify

 

[Berry4Heisman14]

I read on the national post Russia isn't too happy with us. That can't be good

 

[Grand Vol]

So do you think that Syria and/or Russia would release any images of any real destruction or do you think, and I'm just spitballing here, that they might want to portray the US as inept?

It's Trump's fault.

 

[Obsessed]

nice excuse to raise oil/gas prices

Diesel dropped a dime last night where I'm at