What's new

30 Year-Old Soviet Missile Defense Destroys 70% of Trump’s ‘Nice, New, Smart!’ Missiles

Sure:


I admit - you are a decent Russian and can be reasoned with. However, keep in mind that Assad (and Russians) have withheld lot of information from the public because these strikes eroded the myth of their supposedly impregnable defenses.


What limits?

They soundly defeated Iraq in both wars (1991; 2003) whereas Iran couldn't defeat Iraq in a war that lasted 8 straight years (1980 - 1988).

They played a major role in defeating ISIS across the Middle East in recent years (2014 - 2017) - an operation in which 100% precision munition was employed for the first time in the history of mankind; each ISIS stronghold fell to US-led forces on the ground.

They are using Afghanistan as testing ground for new weapons and battlefield doctrines unfortunately. Taliban has proposed talks to them but US isn't paying heed.

By the way, what we saw in Iraq is a mere trailer of their firepower. A single Ohio-class submarine can erase an entire country from existence with its strategic suit.

WTF is that? Do you even nunderstand what you posted? According to official statement from Pentagon total 105 missiles were launched against 3 chemical targets. No other locations were targeted. So you just busted Pentagon lies?
 
.
look like the stealth cruise missile are real deal ... if SCM(stealth cruise missile) are fired at high number , even most advance Air Defence System will have problem to detect them ....

Turkish newest technology 220+ km SOM-J network enabled stealth Cruise Missile for F35 stealth Fighter Jet


 
.
What was the objective of the missile attacks? Assad is still in power. Spending billions trying to destroy a fake chemical factory?

You think they sent missiles to remove Assad like that?

I suppose this attack has several goals:

West have about 0 success in attacks on military bases, but was quite succesive in destroying scientific lab.

There was 0 success on attacks on the military bases because that wasn't the objective and considering not wanting to escalate by killing Russian forces. Hence no bases were ever attacked except the chemical related facilities. If the U.S. really wanted to destroy the military bases, it would have happened. But hence no escalation.
 
.
This is not the first time TomHawk has failed..TomHawks launched to kill OBL in Afghanistan all landed in Pakistan without needing a missile defense system. Cruise missile do not work in featureless groud like dessert. One of the reason why cruise missles launched on targets in Iraq had to be routed over Iran
 
.
Really doubt these figures. Not a single launch playform was shot down. Very very dubious claims

Long distance standoff weapons prevents them from shooting them down. And the Russians wouldn't want to try it anyways. Do they have the ability to do so? Sure they can. Their fleet was right there.

This is not the first time TomHawk has failed..TomHawks launched to kill OBL in Afghanistan all landed in Pakistan without needing a missile defense system. Cruise missile do not work in featureless groud like dessert. One of the reason why cruise missles launched on targets in Iraq had to be routed over Iran

Say what? Tomahawks did hit OBL own camps. He left knowing it was coming. But not all as you said landed in Pakistan.
 
.
Long distance standoff weapons prevents them from shooting them down. And the Russians wouldn't want to try it anyways. Do they have the ability to do so? Sure they can. Their fleet was right there.



Say what? Tomahawks did hit OBL own camps. He left knowing it was coming. But not all as you said landed in Pakistan.

Yes, you are right..not all missle went errant..some were right on target blowing up OBL camps..

http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/asiapcf/9808/24/pakistan.missile.01/index.html?_s=PM:WORLD

But OBL it seems had strong ground intelligence to have been warned in advance.
 
.
.
This is all BS face saving propaganda by the Russians. The facts are that Russians were silent as dead when the US was bombing the hell out of Syria. And now after being humiliated internationally they are inventing fairy tales like these. Putin's credibility has taken a big hit.
 
.
70% LOL it may be like how assad or any dictator get their votes.. they are all elected with ~90% some open office guy just wrote some numbers in calc (excel) and hoped not to be killed because of wrong numbers :)
 
.
.
If you believe on that shit then assume Babur and Ra'ad also can be intercepted by Indians....Don't believe in every sh@t news report.....

Sadam also claims to shot down 200 Tomahawk and we all now how much true was that news.

well , subsonic cruise missile are easy to intercept , you just need to detect it ...
 
. .
Lmao the grand coalition of clowns failing again. :rofl: Those nice, new and smart missiles need to be replaced asap.
Syrians (and Russians) are lying as usual. They haven't produced evidence of their claims.
 
.
Reckless strike on Syria a shameless act

Source: Global Times Published: 2018/4/15

After US, British and French forces launched over 100 missiles at Syria, Washington quickly stated that it was satisfied with the effectiveness of the strike. US President Donald Trump tweeted "Mission Accomplished!" Will there be more military actions on Syria? The US said that will depend on whether Bashar al-Assad's regime will use more chemical weapons in the future.

According to these signals from Washington, most observers believe that this round of strikes against Syria by the US and its allies have come to an end. They have not actually weakened Syrian government forces or hurt Russia's military presence in Syria, but they conveyed a warning that Trump dares to strike.

As for what Trump wants in Syria, many people are confused. Does he really want to stop the Syrian government forces from using chemical weapons? In that case, it's simple, because there is no need at all for the nation's government forces, which already control the situation in Syria's battlefield, to use chemical weapons.

Using chemical weapons would only attract condemnation and attacks from the outside world. Hence, Assad's government has sufficient reason as it claims to keep away from chemical weapons.

Was Trump trying to turn the tables on the Syrian battlefield, where government forces are scoring victories while opposition forces are shrinking? Then 100 missiles are far from enough.

Was Washington attempting to humiliate Russia? Undoubtedly it embarrassed Moscow, but the strike avoided the region where Russian troops are stationed and the US issued a signal to stop the strike immediately afterward. Apparently, Washington restrained itself so as not to push the Kremlin into a corner and escalate the conflict.

Perhaps even Trump and his team have no clue what they want to do in Syria. They may want to showcase the might of the US and the West, send a warning to their potential opponents and boost the unity of the West. Washington may feel that it is no big deal to beat Syria up.

But the US severely underestimated the negative consequences of its reckless military action. It will inevitably stimulate hatred and make many countries and forces believe that the ultimate way to resolve conflicts and disputes can only be the use of force.

It can be foreseen that the military strike on Syria will have a negative impact on the upcoming talks between the two Koreas and the Trump-Kim summit.

One of the major characteristics of the Trump administration's diplomacy is willfulness and recklessness, as if the all-mighty US has the right to do everything.

However, the stronger a country is, the greater the responsibility it has to maintain world peace and order. The military actions of the US and its allies have breached the framework of the United Nations and violated the foundation of modern international relations. If the will of Washington and the West represents the will of all mankind and they can punish whoever they want, why do we need the UN, or international law?

Without UN authorization, the US, UK and France behaved like rogues. No matter how touching the excuses they find for themselves, they cannot change the fact that they were lynching Syria without due evidence.

It is worrying that the US may disturb Syria with yet more missiles from time to time, throwing yet more salt on an open wound of a country.
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom