Over terrain they fly low. Syrian SAM could shot down them only over terrain. If 71 story was correct there should be dozens of intact wrecks around. But we have ZERO.
That is your baseless assumption in which you have zero evidence. Can you give us an exact number or very close estimate with verifiable sources that have a record of all cruise missile shot down? No one knows for sure, so how can you make an erroneous claim without at the least, any impartial evidence to compare to? In other words we know there has been some fairly intact cruise missiles but how many have desintegrated into small debris?
No, coalition did not change story. Its Assadists who changes story.
The amount of declared targets just keeps shrinking.
First they say they shot down 13 then 71, them 66. They also claimed that several missiles hit Mezzeh and Homs airbases later they withdrew this story.
No one claimed anything of the sort. You should try paying attention to the context of what was said,
13 cruise missiles were claimed to have been shot down in Kisweh.
66 cruise missiles were claimed destroyed, the rest crashed, in total 71 cruise missiles never made it to their targets.
When penetration warhead explodes under a concrete building there is virtually no collateral damage around.
Try watching what you actually post, the first missile was said to not have a warhead (warning shot) The second one completely destroyed the building in the video, the comentor even said the home was “shattered inside pieces”. While debris littered the entire road. Now try hitting that building with 76 Tomahawks.
You obviously don’t even realize how you are unwittingly debunking your own claim that the coalition actually used as many cruises missiles as they claimed.
You just wrote that SAMs detonated warheads. You don't even understand what u are posting.
Yes and a shockwave can travel up to 10,200m/s. Far too fast for a human to tell the difference between a single explosion and 2 explosions.
It did hit, but did not explode. If missile just crashed they could show intact missile. But all they showed is 1 warhead which did not explode.
But but the honest coalition which never lied a day in its life claimed all cruise missiles hit their targets. How can a completely intact warhead achieve a successful hit when it clearly crashed/was shot down/never exploded?
Not to mention satellite images show that many cruise missiles missed their targets. The declared targets also don’t even match the number of cruise missile fired based on satellite imagery.
No. Shrapnel tears through the metal and leaves small holes. But what we see there is bend metal caused by explosion or by h
it.
This is shrapnel holes:
This is just physical damage of missile which penetrated a concrete building:
Give it a rest. You have no proof of anything. Shrapnel comes in all shapes and sizes, you just posted a random photo that didn’t prove anything.
MH17 shrapnel:
Look, “bent metal” must be fake
Cruise missile shrapnel:
Some of what you posted were targets drones such as E-95s which do not contain warheads. Only clown can take the clown coalition claims seriously when Satellite images debunked their entire claims, same with wreckage which included intact warheads and shrapnel riddled cruise missile parts.
