OMG Politics, I'm over it already.

Status
Not open for further replies.
lk040917_color.jpg
 
When I first saw the drone footage of the "aftermath", I was highly suspicious about the real object of the Tomahawk attack. First thing I noticed when I saw it was the countless combat jets sitting out in the open unscathed, the fully intact runway, and the scorched but still standing bunkers.

It was quite obvious that no real damage was done to affect the operational ability of the "target".

Those missiles are no joke. They hit what they're programmed to hit with insane accuracy, and destroy the shit out of what they hit.

59 of them hit nothing of consequence.

Coincidentally, Trump owns stock in Raytheon, Raytheon builds Tomahawk missiles. Guess what stock took a sharp uptick immediately after?

Total fuckery.



Sent from Crab Nebulae via reverse engineered alien technology
 
OGG said:
When I first saw the drone footage of the "aftermath", I was highly suspicious about the real object of the Tomahawk attack. First thing I noticed when I saw it was the countless combat jets sitting out in the open unscathed, the fully intact runway, and the scorched but still standing bunkers.

It was quite obvious that no real damage was done to affect the operational ability of the "target".

Those missiles are no joke. They hit what they're programmed to hit with insane accuracy, and destroy the shit out of what they hit.

59 of them hit nothing of consequence.

Coincidentally, Trump owns stock in Raytheon, Raytheon builds Tomahawk missiles. Guess what stock took a sharp uptick immediately after?

Total fuckery.



Sent from Crab Nebulae via reverse engineered alien technology
Click to expand...

like i said above......59 tomahawks is almost the equivalent of a full B-52's unloading on something.
NOTHING would be left, if this actually happened.
clearly MORE FAKE news from the cheeto of chit.

starts to almost seem like "wag the dog".
 
Last edited:
Mark Wein said:
I've read that Tomahawk missiles are great for certain kinds of targets but as far as a runway goes you should be using manned aircraft with different munitions like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matra_Durandal

It's almost like they chose a weapon that would keep them from doing any real damage on purpose.
Click to expand...

i don't think anyone wants to fly american planes over syria. way too much to go wrong there. syrian fighters, russian fighters, iranian fighters.....way too much to go wrong.

but it still smells like "wag the dog".
 
mongooz said:
i don't think anyone wants to fly american planes over syria. way too much to go wrong there. syrian fighters, russian fighters, iranian fighters.....way too much to go wrong.

but it still smells like "wag the dog".
Click to expand...
I agree. But without actual first hand knowledge of what they are doing it seems like a half-assed gesture to make him look like he's doing something after he gave Obama shit for not doing anything.
 
Mark Wein said:
I agree. But without actual first hand knowledge of what they are doing it seems like a half-assed gesture to make him look like he's doing something after he gave Obama shit for not doing anything.
Click to expand...

exactly. cheeto criticized b.o. back when the first gas attack happened and did nothing. then this time dumpster starts out BLAMING b.o. and then says somthing needs to be done......then he is advised that he just backed himself into a corner and now HAS to do something.
i SERIOUSLY doubt that 59 missles were used. even as the wrong type of munition for the job, that much fire power would have fucked up everything there.

i smell wag the dog.
 
I get the impression that the Tomahawk missiles were air burst to destroy planes in the open rather than hitting buildings. Planes are more important targets since they can operate from other locations. And rebuilding warplanes is more costly in both time and money than rebuilding hangars, which can be as simple as a cinderblock box topped with beams and a corrugated steel roof.
 
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-defends-decision-hit-runway-syrian-airbase/story?id=46677805

"The reason you don't generally hit runways is that they are easy and inexpensive to quickly fix (fill in and top)!" the commander-in-chief tweeted.

According to one U.S. official, initial assessments indicate that up to 20 Syrian aircraft were destroyed after the U.S. hit Syria's al Shayrat airbase with more than 50 Tomahawk cruise missiles Thursday. However, the runway -- as well as storage areas suspected to contain chemical weapons -- remained untouched.


and there it is. no way they destroyed 20 aircraft. it's all wag the dog bullshit. otherwise why hit a base that out in the middle of no fucking where?
cheeto fake military operation.
 
So he admitted in his own tweet that hitting a runway was a flaky idea??? I would want to say I don't get it, but I really do by now. I get it indeed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top