Trump's Wag the Dog Moment; Syrian chemical attack was a false flag!

ttystikk said:
It was 59 missiles, that's an official count.

It's much harder to shoot down cruise missiles than you suggest; no air defense system is perfect.

Still, for the airfield to be operational the next day suggests that our 'strike' was more about theater than tactics.
Click to expand...
S400 can target an object travelling at 11,000 miles per hour with a cross section of only a half a metre.

Tomahawks fly at 550mph, they're subsonic.

Must be tough when even the guy with the hand up your ass (Putin) is laughing at what a shit strike it was.
 
Last edited:
SneekyNinja said:
S400 can target an object travelling at 11,000 miles per hour with a cross section of only a half a metre.

Tomahawks fly at 550mph, they're subsonic.

Must be tough when even the guy with the hand up your ass (Putin) is laughing at what a shit strike it was.
Click to expand...
Targeting something is a long way from hitting it. We can target planets in other solar systems. Doesn't mean we can hit them.

You clearly have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.

...AGAIN.

Try to learn something before just shitting all over your keyboard. I mean Damn, Stinkydigit.
 
ttystikk said:
Targeting something is a long way from hitting it. We can target planets in other solar systems. Doesn't mean we can hit them.

You clearly have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.

...AGAIN.

Try to learn something before just shitting all over your keyboard. I mean Damn, Stinkydigit.
Click to expand...
In modern weapons systems; if you can target it, you can hit it.

The key is not being targeted at all.

By definition if you target something with a weapon... you're plotting a course to it...otherwise you're just "looking at it".

Also since you want to be a dick, you have man-boobs.

Enjoy your day.
 
SneekyNinja said:
In modern weapons systems; if you can target it, you can hit it.

The key is not being targeted at all.

By definition if you target something with a weapon... you're plotting a course to it...otherwise you're just "looking at it".

Also since you want to be a dick, you have man-boobs.

Enjoy your day.
Click to expand...
Being able to target something is completely different from having the ability to hit it. That's every bit as true today as it was the first time our ancestors picked up a rock to throw.

The S400 air defense system uses missiles. There is no air defense system with missiles that can travel 11000 mph, not even THAAD or the Patriot system goes anywhere near that fast.

You Google something out of context with absolutely no technical knowledge and then present it as fact. With skills like that you should be on Faux Spews. I hear they have openings for people just like you, Stinkydigit.
 
Last edited:
ttystikk said:
Being able to target something is completely different from having the ability to hit it. That's every bit as true today as it was the first time our ancestors picked up a rock to throw.

The S400 air defense system uses missiles. There is no air defense system with missiles that can travel 11000 mph, not even THAAD or the Patriot system goes anywhere near that fast.

You Google something out of context with absolutely no technical knower and then present it is fact. With skills like that you should be on Faux Spews. I hear they have openings for people just like you, Stinkydigit.
Click to expand...
Yes but the fact that he walked into that one just makes it low-hangin fruit for you though
toooo easy
 
Pair of idiots; the 40n6 missile (and most of the other missiles the S400's carry) has more than enough velocity to shoot down a Tomahawk, it even has the velocity to shoot down a ballistic missile...

Maybe try actually reading the information before vomiting your know all bullshit peppered with weak ass insults?

Hint: They're designed specifically to shoot down cruise missiles ;)
 
ttystikk said:
It was 59 missiles, that's an official count.

It's much harder to shoot down cruise missiles than you suggest; no air defense system is perfect.

Still, for the airfield to be operational the next day suggests that our 'strike' was more about theater than tactics.
Click to expand...
True this.

The carping about not all hitting the target is a bit humorous too. Why else would they send so many missiles? So they could claim success even if there were a in a low hit rate. (which there was)
 
Last edited:
ttystikk said:
This will be thoroughly investigated and the truth will come out.

At the very least, the official line from America doesn't pass the smell test.

The warehouse story doesn't either; sarin gas is unstable and it's stored in two components, one of which is isopropyl alcohol- which of course burns very nicely when bombed.

‘…when you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.’

Sherlock Holmes Quote

-The Blanched Soldier
Click to expand...
I don't have a lot of faith in our government investigating itself right now. But you must know the poison gas attack isn't just of interest by the US. Other countries will investigate too. The truth will out. It might take decades, however.

You sure are full of hyperbole. Referring to the Homes quote, we have not eliminated the possible yet, much less the impossible. There are two competing hypotheses (hypothesuses?) that match the facts:
Hypothesis 1: That Assad gassed people living in a rebel controlled area.
Hypothesis 2: That people in the rebel controlled area were gassed by rebels.

Occam's razor says pick the simplest hypothesis. We know Assam has the gas. He has the aircraft and pilots. Simple to do this act. Rebels, without aircraft and only ground forces. Not so simple.

Everything said in this post and prior posts by you, me and others don't prove anything. The facts may well come out later to say it was a false flag but I don't think so. I look at who is behind this story and smell a rat. Also, your "rebuttal" sucks.
 
Ace Yonder said:
We were winning world war 2 when we dropped the bomb on Japan. You're fucking stupid if you think "He was winning" is proof of anything. But the people at Breitbart agree with you, why don't you guys spend more time over there?
Click to expand...

japan surrendered because they were horrified of the impending soviet invasion. the bombs had little impact other than for us to swing our dicks around.
 
UncleBuck said:
japan surrendered because they were horrified of the impending soviet invasion. the bombs had little impact other than for us to swing our dicks around.
Click to expand...
Nah, the bombs forced the surrender before the Soviets could get involved so that the Soviets couldn't dictate the terms of surrender and annex more land, which was pretty much what they were intended to do.
 
UncleBuck said:
japan surrendered because they were horrified of the impending soviet invasion. the bombs had little impact other than for us to swing our dicks around.
Click to expand...
They didn't have any idea at the time that we only had two bombs.

There was also the that of an American invasion.

The prospect of a Russian invasion was certainly a factor, but not the only one.

Which was the deciding factor? Maybe instead of choosing one of these, perhaps it was the prospect of all of them.
 
Ace Yonder said:
We were winning world war 2 when we dropped the bomb on Japan. You're fucking stupid if you think "He was winning" is proof of anything. But the people at Breitbart agree with you, why don't you guys spend more time over there?
Click to expand...
We used the atomic bombs to avoid the certainty of mass American casualties in an invasion of the Japanese homeland.

A second reason was to intimidate the Russians.
 
ttystikk said:
We used the atomic bombs to avoid the certainty of mass American casualties in an invasion of the Japanese homeland.

A second reason was to intimidate the Russians.
Click to expand...
I can agree with that. Most things are the result of numerous factors, we just are drawn to the simplicity of focusing on a single aspect as the sole catalyst when reality is rarely that simple.
 
SneekyNinja said:
S400 can target an object travelling at 11,000 miles per hour with a cross section of only a half a metre.

Tomahawks fly at 550mph, they're subsonic.

Must be tough when even the guy with the hand up your ass (Putin) is laughing at what a shit strike it was.
Click to expand...
Well, that's at least what the Russians claim they can do. But perhaps they aren't all they are cracked up to be, and the cost to Russia would be incredibly high if they didn't live up to the hype. From an article in popular mechanics titled
Putin Could Have Tried to Shoot Down Trump's Missiles. Why Didn't He?
"There is no greater open question in the defense world than just how effective Russian anti-aircraft weapons really are against American technology. Russia generates money and international leverage by selling systems that it claims can thwart American weapons. But the United States' jamming, cyberwarfare, smart missiles, and advanced decoys are designed to defeat these digitally-linked Russian systems. There would be no greater marketing disappointment than shooting at U.S. cruise missiles and missing, which would demonstrate the deterrent Russia is selling may not work as advertised."
(http://www.popularmechanics.com/mil...putin-didnt-shoot-down-cruise-missiles-trump/)
 
Trump's Wag the Dog Moment; Syrian chemical attack was a false flag!

lol! so much brain damage in this country. and george bush did 9/11 too right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top