Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[hack]

It does seem like there's consensus that it was a for-show attack and not a for-impact one. But factors other than the runway have led to that conclusion as well.

[Dr. Strangelove]

GOod photo essay on Cairo, Illinois

https://medium.com/@Chris_arnade/a-town-forgotten-c870c317417b

[edindetroit]

GOod photo essay on Cairo, Illinois

https://medium.com/@Chris_arnade/a-t...n-c870c317417b

[emoji106]

[hack]

Damn -- it really is. I'm really sick of that guy. He does the same thing over and over again. And, of course, I completely disagree with him. Human history is one in which people go to where the jobs are. They don't stay in places and demand the jobs go to them, save for here and now. People like him are hurting those peoples' ability to reach a realistic understanding of their options.

But wow those are some absolutely great photos. He's good at what he does.

[Wild Hoss]

Which suggests, well, blast some deep holes. You can't do that with 59 missiles? Are they paper missiles, or pretend missiles? Do we have any missiles that blast deep holes? Why do we want missiles that don't?

I would think that a Tomahawk would make a pretty decent hole, but destroyers only carry so many of them; decisions have to be made on the priority and value of targets. There are redundancy concerns which complicate that task further...even with 90-some percent accuracy, "must-hit" targets will be assigned a pair of missiles to ensure success. (In fact, one unit did fail during the attack)

The planning staff runs all that calculus, and might well decide that the number remaining is deemed insufficient to disable takeoff operations. So, at $1.8M a pop, you point them at stuff other than concrete.

That said, they could have waited to bring in additional ships, or bring air-launched missiles to bear, but they decided not to.

[hack]

I was under the impression that taking out the runway is a pretty basic thing you do. Does
leave me wondering what the point was. Others are too, though not focused on the intact runway. I don't do war or security though.

[Wild Hoss]

If you have to chose between taking a shot at a jet or the strip of concrete it takes off from, you go for the jet. Especially when targeting MiGs, nearly all of which have rough-field capability; meaning they don't need paved runways.

IDK if their aircraft can run extended ops in rough-field scenarios, but they can certainly flitter off to another airfield with enough flat dirt. Unless they're blown to smithereens.

[iam416]

Wait, where would you find flat dirt in Syria?

[hack]

I forget where I read it, but it was older MiGs that were hit, and since there was notice, other aircraft were moved away from the area or not hit.

[Wild Hoss]

I would guess that whatever aircraft they had in ready status were gonzo, and whatever mobile equipment was hauling ass out into the desert. As to be expected when you call your shot.

[hack]

Which circles back to the same idea -- what was the point of this?

[CGVT]

Wag the dog.

[Ghengis Jon]

The movie Canadian Bacon.

[Wild Hoss]

Which circles back to the same idea -- what was the point of this?

That's a question for DJT...or perhaps its better asked of the fightin' yachtsman.



It definitely wasn't an anti-force goal though...not if you are providing advance warning of a strike made with weapons who's purpose, from the original drawing on paper, is to strike without warning.

If the goal is political, I'm not sure that the proverbial tossing of feces from a tree (unwilling to commit manned aircraft, unwilling to wait for the deployment of more assets, limited targets and forewarning b/c they were afraid to kill Russians) accomplishes much. The optics, as we love to talk about around here, looked great for a day. Then Assad flew some sorties from the base, and they've kinda flipped.

[hack]

There's already the ``distract from failures at home" angle, and the ``Trump owns Raytheon stock" angle.

If anything, the silver lining of what's going on now is that people are really learning to be skeptical of what their leaders tell them. That comes with overcorrections in the wrong direction, and we can't perceive everything by the potential ulterior motives, but being wary is better than being unaware.

One thing's clear -- we do know he doesn't care what happens to Syrian children. People who worry about the liberal media and focus on TV should ask why CNN trotted out the ``today he became president'' line again. I think it was Zakaria. You'd think that if the liberal media were at war with Trump they wouldn't so easily fall for such a trick.