First satelite imagery of attack

[Onyx]

Why the fuck should we believe Russian satellite data.

Editing that type of footage is almost impossible, and the pentagon has suspiciously released no footage of its own despite having imagery before the attack.

 

[irosie91]

I hope they KEEP TRYING

 

[tyroneweaver]

So it appears drumpf missed the aircraft but killed children in the strike?

Let's wait for this to be confirmed but holly shit talk about an incompetent president.

Mean while your ilk evicted 1 million fetuses from their homes.
Preach me a sermon pablo.

 

[jillian]

This is Russian footage of the attack, but it shows no aircraft destroyed and none of the hardened aircraft shelters hit. They also claim it proves that only 23 of the missiles hit near the base. If that is the case, then either the attack had terrible execution, or it was intentionally designed not to destroy a single target.

Why is the pentagon taking such a long time to publicly release its own satelite imagery? It was a publicity stunt of course. It cost 100 million dollars and almost 2% of the US tomahawk missile arsenal, and did literally nothing. They are not showing proof of damage, because there was none

I'm pretty sure that the Donald and his boyfriend Vlad contrived this whole thing so they could pretend they aren't bff's which might make Donald more useful to vlad in the long run. I mean, what's a few Syrian children's lives, right?

 

[jillian]

So it appears drumpf missed the aircraft but killed children in the strike?

Let's wait for this to be confirmed but holly shit talk about an incompetent president.

Mean while your ilk evicted 1 million fetuses from their homes.
Preach me a sermon pablo.

quiet, idiot

 

[leftwinger]

Cruise missiles have a "shelf-life". Either use em' up, refurbish for later or buy more.

That's your argument? That the missiles were going to expire in 20 years anyways, so it was okay to pound sand with them and cause an international incident? This was a 100 million dollar waste of time and resources. 2% of the US tomahawk missile arsenal used on one airbase, and not a single aircraft was destroyed!

The picture appears to show they hit what they wanted to hit (with great precision). They are in charge not me.

 

[Onyx]

I'm pretty sure that the Donald and his boyfriend Vlad contrived this whole thing so they could pretend they aren't bff's which might make Donald more useful to vlad in the long run. I mean, what's a few Syrian children's lives, right?

I believe the dead children piece is just propaganda. The video evidence is pretty conclusive though. All these missiles did was pound sand. They didn't hit the runway or a single hardened aircraft shelter. It's obvious to me that there was never any intention.

 

[Onyx]

The picture appears to show they hit what they wanted to hit (with great precision). They are in charge not me.

They hit nothing. The most expensive items in an airbase are the aircraft, so why do you think there is not a single crater on the airfield or any of the 15 hardened aircraft shelters. Why do you think there is conclusive video evidence of an entire air squadron intact?

 

[Siete]

Bannon's at the Pentagon right now digging through the archives looking for some past war footage that shows heavy missile damage.

Hannity will show it tonight .. stay tuned.

 

[Onyx]

The longer the pentagon takes to release drone footage of their own, the more obvious it becomes that no aircraft were destroyed and this missile strike was a catastrophic failure. That is if the video evidence didn't already convince you.

 

[BlindBoo]

Why the fuck should we believe Russian satellite data.

Editing that type of footage is almost impossible, and the pentagon has suspiciously released no footage of its own despite having imagery before the attack.

You missed the penny dropping.....

Just like when Iraq invade Kuwait and Russian satellites clearly showed no Iraqi tanks on the border with Saudi Arabia. We all knew that the US satellites pictures showed....um...er where are those damn secret US satellite pictures?????????Fuck!

Never mind.

 

[Onyx]

Just like when Iraq invade Kuwait and Russian satellites clearly showed no Iraqi tanks on the border with Saudi Arabia.

I don't know what you are talking about, but I know this video conclusively proves that not a single aircraft was destroyed. No missiles hit the airfield or hardened aircraft shelters. Only half of them made it through to hit the perimeter.

This video is of Shayrat airbase. They couldn't of edited this kind of footage without it being noticeable. It is conclusive video evidence that this 100 million dollar missile strike did nothing besides pound sand.

 

[KeiserC]

This is Russian footage of the attack, but it shows no aircraft destroyed and none of the hardened aircraft shelters hit. They also claim it proves that only 23 of the missiles hit near the base. If that is the case, then either the attack had terrible execution, or it was intentionally designed not to destroy a single target.

Why is the pentagon taking such a long time to publicly release its own satelite imagery? It was a publicity stunt of course. It cost 100 million dollars and almost 2% of the US tomahawk missile arsenal, and did literally nothing. They are not showing proof of damage, because there was none

Duplicitous, lying scum.... you're a shill propagandist for the opposition... Not credible or even plausible video so in the end inconsequential ....

 

[Onyx]

Duplicitous, lying scum.... you're a shill propagandist for the opposition... Not credible or even plausible video so in the end inconsequential ....

You have been locked in your echo chamber so long that you will deny video evidence... tsk tsk.

Other satellite imagery tells the same story. Old Yeller shared a photo with no damage to the airfield or aircraft shelters. 100 million dollars was wasted to do 2 million dollars in damage.

 

[SYTFE]

This is Russian footage of the attack, but it shows no aircraft destroyed and none of the hardened aircraft shelters hit. They also claim it proves that only 23 of the missiles hit near the base. If that is the case, then either the attack had terrible execution, or it was intentionally designed not to destroy a single target.

Why is the pentagon taking such a long time to publicly release its own satelite imagery? It was a publicity stunt of course. It cost 100 million dollars and almost 2% of the US tomahawk missile arsenal, and did literally nothing. They are not showing proof of damage, because there was none

Duplicitous, lying scum.... you're a shill propagandist for the opposition... Not credible or even plausible video so in the end inconsequential ....

Did you even watch the video????

Drumpf may has well have just dropped 50 tons of Big Mac combos from McDonalds on the base. Would've done the same thing.

 

[KeiserC]

This is Russian footage of the attack, but it shows no aircraft destroyed and none of the hardened aircraft shelters hit. They also claim it proves that only 23 of the missiles hit near the base. If that is the case, then either the attack had terrible execution, or it was intentionally designed not to destroy a single target.

Why is the pentagon taking such a long time to publicly release its own satelite imagery? It was a publicity stunt of course. It cost 100 million dollars and almost 2% of the US tomahawk missile arsenal, and did literally nothing. They are not showing proof of damage, because there was none

Duplicitous, lying scum.... you're a shill propagandist for the opposition... Not credible or even plausible video so in the end inconsequential ....

Did you even watch the video????

Drumpf may has well have just dropped 50 tons of Big Mac combos from McDonalds on the base. Would've done the same thing.

Yup...

Syria airstrike: Russia retaliates after US airstrikes | Daily Mail Online

try the above... to balance out the propaganda in the OP's

 

[Onyx]

try the above... to balance out the propaganda in the OP's

The video isn't propaganda. It is supporting evidence. Try again.

 

[sakinago]

This is Russian footage of the attack, but it shows no aircraft destroyed and none of the hardened aircraft shelters hit. They also claim it proves that only 23 of the missiles hit near the base. If that is the case, then either the attack had terrible execution, or it was intentionally designed not to destroy a single target.

Why is the pentagon taking such a long time to publicly release its own satelite imagery? It was a publicity stunt of course. It cost 100 million dollars and almost 2% of the US tomahawk missile arsenal, and did literally nothing. They are not showing proof of damage, because there was none

How do we know this indeed is the airbase? Remember Russia is very good at sowing misinformation. How do we know this isn't footage from Russia's own backyard, or even previous UAV footage of the same airstrip? This is russia, same guys who hacked into French news networks and pretended to be isis. This is what Russia does.

 

[BlindBoo]

Just like when Iraq invade Kuwait and Russian satellites clearly showed no Iraqi tanks on the border with Saudi Arabia.

I don't know what you are talking about, but I know this video conclusively proves that not a single aircraft was destroyed. No missiles hit the airfield or hardened aircraft shelters. Only half of them made it through to hit the perimeter.

This video is of Shayrat airbase. They couldn't of edited this kind of footage without it being noticeable. It is conclusive video evidence that this 100 million dollar missile strike did nothing besides pound sand.

As Scott Peterson reported for The Christian Science Monitor in 2002, a key part of the first Bush administration’s case “was that an Iraqi juggernaut was also threatening to roll into Saudi Arabia. Citing top-secret satellite images, Pentagon officials estimated in mid-September [of 1990] that up to 250,000 Iraqi troops and 1,500 tanks stood on the border, threatening the key US oil supplier.”

A quarter of a million troops with heavy armor amassed on the Saudi border certainly seemed like a clear sign of hostile intent. In announcing that he had deployed troops to the Gulf in August 1990, George HW Bush said, “I took this action to assist the Saudi Arabian Government in the defense of its homeland.” He asked the American people for their “support in a decision I’ve made to stand up for what’s right and condemn what’s wrong, all in the cause of peace.”

But one reporter — Jean Heller of the St. Petersburg Times — wasn’t satisfied taking the administration’s claims at face value. She obtained two commercial satellite images of the area taken at the exact same time that American intelligence supposedly had found Saddam’s huge and menacing army and found nothing there but empty desert.

The First Iraq War Was Also Sold to the Public Based on a Pack of Lies | BillMoyers.com

The commercial images came from Russia. I must be getting old. I remember this shit.

 

[sakinago]

Lots of Russians and Jihadists on the Forum today Propagandizing for Assad.

Just watch the video. That is not edited. It shows that not a single aircraft was destroyed, or even targeted.

I was suspicious when the pentagon didn't release any video evidence. Now I know why.

And you're not suspicious of election hackers Russia? I'm not saying this video is complete BS, just that Russia pulls this crap ALL the time. They are not to be trusted.