>What was the point of this strike not to kill a lot of people, it seems. Which is why muzzies should pitch in and send Trump and especially Mattis a nice check
Colton Nelson
>What was the point of this strike? To prove that Russia literally can't do anything and make their Allies move over to the NATO camp.
Lucas Reed
global dominance of course. why even bother putting a price on that?
if i had enough money to just hundred dollar bills on the ground just to watch people have to bend over in front of me or take a knee to pick it up i would do it every day of my life
Kevin Fisher
Didn't they intercept 70% of the missiles?
If you are talking about the diplolmacy, then you probably should stop getting your news from Jow Forums, since Russia never said they would retaliate if Syria was hit. They said they would retaliate if their soldiers/officers were hit, of which, admittedly, there were many on various bases all over Syria
Zachary Johnson
Yeah, but then what's the point in ruining two buildings?! At least killing people would send a message. Does spending 500 million dollars to demolish three buildings while losing 70% of your rockets before they hit the ground send any message, beside the "WE ARE RETARDED" one
Like what are they doing? That makes no sense! DId they not expect the missiles to get intercepted? Did Russians break their code and warn the Syrians about the places they were going to hit?
What's going on? Can somebody answer all these questions of mine?
Noah Ortiz
We told Russia to move their shit so we wouldn't hit them and they did it, clear sign of weakness on their part. They left Syria all alone in the night. At this point Syria will start moving away from Russia or double down their alliance, the latter will probably happen IMO.
Eli Long
>We told Russia to move their shit so we wouldn't hit them and they did it, clear sign of weakness on their part. They left Syria all alone in the night. At this point Syria will start moving away from Russia or double down their alliance, the latter will probably happen IMO. But that night Mattis claimed they didn't warn Russians, clearly intending to get the message across that russians could not warn syrians....
That was before ofcourse it became apparent the strikes didn't even kill anyone
Jeremiah Robinson
Why hide behind a meme-flag? We did it because we could.
Carson Clark
The US, and other western countries, need to be in perpetual war. This is in order to make the groups and individuals who make and sell the weapons to continue to bathe in money. So, they shot the missiles so that they would have to buy more missiles.
Cameron Adams
>wound three guys
Where did you hear this? Their stated objective was taking out chemical weapons targets, not people.
Brayden Reed
>wound 3 people
people weren't the target you mong
if we wanted to wipe out a bunch of them we could easily.
>see the MOAB death results
Elijah Hernandez
Yeah, but, forgive me, not trying to make the best of a bad bargain, it seriously strikes me (no pun intended) as a sign of weakness
Like you've spent a shittonne of resources that showed to be apparently ineffective, with most of ur rockets being intercepted, and the ones reaching the targets only wounding 3 guys and destroying 3 buildings.
Isaiah Clark
>wounding 3 guys Provide a source for this please.
Washington — Syrian state-run TV says three civilians have been wounded in the U.S.-led missile attack on a military base in Homs.
It says the attack was aborted by derailing the incoming missile but adds nonetheless that three people were wounded.
It says another attack with “a number of missiles” targeting a scientific research center destroyed a building and caused other material damage but no human losses. The network says the building in the research center included an educational center and labs.
>What was the point of this strike? Raytheon was having a sale on new stock.
Gavin Diaz
Because just like the first time, this strike was a false flag in response a false flag. RU is in on it too. We are honey potting the deep state. Poetic justice.
Cameron Jenkins
The point was to spend your tax money on the military. It was very successful.
You got better sources? Syria is not as closed as a country as you think it is, it would be quite hard for them to hide bodies in the age of smartphones, and the risk of total humiliation would probably prevent them from faking the numbers
Cameron Kelly
>Guys, help me get this right So the US and their vassals had launched 105 cruise missiles to wound 3 dudes in the desert? >What was the point of this strike? to demonstrate that we are willing and able to launch 105 missiles just to would 3 dudes in the desert. people keep throwing around 105 like it's a big deal or something. we intentionally detonate more than that every day just to get rid of old stock. we have unimaginable amounts of missiles, all of which are paid for, and if we don't use them they'll just go bad. this was just to let people know that we will attack you if you decide to use chemical weapons ;we weren't even angry. you wouldn't like us when we're angry.
Isaiah Lewis
what's 30% of a lot? because we have a lot of missiles.
Colton Lopez
>We are honey potting the deep state literally a wet dream right now. what do you think could happen after they realize this and are backed into a corner by us and ru?
Ayden Jackson
Of course the faggot wants to kill men who did nothing wrong besides serving their country.
Benjamin Lewis
To appease the neocons who want boots on the ground Trump will be forced to keep making concessions to these bloodthirsty globalist fucks unless Congress gets fixed with the midterms and people who actually care about America start getting in As it is, it's just a waiting game. After Trump is gone they'll return to form pushing the Uniparty agenda.
Nathaniel Foster
>What was the point of this strike? Spend money, that's all the Neocons really want. They just partner with Israel because Israel promises "Endlesss War". Neocons are literally all war profiteers. Trump is hooking Bolton's boys up with a fat ordinance budget
