It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russian cruise missiles intended for targets in Syria hit Iran instead

page: 8
21
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 12:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012

Missile failure is not the point so long as 19 insurgent targets were destroyed


Got a link for that?





posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 12:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012

Missile failure is not the point so long as 19 insurgent targets were destroyed


Got a link for that?



Check out the BBC link on my other post


ETA: Oops Forgot the link Here

edit on 9-10-2015 by InnerPeace2012 because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-10-2015 by InnerPeace2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 12:29 AM
link   
a reply to: InnerPeace2012

Thanks, but those are air strikes, right?

Just saying....



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 12:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012

Missile failure is not the point so long as 19 insurgent targets were destroyed


Got a link for that?



Check out the BBC link on my other post


ETA: Oops Forgot the link Here


The map doesnt really tell you much unles you know exactly what tactis are being used.

If you know that Russia is supporting Assad it makes a lot of sense why Russia started where they did. Assads forces need to get rid of all the resistance so that they can move out without being intereupted by rebel attacks.



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 12:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: InnerPeace2012

Thanks, but those are air strikes, right?

Just saying....



Yeah the picture is of airstrike targets.

But Russia claims for the missile launches from the 4 ships hit all there 11 targets, which I think should be the focus..

Source


“Four missile ships launched 26 cruise missiles at 11 targets. According to objective control data, all the targets were destroyed. No civilian objects sustained damage,” Shoigu said.

edit on 9-10-2015 by InnerPeace2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 12:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012

Missile failure is not the point so long as 19 insurgent targets were destroyed


Got a link for that?



Check out the BBC link on my other post


ETA: Oops Forgot the link Here


The map doesnt really tell you much unles you know exactly what tactis are being used.

If you know that Russia is supporting Assad it makes a lot of sense why Russia started where they did. Assads forces need to get rid of all the resistance so that they can move out without being intereupted by rebel attacks.


That's exactly what I'm reading from that picture



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 12:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012

But Russia claims for the missile launches from the 4 ships hit all there 11 targets, which I think should be the focus..

Source



Aw, how quaint. And RT as a source for that.

Carry on.
edit on 9-10-2015 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 12:51 AM
link   
a reply to: InnerPeace2012

There are drone fottage of all the target being hit. All the tragets had drone coverage so it should be easy to Count all of the cruise missiles coming to their targets....

I have not been able to get hold of all the drone fottage yet. But i am searching.


edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 01:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012

But Russia claims for the missile launches from the 4 ships hit all there 11 targets, which I think should be the focus..

Source



Aw, how quaint. And RT as a source for that.

Carry on.


Sure why not..they are the ones hitting their targets..
.

Even BBC acknowlegdes that..

Carry on comparing missile efficiency, I was just trying to bring the focus to real actions on the front against bs propaganda.

edit on 9-10-2015 by InnerPeace2012 because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-10-2015 by InnerPeace2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 01:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: DelMarvel
So much for the supposed formidable technology of the Russian military.
Say that to the Crew of the "USS Donald Duck" opps I meant "Cook" , remember how The Russians Jammed thier Electronics, if Russia didn't have formidable weapons Nato would have destroyed them YEARS ago, remember how even the Israeli Spider Missiles couldn' t shoot down any of the Tu-22's over Georgia, in the 8-8-08 Conflict!!,

SO MUCH for ISRAELI/U.S.FORMIDABLE WEAPONS

edit on 9-10-2015 by ATSWATCHER because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-10-2015 by ATSWATCHER because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 02:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: MrSpad

originally posted by: TDawg61
As I'm having trouble seeing 3 Russian missiles miss their targets by that many miles I'd think they were aimed there purposely.So the Iranians can back engineer them.


They blew up. According to Iranians in areas they hit there were explosion that shattered windows. This sort of equipment failure is not unusual for the Russians. Their defense industry has had problems producing quality advanced weapons systems in any numbers since all the skill worker took off after the fall of the USSR. The Indians have long complained of the Russian being unable to deliver a quality product on time, one of the reasons the have turned to the West for arms. The Russian design fine system but, have a hard to fielding them. Now when it comes to small arms they have that mastered. Ad that to poor maintenance do to training and funding and these problems are going to happen.

Remember Russia tries to maintain a military 1/3 the size of the US at !/15 the budget.
WRONG WRONG WWRRROONNGG, Last I Checked The U.S. has 600K " Active Duty troops, while Rus has just over 1 Million Active Duty troops.



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 02:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012

Missile failure is not the point so long as 19 insurgent targets were destroyed


Got a link for that?



Check out the BBC link on my other post


ETA: Oops Forgot the link Here


The map doesnt really tell you much unles you know exactly what tactis are being used.

If you know that Russia is supporting Assad it makes a lot of sense why Russia started where they did. Assads forces need to get rid of all the resistance so that they can move out without being intereupted by rebel attacks.


That's exactly what I'm reading from that picture
Where are the thousands of dead Syrian Troops, and most if not all of thier Bases taken, why haven't we seen ALL of the cities over ran, WHY do we see President Assad walking around MANY cities cheered by the people, if he is 1. A toobit dictator hated by 90+% of Syrians, and if the Army is loosing????????



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 02:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: spy66

It is not even sure the US knew that Russi had the capability to shoot that distance With cruise missiles. 900 miles is a long strech.



What does it mean, that Russia sent 26 missiles away to fly 1500 km before hitting their targets right on.

I think you're right, the Russians were testing their capabilities in real life ... one went of target? not unlikely ... probably a "hit abort button" scenario.

Basically the news coverage of these "unsubstanciated" news ... is mainly to divert peoples attention from the fact, that the Russians are actually succeeding in Syria. And that the US just blew up a hospital ... intentionally.



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 02:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: bjarneorn

originally posted by: spy66

It is not even sure the US knew that Russi had the capability to shoot that distance With cruise missiles. 900 miles is a long strech.



What does it mean, that Russia sent 26 missiles away to fly 1500 km before hitting their targets right on.

I think you're right, the Russians were testing their capabilities in real life ... one went of target? not unlikely ... probably a "hit abort button" scenario.

Basically the news coverage of these "unsubstanciated" news ... is mainly to divert peoples attention from the fact, that the Russians are actually succeeding in Syria. And that the US just blew up a hospital ... intentionally.


These cruise missiles are a show of force and probably a very expencive one too.

Russia are physically fighting ISIL in Syria but Russia are also indirectly fighting NATO at the same time in the ME. There shouldnt be any doubt about that. NATO stated that they might want to send more troops to Turkey??? Is this really a war against ISIL or is it really confontation between Russian and the US?

Russia needs to show force, and we are probably going to see a lot more from the Russians in the day's and weeks to come. The rumor now is that Russia might bring the White Swan TU 160 into the fight.

Wasington are probably Cooking up something to and it probably aint much good.
edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 05:51 AM
link   
a reply to: spy66
Killing civilians is only considered bad if their enemies do it. When we do it, it's unavoidable collateral damage, in support of freedom!



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 06:08 AM
link   
how can a topic like this get 19 flags????
this belongs in the hoax section or at beforeitsnews.



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 06:08 AM
link   
a reply to: GuidedKill

We will have to wait for details. It isn't out of the realm of possibilities that the first real time use of Russia's cruise missiles didn't go right 100%. Russia is going to test out a lot of things in real combat scenarios for the first time against ISIS and other groups.



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 06:41 AM
link   
Can someone explain what the big deal is? Russia is conducting airstrikes in Syria, 3-4 missiles malfunction and hits Iran instead. No official reports coming in, no reports of casualties - the only lead is an "unnamed US official" which is being reported by news outlets which can't be trusted or even considered respectable in any way. Russia is getting mocked for not having better missiles, which maybe didn't even explode on the impact. There are so many reasons why this happened, at this point we basically don't know anything about this - even if it happened or not.


We do have confirmation that the most expensive Army in the world just hit a hospital in Afghanistan, killing MSF staff and civilians which was rarely reported by news outlets. In my opinion, this is a big deal.




Three children died in the airstrike that came in multiple waves and burned patients alive in their beds.



But hey, collateral damage right? Just because someone else screws up, it doesn't mean that your own wrong doing is justified in any way.

Denial. Denial. Denial. Denial. Denial. Denial.





Your ego is so out of whack that it will do whatever it can to protect themselves. And people with a messed up ego can do this mental gymnastics to convince themselves their awesome, when really their just douchebags.



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 06:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: spy66
a reply to: InnerPeace2012

There are drone fottage of all the target being hit. All the tragets had drone coverage so it should be easy to Count all of the cruise missiles coming to their targets....

I have not been able to get hold of all the drone fottage yet. But i am searching.




This is a false claim.

And no, there is not associated drone footage for each Missile strike...purported or otherwise.

Please avoid confusing issues with BS.



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 08:01 AM
link   
a reply to: yeahsurexxx


how can a topic like this get 19 flags????


Legitimate ATS members are relieved to see a thread mentioning Russia that wasn't started by a Russian sock puppet.




top topics



 
21
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join