quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/14...know-intl/index.html

105 missiles. all reached target

US
66 Tomahawk
19 air to surface missiles

Let's see....

Tomahawk Missiles
66 @ $1.5mm/Ea = $99,000,000

Surface to Air Missiles
19 @ $120k/Ea = $2,280,000

Total Ordinance Cost = $101,280,000

Plus cost of hardware to deploy ordinance = ????

I'm not suggesting I'm for or against this action, just keeping a running tab.

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/14...know-intl/index.html

105 missiles. all reached target

US
66 Tomahawk
19 air to surface missiles

Let's see....

Tomahawk Missiles
66 @ $1.5mm/Ea = $99,000,000

Surface to Air Missiles
19 @ $120k/Ea = $2,280,000

Total Ordinance Cost = $101,280,000

Plus cost of hardware to deploy ordinance = ????

I'm not suggesting I'm for or against this action, just keeping a running tab.

Those don't last forever. Eventually they would need to be dismantled and scrapped meaning they would have been useless. At least this way they performed their intended function.

quote:

Originally posted by Rightwire:
Those don't last forever. Eventually they would need to be dismantled and scrapped meaning they would have been useless. At least this way they performed their intended function.

So are you suggesting we're simply rotating inventory? Again, I'm not weighing in on the attack itself, just trying to apply a price tag to it.

quote:

Originally posted by HuskySig:

quote:

Originally posted by Bigboreshooter:
No, we have forum members here who are much wiser and better informed, even though they haven't seen ANY of the intelligence on the matter.

I’m glad you’re clued in and posting here. prick.

Wow.

Maybe switch to decaf?

quote:

Originally posted by HuskySig:

quote:

Originally posted by Bigboreshooter:

No, we have forum members here who are much wiser and better informed, even though they haven't seen ANY of the intelligence on the matter.

I’m glad you’re clued in and posting here. prick.

Apparently questioning things is verboten.

Glad you were able to figure out who I was talking about, FOOL.

What's YOUR intel telling you today?

Let the purse slapping begin. LMFAO.

OT, good on Trump for hitting Syria.

Back to your regularly scheduled program of complaining and wanking about how plugged in you are from watching Drudge Report and listening to your brother's sister's former roommate for 'intel'.

quote:

Originally posted by Bigboreshooter:

quote:

Originally posted by HuskySig:

quote:

Originally posted by Bigboreshooter:

No, we have forum members here who are much wiser and better informed, even though they haven't seen ANY of the intelligence on the matter.

I’m glad you’re clued in and posting here. prick.

Apparently questioning things is verboten.

Glad you were able to figure out who I was talking about, FOOL.

What's YOUR intel telling you today?

That you’re a douche bag.

Nikki Haley addressing the UN this morning>

http://www.foxnews.com/politic...l-weapons-again.html



Haley warns US is 'locked and loaded' if Syria uses chemical weapons again.

quote:

Originally posted by HuskySig:

quote:

Originally posted by Bigboreshooter:

quote:

Originally posted by HuskySig:

quote:

Originally posted by Bigboreshooter:

No, we have forum members here who are much wiser and better informed, even though they haven't seen ANY of the intelligence on the matter.

I’m glad you’re clued in and posting here. prick.

Apparently questioning things is verboten.

Glad you were able to figure out who I was talking about, FOOL.

What's YOUR intel telling you today?

That you’re a douche bag.

Typical response of those who can't debate the issues in an intelligent manner. . .start calling the opposition names. Pathetic.

quote:

Originally posted by HuskySig:

quote:

Originally posted by Bigboreshooter:

quote:

Originally posted by HuskySig:

quote:

Originally posted by Bigboreshooter:

No, we have forum members here who are much wiser and better informed, even though they haven't seen ANY of the intelligence on the matter.

I’m glad you’re clued in and posting here. prick.

Apparently questioning things is verboten.

Glad you were able to figure out who I was talking about, FOOL.

What's YOUR intel telling you today?

That you’re a douche bag.

LOL, I'm just trying to decide if I should be listening to you or Gen. Mattis......Hmmmm

quote:

Originally posted by Bigboreshooter:

quote:

Originally posted by HuskySig:

quote:

Originally posted by Bigboreshooter:

quote:

Originally posted by HuskySig:

quote:

Originally posted by Bigboreshooter:

No, we have forum members here who are much wiser and better informed, even though they haven't seen ANY of the intelligence on the matter.

I’m glad you’re clued in and posting here. prick.

Apparently questioning things is verboten.

Glad you were able to figure out who I was talking about, FOOL.

What's YOUR intel telling you today?

That you’re a douche bag.

LOL, I'm just trying to decide if I should be listening to you or Gen. Mattis......Hmmmm

Husky, Bigbore, you remember we have a rule about name calling?

If you cannot disagree civilly, feel very free to take your disagreement out of this forum.

quote:

Originally posted by Yellow Jacket:

quote:

Originally posted by HuskySig:

quote:

Originally posted by Bigboreshooter:

quote:

Originally posted by HuskySig:

quote:

Originally posted by Bigboreshooter:

No, we have forum members here who are much wiser and better informed, even though they haven't seen ANY of the intelligence on the matter.

I’m glad you’re clued in and posting here. prick.

Apparently questioning things is verboten.

Glad you were able to figure out who I was talking about, FOOL.

What's YOUR intel telling you today?

That you’re a douche bag.

Typical response of those who can't debate the issues in an intelligent manner. . .start calling the opposition names. Pathetic.

Scroll back to page 2 and note my original question was never answered with more than a “because” type answer. Then bigbore came in with a condescending post implying all questions are not permitted.

OK, guys. Let's take it easy.

Israel getting in on the fun?



Iranian military base in Syria 'bombed by warplanes with reports of casualties as four Assad regime sites targeted'



https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/...tter_impression=true

quote:

Originally posted by Butch 2340:
Israel getting in on the fun?

Iranian military base in Syria 'bombed by warplanes with reports of casualties as four Assad regime sites targeted'

quote:

Originally posted by HighZonie:
Nikki Haley addressing the UN this morning>

http://www.foxnews.com/politic...l-weapons-again.html



Haley warns US is 'locked and loaded' if Syria uses chemical weapons again.

She is a good Embassador. Tells it like it is.

Sure its expensive but its the best kind of training our troops could get.
I think we learn way more from this type of attack as far as how our weapons fared, and testing the countermeasures of those being attacked.
Its the only way we really learn what works, what doesn't.
God bless our troops!

Caught a bit of Fox News last night, and I couldn't believe what Laura Ingraham was saying - that this strike was too expensive, and that we should have refrained from launching it due to our 'depressed economy' and the cost to the taxpayer. She was a condescending jerk to the one sane guy there that was arguing in favor of it as a deterrent lesson, and because it was "The Right Thing To Do."

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
Does destroying the sites in Syria release hazardous chemicals into the environment? This is not a political question, just informational. I know that when the United States destroyed some of its stockpile of mustard gas it did so literally in the middle of the Pacific Ocean on an isolated atoll.

Reportedly this was taken into account and any release would be away from populated areas. Given the material, you'd expect that the sites would be isolated.
On the other hand I had a friend that was downwind from Khamisiyah when some of Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons were destroyed. He was messed up.

A lot of boxes got checked off.

-Weapon systems need to be used, most components have shelf life.

-We need to make sure they work, that the people the maintain, and use them know how and have confidence in there function and see them work. Since the "forces" change over time, this needs to be done enough that all are exposed to the above.

-That top to bottom and bottom to top logistics are well wrung out.

-That we engage the "enemies" systems, tactics, operations and communications in "real events" to obtain intel and make changes to our own "game".

-That the people "paying attention" take notice.

-That those not taking notice, "pay attention".

And a few other things. (already mentioned a few times.)

Yes. I have a closet full of t-shirts, and wore out a bunch more.