According to the FAN, a total of 59 missiles were launched against the Syrian base. cruise missiles. Of these, 36 "Tomahawks" did not reach the intended goal. In addition, minimal destruction was recorded on Syrian territory. Losses amounted to less than ten soldiers. Andrey Ryazantsev, a military expert of the People's Diplomacy Foundation and the Future Today Expert and Analytical Club, shared this information.

According to Ryazantsev, even an inexperienced observer can notice the disproportionate scale of the attack and its media resonance with the actual damage caused. This may be due, as the expert said, to the fact that the American military machine is archaic and inefficient. It is not capable of solving urgent military tasks.

In addition, Ryazantsev believes that the Syrian air defense, which at one time was reinforced by Russian S-300 systems, was able to counteract the attack quite effectively.

Each of the above versions may be reliable. The expert does not exclude that there was a combination of both. In any case, this is a negative symptom for the United States, which continues to lose ground in the Syrian conflict.

Ryazantsev is sure that in the near future the Syrian air defense, thanks to the assistance from Russia, will be able to strengthen even more. And then the aggressive actions of the American leadership will demonstrate weakness and failure even more clearly.

The words of the expert are confirmed by information from official Russian authorities, who said that Syrian air defense will receive additional systems.

Currently, the S-300 systems available to the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) have difficulty recognizing cruise missiles that prefer extremely low altitudes. They need targets at altitudes of 50 meters and above. In addition, a simultaneous salvo of 60 Syrian air defense missiles was difficult to handle. Only defense in depth from a multitude of air defense systems is capable of this. That is why, according to experts, the Americans preferred Tomahawks to attack the air base, and not aviation.

According to political scientist Igor Ryabov, Russia, with its withdrawal from the memorandum on joint control of airspace in Syria, is actually closing the sky for American missiles and US aircraft.

Ryabov noted that American aggression is characterized by the use of air and missile strikes. Americans prefer not to engage in contact combat. Therefore, after depriving the United States of advantages in the air, the coalition that wants to overthrow Assad will have only hysteria.

The political scientist believes that Trump, succumbing to emotions, made a decision that drove the situation to a standstill. The Americans, according to Ryabov, were criticized in the UN Security Council because of this for the first time in many years. This can be exploited by internal opposition in the United States.

The expert said that Trump, having launched an attack at the time of Xi Zengping's visit to Washington, acted boorishly towards him. China is unlikely to forget this. Therefore, to support Beijing The White house, as Ryabov said, may not count.

Ryabov is confident that a significant strengthening of air defense systems in Syria will make Washington's desire to "punish" difficult. At the same time, the United States will suffer more and more losses from its aggressive actions. This, according to the political scientist, is a sober calculation

A serious and controversial struggle unfolded today between the Pentagon and the Ming. Defense Russian Federation on the topic of how many American missiles flew to the Syrian military base - the Shayrat airfield and what real damage they caused.

According to the briefing Min. Defense of the Russian Federation and the statements of Igor Konashenkov, the Russian side observed only 23 hits by American cruise missiles on the Shayrat military airfield. Moreover, Konashenkov emphasized that this information came to the Russians from the means of OBJECTIVE CONTROL. And, here, "the place where the remaining 36 missiles fell is unknown" - this is also a quote from Konashenkov. Doesn't it seem strange to you that the means of Russian objective control clearly indicated the number of missiles, but lost as many as 36 somewhere along the way. Moreover, they lost so much that Konashenkov did not even name the area of ​​​​their fall.

In this light, the American fleet, along with Petagon, looked "slightly" silly. And, for the whole world. After all, such a massive and very expensive strike for American taxpayers caused relatively little damage to the infrastructure of the Syrian military airbase, from which Syrian planes defiantly took off again a day later.

This foolishness, of course, was noted by the US military allies. After all, to explain this great amount expensive Tomahawk cruise missiles that did not reach the target can only be achieved by their low effectiveness in real combat conditions. And this stupidity will still come back to haunt the Americans at future arms exhibitions with lost contracts.

In this regard, many people ask a legitimate question: what did the Russian and Syrian S300 and S400 do? How did they miss this barrage of missiles? After all, it was for this that they were delivered there - as air defense systems. Moreover, the Americans warned the Russian coordination headquarters military operation in Syria about their strike in advance and the Russians should have at least warned the allies. There are few official answers to this question, and they are all inconclusive. The first version says that the American missiles themselves fell into the mountains of Lebanon, while the rest flew unhindered to Shayrat. The second says that Russian air defenses only protect the positions of the Russian forces in Syria, and therefore they saw everything, but did not react at all, so that this interception would not become a direct armed clash between Russia and the United States in Syria. Agree, this is also a very unconvincing version. After all, who needs such military allies who protect only themselves? Today, Russia cannot afford such a "loss of face" at all, since this would be greatly leveled by its value as a military ally for the same China and Iran.

The Pentagon has already stated that all of its missiles have reached the target in Syria, except for one, defective, which actually fell along the road. But with such a statement, the stupidity of the American military leadership increases even more. After all, funnels can be read, and the means of Russian control over flights in this zone are OBJECTIVE.

In this regard, the version of the respected comrade Sergei Zinchenko is interesting, which, it seems, reveals the secret of the American tomahawks that did not fly. In the details, something may not coincide there (in terms of the number of "fallen" without direct impact). But the overall picture as a whole, according to this version, looks much more convincing than "the total marriage of American cruise missiles." The Russian headquarters, of course, recognize the downing and should not, so as not to escalate the situation and allow the Americans to save face. Otherwise, they would have to accuse Russia of military aggression with all the consequences. And now the pendos can only prove with resentment that all their missiles (would) have reached the target, but ...

Automatic translation

4:25 p.m.

The US military says 58 of the 59 missiles and targets they hit are on strike at a Syrian airbase.

Says US official initial estimate suggests one missile failed. The official claims the missiles hit several aircraft and hardened hangars and destroyed fuel.

The official claims that information continues to come from the impact site.

The official was not authorized to discuss the initial reports and spoke on condition of anonymity.

Lolita in baldor in Washington DC

Saved

The US missile attack on Syria has once again demonstrated the role the world's leading power assigns to the UN. Namely, none, since it was decided to bomb before the UN conducted an independent investigation in order to identify those responsible for the use chemical weapons, - said in a statement of the deputies of the Italian Parliament.

What happened and why the peacemaker Donald Trump until quite recently, who asserted that the United States should no longer participate in external military conflicts, but should deal with its own economy, suddenly changed his mind? Who framed the president?

Remember what kind of persecution the American media, together with the special services, recently arranged for the American president, accusing him of almost conspiring with Moscow and winning the election only thanks to hacker attacks Russia. Direct evidence was not given, it was only reported that they were obtained from secret sources through intelligence and to open them means to substitute your residency in Russia. Apparently, in this case, too, secret intelligence channels had a decisive influence on the actions of Donald Trump.

The confrontation between the great powers is not only in the economic and military spheres, but also in conducting various open actions to discredit the enemy, covert secret operations, and even throwing in all sorts of misinformation.

It is clear that Russia is currently significantly inferior to the United States in terms of conventional weapons non-contact type, among which CR (cruise missiles) are a particularly important component. It was the massive use of cruise missiles in Iraq, Yugoslavia and Libya at the initial stage of hostilities that allowed the United States to disable the bulk of the enemy’s air defense and command and control structures, which made it possible to gain a clear advantage and prevent the enemy from inflicting significant damage on NATO troops.

What happened in Syria on the night of April 6? Scattered information in the media and from various insiders on the network nevertheless allows us to confirm the following facts:

1) In the Syrian city of Khan Sheikhoun in the province of Idlib, contamination of the area with chlorine was recorded, which caused poisoning of more than 100 local residents. According to the opposition and the West, the Syrian Air Force attacked the city with bombs or rockets filled with chemicals. According to the Syrian government, the Air Force bombed a plant that produced chemical weapons.

2) The Syrian Air Force took off from the Shayrat airfield.

3) C American destroyers 59 cruise missiles were launched, only 23 reached the target and did not destroy the runway. A day later, the Syrian Air Force resumed flights and strikes from this airfield against the opposition and terrorists.

4) The American command warned Russia about the attack on the airfield.

5) Russian S-300 and S-400 air defense systems did not interfere with the American strike.

However, why did the American president suddenly change his mind and strike at Syria without even coordinating it with Congress and his allies? Who framed the president? Why was the accuracy of the cruise missile strike so low? (Remember Iraq, Yugoslavia and Libya, where hundreds of launches of such missiles were made at enemy targets and in 90-95% of cases they reached the targets, and here only some 38%). What happened? American missiles for several years they have become rotten in warehouses, or did someone interfere with them?

I will assume a scenario that, in my opinion, is quite real:

1) After an air strike on a plant in Khan Sheikhoun and the spread of chemical substances in its vicinity, the opposition launched a "duck" about chemical attack Syrian Air Force on the city. Western media picked up this news, as it completely coincides with their opinion about Assad. Although, based on the usual logic, why should Assad incur the wrath of the world community, if things at the front are in his hands? recent months and so they add up successfully.

2) The United States checked the information through its intelligence channels. Russia also checked the information, and at the same time calculated American channels for obtaining information (after all, one of its own people leaked data to the CIA and the NSA about Russia's indirect participation in the American elections). Therefore, it is very likely that there was disinformation about the presence of chemical weapons in Shayrat. In this case, it becomes clear why the Americans were in such a hurry to strike. If there really were weapons there, then there would be a significant contamination of the area with chemicals after missile attack and then Assad and her allies supporting her would not be able to get away from the crime against humanity. However, as we know, nothing of the kind happened and no chemical weapons were found in Shayrat.

3) Where did 36 tomahawks fly to and why weren't they shot down by S-300 and S-400 complexes? Firstly, shooting down cruise missiles in this way is very expensive and would not guarantee 100% success, since such low-flying objects in rough terrain are very difficult to shoot down. Secondly, the Americans could get information about the effectiveness of Russian complexes and use it for a further campaign against Russia. If suddenly all the missiles could be shot down, then the United States could declare that Russia is trying to hide the crime in Shayrat and is thus itself an accomplice in the crime, the site reports. If some of the missiles had reached the airfield, then the US military would have received data on the effectiveness of our missile defense systems and would have launched a campaign that the vaunted Russian S-400s could not contain the strike of American cruise missiles.

4) However, according to some insiders, it was Russia that started this counter-provocation. According to them, several goals were pursued. Firstly, to show Donald Trump the worthlessness of those secret US intelligence channels that were used against him to prove his connection with Moscow. Secondly, the stuffing made it possible to identify part of the American residency in Russia, from where important data was leaked. Third, the US will now need to find real evidence chemical attacks from Assad, and not to talk in vain. If the evidence is not found, the US will look in a rather negative light, once again coming up with false information. Fourth, another step was recorded on the part of the United States, when the leading world power does not take into account either the UN or the global rules. Without presenting serious evidence, but only referring to secret information, he behaves like an aggressor and a world gendarme. Fifth, it is very likely that Russia decided to test some new and inexpensive weapon with which it was able to either destroy or knock out most of the American cruise missiles. At the same time, the weapon remained undiscovered, otherwise the Americans would have staged a serious showdown. But to believe that high-precision american weapons suddenly gave a serious failure very, very difficult. The most formidable weapon of the United States is its "rocket sword" was not very effective in confrontation with a more serious opponent.

It was to such an unexpected conclusion that General Konashenkov's phrase about the Tomahawks that had reached the target led the experts. I will not bore readers with details why this act is impossible - there are both political and purely technical reasons. The latter, however, are of a secondary nature - having missed the first launches, ours could well work out on launched missiles. But this is already a direct clash, for which Russia did not sign an agreement with Syria, helping only in the fight against terrorists. The United States, de jure, are not. And de facto it is clear where dissenters can shove themselves - after Yugoslavia, even the most slow-witted understood. And after Libya...

Konaenkov's speeches are interesting and self-sufficient in themselves:

But the conspiracy theory is also beautiful. According to Russian funds objective control, only 23 missiles flew to the Syrian air base. The crash site of the remaining 36 cruise missiles is unknown,” Konashenkov said. Plus, the video of the destruction in his own speech is clearly not enough for 59 missiles. Based on this, we start:

"... I believe the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, writes chervonec:

a) it is possible to determine the number of missiles that reached the airfield on the spot
b) the survey shows completely non-critical damage

It is doubly surprising that there are no reports that Russia used the S-300 and S-400 systems (only target illumination?) And its aircraft as air defense.

Another moment --- attack came from the side of the sea, from which the rocket does not fly much --- 100 km and only 30 km to fly over the territory of Syria (from the border of Lebanon). Accordingly, the Syrian air defense for counteraction is nothing at all and time and distance.

So where did 61% of the rockets dissolve. The rest .... disappeared?
23 flew, and 4 hit the target.

As a result, 59 cruise missiles worth almost 100 megabucks went to 6 old MiG-23s that were under REPAIR. And the dining room is a pity."

The dining room is really a pity. As well as the dead. But the version is only developing. Let's start from the number 36. By the way, there was another rocket that "fell down" there, the 37th. Remember: "At the moment, hops fly off me at the number 37 ..."?:

The missiles obviously did too little damage for their smart 59 brains, really barely enough for two dozen:

Here's how Tomahawks hit targets:

Some of the aircraft in the open air and some of the caponiers also survived here.

But we develop theme 36:

"So, given: - how many missiles were fired from American destroyers: 59; - how many missiles flew to the ill-fated Syrian airfield: 23. In the balance: 36 missiles. Where did they go? hard to believe, the Americans are too prudent and pragmatic to lose more than half of the missiles just like that somewhere, especially since Tomahawks have long been used in punitive operations since the Gulf War in 1991, then there was Yugoslavia, again Iraq, Libya .

Few times the Americans lost dozens of Tomahawks at once. Watch the numbers: 59 - 23 = 36... Intriguing biggrin Remember the number 36. Now let's look at performance characteristics The S-400 Triumph air defense system can be found on any military website, no one hides this data. Small screenshot:


American "Tomahawks" in Syria could be shot down by our S-400 "Triumph" 59 - 36 = 23

The number of simultaneously fired targets (with the full complement of air defense systems) 36. What does this mean? This means that 1 S-400 division is capable of simultaneously shooting down 36 targets. One S-400 division includes many different equipment: command post, radars, launchers themselves, technical assistance, etc. Launchers, those that we always see at parades (see the photo below, who have not seen), there are 12 pieces in the division, i.e. 12 x 4 = 48 missiles. This means that the number of missiles for 1 accurate salvo is quite enough for itself. The height of hitting targets is from 5 meters, cruise missiles are included in this category of targets.

American "Tomahawks" in Syria could be shot down by our S-400 "Triumph"

Why am I so sure that 1 S-400 division is based in Syria? Because it open information, which is in the public domain:


Based on all the data, we can conclude that there is 1 S-400 Triumph division in Syria, capable of destroying up to 48 targets, but 36 of them with one salvo. 36.


Here's another helpful information, for those who say that the Tomahawks were out of reach of our air defense.

Why am I so sure that it was the S-400s that destroyed the Tomahawks? And let's ask a counter question, why did the Americans suddenly want to launch 59 (!!!) cruise missiles at the airfield of the Syrian army? This huge swarm of metal, fire and explosives is fired at one military airfield.

To completely paralyze such an airfield, a pair of missiles would be required - to hit the runway, and that's it. By the way, why exactly 59 and not 60, for example? Probably 1 rocket did not take off or fell somewhere on the deck. Such a swarm of missiles was needed to somehow get through our air defense. The maximum that we are capable of in such a situation is to shoot down 48 missiles of an obvious enemy. It was decided to shoot down 36 out of 59 with one salvo.

The rest, most likely, were blinded and stunned by our electronic warfare, because. it is not entirely clear why the missiles did not hit the target exactly. Well, this is an assumption, I can not vouch for the accuracy of the information. Or maybe the Americans did not set exact goals, but simply wanted to defiantly go through our air defense. And they passed, with losses, but they passed. As planned. By the way, this was a reason for all the liberal media to shout that our air defense is full of holes like a sieve and start arranging a funeral for the S-400.

But none of them considered our specific resources and downed enemy missiles. If we proceed from the fact that 59 missiles were launched not at the airfield, but to break through our air defense, then this can be considered a direct blow to us. The breakthrough in this case was a success, 23 missiles passed through our defenses. The United States is once again openly showing aggression towards Russia, but we do not see an adequate response. Or it is still too early to wait for any reaction, although ... wait for the replenishment of S-400 divisions in Syria, there are clearly not enough resources there."

Such is the version. Incredible for me - it is impossible to hide the launch of dozens of missiles - the network would already be torn from the frames recorded on the phones, since there are plenty of people around our base, and no one would hide such a phenomenal success. But like a beautiful fairy tale, it has the right to life.

Where did the 36 Tomahawks fired by the US Navy at the Syrian Shayrat airbase go?

At night, looking at something came to mind. Writing. So given:
- how many missiles were fired from American destroyers: 59;
- how many missiles flew to the ill-fated Syrian airfield: 23.

In the balance: 36 missiles. Where did they go? Did they simply fly across the desert or fall into the sea? I don’t believe it much, the Americans are too prudent and pragmatic to lose more than half of the missiles just like that somewhere, especially since Tomahawks have long been used in punitive operations since the Gulf War in 1991, then there was Yugoslavia, again Iraq, Libya. Few times the Americans lost dozens of "Tomahawks", worth one and a half million dollars each, at once.

Watch the numbers: 59 - 23 \u003d 36 ... Intriguing Remember the number 36.

Let's now look at the performance characteristics of the S-400 Triumph air defense system, you can find it on any military website, no one hides this data. Small screenshot:

59 — 36 = 23

The number of simultaneously fired targets (with the full complement of air defense systems) 36. What does this mean? This means that 1 S-400 division is capable of simultaneously shooting down 36 targets. One S-400 division includes a lot of different equipment: a command post, radars, launchers themselves, technical assistance, etc. Launchers, those that we always see at parades (see photo below, who have not seen), there are 12 pieces in the division , i.e. 12 x 4 = 48 missiles. This means that the number of missiles for 1 accurate salvo is quite enough for itself.

Height of hitting targets - from 5 meters , cruise missiles are included in this target category.

Here's what Wikipedia says:

Why am I so sure that 1 S-400 division is based in Syria? Because this is open information that is in the public domain:

Based on all the data, we can conclude that there is 1 S-400 Triumph division in Syria, capable of destroying up to 48 targets, but 36 of them with one salvo. 36.

Here is some more useful information for those who say that the Tomahawks were out of reach of our air defense. The range of the S-400 in Syria:

And now, why am I so sure that it was the S-400s that destroyed the Tomahawks? And let's ask a counter question, why did the Americans suddenly want to launch 59 (!!!) cruise missiles at the airfield of the Syrian army? This huge swarm of metal, fire and explosives is fired at one military airfield. To completely paralyze such an airfield would require a pair of missiles - to hit the runway, and that's it.

By the way, why exactly 59 and not 60, for example? Probably 1 rocket did not take off or fell somewhere on the deck.

Such a swarm of missiles was needed to somehow get through our air defense. The maximum that we are capable of in such a situation is to shoot down 48 missiles of an obvious enemy. It was decided to shoot down 36 out of 59 with one salvo. The rest, most likely, were blinded and stunned by our electronic warfare, because. it is not entirely clear why the missiles did not hit the target exactly. Well, this is an assumption, I can not vouch for the accuracy of the information. Or maybe the Americans did not set exact goals, but simply wanted to defiantly go through our air defense. And they passed, with losses, but they passed. As planned.

By the way, this was a reason for all the liberal media to shout that our air defense is full of holes like a sieve and start arranging a funeral for the S-400. But none of them considered our specific resources and downed enemy missiles.

If we proceed from the fact that 59 missiles were launched not at the airfield, but to break through our air defense, then this can be considered a direct blow to us. The breakthrough in this case was a success, 23 missiles passed through our defenses.

The United States is once again openly showing aggression towards Russia, but we do not see an adequate response. Or it is still too early to wait for any reaction, although ... wait for the replenishment of S-400 divisions in Syria, there are clearly not enough resources there.

Your humble servant

*Editorial opinion does not always coincide with the opinion of the authors.