Quote from: bryant.coleman on April 11, 2017, 02:22:12 PM

Quote from: Alexzap on April 11, 2017, 01:51:17 PM

Quote from: Sithara007 on April 11, 2017, 06:42:05 AM

According to the US Defence Secretary James Mattis, the American missile attacks destroyed 20% of the active aircraft in the possession of the Syrian Air Force. I know that the ISIS and the Al Qaeda will be rejoicing at this news.

The destroyed aircraft include six Russian-made MiG-23.

Is it the planes? The MiG 23 was put on the wing in 1969. It's junk. It seems to me that missiles were more expensive than the damage which they have caused Assad.

The missiles may be more expensive than the aircraft, but they did the purpose. No matter how old these aircraft were, some of them were used for dropping barrel bombs and other explosive devices. The Americans wanted to get rid of them, at any cost. The rebels were also finding the life quite tough as a result of the bombings. So I'd say it was $500 million well spent.

It seems to me that it was possible to destroy them with a cheaper way. To achieve their goals in Syria, the Americans need to destroy the most modern weapons, and then old. Maybe the goal was the other?