- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Cruise Missiles selection
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:26 pm
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:26 pm
Why are we using these? This technology is 30 years old. Do we not have anything more efficient? Or did we have them laying around in stock piles?
16
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:27 pm to BigPerm30
quote:
Why are we using these? This technology is 30 years old. Do we not have anything more efficient? Or did we have them laying around in stock piles?
They're accurate and relatively cheap........ relatively
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:27 pm to BigPerm30
1.000 pound warhead, accurate and no need to over fly the airspace the Russians control.
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:28 pm to BigPerm30
(no message)
This post was edited on 1/10/21 at 7:14 pm
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:28 pm to BigPerm30
I think there's a new generation coming out that will be half the cost.
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:28 pm to BigPerm30
What'd you have in mind bigperm?
This post was edited on 4/6/17 at 9:29 pm
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:29 pm to BigPerm30
No risk of a trigger happy Russian shooting down one of our jets.
Or we did use manned aircraft and they're just not telling us.
Or we did use manned aircraft and they're just not telling us.
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:29 pm to Navytiger74
crickets.
Cruise missiles were designed to do what we used them for tonight.
Cruise missiles were designed to do what we used them for tonight.
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:30 pm to Navytiger74
quote:
What'd you have in mind bigperm?
Weed. Drop couple hundred pounds of weed in Syria and watch everyone chill the frick out.
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:30 pm to BigPerm30
quote:
Do we not have anything more efficient?
Like what?
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:30 pm to BigPerm30
The Navy wanted to make some grass grow but also be frugal about it.
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:31 pm to BigPerm30
quote:
This technology is 30 years old.
so is Syria's defensive capabilities with regards to repelling such an attack.
Actually I'm talking out of my arse...but seriously they worked, we have em...why not use em? Unless there was something cheaper which doesn't put our men in harms way?
This post was edited on 4/6/17 at 9:32 pm
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:31 pm to BigPerm30
Low risk....but targets go boom
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:31 pm to Navytiger74
quote:
Navytiger74
TLAMs seem like they should be easy to intercept, right?
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:32 pm to BigPerm30
We weren't trying to kill anyone
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:33 pm to upgrayedd
Not 59 of them.
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:33 pm to Bamatab
quote:
Like what?
I literally have no clue. That is why I asked the question.
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:35 pm to navy
quote:
Not 59 of them.
Is that over kill? I'm curious
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:36 pm to BigPerm30
They were about to expire
Posted on 4/6/17 at 9:36 pm to BigPerm30
quote:Yes.
Is that over kill? I'm curious
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News