US and allies attack Syrian chemical weapons sites

  Belatucadrus 09:34 14 Apr 2018

The US, UK and France have bombed multiple government targets in Syria in an early morning operation targeting alleged chemical weapons sites.


Al Jazeera

  alanrwood 10:02 14 Apr 2018

It was always just a matter of time. This is what Obama should have done all those years ago when his stated red line was crossed and he backed down.

  Forum Editor 11:39 14 Apr 2018


It's why French President Macron committed French aircraft on this occasion - he strongly believes that if you draw a red line you must react swiftly when it's crossed.

Donald Trump invites criticism on an almost daily basis, but over Assad's use of chemical weapons against Syrian citizens he acted rapidly and decisively, as did Macron and Theresa May.

  Govan1x 13:04 14 Apr 2018

We were all expecting it to happen.

But you have to ask with Syrian Airforce there and the Russian Airforce and all the radar that they have and all the anti aircraft missiles that they have not one plane was damaged.

I have a feeling that Russia also must have known it was going to happen but did not retaliate in case they were drawn into an all out war.

You may say they had the element of surprise but if they were expected one would have thought that all weapons would have been loaded and waiting for them.

  Forum Editor 13:36 14 Apr 2018


" would have thought that all weapons would have been loaded and waiting for them."

British aircraft fired eight Storm Shadow cruise missiles from outside Syria's airspace, and out of range of its air defence system.

Storm Shadow is one of the most sophisticated air-launch weapons in the world. When launched by a Tornado GR4, it drops to a very low altitude, and starts its fast, ground-hugging run to its target. As it makes its final approach, it jettisons its nose cone,revealing a high resolution infra-red camera. This looks at what is ahead, and compares it to a stored image of the target.

When it arrives, it first cuts a hole into the building. Then it drops inside and detonates. Once it's on its way, the target is as good as destroyed.

  Govan1x 14:26 14 Apr 2018

Forum Editor

Thanks for the update now we know why no damage to any of the aircraft.

  bumpkin 15:37 14 Apr 2018

Are there not potential dangers in bombing WMD sites. Is it certain the stuff will be destroyed and not released into the atmosphere.

  Pablo de Catio 17:10 14 Apr 2018

In a direct hit, any potential leak would be incinerated.

I would of thought.

  bumpkin 17:50 14 Apr 2018

In a direct hit, any potential leak would be incinerated.

I would like to think so but if you don't know what you are dealing with then surely it is a bit risky.

  john bunyan 18:17 14 Apr 2018

The world , after a million or more were killed in WW1 with chemical weapons, banned their use. Syria has used them over 50 times. They were warned to stop, but ignored the warnings. You can’t threaten retaliation then not use it, or Assad will go on using them. No one wants a prolonged, hot, war but the world can’t ignore these crimes. The response of Corbyn and Abbott talking of “using diplomacy” is frightening, a bit like Chamberlain beforeWW2

  Quickbeam 18:20 14 Apr 2018

I have considerably more confidence in being allied with France over this that the USA with Trump in office. His Tweets are akin to a boastful schoolboy seeking attention...

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Google Stadia review

When 12 countries take on the same brief in a globalised world

Best Apple tech gifts for Christmas 2019

Les meilleurs bracelets connect├ęs (2019)