Syria Strike Rate Data Flawed – 68 percent of US/Ally missiles shot down

18th April 2018 / United Kingdom
Syria Strike Rate Data Flawed - 68 percent of US/Ally missiles shot down?

By TruePublica: Theresa May has said it was “legally and morally right” for the UK to join air strikes against the Syrian regime to prevent “further human suffering”. She told MPs there was “clear evidence” the Assad government was behind the Douma chemical weapons attack.

Taking questions for more than three hours, Mrs May defended the decision not to seek Parliamentary approval for the intervention after criticism from opposition parties. MPs then held the first of two emergency debates on Syria which were approved by Speaker John Bercow, with the second to take place on Tuesday.

Monday’s debate ended with a vote, forced by the SNP, on whether the House had sufficiently debated the matter of Syria.

The government won the motion by 314 to 36 votes, a majority of 278. This clearly demonstrates that both Labour and the Conservatives were as misguided then as they were for making the same decision in attacking Iraq and Libya that ended up killing a million people and displacing tens of millions.

Mrs May insisted it was in the UK’s national interest to act: “we have not done this because President Trump asked us to but because it was the right thing to do” by confirming that “No other group could have carried out this attack.”

On all accounts, Mrs May, her cabinet and now parliament itself have been called out for their lies now that we have hard irrefutable evidence, that includes the witness testimony of more than two dozen people and a highly respected Western journalist that no chemical weapons attack took place in Douma.

In addition, it appears that the leaders of the US, France and Britain have forgotten what former US Secretary of State John Kerry said in this interview: “Let’s be crystal clear, the decision to strike Syria didn’t happen – because we came up with a better solution. We found a better solution when we got all the chemical weapons out of Syria.”

Here, President Obama angrily defends his actions against critics for not attacking the Syrian regime by confirming what Kerry had said: “Well perhaps you should have taken a strike at Syria to get their chemical weapons out – well it turns out, we’re getting chemical weapons out of Syria without having to initiate a strike – so what else are you talking about.

John Kerry continues in multiple interviews to the mainstream media that not only did they get 100% of the chemical weapons out of Syria but that it wouldn’t have happened without the help of Russia.


SafeSubcribe/Instant Unsubscribe - One Email, Every Sunday Morning - So You Miss Nothing - That's It

Source of map: The Pentagon, UK Ministry of Defence – to BBC

In addition to the statement used by the US, UK and France that everything was “highly likely,” even the map supplied by the Pentagon and UK Ministry of Defence provided to the mainstream media shows the chemical weapons sites targeted by strikes as “suspected.”

The BBC also reported that “The UK is “confident” that air strikes carried out by Britain, the US and France on “suspected” chemical weapons facilities in Syria had been successful, the PM Theresa May has said.

In other words, the government is still refusing to make clear, unequivocal statements based upon actual hard evidence.

Even the bombing strike rate numbers provided by the authorities appear to be full of holes.


The Pentagon said that the US and its allies had launched a total of 105 missiles at the “suspected” chemical weapons facilities of the Assad government and all of them had precisely hit their targets.

The attack involved the following means and launchers:


  • The USS Monterey CG61 fired 30 Tomahawk cruise missiles from the Red Sea.
  • The USS Laboon DDG58 fired 7 Tomahawk cruise missiles from the Red Sea.
  • The USS Higgins DDG76 fired 23 Tomahawk cruise missiles from the Persian Gulf.
  • The USS John Warner SSN785 fired 6 Tomahawk cruise missiles from the Mediterranean.
  • The French frigate LANGUEDOC fired 3 Storm Shadow/SCALP EG cruise missiles from the Mediterranean.
  • B-1B strategic bombers fired 19 AGM-158 JASSM air-launched cruise missiles.
  • British Typhoon and Tornado fighter jets fired 8 Storm Shadow/SCALP EG air-launched cruise missiles.
  • French Rafel and Mirage fired 9 Storm Shadow/SCALP EG air-launched cruise missiles.


It appears that British bombers fired 8 ‘Stormshadow’ missiles, produced by UK arms manufacturer BAE Systems, at a cost £790,000 each, coming to a total of £6.32 million. It also appears these weapons reached their intended targets.

According to the Pentagon 76 missiles hit “Barzah Research and Development Center”, 22 missiles hit “Him Shinshar Chemical Weapons Storage Site”, 7 missiles hit “Him Shinshar CW Bunker”.

However, basic analysis refutes what the official briefing at the Pentagon says, particularly as they declined to provide any evidence or explanation as to why there was no dispersal or reports of chemical agent clouds if the chemical weapons facilities had indeed been hit. Indeed, had they been hit, the release could well have proved fatal and ironically would have achieved little more than the gassing of Syrian people.

Another issue raised by experts is why 76 missiles were needed to destroy just three buildings in Barzeh.

There is another side to the story according to military analysis from Southfront. The Syrian Defense Ministry said many of the missiles launched by the US-led bloc were intercepted. The Russian Defense Ministry provided more details by saying that Russia had not employed its air defence assets, but 71 missiles heading to 8 locations had been intercepted by the Syrian Air Defense Forces (SADF).


Southfront raise a good point. “However, the numbers provided by Russia raise serious questions. Some experts contacted by SouthFront said that even theoretically the SADF could not have been capable of shooting down more than 15-20% of the launched missiles. The SADF just does not have the means and measures necessary to intercept such a number of missiles simultaneously in one wave of strikes.

The experts suggested that the Russian military had possibly used its state-of-the-art electronic warfare systems to counter the launched missiles during the final phase of their flight path.

Another factor, which “highly likely” contributed to the effectiveness of the Syrian counter-measures, is that Russia had provided the Syrian military with operational data from its technical reconnaissance net, including satellites and other surveillance means. Likely, Iran had done a similar thing.

Using tracking data, Russian-made air defense systems like S-125, S-200, Buk and Kvadrat are capable of shooting down cruise missiles with a relatively high efficiency.”


Not only should it be said that of 105 missiles launched, the interception rate of 68 percent can only be described as a comprehensive failure but this exercise has demonstrated something else. If we assume the strike rate is barely 30 percent because the technical capability of the opposing side has increased that far, what might happen if they fired back with the same technical ability that was used to defend themselves.

If anything, this has quite possibly been something of a shock to both The Pentagon and UK Ministry of Defence.

Some military experts have already come to some conclusion that the 76 missiles strike on Barzeh announced by the Pentagon could be an attempt to explain where all the missiles had gone.

In the meantime, Southfront also makes another good point that “If the data provided by the Russian Defense Ministry is confirmed, this will be the first time in (modern) history when a side was able to repel a massive strike of so-called modern high-precision weapons/missiles.”




At a time when reporting the truth is critical, your support is essential in protecting it.
Find out how

The European Financial Review

European financial review Logo

The European Financial Review is the leading financial intelligence magazine read widely by financial experts and the wider business community.