Yes. All one needs to do is look at how certain pieces of shit I mean members of Congress reacted to this. Schiff is upset because Trump didn't get Congressional approval (didn't care about Libya) and is worried about escalation (but doesn't have a problem accusing Russia of manipulating elections). Pocahontas also butthurt, Garamendi butthurt. What happened to "Do it for the children?" MSM Is already ripping Trump and the DoD for "giving too much time" for Syrians to vacate targets.
Yup the USA Today actually criticized for using de-escalation line and letting Syrians and presumably Russians get out of the way.
https:// www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/04/13/trump-strike-syria-analysis-president-britain-france/515507002/
Q said missiles only. What if that means missiles but no warheads? Even ones launched from aircraft. Doesn't look like the Tomahawks launched last year had warheads since hangars were still standing, no craters. Those hangars should've been leveled.
Saw one picture of a hangar that had been struck (big hole in the roof) with what looked like a MiG-21 or similar looking Sukhoi aircraft more or less intact.
Dud Tomahawk was the explanation for the lack of damage last year. I have a hard time buying that. If you wanna be taken seriously, launching defective munitions is not how to accomplish that.
I took that to mean only the missiles. They weren't armed with warheads or possibly lacked a guidance system. Or both.
That doesn't foreclose on the possibility that they weren't armed. A telephone pole sized object traveling at 500+ mph striking anything is going to cause a fuck ton of damage even without explosives.