While much of the world is praising President Trump’s missile attack on a Syrian airbase thought to be the launching site of an airborne chemical attack on civilians, we should step back and do the math.
Each of the 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles fired into Syria cost $832,000 (https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3277606/tomahawk-cruise-missiles-syria-chemical-attack-trump/#) for a total cost of $49,088,000. They killed 7 people, presumably—but not confirmed—members of the Syrian military. This was one tenth the number of people killed in the gas attack on Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province of Syria. Among the gas victims were 10 children. The airport hit by these precision guided weapons re-opened a day later.
Terrorists kill more people by driving a truck into a crowd, and can close down an airport for a day with a bomb-threat phone call.
Why did the most powerful military in the history of the world get such poor results for so great a cost?
Right-wing news outlets, Breitbart, Fox and the Washington Examiner, have all run stories about deployment in Syria of Russian SA-23 Gladiator anti-missile missiles which are reportedly able to knock down Tomahawks. These are the places Trump gets his news.
Since we didn’t want Russian casualties or interference, Russia was notified of the strike in advance. Even if we give the Russians benefit of the doubt and say they did not promptly tell Syria of the impending attack, the Syrians would certainly have noticed Russian personnel fleeing Al-Shayrat air base and figured something was afoot.
Remember when Trump complained about Obama giving the enemy notice by publicly announcing future military operations? The new President has fixed that by privately giving the enemy notice. Big improvement.