7 ms·
Misleading headline; if you look at the actual US government source, 42 aircraft were either destroyed or damaged. Most of the actual losses (destroyed aircraft
by artbristol 4mo ago
Misleading headline; if you look at the actual US government source, 42 aircraft were either destroyed or damaged. Most of the actual losses (destroyed aircraft) were 24 MQ-9 Reaper drones.
- DrProtic 4mo agoDo you count that AWACS as damaged or destroyed?
- locknitpicker 4mo ago> Misleading headline; if you look at the actual US government source, (...) Let's pause a moment to think about this sentence alone.
- strken 4mo agoVague innuendo doesn't stop the headline from being misleading, since it's based on that same source.
- locknitpicker 4mo ago> Vague innuendo There is no innuendo. The only claim in this discussion is trying to cast doubt on semantics such as whether "destroyed" or "damaged" has a meaningful difference. In the meantime, let's verify what the US government classifies as "damage". https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwyd07m7e1xo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwyd07m7e1xo This doesn't even fit the old "the front fell off" skit.
- oliwarner 4mo agoEach of those drones is $30m (plus munitions). Together with the other losses and damages to aircraft, it moving towards $7b. Feels like a considerable loss.