Thread by @benimmo

Thread: the different claims on the #SyriaStrikes (state of play at 2200 UTC, April 14).

medium.com/dfrlab/syriast…

The basic claim from the US, France and UK was that they targeted three sites, one at Barzah in greater Damascus, two at Him Shinsar, west of Homs.

They said all were directly related to the chemical weapons programme.

(Map by US DoD)

The @DeptofDefense briefing showed before-and-after imagery of the sites it named. Thanks to stars like @JakeGodin and @vpkivikami, they've been geolocated and checked against satellite imagery.

This is the Barzah site, 33.558419, 36.316080.

This is the first Him Shinsar site, 34.681473, 36.466262.

This is the second Him Shinshar site, 34.695222, 36.537528.

The strike countries broadly agree on the weapons and platforms used:

US TLAMs
US JASSMs
UK Storm Shadows
French SCALPs
USS Monterey
USS Laboon
USS Higgins
USS John Warner
FS Languedoc
US B-1B Lancers
RAF Tornadoes
French Rafale and Mistral

There's a discrepancy in how they describe the Him Shinshar sites. The US called them storage facilities; the French Minister of Defence called them "important production sites."

Unclear why.

elysee.fr/videos/new-vid… (timestamp 6:48)

The Russian MoD's briefing broadly agreed on the number of weapons used and most of the platforms. The big difference was in the targets it listed, and the success of the Syrian air defences it claimed.

eng.mil.ru/en/news_page/c…

Russia claimed strikes were aimed at 8 targets, of which 6 airfields, and said that 71 of the 101 (or 103) missiles they tracked were intercepted.

Most of the evidence that's been claimed to show interceptions was actually taken from other incidents and conflicts - @trbrtc has a good analysis.

https://twitter.com/trbrtc/status/984992045730336768

The three sites listed by the US have been verified against satellite imagery. The next question is whether there's confirmed evidence showing strikes, or attempted strikes, on the airfields. / Thread ends