Less than half of Trump's missiles hit Syrian airbase, which is still functioning

UPDATE: According to the US Navy, 59 missiles hit the taget. According to Russia, only 23 missiles hit targets. This entry is based on the 23 missile report, which was reported by several media outlets.

This missile attack Donald Trump launched against a Syrian air base is looking increasingly fishy. First, he told Russia in advance he was going to fire the missiles at the air base, knowing full well Russia could alert Assad.

Then he launches 59 missiles towards the base, but only 23 actually hit the base according to British newspaper Metro.

And they don't seem to have destroyed the base, judging by the photos of the base with just some smoke, but no actual destruction, although there is a report that 6 Syrian fighter jets were hit.

In other words, that missile strike was just for show, without any real consequences. And Russia knew about it.

But here's were things got even fishier. First, Trump said he ordered the attack because of the death of children in a chemical attack by Bashar al-Assad. Really? Trump is worried about Syrian children? Then why did he want to deny entry to America to Syrian refugees and tried to impose two Muslim bans?

And then there's the alleged Russian outrage over the missile attack, suspending an agreement over Syrian air space and claiming the attack will have serious consequences. According to Reuters:

Russia warned on Friday that U.S. cruise missile strikes on a Syrian air base could have "extremely serious" consequences, as President Donald Trump's first major foray into a foreign conflict opened up a rift between Moscow and Washington.

...

"We strongly condemn the illegitimate actions by the U.S. The consequences of this for regional and international stability could be extremely serious,” Russia's deputy U.N. envoy, Vladimir Safronkov, told a meeting of the U.N. Security Council on Friday.

Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev charged that the U.S. strikes were one step away from clashing with Russia's military.

Really? Why didn't they say that when Trump actually told them about the attack in advance?

This sounds like Trump ordered a bullshit attack with no consequences (no chemilca weapons were targetted) and now Russia is playing along making it look more serious than it really is. That way Putin looks tough and at the same time Putin helps Trump look tough, when in reality less than half the missiles reached the base, Russia knew about it in advance, and nothing really changed much other than some burnt walls at the airbase and some fighter jets destroyed that Russia can gladly sell to Assad again.

But what's even worse about this is the fact that nobody in the media is questioning this charade. "Syria Strike Puts U.S. and Russia at Odds" reads the headline by The New York Times. Really?

It's like Jon Stewart said once: The media has a tendency towards sensationalism and lazyness. And in this case that's exactly the case.