"There was conflicting information, as Israel denied the missile attack and Russia confirmed the missile attack.

"An Israeli statement was issued indicating the missiles were fired in the context of an Israeli-US joint drill and fell in the sea, and that they were not related to the Syrian crisis."

"the US forces fired these two rockets from a NATO base in Spain, and were instantly detected by the Russian radars and confronted by the Russian defense systems, so one of them exploded in the airspace and the second one diverted towards the sea."

"Washington demanded that Tel Aviv take responsibility for the rocket firing to save the USA's face in front of the International Community..."

 

"One of the first results of the US-Russian military confrontation was the British House of Commons' rejection of participation in a war on Syria. This was followed by European statements, most significantly, the German opposition to participation in a war - announced by Chancellor Angela Merkel."

Moron Airbase in Spain is used by the US military

If accurate, yes, this is huge. And, why a ballistic missile strike?

But also, where was the intercept made? It seems it would be upon re-entry on the down side of the parabolic path, but, then, again, the description sounds as if it was towards the initial launch point. But, then, again, the intercept was reported to be in the East Mediterranean of the coast of Syria.

Interception of a ballistic missile is a "big deal" in terms of technological ability. Much, much, harder than a cruise missile or even a fighter jet. e are talking capability to intercept a supersonic projectile.

All public reports refer to interception of ballistic missiles at the early post launch stage (the clime on the parabolic flight path).

 

Russia has technology the U. S. public is not aware of (I'm an American)?

 

Why launch ballistic missiles, in any event? (as opposed to cruise missiles?) hat? Plausible deniability?

 

And what was it designed to achieve? Would Syria attempt to retaliate against the U. S. destroyers off shore? r simply punishment?

 

...Syria has important geopolitical significance, in its own right, but not enough, I would think, to cause the U. S. to launch ballistic missiles at Syria.

 

Could this have been a 'head shot' in an attempt to take out Assad?

 

Clearly, the corrupt leadership in Washington D. C. is desperate to get regime change.