Posted on 12/20/2005 10:47:51 AM PST by West Coast Conservative
Syria has signed a pledge to store Iranian nuclear weapons and missiles.
The London-based Jane's Defence Weekly reported that Iran and Syria signed a strategic accord meant to protect either country from international pressure regarding their weapons programs. The magazine, citing diplomatic sources, said Syria agreed to store Iranian materials and weapons should Teheran come under United Nations sanctions.
Iran also pledged to grant haven to any Syrian intelligence officer indicted by the UN or Lebanon. Five Syrian officers have been questioned by the UN regarding the Hariri assassination, Middle East Newsline reported. "The sensitive chapter in the accord includes Syria's commitment to allow Iran to safely store weapons, sensitive equipment or even hazardous materials on Syrian soil should Iran need such help in a time of crisis," Jane's said.
The accord also obligated Syria to continue to supply the Iranian-sponsored Hizbullah with weapons, ammunition and communications. Iran has been the leading weapons supplier to Hizbullah, with about 15,000 missiles and rockets along the Israeli-Lebanese border.
The accord, negotiations of which began in 2004, was signed on Nov. 14 and meant to prepare for economic sanctions imposed on either Iran or Syria. Under the accord, Jane's said, Iran would relay financial aid to Syria in an effort to ease Western sanctions in wake of the UN determination that Damascus was responsible for the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.
Iran also pledged to supply a range of military aid to Syria. Jane's cited technology for weapons of mass destruction as well as conventional arms, ammunition and training of Syrian military.
Teheran would seek to upgrade Syrian ballistic missiles and chemical weapons systems. Under the accord, Iran would also be prepared to operate "advanced weapon systems in Syria during a military confrontation." Jane's said.
"The new strategic accord is based on the existing military MoUs, with the addition of the sensitive chapter dealing with cooperation in times of international sanctions or military conflict," Jane's reported.
What argument? I was insulted and responded in kind. All I get back is more insults, whining and denial. The bunch of you put together couldn't construct an argument for steak over tofu.
I know.
This guy must have a mod as a friend. He hasn't been zotted yet.
you have no common sense. Why should we argue with an obvious troll?
It's easier to make fun of them......
No, they are in fact considered useful, but they have their particular focus on the mideast and see things through that lens.
Clearly, though, Debka was right about the Iraqi WMDs, that we wouldn't find much, weren't they? I would suggest they are also right on where they went. Numerous sources, from others in Israel, reporters in Syria, and even including ISG former head David Kay and Tommy Franks deputy agrees.
Isn't it interesting how Colin Powell keeps running interference for Syria...even after he was let go?
He must be getting more 'sugar'
LOL
I never knew Powell had that much influence.
LOL
heh...
check the tagline :)
I think I will keep it for, oh I don't know, YEARS
Hehe I love it! :)
hehe :)
You don't? Well then its you who have some explaining to do. Where did they go? You know the ones Saddam had ADMITTED to having after the Gulf War? Plus, as shown by our troops right here in Free Republic, they still found a couple overlooked (by the MSM) hundred tons of stuff. Why didn't Saddam use that "piddly stuff" against us?
And just what makes you think Saddam would ever dare mess with These Guys?
Yah. Too bad it was as much as it was. He is a "friend" of our side...sort of like Senator Graham. With friends like that who needs enemies...
Because he was not suicidal like most terrorists. Had he used them we would have retaliated with NUCLEAR weapons.
I know. State is still full of Klinton holdovers. As proven by 'our' stance on Israel/palestinian conflict.
Agreed, That is certainly one serious consideration that Saddam and/or his Russian handlers probably thought through.
So you admit to being a defeatist.
Thank you.
"We don't have what it takes to win this war."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1544119/posts?page=47#47
"We need to nuke the blue zones stateside too. Too many dim-bulb, traitor-trash weenies."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1544119/posts?page=84#84
What, don't like having your posts quoted back to you?
"The bunch of you put together couldn't construct an argument for steak over tofu."
The sum of YOUR argument has been to insult, whine, and then make stupid statements:
"We don't have what it takes to win this war."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1544119/posts?page=47#47
"We need to nuke the blue zones stateside too. Too many dim-bulb, traitor-trash weenies."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1544119/posts?page=84#84
Such is the 'construction' of your 'argument'.
Sorry, didn't see you there.
Catching up wih the thread.
Take them both out. NOW!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.