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.
"My answer is to send a message that won't be misunderstood."
Yeah, by talking about nuking parts of the U.S. much like the now zotted TROLL 'aug645' who was saying that we needed to have an 'August 6 1945' happen here in the U.S.
Nice of you, really.
That remark pertty much negates your "Merry Christmas," doesn't it?
For someone who tries to make things about arguements, you certainly DON'T bring anything to the table, TROLL.
Hey, I'm not the one talking about nuking parts of the U.S., if you're yelping that badly, the rock must have hit you pretty hard.
that's all he has.....
I'm still waiting on a translation of "Keyboard puffer" from you, Troll.
Oh, the terrorists understand our message.
Just out of curiosity, where would you drop your nukes? I mean, besides the blue states as you've already designated? (As if that isn't a looney enough idea right there...)
I didn't know the media was promoting the same solutions that I am. Gonna have to watch some I guess. Why this harping on Iraq? I never mentioned it. At your level of participation it's probably unnecessary to know but the enemy is radical Islam not any country in particular. Just keep your boots shined, Sonny, you'll be all right.
You said this "war" is "PC."
Last I looked, (and I really have looked!) that's pretty much where the "war" is.
You must have been referring to some other war?
"the enemy is radical Islam not any country in particular."
You seem to think that the U.S. and certain states therein are the enemy, judging from your post 84.
"Why this harping on Iraqq?"
So you didn't say this:
"We don't have what it takes to win this war."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1544119/posts?page=47#47
you said raghead SOBs. You said you would nuke people in the region.
Guess what, IRaqis have been called ragheads in the past.
Let me guess, YOU think that Nuking country A wouldn't affect country B? In that case, you are even more of a moron than I already think you are.
Our war is with IRAQ troll. NOT with Syria. you scream PC this and PC that, but you haven't been there. You aren't in the military (Thank God) and you aren't in charge or in the chain of command (again thank God).
C'mon, Darks, what happened to your confidence that you can get anybody zotted after pack attacking them with your buddies? Lose your nerve?
"We don't have what it takes to win this war."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1544119/posts?page=47#47
You sound like the defeatist trolls.
you are out-matched, you are completely out-classed, and you have been outed as a troll...
what to quit yet?
Go back to the DUmpster
I'm willing to stake my "level of participation" against yours any day.
So it's a good thing I don't advocate nuking everything in sight.
Case closed.
LOL
his "level of participation" is whatever kiddie porn he can download.......
He's got more nerve than you do, he at least honors himself by NOT advocating nuking everything like some crybaby liberal.
And he isn't outing himself as an enemy of the state by advocating the annhiliation of the "blue parts" of this country either.
Way to go Osama.
Go check out the bio page for St.Chuck if your curious about my nerve.
http://www.freerepublic.com/~stchuck/
And, in case you don't get it yet, the determination to ban is made by the mods.
So far you've skated under their radar.
How about I ping a bunch of the forum military types to your comment about how we don't have what it takes to win this war?
Where's YOUR nerve?
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.