February 17, 2005
Syria
Feb. 17 - U.S. Sec. of State Rice has said that the U.S. Ambassador to Syria, Margaret Scobey, has been recalled for an "interminate" period of time (
Tension mounts between U.S., Syria) and said that the U.S. has an "increasing list of problems" with Syria.
The ball is in Syria's court, but the response from Syrian Ambassador Imad Moustapha that Syria has cooperated with the U.S. and done everything asked of it is extremely non-substantive.
As always, it's the face down cards that are the most interesting.
14:03: Russia has just finalized a deal to sell short-range anti-aircraft missiles to Syria. They have been identified as Igla shoulder-held missiles called Strelets. A defence ministry spokesman says fears that the missiles could be used against US, British or Israeli aicraft were unwarranted because "the launching device is fixed either on tracked or wheeled gear and is not portable." (We're into tech stuff about which I know little, but if it's not portable, why the wheels? And why are wheels on a shoulder-held launcher?) [To clarify, I realize that wheels or tracks would be for the recoil but on a shoulder-launcher? Must.Google.]
The article ends on an ironic note:
Mr Putin is to meet President George W Bush in the Slovak capital Bratislava next week. They are expected to sign a deal aimed at curbing the spread of shoulder-held missile-launchers.
Posted by: Debbye at
07:13 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 210 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Nice post, but what gets me is that American taxpayers dollars go to Russia to get rid of WMDS and in return they add fuel to the fire. Strange you think?
Posted by: Dex at February 17, 2005 08:07 PM (kO17P)
2
Hey Dex- missiles, either shoulder held or tracked aren't WMD by any definition I am familiar with. Unless the State Department and American gov't is trying to sell conventional weapons as the new "WMD" in their saber rattling with Iran and Syria, they are simply everyday weapons.
They're not adding any fuel to any fire.
Posted by: Blackglasses at February 18, 2005 09:11 AM (Ojo2r)
3
"The ball is in Syria's court, but the response from Syrian Ambassador Imad Moustapha that Syria has cooperated with the U.S. and done everything asked of it is extremely non-substantive."
Syria did torture Maher Arar for the U.S. That must count for something.
Posted by: mijnheer at February 18, 2005 11:39 AM (QKBqr)
4
Blackglasses, he didn't say that short-range anti-aircraft missiles are WMDs. That's not exactly highly arcane technical knowledge. Yeah, he should've expressed himself more clearly. Whatever.
In any case: The fact that the Syrians appear to be arming people who shoot directly at Americans is an issue here, if we're talking about providing the Syrians with weapons.
mijnheer: Amusing indeed. Trying to change the subject, eh? You poor kids sure do hate seeing a old loyal Soviet satellite police-state not getting enough love.
By the way, is there any evidence to indicate that Arar's story is true? How much is he being paid, if you don't mind my asking? Just curious, that's all.
Posted by: Sigh... at February 18, 2005 03:10 PM (ZEGuQ)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Comments are disabled.
Post is locked.
15kb generated in CPU 0.019, elapsed 0.093 seconds.
64 queries taking 0.0835 seconds, 146 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
