Moscow Arms Assad with a Top-Flight Surface Missile

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 06:57 PM
link   
Vladimar Putin has gone against the promise that he gave to the US, and signed a contract to sell the Iskander SS-26 to Syria. This missle is one of the most advanced in the world, and neither the US nor NATO have anything in their arsenals to match it.

Two generals were in Moscow on the same day, September 26: the head of Israel’s National Security Council Maj.-Gen (Res.) Giora Eiland and the Syrian chief of staff General Ali Habib. Both also called on the Russian chief of staff, Gen. Yuri Baluyevski. The Syrian general came out of his meeting with a brilliant contract for the sale of the advanced Iskander SS-26 surface missile. The Israeli general ran into a blank wall when he tried to persuade the Russian to withhold the missile from the Assad regime. Last January, when the deal was first broached, the Bush administration stepped in and obtained a promise from president Vladimir Putin to call off the sale, as did Israel’s Ariel Sharon during the Russian president’s visit in May.

Putin has broken those pledges.
:
With a 400-km range and a 480-kilo warhead composed of 54 elements, the missile hits a target within a 20-meter radius. Two missiles with a range of 280km are mounted on each launch pad. The system can be used against small and large targets alike, easily overcoming air defenses. It is almost impossible for existing electronic weapons systems to prevent the Iskander’s launch because of its speed and high flexibility. Its targets are found in mid-flight by satellites, accompanying airplanes, conventional intelligence centers or a lone soldier directing artillery fire. Targets may also be found by feeding photos into the missile’s computer by means of a scanner.

The self-direction device functions even in fog, darkness or storms. The name Iskander is Alexander (the Great) in the Turkoman language. Weighing 3,800 kilos it is operated by a crew of three. It comes in two versions: the 500-kilo version provided the Russian Army and the 280-kilo missile sold to Syria.

So impressive is the Russian “Stone”, that in 2004, the Americans sought to include it in various treaties signed with Russia for precluding the manufacture and sale of certain weapons. Moscow balked. A Western missile expert says: “Even a small quantity of these missiles is capable of radically changing the balance of strength in local conflicts.” It is a strategic weapon for countries with a small area like Syria.
www.debka.com...

The Syrians paid cash to ensure a Q1 2006 delivery.

Up goes the ante in the game of insanity...




posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 07:02 PM
link   
it figures. the Syrians now hoping to get a weapon to deter anibody. or it may be that they decided to go to war again against Israel. and that aint no fantasy, its a possibility.



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 07:13 PM
link   

Vladimar Putin has gone against the promise that he gave to the US.....


I believe you are mistaken on this.

An agreement that would cover these missiles was never made.

The Article you posted says the same....



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 07:15 PM
link   
I think Israel is the real target also. Israel should never allow delivery to be made.

Maybe Russia will take the cash and stiff Syria...



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel

Vladimar Putin has gone against the promise that he gave to the US.....


I believe you are mistaken on this.

An agreement that would cover these missiles was never made.

The Article you posted says the same....

Oh. Ok.

Last January, when the deal was first broached, the Bush administration stepped in and obtained a promise from president Vladimir Putin to call off the sale, as did Israel’s Ariel Sharon during the Russian president’s visit in May.

Is it the semantics that have you confused?



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 07:43 PM
link   
Syria has made several purchases of weaponry in the last decade. Included are short-to-medium range surface-to-air and surface-to-surface tactical missiles. (non nuke). As well as interesting equipment flown in from Iran. (If you missed it, Iran and Syria made a mutual defense pact a while back. Altho such agreements in the middle-east are mostly empty words.)

Three reasons why:
1. The Syrian miltary is in poor condition.
2. The US forces invaded Iraq.
3. Israel really doesn't want to give back the Golen Heights.

The Israeli military does not need similar surface-to-surface items. They have an Aiir Force and Army capable of force projection. Syria does not.

SS-26: Basically the more modern replacement for the "Scud" missile system. Range is 400km, but 300km on the export model. So I'm surprised to see the range listed as 400km. Capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. But only the Soviets and the Americans can make one small enough to meet the low weight payload requirement. Very sophisticated targeting capabilities. The most important fact is that the SS-26 units are road mobile. Able to move around and hide. That makes them difficult to find or track.
www.fas.org...

Israel doesn't like missiles like this, having been hit by a few before. That would be why they now have the THEL surface-to-air defensive laser to attack them with. Developed with help from TRW in the US.
www.israeli-weapons.com...



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
Oh. Ok.

Last January, when the deal was first broached, the Bush administration stepped in and obtained a promise from president Vladimir Putin to call off the sale, as did Israel’s Ariel Sharon during the Russian president’s visit in May.

Is it the semantics that have you confused?


The part at the end makes the article self-contradictory.


So impressive is the Russian “Stone”, that in 2004, the Americans sought to include it in various treaties signed with Russia for precluding the manufacture and sale of certain weapons. Moscow balked.


If there was an Agreement can we read it ourselves?



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 08:09 PM
link   

If there was an Agreement can we read it ourselves?

Sure, go ahead. It sounds like more of a verbal agreement than a written one.

And both types of agreements are broken with the same regularity.

But you're going way off topic here. The important point is the sale of the missles to Syria.

Are you defending Putin's integrity, trying to imply that he would never break an agreement? Why is it important?





top topics
 
0

log in

join