It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Report: Syria agrees to hide Iran nukes

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by kojac
O.K I"m surprised no one else hasn't picked this up. Nowhere in the above article, apart from the heading, does it even make reference to nucleur weapons.

"The magazine, citing diplomatic sources, said Syria agreed to store Iranian materials and weapons should Teheran come under United Nations sanctions."


Kojac, I don’t mean this as an insult, but you have really missed something very simple about this article to lead you to your point. ONLY nuclear weapons and WMD's are governed by the UN, conventional weapons are not. To assume they are talking about hiding conventional weapons from UN inspectors is just plain silly and a sign of shortsightedness.

I give you credit for looking deeper into the story, but the result was less than accurate.




posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 03:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc

Originally posted by kojac
O.K I"m surprised no one else hasn't picked this up. Nowhere in the above article, apart from the heading, does it even make reference to nucleur weapons.

"The magazine, citing diplomatic sources, said Syria agreed to store Iranian materials and weapons should Teheran come under United Nations sanctions."


Kojac, I don’t mean this as an insult, but you have really missed something very simple about this article to lead you to your point. ONLY nuclear weapons and WMD's are governed by the UN, conventional weapons are not. To assume they are talking about hiding conventional weapons from UN inspectors is just plain silly and a sign of shortsightedness.

I give you credit for looking deeper into the story, but the result was less than accurate.


Is that really true though?
I mean wasn't Iraq banned from having long range missiles and non-defensive weapons and things like that? So they're not necessarily talking about "weapons of mass destruction" in these treaties they're just talking about whatever weapon systems the UN decides to prohibit in the course of sanctions.



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Anyone care to bet that those reported "diplomatic sources" turn out not to have anything to do with either Syria or Iran?

Such an obvious cranking up of the tensions on this kind of thing doesn't seem to me to be in either Iran or Syria's interests.

One can only guess as who might feel they benefit from all this 'pressure'.


Anyhoo I though Syria was the USA's great mate at the moment seeing as they are helping out with the current (shameful and disgusting) torture policy....um, er.....I mean 'extrordinary rendition' (
) policy.



new topics
 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join