| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| Syria focusing on missile production, with help from Iran |
| 2006-05-12 |
| From Geostrategy-Direct, subscription. TEL AVIV — Syria has accelerated production of missile and rockets. Israeli military sources said the regime of President Bashar Assad has been investing in the development of missiles and rockets. The sources said the Syrian effort has been facilitated by Iran. On April 26, military intelligence chief Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin said Damascus has been developing and producing extended-range Scud ballistic missiles. Yadlin told an audience of former intelligence officers that Syria was producing 200- and 300- millimeter rockets with a range of up to 100 kilometers. Yadlin said some of these rockets have been transferred to Hizbullah. He cited a convoy of trucks sent from Syria to Lebanon in February 2006. In 2005, Syria fired a Scud D in an attempt to expand production of an indigenous model of the extended-range ballistic missile. The missile landed in Turkey. Oops.... The general said Syria has sought major weapons platforms amid an increase in revenue. Damascus has not conducted a major aircraft or main battle tank purchase in more than 20 years. On May 2, the London-based Al Hayat daily and Dubai-based Al Arabiya satellite channel quoted Iranian military sources as saying that Teheran has obtained information that the United States was planning a strike on both Iran and Syria. The sources said the United States was drafting options to topple the regimes in both Damascus and Teheran. I would imagine that that report of planning is true. I would expect nothing less from our government. I'm sure that missiles are being transported down to the south Lebanon border area. This while thing with Iran, Syria, and Israel is headed for a showdown. |
| Posted by:Alaska Paul |
| #7 I'm certain they would but did you check the list of destination cities? A few well-scheduled delays and Iran could easily deliver a half-dozen or more Fatman / Little Boy sized bombs to western cities and even explode them at altitude for the greatest effect. |
| Posted by: AzCat 2006-05-12 21:11 |
| #6 think Israel wouldn't shoot it down before it ever made the border? |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-05-12 21:01 |
| #5 Who needs missiles? |
| Posted by: AzCat 2006-05-12 20:58 |
| #4 SYRIA = PAKISTAN = PALESTINE = LEBANON, etal > are all SSSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHH future provinces of Iran, whether they like it or not, know it or not. Iran will not destroy the Muslim ME - Iranian-controlled/supported armed Militia-Terror groups will, ergo Tehran cannot be blamed by anyone. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2006-05-12 20:53 |
| #3 Last year there was some noise about the to lazy to site it though. |
| Posted by: RD 2006-05-12 18:36 |
| #2 Iran is convinced that missiles are the ultimate weapons. Same with North Korea. Ergo, some of our top priorities is to defeat 200% of their overkill(*) with reserve systems still unused. These anti-missile systems also have to be able to defeat multiple missile salvos, and in a 180 degree to 270 degree arc around the entire launching nation. Finally, to assume that both nations could launch missile strikes simultaneously. Fortunately, we have advanced far beyond the singular use of anti-missile missiles, and have several other tools at our disposal. We also have the supreme advantage of advanced satellite reconnaisance to detect the missile-alert-launch sequence that will both permit pre-emptive counterattack against launch sites, and launched missile tracking and targetting control. Possibly even detection of decoy weapons. It is also important that the other nuclear powers also have similar satellite capabilities, so that with a missile-alert-launch, pre-agreed protocols will automatically come into effect. Their own satellites will confirm the use of ballistic missiles to start a war, leaving our enemy exposed for "retaliation without complaint." (*) Overkill with missiles is correctly defined as having enough missiles to achieve 100% coverage of targets, assuming that some missiles just won't launch, some will detonate on launch, some will be destroyed in their launch area before launch by enemy fire, some will fail in flight due to mechanical malfunction, some will be intercepted due to enemy action, some will significantly miss their target area, and some will just not detonate on landing or will not MIRV properly. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2006-05-12 16:57 |
| #1 Damascus has not conducted a major aircraft or main battle tank purchase in more than 20 years. Purchase? I thought most of Syrias stuff was gratis from the Soviets. |
| Posted by: 6 2006-05-12 16:18 |