fedayeen

James Rogers jamesr@best.com
Thu, 27 Mar 2003 13:08:34 -0800


I wrote:=20
> I think most of the objection was in principle, since it=20
> violates the arms embargo.  It represents a modest threat at=20
> best to the forces in the region.  It is possible that the=20
> Iraqis acquired more advanced anti-armor systems from the=20
> Russians, but I doubt it.


I stand corrected.  I'm seeing from other sources that the anti-tank =
system
in question is the Russian AT-14, a modern late-generation anti-tank =
system.
So it isn't an older generation system, but a state-of-the-art (for the
Russians) system.  Apparently US soldiers have been told to retrieve any =
of
these systems they find, either captured or destroyed.

There is a good probability that these weapons were proxied through =
Syria,
and not imported into Iraq directly from Russia (such weapons were =
exported
to Syria from Russia).  I believe many of the French imports were =
proxied
through Syria during the embargo as well.

-James Rogers
 jamesr@best.com