Digg Townhall Tonight!
Tune into the live Digg townhall tonight at 5:00pm PST/8:00pm EST.
Did the US Arrange Deal to Sell Russian Helicopters to Iraq?
blog.wired.com — The Defense Department quietly gave a U.S. company a contract to provide 22 new The Defense Department quietly gave a U.S. company a contract to provide 22 new Russian-made Mi-17 troop transport helicopters to the Iraqi military in a deal worth an eyebrow-raising $325 million.
diggleague- 633 diggs
- digg it
- Crackerpat, on 07/25/2008, -13/+8If this is true, IF this is true, those responsible should be shot in the face.
- affiliatebroker, on 07/25/2008, -2/+3Prepare to be shocked.. Uh,, will you shoot?
- rootnik, on 07/26/2008, -1/+3Why???
- heliox, on 07/26/2008, -1/+3why?
- jerrycurley, on 07/26/2008, -3/+1I third that...why? Do you never want the Iraqi government to be self sustaining?
- waxoff, on 07/26/2008, -0/+5The problem is not handing the Iraqis Russian made helicopters. The problem is the sweetheart contract and corruption that hands them shoddy equipment. The Iraqis will never be self sustaining with contracts like that. Meanwhile ARINC walks away with millions in taxpayer money.
- vincimus, on 07/26/2008, -0/+4Funny, I just watched the movie Shooter, in which the main character shoots the people responsible for private contracts.
- waxoff, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3That movie was freaking hilarious. It hits every action movie cliche in the book. My buddies and I sat around drinking and predicting the next cliche while laughing our asses off.
He's gonna have a dog with a bandanna!
A an old officer of his will show up and say "We need you back!"
Gratuitous shots of the rifle from 30 different angles!
- waxoff, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3That movie was freaking hilarious. It hits every action movie cliche in the book. My buddies and I sat around drinking and predicting the next cliche while laughing our asses off.
- angusm, on 07/25/2008, -2/+33So who's selling these helicopters at nearly twice market value? That would be ARINC, owned by the Carlyle Group. And who are some of the partners in the Carlyle Group? I'll leave you to read the Wikipedia entry at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlyle_Group#Politic ...
- Zetsubou, on 07/26/2008, -0/+12Shafig bin Laden, older brother of Osama bin Laden
...Huh... - vincimus, on 07/26/2008, -1/+10Both of the Bush's
...Huh.. - sanman, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1Well, they're making weapons available to stabilize a country that needs it. You can't fight the insurgents without the right tools, and the US seems to be suffering from a shortage of helicopters, so they can't be giving any away. So what's the Iraqi state supposed to do? Not have enough helicopters?
Obviously, if the helicopters are meeting the needs, then we should be glad they're being supplied. Helicopters are widely considered to be crucial to counter-insurgency wars, and valuable where transportation infrastructure isn't adequate. I don't see a need to look askance at this.- geffo, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1at 3 time market rates, this is another tax on Iraqi oil revenues that otherwise could be used to fund their hospitals schools and man on the ground law and order.
helicopters are going to be useless in urban areas, yet again the USA is confusing afghanistan where the helicopters would be useful with Iraq.
Iraqi $ in the hands of the Iraqi people would solve 1/2 the issues there. - sanman, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1You're implying that Iraq should be buying helicopters for Afghanistan rather than for itself (as we know, those helicopters aren't being purchased by the US)
Well, I think Iraq has enough problems of its own to worry about, that it can direct its purchases to its own country's needs.
The price may be high, but those helicopters are vital for improving counter-insurgency, and for for bypassing conventional transportation bottlenecks.
Iraqi officials are probably safer in choppers than on the IED-vulnerable highways. - geffo, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1is English your second language?
the purchase of military supplies in Iraq is controlled by the USA which thinks the war in Iraq is the war in afghanistan.
the military tactics of the USA in Iraq are being confused with what is needed in Iraq and with what is needed in afghanistan.
having a technical army in an urban conflict has not worked for the USA, so why arm the Iraqis in the same way.
what the Iraqis need is access to their own money to pay their own people to do the jobs that USA militia are being paid excessive amounts for.
who pays first world prices in second and third world countries? corrupt people receiving kickbacks do.
why aren't these jobs being out source for low cost instead of extreme high cost?
helicopters are more vulnerable than using the correctly armoured ground vehicles the only reason helicopters could be safer is if they can avoid passing over dangerous ground it does not make them better at going over dangerous ground, using helicopters in this way is a withdrawal from urban patrols.
- geffo, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1at 3 time market rates, this is another tax on Iraqi oil revenues that otherwise could be used to fund their hospitals schools and man on the ground law and order.
- vexingmodstwo, on 07/27/2008, -0/+2A crapload of former Clinton advisors.. huh?
George Soros... huh?- kemp34, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1Two sides of the same coin.
- Zetsubou, on 07/26/2008, -0/+12Shafig bin Laden, older brother of Osama bin Laden
- wishninja, on 07/26/2008, -3/+15so what? everyone already knows we the Pentagon is sucking the money out of iraqs and giving it to private US companies that should be the real story title here.
Here is one for you:That is what we did in Afghanistan also. If most of the equipment you already have is Russian and most everyone knows how to work on that platform it makes sense that is what you would want to resupply the country with.
"Moscow and Washington have agreed a deal in principle over the supply of Russian weaponry to the Afghan army in its fight against the Taliban insurgency, senior diplomats announced in a statement Friday.
The deal was signed in the Russian capital as part of the United States-Russia Working Group on Counterterrorism (CTWG), although no immediate figures were put on any Russian supplies.
"An agreement in principle to provide Russian military material to the Afghanistan National Army," was concluded during a two-day meeting of the CTWG, the communique said." - drex8, on 07/26/2008, -8/+17The Defense Department quietly gave a U.S. company a contract to provide 22 new The Defense Department quietly gave a U.S. company a contract to provide 22 new The Defense Department quietly gave a U.S. company a contract to provide 22 new The Defense Department quietly gave a U.S. company a contract to provide 22 new....
- twister17e, on 07/26/2008, -3/+3Why am I not surprised? "Iraq's effort to re-equip its military has been marred with corruption". At least, for double the price, the Iraqi's will have "working equipment" unlike the Poland deal (mentioned in article) that involved accusations of purchasing shoddy equipment.
- ohitsme553, on 07/26/2008, -3/+4Headlines are meant to tell the story, not ask our opinion...
- Jovensenforcer, on 07/26/2008, -19/+6I know it's not true because I read it on digg... where liberals roll madly in their filthy lies.
- bjornski, on 07/26/2008, -2/+2Then go back to LittleGreenFootballs and FreeRepublic with your buddies.
- CryRightardCry, on 07/28/2008, -1/+2That's actually a link to Wired, if you bothered to look.
But as a ***** rightard warmonger you can't be bothered to read what you comment on, right?
The whole point is to just try to change the subject.
What's it like to be a warmonger but to also be too cowardly to enlist and fight the war you claim is necessary?
- MattNF, on 07/26/2008, -1/+16"The Defense Department quietly gave a U.S. company a contract to provide 22 new The Defense Department quietly gave a U.S. company a contract to provide 22 new Russian-made Mi-17 troop transport helicopters to the Iraqi military in a deal worth an eyebrow-raising $325 million."
Is there an echo in here?- T440, on 07/26/2008, -2/+3I feel like I'm back in middle school English class when the stupid kid had to stand up and read something out loud.
- Stonekeeper, on 07/26/2008, -8/+4I totally cannot I totally cannot believe it
- damonic, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2Does this truly surprise anyone?
- bluesman3535, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1It explains why the Iraqi Army takes so long to train, US forces had to learn Russian first to explain the chopper manuals to them.
- Reedan, on 07/26/2008, -3/+1Did the US Arrange Deal to did the US Arrange Deal to Sell Russian Helicopters to Iraq?
- jamessavik, on 07/26/2008, -2/+14Those Russian helicopters are just what Iraq's new military needs: they are designed to be low maintenance and deliver squads to the battlefield. They are also designed to survive ground fire short of AAA and protect their troops and and crews.
American helios like the Blackhawk or the Paveway would be much more expensive to purchase and maintain. In fact the US doesn not export either model.- lived666, on 07/26/2008, -0/+12Using Russian equipment is not the problem, paying twice the market price is the problem.
- cvelusc, on 07/26/2008, -2/+5Untrue. The Israelis have a number of Blackhawk helicopters in their inventory.
- waxoff, on 07/26/2008, -1/+2There really should be a delete button...
- bjornski, on 07/26/2008, -0/+4And we pay to keep them serviced and stocked with parts.
- jamessavik, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2Back when I was in, those birds were not exported. If it's changed since then, I didn't know.
There's bound to be a very small market for them because most countries just don't have the infrastructure and engineering skill to support them. Israel, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, NATO members would be my short list. - warriorscot, on 07/26/2008, -1/+2Israel doesn't really count, it lets pretty much all the defence companies access to do whatever they like in return for a slice of any good stuff they develop. They also fall in the US development camp, they share technology and resources to get the best kit out quicker, Europe does the same thing with poorer countries often getting "freebies" or discounts in return for contributing something to development.
- hmunkey, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1Now they do, because of joint US and Iraqi troops.
- miatafan, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2Not Paveway, it is Pavehawk.
- bluesman3535, on 07/27/2008, -1/+0Since Russia and Iran seem very cozy, these choppers might come with with a nice surprise if Iran invades Iraq, 'shutdown' via satellite.
- skews13, on 07/26/2008, -0/+4ah, brings back fond memories of reagan, and ollies "neat idea", to trade arms for hostages in the early 80's. my, my how short peoples memories are.
- bluesman3535, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1Yes but nobody forgets $600.00 toilet seats, make that $1500.00 in todays money.
- bjornski, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2This time they just didn't buy them with money made by selling crack in L.A.
They took it from the taxpayers instead.
- InfinitySnatch, on 07/26/2008, -3/+2A Hind D?!?
- chrisgnv, on 07/26/2008, -0/+8So we start a war in Iraq after the events set up by Osama Bin Laden, set up a new government, then overcharge the new government for some helicopters and give the contract to a private US company affiliated with the administration, and worse, the older brother of Osama Bin Laden?
- Flytrap, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3He he he... If you removed the names, it could be a common tale in many an African country
- razorsharpwit, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3More and more things seem like 1984....Eric Blair, what a genius.
- seanof, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3I bet a good deal off the money is going strait into some secret bank accounts.
- bjornski, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1Gee, ya think?
- ufia, on 07/26/2008, -0/+5That's some ***** luxurious choppers. At that price, you want to keep them safe in the hangar, and not risk having them shot down in Iraq.
- DigitusAnonymus, on 07/26/2008, -1/+6So?
-Dick Cheney - bluesman3535, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2So the Iraqis want us out asap, then want Russian armor too. I didn't realize the Surge worked to help Putin. Oh well, another day in the life of a blunder.
- dupswapdrop, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2As long as one of the bush man's bud's makes a ton of money its all good.
- LenBaird, on 07/27/2008, -0/+2His father(George Bush sr.) is associated with the Carlyle group. Last I knew they listed him as a "consultant" so it wouldn't look so much like his son was starting wars that hugely increase the value of his inheritance. Good thing we don't allow presidents to do that... oh crap wait a second!
Look at the two main warmongers, and then look at the private contractors. Funny thing, you'll see Carlyle group and Haliburton all over the place. Must be a coincidence.
- LenBaird, on 07/27/2008, -0/+2His father(George Bush sr.) is associated with the Carlyle group. Last I knew they listed him as a "consultant" so it wouldn't look so much like his son was starting wars that hugely increase the value of his inheritance. Good thing we don't allow presidents to do that... oh crap wait a second!
- MorganMghee, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1Then Pakistan, then Palestine, then Iran, then Israel, then Iraq then Turkey then Afghanistan then Pakistan then Palestine...
STOP IT! - crackberri, on 07/26/2008, -7/+0You’re a di di di dipshipt……….
- Ortheos, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1Australia paid $3 billion for around 16-17 state of the art helicopters ordered from the US. They were all found to be faulty after one crashed for no reason, and were returned. US is a ***** weapons exporter, even to it's closest allies. You DON'T get what you paid for with the US.
- kemp34, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1Corruption.
- facepalmjpg, on 07/27/2008, -0/+0God forbid the Iraqis transport troops...
- LenBaird, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1They are paying almost triple the going rate to a company associated with the "Carlyle Group", who employ George Bush sr. If his son hadn't started an illegal war of aggression, they wouldn't need to be spending outrageous sums to transport troops around a war zone.
So, the short winded response is, you are missing the point.
- LenBaird, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1They are paying almost triple the going rate to a company associated with the "Carlyle Group", who employ George Bush sr. If his son hadn't started an illegal war of aggression, they wouldn't need to be spending outrageous sums to transport troops around a war zone.
- JMellissa, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1Of course! without an armed adversary, how can you keep a war going? without war, the fat cats don't get their money.
- LilRabbitFooFoo, on 08/11/2008, -0/+2We (meaning Rumsfeld/Cheney/etc.) sold Iraq the chemical weapons and helicopter means to distribute them so they could use them on Iran. Unfortunately, ahem, their buddy Saddam had some left over and tested them on a few hundred thousand Kurds. Bushco Prime didn't care though, until Saddam went into Kuwait and threatened Saudi Arabia.
I don't see why any of this is a surprise to any of you. If we Americans looked past a 4 year lens, we'd be well aware of why we are currently in the state of ruin our country is in now.
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is