Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

I'm glad the U.S. aviation industry doesn't need $572 million in business

3 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Guest


Guest

The U.S. government is buying more Russian helicopters for the Afghans. What are the idiots in D.C. thinking? $572 million worth, this is the 2nd buy - the first was a paltry $217.7 Million.


(Reuters) - The Pentagon said on Monday it will spend $572 million to buy 30 Russian-built military helicopters that will be used by Afghan security forces.
The Mi-17 helicopters will be used by Afghanistan's National Security Forces Special Mission Wing, which supports counter-terrorism, counter-narcotics and special operations missions.
The contract with Rosoboronexport, the Russian arms company, covers spare parts, test equipment and engineering support. The Pentagon said the work would be performed in Russia. It is expected to be completed by the end of 2014.
A year ago, the Defense Department purchased a dozen of the Mi-17 aircraft from Rosoboronexport for $217.7 million, as part of a larger contract originating in 2011.

(Reporting by Charles Abbott; Editing by Toni Reinhold)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/17/us-afghan-usa-helicopters-idUSBRE95G18620130617

Nekochan

Nekochan

This is crazy!!!!!!

Guest


Guest

Nekochan wrote:This is crazy!!!!!!


_______

Yes it is - but given Obamas infatuation with Putin he wants to make sure he is in tight with Russia when he has "more space" in a few short years. Of course Putin, being the guy he is, shafted Obama on Syria but what the hey - the illustrious CinC will probably just tell the Pentagon to arm Syrian rebels with RUSSIAN weapons too.

Nekochan

Nekochan

I asked my husband about this and he told me that these are good helicopters, they're big, they carry a lot of people and they're cheap.

Guest


Guest

nochain wrote:
Nekochan wrote:This is crazy!!!!!!


_______

Yes it is - but given Obamas infatuation with Putin he wants to make sure he is in tight with Russia when he has "more space" in a few short years. Of course Putin, being the guy he is, shafted Obama on Syria but what the hey - the illustrious CinC will probably just tell the Pentagon to arm Syrian rebels with RUSSIAN weapons too.


   Selling to the US.....Arming the government of Syria along with ally Iran...Yup looks like clear as mud foreign policy from the US side of things...

2seaoat



Also.....we are not handing our technology over to future enemies......Do you really think we give a rat's tail about maintenance on these cheap helicopters in five years....we be gone.

Guest


Guest

And now it's discovered the same company is being used by the Russian Gov't to supply weapons for the Syrian Army. I'll bet they are laughing all the way to the bank.

Guest


Guest

nochain wrote:And now it's discovered the same company is being used by the Russian Gov't to supply weapons for the Syrian Army. I'll bet they are laughing all the way to the bank.


      This would make the cowh and the administration 'traitors' by definition provided here on this forum...I know...Cheney and others did it too...

boards of FL

boards of FL

2seaoat provided a valid explanation. Did you two not see it?


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest

boards of FL wrote:2seaoat provided a valid explanation.  Did you two not see it?

    My comment wasn't directed towards 'seaoat' but thanks for taking the time to point that out...Did you not understand that?...'Bob' will understand and probably agree...

boards of FL

boards of FL

newswatcher wrote:
boards of FL wrote:2seaoat provided a valid explanation.  Did you two not see it?

    My comment wasn't directed towards 'seaoat' but thanks for taking the time to point that out...Did you not understand that?...'Bob' will understand and probably agree...

So what is your take on 2seaoat's explanation?


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest

boards of FL wrote:2seaoat provided a valid explanation.  Did you two not see it?

_____
Valid to you and 2SO perhaps. Heavy lift helicopters are not exactly "cutting edge technology" - Boeing is still the building the CH-47F Chinook for export so the technology give-away is moot. U.S. aviation companies would hire contractors so the point about the military (or whoever 2SO is talking about) not being around Afghanistan in a few years is also moot. 

In short, yes I saw 2SO's comment and evaluated it as "not valid" in this particular instance although he usually is closer to the target.

boards of FL

boards of FL

http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/us-scraps-military-equipment-worth-billions-before-leaving-afghanistan-382182

The US military has destroyed more than 77,000 metric tons of military equipment - including mine-resistant troop transport vehicles - as it prepares to withdraw from Afghanistan in late 2014, the Washington Post reported today.

More than 7-billion-dollar worth of military equipment is no longer needed, or would be too expensive to ship back to the United States, and much of it is being shredded and sold locally as scrap metal, the Post reported, citing US military officials.

Donating the gear to the Afghan government is difficult because of complicated bureaucratic rules, plus US officials do not believe the Afghans could maintain the gear.


_________________
I approve this message.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum