Tell me why again we are buying Russian made helicopters for use in Afghanistan??

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by secgator, Jun 17, 2013.

  1. secgator
    Offline

    secgator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2007
    Messages:
    10,808
    Likes Received:
    362
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,050
    If this has been covered in here before, then just ignore--but I don't recall seeing anything about this or even hearing about it until this evening when I heard a discussion briefly on the radio.

    Why is our Defense Dept spending $1Billion for the US Army for Russian made helos while we have American factories needing work??? Not to mention propping up Russia's economy?

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapo...e-dept-sticking-with-russian-helicopter-deal/

    http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2013/04/05/US-to-buy-Russian-helicopters/UPI-31971365168951/

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...p-buying-russian-helicopters-carter-says.html
  2. gator_in_georgia
    Offline

    gator_in_georgia Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    Messages:
    3,230
    Likes Received:
    224
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +787
    Because the leadership doesn't want U.S. Soldiers flying U.S. Blackhawks filled with ANA Soldiers. The leadership wants ANA pilots flying the Russian helicopters. Remember no matter what the president has said we will begin drawing down in 2014.
    • Like Like x 1
  3. gatorev12
    Offline

    gatorev12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2009
    Messages:
    11,878
    Likes Received:
    341
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,756
    Multiple reasons: the Russian helicopters are cheaper and better-suited to the region and the needs of the Afghan military going forward. Blackhawks are excellent for many roles, but don't carry as much payload or troops as the Russian helicopters here do. We have US helicopters that match or exceed the Russian helicopters (Chinooks and the CH-53s), but they are more expensive and most of the current variants in production are upgraded models with technology we may not want the Afghans using.

    Additionally, giving the Russians the order here is a nice quid pro quo for when we want them to support us on more important issues (like Syria or Iran). Such is geopolitics sometimes.
  4. Allanon
    Offline

    Allanon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2010
    Messages:
    3,872
    Likes Received:
    394
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +449
    Because the Russians were so successful there?
  5. Lawdog88
    Offline

    Lawdog88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    30,945
    Likes Received:
    654
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Inside the War Room, No Name City, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +2,373
    Because John J. Rambo has retired, and there is no further threat to the Ruskies or their choppers.
  6. cocodrilo
    Offline

    cocodrilo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    11,766
    Likes Received:
    297
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,776
    Tell me again why we're in Afghanistan.
  7. uftaipan
    Offline

    uftaipan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2007
    Messages:
    4,488
    Likes Received:
    382
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Ratings Received:
    +1,997
    For all that is sacred, please let no one here rise to this bait. Just let it sit there on the hook.
  8. VAg8r1
    Offline

    VAg8r1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,970
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +174
    Although the quote below concerns the purchase of Mi17s by Thailand in 2008, not the recent purchase for Afghanistan, It explains the rationale for the recent decision to purchase the Mi17s rather than US produced Black Hawks.
  9. Gatorrick22
    Offline

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    35,055
    Likes Received:
    2,842
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +6,040
    I don't want that country running loose (soon they'll be on their own) with our technology i.e., helos.
  10. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    23,885
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +2,180
    3 for the price of 1? Given the cost, maybe we should be buying Russian helicopters for ourselves. ;)
  11. gatorev12
    Offline

    gatorev12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2009
    Messages:
    11,878
    Likes Received:
    341
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,756
    They're two different helicopters and are designed to different missions.

    You can buy 3 Ford Rangers for the cost of 1 F-450--but both are trucks.
  12. diehardgator1
    Offline

    diehardgator1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    6,791
    Likes Received:
    177
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +499

    And we can keep the Russian people with jobs while we keep our people on unemployment, food stamps, welfare, free cell phones, housing allowance etc. Very good trade off should do more of it.
  13. 108
    Offline

    108 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    18,532
    Likes Received:
    498
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings Received:
    +1,910
    to protect American citizens from terrorists :grin: :no:
  14. reformedgator
    Offline

    reformedgator Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    1,974
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +285
    We all know there's never been any terrorists in Afghanistan that meant us any harm.
  15. gatorev12
    Offline

    gatorev12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2009
    Messages:
    11,878
    Likes Received:
    341
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,756
    I don't approve of most of the welfare state any more than you do...but that doesn't exactly mean buying the Russian helicopters here was the wrong decision.

    Again, they were the cheaper option and the one that fit the needs better.
  16. diehardgator1
    Offline

    diehardgator1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    6,791
    Likes Received:
    177
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +499
    Sorry but no way should we be buying military weapons from a foreign country. Our tax dollars should remain in the US if at all possible even if we have to pay a little more
  17. gatorev12
    Offline

    gatorev12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2009
    Messages:
    11,878
    Likes Received:
    341
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,756
    We're not buying them for our own use, we're buying them for Afghanistan. It's one example of the hundreds of different types of aid we've given them. And on most stuff, they buy American.

    On this particular thing, it was far cheaper to buy the Russian helicopters. And if that purchase makes the Afghan army more self-sufficient, then it's a cheap deal.
  18. diehardgator1
    Offline

    diehardgator1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    6,791
    Likes Received:
    177
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +499
    Cheap is not always the best way to go.

Share This Page