• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticism

joko104

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
65,981
Reaction score
23,408
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia

Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticism

Mi-17 helicopter units are being sold by Russia to the United States in a move that has drawn criticism. The M-17 helicopters will be deployed to the Afghan army.
WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. military officials insisted a top-secret Pentagon study proved the need to buy Russian helicopters for Afghanistan’s security forces. But the study actually recommended an American-made rotorcraft, according to unclassified excerpts obtained by The Associated Press.
The excerpts show the U.S. Army’s workhorse Chinook, built by Boeing Co. in Pennsylvania, was “the most cost-effective single platform type fleet for the Afghan Air Force over a 20-year” period.
The finding has triggered allegations the Defense Department misled members of Congress and improperly cut U.S. companies out of competing for a contract that has swelled to more than $1 billion.
More than two years since DOD announced it was acquiring Russian Mi-17 helicopters, a veil of secrecy still obscures the pact despite its high-dollar value, the potential for fraud and waste, and accusations the Pentagon muffled important information.

- - - - -

USA buying Russian helicopters. Whatjathink?

I think it sucks. The cost isn't JUST the dollar costs, but where those dollars go. If American made, those dollars go here. If not, they go elsewhere. Paying unemployment and welfare to American workers while have Russia build systems we pay for? That's NUTS by every measure.
 
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

Gotta love the editorial comment in the middle of it:

An extensive analysis of both helicopters concluded a refurbished Chinook would cost about 40 percent more overall to buy and maintain than the Russian helicopter, the senior defense official said.

That is hard to fathom.

Boeing executives informed congressional staff during a meeting held in late September that the cost of a refurbished CH-47D would be in the $12 million to $14 million range, according to a person knowledgeable about the discussion but not authorized to be identified as the source of the information.
 
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

1) The Afghans are use to Soviet tech.
2) Russian tech is Soviet tech.
3) Russian tech is cheaper than American tech.
4) The report seems to be bull**** made by Boeing.
5) Repairing Russian tech is easier than American tech.. and cheaper.

Saying that, I agree that US money should be use don US companies and jobs.. problem is that it would most likely cost the US tax payer much more due to the corruption in the US military.
 
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

1) The Afghans are use to Soviet tech.
2) Russian tech is Soviet tech.
3) Russian tech is cheaper than American tech.
4) The report seems to be bull**** made by Boeing.
5) Repairing Russian tech is easier than American tech.. and cheaper.

Saying that, I agree that US money should be use don US companies and jobs.. problem is that it would most likely cost the US tax payer much more due to the corruption in the US military.

Yeah, I was about to say, but you beat me to it. There's far more expense associated with the proper maintenance of aircraft and proper training of crew that this decision makes sense for the Afghans. Of course, rather than the US military buying those aircraft and giving them to the Afghans, why not give the Afghans the money and let them buy them themselves? Or is that what's going on here?
 
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

1) The Afghans are use to Soviet tech.
2) Russian tech is Soviet tech.
3) Russian tech is cheaper than American tech.
4) The report seems to be bull**** made by Boeing.
5) Repairing Russian tech is easier than American tech.. and cheaper.

Saying that, I agree that US money should be use don US companies and jobs.. problem is that it would most likely cost the US tax payer much more due to the corruption in the US military.
In a rare move I'm going to agree with everything you said, because I happen to know something about this. What you're saying is precisely why they are getting this aircraft, and this is not news exactly.
 
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

The thing is prolly bugged with all kinds of shut down viruses.

Remember when America sold weapons to Saddam and what those weapons did when we invaded them?
 
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia

Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticism

Mi-17 helicopter units are being sold by Russia to the United States in a move that has drawn criticism. The M-17 helicopters will be deployed to the Afghan army.
WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. military officials insisted a top-secret Pentagon study proved the need to buy Russian helicopters for Afghanistan’s security forces. But the study actually recommended an American-made rotorcraft, according to unclassified excerpts obtained by The Associated Press.
The excerpts show the U.S. Army’s workhorse Chinook, built by Boeing Co. in Pennsylvania, was “the most cost-effective single platform type fleet for the Afghan Air Force over a 20-year” period.
The finding has triggered allegations the Defense Department misled members of Congress and improperly cut U.S. companies out of competing for a contract that has swelled to more than $1 billion.
More than two years since DOD announced it was acquiring Russian Mi-17 helicopters, a veil of secrecy still obscures the pact despite its high-dollar value, the potential for fraud and waste, and accusations the Pentagon muffled important information.

- - - - -

USA buying Russian helicopters. Whatjathink?

I think it sucks. The cost isn't JUST the dollar costs, but where those dollars go. If American made, those dollars go here. If not, they go elsewhere. Paying unemployment and welfare to American workers while have Russia build systems we pay for? That's NUTS by every measure.

Since Afghan security forces have been known to shoot our troops it does not seem wise to give them better weapons to do so. When we get out then let them buy whatever they want using their own money to do so. Why should the US taxpayers fund the Afghan military at all?
 
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

I had not heard this and by the date seemed breaking news.

Those who do not learn from history are destined to repeat it. We have learned that shutting down American industry and jobs for cheap imports is devastatingly costly in the long run.

IF this with helicopters makes sense, then all US made military goods should be offshored. India, China, Indonesia and so forth could make it all much cheaper. We could just shut down our entire defense industry, like our textile, electronics, steel making and about everything else.

What would save enough more would be to replace our $840,000 each troops with Chinese, Indian, Indonesian and 3rd world military employees who would work for pennies on the dollar, plus no benefits or retirement in the future. This would save trillions and trillions of dollars.

The greatest savings would be to contract out our military defense completely. Put the defense of the USA up for competitive world bidding. Chinese ground forces, Russian air force and Japanese Navy with N. Korean Marines.

There MAY be a good PR reason to buy Russian helicopters for Afghanistan. For the USA, this year's ally is next year's enemy, and next year's enemy is the following year's ally.

Probably, they see in the future an opportunity for another glorious shock-and-awe campaign in which our fabulous military is obliterating the Afghanistan military like shooting fish in a barrel - so good for national pride - and it's always embarrassing when we blow up weapons we gave to them in the first place. So, probably, the purchase of Russian helicopters is so that we can eventually destroy them in air attacks in the future.
 
Last edited:
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

The thing is prolly bugged with all kinds of shut down viruses.

Remember when America sold weapons to Saddam and what those weapons did when we invaded them?

What are you talking about?
 
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

I posted complaining about this some time ago http://www.debatepolitics.com/gener...russian-we-dont-make-helicopters-america.html

...and there were some pretty good responses there FYI.

A lot of good answers and I do see some explanation for this. Better product, better price. But I still wonder why this should be so. We spend a fortune on our military. Something like 700 billion and that's probably not everything since they have lots of hidden classified stuff in the background.

Someone objected to bloating defense contractors. Sure, who loves them? They have enriched themselves beyond measure. But aren't we just bloating a Russian defense manufacturer?

Instead of giving away deals and freebies only to the very rich and very poor, wouldn't this have created jobs and kept those dollars circulating in America? Why do they buy $3000 toilet seats and then suddenly decide the Russians offer a better price? So what if our helicopters suck? They'll probably be used to fight us 10 years from now anyway. At least we would control the parts supply.

When I was in Thailand in 1967, I wrote to Lyndon Johnson complaining (very politely) about the same problem. Staff cars made in Germany. Generators made in Czechoslovakia (sp?). Hammers from China? Assistant Managers (for the contractor I worked for) from the Philippines. They had a justification for every point I addressed. The cutes one was if we hired Filipinos, they would go back to the Philippines and buy lots of American products there. Huh? As thanks for my interest, the State Department called my employer (Philco-Ford) and asked them to fire me. I threatened to sue (I had a one year contract) and they backed off. But the point is that they really like to buy foreign and they don't want to hear no stinkin' complaining. Hasn't changed much in 47 years.

So, while I now understad the rationale, I don't agree with the procedure. Someone brought up the Glock as an example of so what. Good point. We can't make an American gun effective enough to supply ourselves. That's ridiculous! The only country where everybody can buy a gun - a huge market - a huge military - and we can't come up with a decent gun? What's wrong with us?

I pulled it over and agree with you.
 
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

I have no problem with this. If we were buying Russian equipment for our own use I would but to supply a foreign army it makes to give them cheaper (to buy and maintain) equipment.
 
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

What are you talking about?

I can't recall all the details as it has been quite a while but you may recall, back during the , "Shock and Awe," attack on Iraq, when America opened a big old can of Whup-Ass, and all those Iraqi defense systems we're just firing off in the air indiscriminately. It was reported on one of the major networks, in an interview with some defense official, that the Iraqi defense systems had been infiltrated by American technology since it's inception, to be rendered useless at America's pleasure.

There should be a lesson somewhere in there when using the enemie's weaponry. At least, one would think so.

I will go try to look it up. Not really sure how to Google it but I will try.

Stay warm.
 
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

The thing is prolly bugged with all kinds of shut down viruses.

Remember when America sold weapons to Saddam and what those weapons did when we invaded them?

My unit took indirect fire from some Iraqi crewed, American made M-107's that looked to be working just fine...so, what did those weapons do?...lol
 
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

I have no problem with this. If we were buying Russian equipment for our own use I would but to supply a foreign army it makes to give them cheaper (to buy and maintain) equipment.

We don't want our future enemy to have gunships that are equal to ours.
 
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

We don't want our future enemy to have gunships that are equal to ours.

They are not gunships, they are transport helicopters.
 
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia

Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticism

Mi-17 helicopter units are being sold by Russia to the United States in a move that has drawn criticism. The M-17 helicopters will be deployed to the Afghan army.
WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. military officials insisted a top-secret Pentagon study proved the need to buy Russian helicopters for Afghanistan’s security forces. But the study actually recommended an American-made rotorcraft, according to unclassified excerpts obtained by The Associated Press.
The excerpts show the U.S. Army’s workhorse Chinook, built by Boeing Co. in Pennsylvania, was “the most cost-effective single platform type fleet for the Afghan Air Force over a 20-year” period.
The finding has triggered allegations the Defense Department misled members of Congress and improperly cut U.S. companies out of competing for a contract that has swelled to more than $1 billion.
More than two years since DOD announced it was acquiring Russian Mi-17 helicopters, a veil of secrecy still obscures the pact despite its high-dollar value, the potential for fraud and waste, and accusations the Pentagon muffled important information.

- - - - -

USA buying Russian helicopters. Whatjathink?

I think it sucks. The cost isn't JUST the dollar costs, but where those dollars go. If American made, those dollars go here. If not, they go elsewhere. Paying unemployment and welfare to American workers while have Russia build systems we pay for? That's NUTS by every measure.

As I understand that the helicopters were bought with the pilots because there beside the Russian Federation and have the opportunity to receive parts.
 
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

Yeah, I was about to say, but you beat me to it. There's far more expense associated with the proper maintenance of aircraft and proper training of crew that this decision makes sense for the Afghans. Of course, rather than the US military buying those aircraft and giving them to the Afghans, why not give the Afghans the money and let them buy them themselves? Or is that what's going on here?

Afghanistan grows enough opium poppies to pay for their own helicopters.
 
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

Afghanistan grows enough opium poppies to pay for their own helicopters.

The Afghans don't have the expertise to maintain them so they get training, and probably helping them setup a proper maintenance system. Before we showed up they were keeping them together with bubblegum and chicken wire. Our pilots didn't even want to get in those death traps.
 
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

Afghanistan grows enough opium poppies to pay for their own helicopters.

Afghanistan it is mountains, gorges and rocky deserts.:(
 
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

" It is a medium twin-turbine transport helicopter that can also act as a gunship.

I understand that, but I think they are mostly used for transport. And those gunships aren't as good as ours.
 
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

The Afghans don't have the expertise to maintain them so they get training, and probably helping them setup a proper maintenance system. Before we showed up they were keeping them together with bubblegum and chicken wire. Our pilots didn't even want to get in those death traps.

This topic was brought up a couple nights ago on another thread on the DP military forum.

We all know why the Afghan's will be flying Russian copters than American made copters. The same reason why we are arming the Afghan army with AK-47 instead of M-16's.

The Afghans aren't capable of maintaining either the American CH-47 or M-16.

And it's very probable all of the Afghan army weapons will be in the hands of the Taliban within a decade anyways.
 
Last edited:
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

And those gunships aren't as good as ours.

And that is my original point. :)
 
Re: Mi-17 Helicopter Sale: Mi-17 Helicopters Bought by US from Russia, Draws Criticis

This topic was brought up a couple nights ago on another thread on the DP military forum.

We all know why the Afghan's will be flying Russian copters than American made copters. The same reason why we are arming the Afghan army with AK-47 instead of M-16's.

The Afghans aren't capable of maintaining either the American CH-46 or M-16.

And it's very probable all of the Afghan army weapons will be in the hands of the Taliban within a decade anyways.

True, and the Navy is going to phase out the CH-46, but these are likely too advance for them as well.
 
Back
Top Bottom