Skip to comments.
Iraq on $3 billion weapons buying binge
The Examiner ^
| March 19 2007
| Rowan Scarborough
Posted on 03/19/2007 2:35:34 PM PDT by jmc1969
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61 next last
I have said for three years the Pentagon was stupid for telling the Iraqis to buy Warsaw pact junk from Russia, because we didn't trust them with American weapons. It looks like reality dawned on someone in the Pentagon.
1
posted on
03/19/2007 2:35:36 PM PDT
by
jmc1969
To: jmc1969
They're buying it with what money? Is the 3 billion from the US taxpayer?
2
posted on
03/19/2007 2:38:25 PM PDT
by
Barney Gumble
(A liberal is someone too broadminded to take his own side in a quarrel - Robert Frost)
To: Barney Gumble
Iraq has a 10 billion dollar surplus this year from oil money.
And, that is after they spent 3 billion on US weapons.
Iraq makes 40 billion a year from oil.
3
posted on
03/19/2007 2:40:01 PM PDT
by
jmc1969
To: jmc1969
Awesome! Awesome! Awesome! This is the best news I've heard on Iraq in a long time. Without taking any arrogant high-ground... that's also what I hoped to see for years. Iraq has to be incorporated into the broader American-Western defense and military system (not necessairly NATO itself). They should use our weapons, not Soviet/Chinese junk.
4
posted on
03/19/2007 2:40:05 PM PDT
by
SolidWood
(Attack Iran NOW!)
To: Barney Gumble
I think I heard somewhere that they have OIL!
5
posted on
03/19/2007 2:40:53 PM PDT
by
Ernest_at_the_Beach
(The DemonicRATS believe ....that the best decisions are always made after the fact.)
To: Barney Gumble
Who cares? Should we give it to the spinach farmers?
6
posted on
03/19/2007 2:41:07 PM PDT
by
rocksblues
(Do unto others as they do unto you!)
To: jmc1969
Question: The AK-47 has a reputation as being a very resilient to harsh environments with little upkeep. Will the AK-47 hold up better in sandy desert environments than out M-16? Will your average Iraqi Army soldier put in the gun maintenance needed to keep the M-16 firing cleanly?
Or is this an outdated assumption?
7
posted on
03/19/2007 2:41:11 PM PDT
by
Yossarian
(Everyday, somewhere on the globe, somebody is pushing the frontier of stupidity...)
To: jmc1969
"I have said for three years the Pentagon was stupid for telling the Iraqis to buy Warsaw pact junk from Russia"
I don't think they've actually bought anything from Russia since 2003. It is mostly a matter of letting them use what they already have...in large quantities. We purposely didn't destroy a lot of weapons (including tanks and APCs) with the intent of resupplying the new Iraqi army when it was ready.
8
posted on
03/19/2007 2:43:44 PM PDT
by
Rokke
To: Rokke
Yes, the Iraqis have done multi million dollar weapons sales with Russia since the war ended and they have done sales with lots of ex-Soviet counties in Eastern Europe.
9
posted on
03/19/2007 2:45:31 PM PDT
by
jmc1969
To: jmc1969
10
posted on
03/19/2007 2:56:24 PM PDT
by
Rokke
To: Marine_Uncle; Dog; Coop; Allegra; DevSix; Cap Huff; zarf; SandRat; Dog Gone; Ernest_at_the_Beach; ..
11
posted on
03/19/2007 2:57:05 PM PDT
by
jmc1969
To: Rokke
Mostly replacement equipment for their Warsaw pact junk.
12
posted on
03/19/2007 2:57:50 PM PDT
by
jmc1969
To: jmc1969
We're arming the Palestinians with M-16s, may as well arm the Iraqis with them, too.
Were it my money, I'd be buying theHK416 instead. Nothing like replacing the gas tube with a short stroke piston to improve reliability!
13
posted on
03/19/2007 2:59:20 PM PDT
by
Yo-Yo
(USAF, TAC, 12th AF, 366 TFW, 366 MG, 366 CRS, Mtn Home AFB, 1978-81)
To: Yossarian
I like the Ak-47 round more than the M-16.
Sure, it's not as accurrate, long range.
It knocks people down, however, instead of going through them.
Opinions differ.
14
posted on
03/19/2007 3:00:37 PM PDT
by
MeanWestTexan
(Kol Hakavod Lezahal)
To: jmc1969
So it's their money that's buying our equipment?
15
posted on
03/19/2007 3:03:00 PM PDT
by
airborne
(Airborne! Ranger! Vietnam Vet! That's why I support DUNCAN HUNTER 2008!)
To: airborne
16
posted on
03/19/2007 3:10:07 PM PDT
by
jmc1969
To: jmc1969
17
posted on
03/19/2007 3:12:42 PM PDT
by
airborne
(Airborne! Ranger! Vietnam Vet! That's why I support DUNCAN HUNTER 2008!)
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Its a bit suprising how many people forget that Iraq isn't a dirt poor third world country.
In 4-6 years they could be pumping more oil then Saudi Arabia.
18
posted on
03/19/2007 3:14:02 PM PDT
by
jmc1969
To: jmc1969
Unfortunately, they will be used against us in the short term of this generational fight. But we have no choice - if we don't arm them, Iran will infiltrate them even faster.
Still, I would limit what we give them, otherwise 1979 all over again.
19
posted on
03/19/2007 3:20:38 PM PDT
by
rjp2005
(Lord have mercy on us)
To: jmc1969
40 billion a year. If that's accurate I don't want to hear about 1 more penny of American taxpayer money going to anything but our own military period. If they've got 10 billion surplus let em build their own libraries and schools !!!
20
posted on
03/19/2007 3:23:57 PM PDT
by
Obie Wan
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson