About shooting down helicopters...

[Jackpine Radical]

I assume there are a lot of these lying around loose in the Middle East. The only question is "Why now?" (Did they just get a stockpile from somewhere? Saudi? Iran? Somewhere else?)

Russian 9К32 "стрела-2" - arrow, NATO reporting name SA-7 "Grail") is a man-portable, shoulder-fired, low-altitude surface-to-air missile (SAM) system similar to the US Army REDEYE, with a high explosive warhead and passive infrared homing guidance. The SA-7 was the first generation of Soviet man portable SAMs, its first version entered service in 1968. Although the SA-7 is limited in range, speed, and altitude, it can force enemy pilots to fly above its effective ceiling, causing increased chance of detection by radar and vulnerability to other air defence systems. The SA-7 is a tail-chase missile system and its effectiveness depends on its ability to lock onto the heat source of low-flying fixed and rotary-wing aircraft.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SA-7

[Little Wing]

1. Maybe Putin is just giving us a little taste of what we did to them in Afghanistan

[madokie]

10. maybe

[Bonobo]

2. THAT is the right question indeed. Why now?

Afghanistan connection?

[northernsoul]

4. Lots of countries don't mind seeing us bogged down in this disaster

Could be any of a wide variety of candidates. 'Why now?' is the question we should be asking, though.

<edited for grammar, content>

[Jacobin]

3. We gave Osama shoulder fired missiles in Afghanistan to use

against the USSR.

I understand that arms like these can be purchased freely on the black market.

Since we dumped hundreds of tons of hundred dollar bills on Iraq, I suppose there's no shortage of money for them to buy arms. Also, the Iraqis are siphoning off lots of oil to sell on the black market to pay for arms.

This is obviously going to get much much worse before it gets better.

you can't drive around Iraq because of IEDs and now flying helicopters there has become problematic.

[Solo_in_MD]

13. Bear i mind that those weapons have a shelf life after which they need to be

refurbished. If there are fresh ones out there, the source would be interesting to know

[dysfunctional press]

17. it's the batteries- iirc they have a max life of 20 years(?)

or it may be less than that- but once they go, they're pretty much worthless.
(except perhaps as a component of an ied.)

[stonecoldsober]

I think it's the Iranians

But unlike our fearless leader, that is not a reason to nuke them. It is just another reason to get the fuck out!

[Dhalgren]

9. I don't think it is the Iranians. They would have nothing to gain. I

think that it is probably arms bought with all that Saudi money that has been flowing to the insurgents. Getting SAMs in this day and age takes only the will and the money - the insurgents have both- now.

[stonecoldsober]

12. Nothing to gain? Sorry, you lost me there.

[Dhalgren]

15. I don't see what the Iranians have to gain by giving SAMs to Sunni insurgents.

What is to explain?

[stonecoldsober]

21. Who said they were Sunni?

[Dhalgren]

22. Well, in three of the instances the US aircraft was engaged with

what they claimed to be insurgents (i.e. Sunnis). The other two (including the merc chopper) it was unclear who the "enemy" was. But why Iran should be the "top of the list" of likely suspects is just a result of Bush administration propaganda. Again, I can see nothing that Iran would have to gain by supplying SAMs to any group in Iraq.

Maybe you know of something Iran would have to gain by such action? Please share...

[stonecoldsober]

23. Insurgents can be anyone, even a Shia

"Maybe you know of something Iran would have to gain by such action? Please share..."

You will have to put that question to them.

[Dhalgren]

24. You are the one who said that it was the Iranians. Why do you

think they would do this? If you know of nothing they would have to gain, why do you think they are behind the SAMs?

[stonecoldsober]

25. Just a wild guess, but I think it's very possible

that the Iranians think it is in their best interests to get the US out of Iraq.

[stonecoldsober]

5. dupe

the double enter got me again!

[havocmom]

6. Plame's weapon monitoring network probably not the only one Cheney closed down

There's lots of $$ to be made moving stuff around - seems there are plenty of our tax $$ floating around out there. Business is GOOD. Thinking Plame's unit not the only enforcement Cheney took down to make it easier for his masters/merchants of death.

Evil alchemy: turning blood into gold.

edited for typo

[oasis]

11. Maybe you're on to something here.(eom)

[Schema Thing]

7. I think it's exactly as Wes Clark has described it

in the past several months:

Iran has their hand on the rheostat. We've been sabre rattling, they've turned up the heat as a reminder that while yes, we can bomb the shit out of them, they can kill us with a thousand cuts.

[T Wolf]

8. Like "canned" hunts, the pukes love it when copters are downed. It

allows them to make more money by replacing the equipment.

The biological equipment is easily replaceable - they just do not make as much money on that transaction.

[Solo_in_MD]

14. Mildly OT: Anyone here ever listen to the SAM Song by Athenrye or other IRA music groups?

I don't recall it every happening, but it made for good music.

[HuffleClaw]

16. i think its also very possible the missiles being used are US weapons

that were stolen.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

18. The insurgents have been shooting down helicopters...

since the beginning.

Sure, it's sky rocketed in the last few weeks. But then again, that could be just another sign that we're losing the war.

[theboss]

19. Pick one of the three: Iranians, Saudis, or Syrians....

My guess is the Iranians are supplying the missles, through pathways that we won't be able to link back to them.

I've come to the conclusion that our presence in Iraq is a goldmine for the Iranians. They probably want us bogged down there for a generation.

[Breeze54]

20. Saudis reportedly funding Iraqi Sunni insurgents

Saudis reportedly funding Iraqi Sunni insurgents
Updated 12/8/2006 7:29 AM ET

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2006-12-08-saudis-sunnis_x.htm

CAIRO (AP) —

Private Saudi citizens are giving millions of dollars to Sunni insurgents in Iraq and much of the money is used to buy weapons, including shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles, according to key Iraqi officials and others familiar with the flow of cash.

Saudi government officials deny that any money from their country is being sent to Iraqis fighting the government and the U.S.-led coalition.

But the U.S. Iraq Study Group report said Saudis are a source of funding for Sunni Arab insurgents. Several truck drivers interviewed by The Associated Press described carrying boxes of cash from Saudi Arabia into Iraq, money they said was headed for insurgents.

Two high-ranking Iraqi officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the issue's sensitivity, told the AP most of the Saudi money comes from private donations, called zaqat, collected for Islamic causes and charities.

Some Saudis appear to know the money is headed to Iraq's insurgents, but others merely give it to clerics who channel it to anti-coalition forces, the officials said.

In one recent case, an Iraqi official said $25 million in Saudi money went to a top Iraqi Sunni cleric and was used to buy weapons, including Strela, a Russian shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missile. The missiles were purchased from someone in Romania, apparently through the black market, he said.

more at link....

-------------------------

Maybe this is why?? :shrug: