Military Review

Afghan Lebanon Solution

4



US agreed to provide Lebanon b / y. Cessna Caravan 208B transport aircraft. This is part of the international efforts to rearm the Lebanese Armed Forces, which are currently significantly inferior to Hezbollah.

Earlier, the United States provided Cessna Caravan 208B aircraft to Afghanistan and Iraq, which they use as training, transport and light attack aircraft. Iraq, for example, equipped some of its Cessna Caravan 208B with sighting devices and armed them with Hellfire missiles.

The Cessna Caravan 208B is a large single-engine aircraft capable of carrying up to 14 passengers or 1.3 tons of cargo. At the same time, it costs about half of the twin-engine cargo aircraft King Air, which is more popular in the American armed forces and in remote corners of the planet. The Afghan Air Force received 26 such "light transports", and the Iraqi - five.

The four-ton Cessna Caravan 208B has a cruising speed of 317 km / h and can be in the air for about six hours per departure. The machine has been in operation since the middle of 1980's, since then more than 2000 Cessna Caravan 208B has been built. The cost of the new aircraft is about $ 2 million.
Originator:
http://www.strategypage.com
4 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vadim
    Vadim 31 January 2012 08: 29
    +1
    They get rid of unnecessary b / y, while they look almost philanthropists.
    1. Professor
      31 January 2012 10: 38
      -1
      They get rid of unnecessary b / y, while they look almost philanthropists.

      They get rid of unnecessary b / y in a landfill, and these papelos cost not a lot of money and will last for more than one year. And thus gaining influence in the world.
  2. sergo0000
    sergo0000 31 January 2012 08: 43
    +2
    Benefactors, their mother !!!
    1. Ascetic
      Ascetic 31 January 2012 16: 12
      +6
      Quote: sergo0000
      Benefactors, their mother !!!


      Your wonderful phrase prompted the idea to tell Kaa Pindosia "helps" the starving in Africa.
      First, they raise money to help starving black children. Then they buy food. Then they are brought to a country where famine is rampant. And finally, they give out food to the starving. Check yourself, is that how you imagine American charity? If so, then you are a normal person. But you are completely unsuitable for politics, because you think that the United States is helping the starving to save unfortunate children from a terrible death. And they do it for a completely different purpose.
      First, the Americans with great fanfare allocate huge amounts of food aid to starving Africa. A whole show is being arranged, with pictures and films showing horrific content. Skeleton-like African children barely move their legs or lie covered in flies. Charitable organizations raise funds, but the bulk of the money comes from the United States government. These are millions and tens of millions of dollars. However, this money does not leave the United States. They buy products. What is so strange here? It turns out that under American law all food aid should consist of food produced in the United States.
      Moving on.
      Humanitarian aid can only be exported on ships flying the US flag. So, the Americans gave hidden subsidies to their agricultural sector, their farmers, gave jobs for sailors and port workers. But these are still flowers. Berries begin when products designed to save the starving arrive at their destination.
      Humanitarian organizations do not distribute food aid to the starving. They are ... selling it!
      The brain of a normal person cannot imagine this turn. How is it possible to sell products starving? But like this. Arriving American food is being sold to countries where hunger is rampant at dumping prices. But now they spend money on the proceeds from the sale in the fight against poverty and raising the agriculture of a poor country. There is no one left to raise in Ethiopia or Mozambique: cheap overseas food in the bud destroys local producers in African countries. African farmers cannot compete with the products of Washington-subsidized US agricultural giants. As a result, former farmers and peasants themselves become poor and hungry and become recipients of American assistance.
      African regimes cannot refuse to take “humanitarian aid”.
      In case of refusal, the United States will immediately begin to engage in human rights in a starving country, and the ruling
      the regime will not be good. In addition, a locally sourced food producer is sailing to Africa under the noble slogan of saving the starving. How can I refuse to accept products for dying children? It means killing them! Killers of children! Approximately such headlines will decorate the front pages of Western newspapers, next to large color photographs of children's corpses. The fact that help is being sold, but not distributed, is not bashfully written in those newspapers. And if someone raises the topic of the strangeness of such assistance, proud human rights activists and philanthropic liberals will logically explain that selling food at ultra-low prices is a huge blessing. Indeed, for one amount you can buy twice as much food and, therefore, save twice as many dying children! And the proceeds will go to the rise of agriculture. Everything is logical, everything is beautiful, everything is noble.
      The most amazing thing is that the brains of Western inhabitants, powdered by many years of propaganda, cannot even imagine that such a strange mechanism of charity was created by chance and pursues quite pragmatic goals that have nothing to do with morality or morality, or with what we are used to call “Help” and “charity”.
      over the past 3 years, food aid worth $ 500 million was sold in developing countries. That is, in the United States, philanthropists paid $ 500 million for this amount of products, and no one knows how much they sold all this after losing transportation. Why there are no figures of assistance provided, but there are figures of food purchased?
      Because no one really cares about the hungry and it doesn’t care what kind of assistance will be provided to the agriculture of Mozambique. It doesn’t matter how much will be stolen and whether at least one cent from each allocated dollar will reach really needy people.
      Another thing is important: the amount of hidden subsidies to the American economy. Her agriculture, her transporters. These figures are calculated very carefully and are also carefully recorded. In addition, next year you can safely plan a new charity for even larger amounts. It's worth it to consider ...

      PS About the "humanitarian" aid to Russia in the 90s, the legs of "Bush", etc. and who made fortunes on this together with American friends, today's "advanced" liberal economists for some reason are modestly silent