Military Review

Acting Minister of Defense of Afghanistan: We no longer need Russian helicopters

126
The acting minister of defense of Afghanistan announced that the country's armed forces no longer need Russian helicopters. According to Lt. Gen. Tariq Shah Bahrami, Afghanistan "does not need Russian helicopters, as the country has begun to purchase helicopters from the countries of the North Atlantic Alliance."


The statement of Bahrami leads TASS:
Now we are receiving helicopters produced by NATO countries, we no longer need Russian helicopters.


Acting Minister of Defense of Afghanistan: We no longer need Russian helicopters


It is noteworthy that a few months ago, the government in Afghanistan allowed themselves statements that they would "insist on the withdrawal of all NATO troops from the country, including the US." However, after the Washington contingent decided to expand thousands of military personnel by approximately 4,5, the rhetoric of Kabul changed virtually to the diametrically opposite.

It should be noted that Russia was not going to deliver helicopters to Afghanistan itself. Earlier, it was the United States that went to Moscow, concluding contracts for the purchase of Russian helicopters for the Afghan troops. The main reason for concluding such contracts: the supply of Russian helicopters cost the American treasury much cheaper than the supply of helicopters of American or European origin. From the treasury of Afghanistan for a helicopter was not paid a penny.

For reference: Acting Afghan Minister of Defense Tariq Shah Bahrami graduated from Kabul Military University in 1986, receiving the rank of junior lieutenant. In 1990, he was promoted to battalion commander of the Afghan army. From 2009 to 2012, he commanded the forces of the Afghan special forces in Helmand province. In 2012, he was appointed general director for planning and operational management of special forces units at the Ministry of Internal Affairs. In 2014, he graduated from courses at the British General Staff. The white spot in this person’s biography draws attention at a time when the main territory of Afghanistan was under the control of the Taliban militants (banned in Russia).
Photos used:
https://www.facebook.com/pg/MoDAfghanistan
126 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. adma
    adma 9 November 2017 19: 10 New
    18
    It remains to wait for a video about the downed "Apaches" and "Chinooks" in the Hindu Kush mountains.
    1. RASKAT
      RASKAT 9 November 2017 19: 12 New
      25
      Well, this is not the first Afghan leader trying to abandon our technology. We’ll wait for a couple of three years, again crawl on their knees. bully
      1. Tusv
        Tusv 9 November 2017 19: 22 New
        24
        Quote: RASKAT
        We’ll wait for a couple of three years, again crawl on their knees.

        And why do we need this? The last Eighth Miles will fail, so be it. Let them deliver drugs to NATO.
        1. sergey32
          sergey32 9 November 2017 20: 56 New
          +2
          Quote: Tusv
          Quote: RASKAT
          We’ll wait for a couple of three years, again crawl on their knees.

          And why do we need this? The last Eighth Miles will fail, so be it. Let them deliver drugs to NATO.

          On donkeys more familiar.
          1. Shurik70
            Shurik70 9 November 2017 23: 30 New
            0
            So the article explicitly states that we sold equipment to Afghans only at the request of the United States.
            I believe that now the United States will not ask. And the Afghans ... Well, who is listening to them (except when they sent a machine gun at you, and you are unarmed).
            1. Vladimir16
              Vladimir16 10 November 2017 07: 28 New
              0
              Quote: Shurik70
              So the article explicitly states that we sold equipment to Afghans only at the request of the United States.

              The article says that the Afghans did not pay a dime. Helicopters bought mattresses for the Afghans. Russian helicopters are cheaper.
              But, this is if the article is read. wink hi

              The United States went to Moscow, concluding contracts for the acquisition of Russian helicopters for the Afghan troops. The main reason for concluding such contracts: deliveries of Russian helicopters cost the US treasury much cheaper than deliveries of helicopters of American or European production. From the treasury of Afghanistan for a helicopter was not paid a dime.
      2. 210ox
        210ox 9 November 2017 19: 25 New
        +8
        How will the NATO members put the bill for all this ... and immediately comb their hair .. They went, had fun, counted, cried
        smiling ..
        Quote: RASKAT
        Well, this is not the first Afghan leader trying to abandon our technology. We’ll wait for a couple of three years, again crawl on their knees. bully
        1. Leeds
          Leeds 9 November 2017 19: 47 New
          +4
          Prostitution
          1. maxim947
            maxim947 9 November 2017 20: 08 New
            +4
            About the "white" spot is well noticed, and time will put everything in its place.
            1. Nyrobsky
              Nyrobsky 9 November 2017 23: 02 New
              0
              Quote: maxim947
              About the "white" spot is well noticed, and time will put everything in its place.

              I took a “shot” course in the USA))) That’s “banged” when the team arrived.
        2. bouncyhunter
          bouncyhunter 9 November 2017 19: 58 New
          +9
          Hello Dima ! hi
          Quote: 210ox
          How will the NATO members expose the bill for all this ... and immediately comb their hair.

          You forgot to mention the bill for retraining pilots, technical staff and changing the airfield infrastructure for new turntables.
          1. alexmach
            alexmach 9 November 2017 23: 37 New
            0
            So what? they don’t get it for their money anyway.
          2. Captain Pushkin
            Captain Pushkin 9 November 2017 23: 53 New
            +1
            Quote: bouncyhunter
            Quote: 210ox
            How will the NATO members expose the bill for all this ... and immediately comb their hair.

            You forgot to mention the bill for retraining pilots, technical staff and changing the airfield infrastructure for new turntables.

            Helicopter purchases for Afghanistan are paid by the United States. What are ours, what are American. It was just that under Bush our relations were a little better, and the Yankees then believed that Afghans could be supplied with what would be cheaper for the US budget.
            Now in Washington, other views, well, and who pays, he orders songs to the Afghan generals.
      3. Starover_Z
        Starover_Z 9 November 2017 19: 35 New
        +3
        The acting minister of defense of Afghanistan announced that the country's armed forces no longer need Russian helicopters. According to Lt. Gen. Tariq Shah Bahrami, Afghanistan "does not need Russian helicopters, as the country has begun to purchase helicopters from the countries of the North Atlantic Alliance."

        They probably gave a try a western hamburger! Not otherwise !
        1. just exp
          just exp 9 November 2017 21: 32 New
          +1
          They didn’t give anything there except for a kick.
          they changed their speech after they decided to increase the contingent by another 4.5 thousand soldiers.
      4. alexmach
        alexmach 9 November 2017 23: 36 New
        0
        So after all just recently came what? Are you ready to cooperate and at least maintain already delivered equipment in flight condition? At his own expense, of course. And if you crawl on your knees you will be ready?
    2. Barshchik-M
      Barshchik-M 9 November 2017 19: 17 New
      +7
      Quote: adma
      It remains to wait for a video about the downed "Apaches" and "Chinooks" in the Hindu Kush mountains.

      The Taliban have not yet spoken their word ... But this donkey has so far been acting USA heh heh ..
      Let's see more ...
      1. Pirogov
        Pirogov 9 November 2017 19: 21 New
        +4
        Quote: Bathhouse attendant-M
        The Taliban have not yet spoken their word ... But this donkey has so far been acting USA heh heh ..
        Let's see more

        How can the Taliban influence arms purchases? Or do you believe that the Americans will leave Afghanistan?
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 9 November 2017 19: 24 New
          +3
          Quote: Pirogov
          How can the Taliban influence arms purchases?

          Easy. The more active the Taliban, the less Afghanistan will be able to borrow.
          1. Pirogov
            Pirogov 9 November 2017 19: 44 New
            +2
            Quote: Spade
            Easy. The more active the Taliban, the less Afghanistan will be able to borrow.

            It’s bad that you did not write about the victory of the Taliban over America, I would have at least neigh. No offense.
            1. Baby sitter
              Baby sitter 9 November 2017 19: 58 New
              +6
              The Americans and NATA defeated the Taliban! Is funny Have a good laugh ...
              1. Pirogov
                Pirogov 9 November 2017 22: 24 New
                0
                Quote: Baby sitter
                The Americans and NATA defeated the Taliban! Is funny Have a good laugh ...

                You can immediately see the nanny and the habit of fulfilling requests, thank you smiled?
            2. Lopatov
              Lopatov 9 November 2017 20: 02 New
              +4
              Quote: Pirogov
              It’s bad that you didn’t write about the victory of the Taliban over America, I would at least laugh

              Are you so sure that this is impossible?
              Fact: The situation in Afghanistan is currently much worse than at the time the occupation contingent was introduced into Afghanistan.
              He and the Taliban are already fighting in the north of the country ...
              1. Pirogov
                Pirogov 9 November 2017 22: 16 New
                +2
                Quote: Spade
                Are you so sure that this is impossible?
                Fact: The situation in Afghanistan is currently much worse than at the time the occupation contingent was introduced into Afghanistan.
                He and the Taliban are already fighting in the north of the country ...

                Yes I am sure . America will leave when it wants to, and the success of the Taliban is explained by the fact that such a situation suits the United States. The Taliban themselves justify the presence of the US Armed Forces in Afghanistan. There will be no Taliban, the United States will become invaders and will cause a lot of questions in the same UN, and the current situation suits the mattresses here completely and the pressure on Pakistan, which is approaching China, and the proximity of their bases to Iran and the CIS, etc. .
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 9 November 2017 22: 38 New
                  +4
                  Quote: Pirogov
                  Yes I am sure . America will leave when it wants to

                  And she will want it when she can’t fight there anymore. For foreign, domestic or economic reasons. Well, about the "victory over the Taliban" is not worth declaring at all.

                  Quote: Pirogov
                  and the success of the Taliban is explained by the fact that such a situation suits the United States

                  But you have amiably amused me ... Americans are satisfied with the growth of their losses and the growth of expenses for this war?

                  Quote: Pirogov
                  there is pressure on Pakistan

                  And not vice versa by chance? Pakistan is currently the only adequate way to supply the occupation group. By sea, only through them. A somewhat more expensive way is the railway. Agree with China, make concessions, because Russia has blocked transit.
                  The most fun way remains: to the Georgian ports, from there to the Caspian, transshipment by sea transport again, then negotiate with the Turkmen Un-II, and from there drag the columns through the mountains, with the sickly problems that the USSR fully experienced on itself

                  Quote: Pirogov
                  and the proximity of their bases to Iran and the CIS

                  Again, Pakistan 8))) It all depends on his goodwill. As soon as they block the faucet, all of these regularly fired bases will become useless.
                2. gaura
                  gaura 10 November 2017 08: 40 New
                  0
                  If the brave American niggers back the Taliban, why every new president, promising to withdraw troops, on the contrary increases it? To put pressure on someone there? Yes, they only press on their internal rating, and that matters
          2. Maki Avellevich
            Maki Avellevich 10 November 2017 08: 15 New
            +1
            Quote: Spade
            Easy. The more active the Taliban, the less Afghanistan will be able to borrow.


            America / the Fed is not giving interest for the interest, but so that the debtor could not return. and then he as they say should.
            and when someone should work it out.

            debt is a control tool, so the Taliban’s activity has nothing to do with it
        2. Doliva63
          Doliva63 9 November 2017 20: 28 New
          13
          Quote: Pirogov
          Or do you believe that the Americans will leave Afghanistan?

          It was once said that the CPSU was deceiving everyone when they explained the entry of 40 armies into the DRA - protecting the southern borders of the Motherland from the Americans, but it turned out in the end! sad
          1. Pirogov
            Pirogov 9 November 2017 22: 33 New
            0
            Quote: Doliva63
            It was once said that the CPSU was deceiving everyone when they explained the entry of 40 armies into the DRA - protecting the southern borders of the Motherland from the Americans, but it turned out in the end!

            The USSR was torn in Afghanistan, and the United States included a printing press and this war is practically not worth anything and at the same time brings great geopolitical benefits.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 9 November 2017 23: 30 New
              0
              Quote: Pirogov
              and the United States include a printing press

              They cannot do it. The printing press can include only one private bench, the Fed.
              And the state can only take.
              1. Golovan Jack
                Golovan Jack 9 November 2017 23: 37 New
                +7
                Quote: Spade
                They cannot do it. The printing press can include only one private bench, the Fed.
                And the state can only take

                Stop shaming ... write about that, you know, you have something to write about here.
                And now you wrote, sorry, complete, like her ... goose which ... a. in - garbage!
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 9 November 2017 23: 44 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Golovan Jack
                  Stop shaming ... write about that, you know, you have something to write about here.
                  And now you wrote, sorry, complete, like her ... goose which ... a. in - garbage!

                  Hehe ... So "full" ...
                  The question for you, such a super-knowing one: why borrow money, and at the same time bear the additional costs of servicing the debt, if they can simply be printed in unlimited quantities?
                  And it will be your argument ... But somehow unconvincingly, purely according to Zhvanetsky, you succeeded. 8)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
                  1. Golovan Jack
                    Golovan Jack 9 November 2017 23: 48 New
                    +7
                    Quote: Spade
                    The question for you, such a super-knowing one: why borrow money, and at the same time bear the additional costs of servicing the debt, if they can simply be printed in unlimited quantities?

                    Ask a question so that it can be answered.
                    Take your time, I will answer tomorrow morning anyway, after the dog walks and before the road to work.
                    So far I don’t see the question, but I see a certain set of word books.
                    1. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 9 November 2017 23: 59 New
                      +2
                      Quote: Golovan Jack
                      So far I don’t see the question, but I see a certain set of word books.

                      8))))))))))))))))))))))))))
                      Sad ...
                      Next time, take the least reason to argue. And you will, as now, be forced to resort to outright verbiage ...
                      1. Golovan Jack
                        Golovan Jack 10 November 2017 06: 39 New
                        +7
                        Quote: Spade
                        resort to outright verbiage

                        This is for you, dear.
                        Quote: Spade
                        They cannot do it. The printing press can include only one private bench, the Fed.
                        And the state can only take

                        This is either nonsense or semolina in your mouth (it’s clear what I mean?).
                        Now, self-destruct:

                        Contrary to popular belief, the Fed does not emit money arbitrarily. According to the Act on the formation of the Fed and subsequent amendments to it, the Fed issues dollars against a corresponding amount of securities. This closely links the issue procedure to the securities market and institutions issuing bonds. This is how the US Treasury Department indirectly takes part in the issue.


                        In general, in order to talk about something, you need to be at least a little bit in the subject.
                        This rule also applies to writing comments on the Internet ... oddly enough.
                    2. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 10 November 2017 08: 55 New
                      0
                      Quote: Golovan Jack
                      This is either nonsense or semolina in your mouth (it’s clear what I mean?).
                      Now, self-destruct:

                      Damn ... Do you have enough at the very brains to understand that what you copied past well does not refute what I wrote?
                      Did I write somewhere that the Fed is unlimited?
                      But he wrote that the state can only occupy. What did you confirm with your copy-paste? After all, what is the issue of T-bills? Just think a little if there is anything left ...

                      Quote: Golovan Jack
                      In general, in order to talk about something, you need to be at least a little bit in the subject.

                      Exactly!!!
                      As you have notably carved yourself. 8)))))
                      And when some are completely off topic, then two stupid posts appear, in which there is not a single argument, but in the presence of a sea of ​​assaults in the style of pimple shkolota
                      1. Golovan Jack
                        Golovan Jack 10 November 2017 09: 50 New
                        +7
                        Quote: Spade
                        Did I write somewhere that the Fed is unlimited?

                        No. You wrote better:
                        Quote: Spade
                        Quote: Pirogov
                        and the United States include a printing press

                        They cannot do it. The printing press can include only one private bench - the Fed.
                        And the state can only take

                        Everything seems to be right but there is a nuance (with): without decision "state to occupy" "private Fed store" the machine will not turn on request
                        This is precisely the key point of the whole scheme.
                        I even quoted you from the article above about this, but, apparently, “not in the horse”.
                        Okay, educating the uneducated is not my job, chav ... ugh ... ciao, naturally hi
                    3. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 10 November 2017 10: 04 New
                      0
                      Quote: Golovan Jack
                      Everything seems to be correct, but there is a nuance (s): without the decision of the "state to occupy" the "private store of the Fed" the machine will not turn on

                      This is all blah blah blah. Because "the private store of the Fed may turn the machine on or it may not turn it on. And the" decision of the state to take "does not do it automatically. Indeed, by and large one of the main tasks of the Fed in this area is to maintain inflation that is comfortable for the economy. In a certain" corridor "avoiding both deflation and high inflation. Which they decide, including through emission.
                      So about any influence of the state, including the "indirect" is impossible. It does not “affect”, it limits the actions of the Fed, nothing more.
            2. alexmach
              alexmach 9 November 2017 23: 43 New
              +2
              But in what he was torn then? What nonsense. For 10 years of war of losses - as in modern Russia for a year in road accident. Was it torn or something? Or did he occupy any significant position in your military budget of the country that built the nuclear submarine ballistic missile and flew into space?

              He only overturned on the rotten elite and on an infantile society.
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov 10 November 2017 00: 01 New
                0
                Afghanistan also "participated." After all, it was the deployment of troops there that became the argument that allowed the Americans to persuade the "oil" countries of the Middle East to bring down oil prices.
                1. alexmach
                  alexmach 10 November 2017 00: 06 New
                  +2
                  So what? Do you believe in fairy tales about oil prices? The USSR depended on oil prices for a lock less than modern Russia. Continue to develop it at the right pace, and not to eat the future, any oil prices would not be an obstacle to him.
                  1. Lopatov
                    Lopatov 10 November 2017 09: 05 New
                    +1
                    Quote: alexmach
                    So what? Do you believe in fairy tales about oil prices?

                    I believe in a variety of reasons. Starting with the fall in oil prices and ending with the arms race, the excessive support of "countries along the socialist path of development", the costs of Chernobyl and Spitak, the stupid Gorbachev economic policy and a bunch of loans that stupidly consumed.
                    And this is only part of the category of "economy". Add here domestic politics, ideology, the lack of responsibility of the elites (as far as I know, Khrushchev secured them, and thereby formally put one of the largest bombs under the foundation of the USSR), a very unsuccessful national policy ...
                    That's how the USSR fell apart. In fact, here, like in most plane crashes. It is rare that airplanes crash for one single reason.
                    1. alexmach
                      alexmach 10 November 2017 09: 14 New
                      0
                      Here I read your comment, and as for me, oil prices in this list are just one of the small accompanying factors.
                      1. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 10 November 2017 09: 22 New
                        0
                        Small but significant. After all, the currency in the USSR actually came only as a payment for hydrocarbons and cotton. Falling oil prices and obvious problems with cotton forced the USSR to take loans to eat them, and not only for themselves, but also for parasites of varying degrees of usefulness.
                        And loans were only initially given just to get used to. Then they linked them with concessions. Bigger and Bigger.
            3. gaura
              gaura 10 November 2017 08: 42 New
              0
              The printing press is already off. And while it is not included
      2. 79807420129
        79807420129 9 November 2017 19: 27 New
        13
        Quote: Bathhouse attendant-M
        The Taliban have not yet spoken their word ..

        As they did not say laughing
        The “white spot” in the biography of this man is noteworthy at a time when the main territory of Afghanistan was under the control of Taliban militants

        So they say
        We no longer need Russian helicopters

        yes wink
        1. Solomon Kane
          Solomon Kane 9 November 2017 20: 00 New
          +9
          "The boy said - the boy did," said General Tarik to the rabid dog METTIS, not to fly Russian helicopters in the Afghan sky ........ but not to fly, to teach Afghans to fly on the Apaches, not to teach them how to shoot them from the Stinger ... ... there are very few who wish ...
          1. Going
            Going 9 November 2017 20: 21 New
            +6
            He joked very unsuccessfully, apparently passed through a poppy field.
            1. Thunderbolt
              Thunderbolt 9 November 2017 20: 45 New
              +5
              Quote: Pirogov
              It’s bad that you did not write about the victory of the Taliban over America, I would have at least neigh. No offense.

              After all, the Taliban are not on their own. The interests of very large players are behind them, as if in an ambush regiment, and if these players want to bend America in Afghanistan, then the Taliban can have anything, including helicopters.
              1. ariman1
                ariman1 9 November 2017 21: 49 New
                +1
                The UN Taliban declared terrorist. Therefore, if a certain "major player" is so insane that it begins to supply weapons, then this will give rise to new sanctions, and very cruel sanctions at the level of UN member states. Perhaps this major player may lose the right to vote in the UN Security Council
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 9 November 2017 22: 41 New
                  +1
                  Quote: ariman1
                  Therefore, if a certain "major player" is so insane that it will begin to supply weapons

                  And where did they get their weapons now?
                2. 34 region
                  34 region 9 November 2017 22: 50 New
                  0
                  21.49. Uh uh! UN sanctions? Against a major player? Is it against the United States or what? What the USA does not sponsor for human rights movements, no one has imposed sanctions against the USA! And then. Country leaders are not so stupid as to make deliveries directly from the country. There are many schemes of non-state level for this. As an example, the United States. hi
              2. Lopatov
                Lopatov 9 November 2017 22: 41 New
                +1
                Quote: Thunderbolt
                Behind them, as in an ambush regiment, are the interests of very large players

                Pakistan. So China
                The Taliban is the brainchild of Pakistani military intelligence with all the consequences.
                1. Young_Communist
                  Young_Communist 10 November 2017 00: 01 New
                  0
                  Behind them, as in an ambush regiment, are the interests of very large players

                  Quote: Spade

                  Pakistan. So China

                  “A very large player” is the main economic partner and the stuck friend of mattresses in the region and winks that, supposedly, the Chinese de, together with the Taliban, will defeat America, no more than the wet mrias of couch patriots.



                  https://russian.rt.com/world/news/447572-kitai-ss
                  ha-soglasheniya-250-mlrd
                  1. Thunderbolt
                    Thunderbolt 10 November 2017 01: 19 New
                    +2
                    Quote: Young_Communist
                    nothing more than the wet mriy of couch patriots.

                    Koba, just don’t be rude here ... Well, what did you want to shout here with your "250 billion" ... ???
                    Turn on the logic: China is the world's largest merchant and the United States the largest merchant in the world, so it’s only logical that there is mutually beneficial trade between them, and it’s measured not by some miserable 250 billion.
                    But this is not what "this" does not mean.What else should they have such a great relationship with? Offer China to switch to Nepal, and make America Honduras its main partner ..? Honduras might be glad to become one and America would be so quieter. But a little problem ... Honduras the market is not as capacious as that of the Chinese and it can offer not so much.
                    Therefore, before hanging your labels, take the trouble to study at least a little the history of world political and economic relations. I assure you that you will find many interesting things there, such as:
                    1.) On the eve of World War I, the main trading partner of the Russian Empire, who did you know? Not one of the Entente’s friendly countries, but ... Germany. The German share (1% exp. And 29,8% imp.) Outweighed the shares of England allied to us (47,5% and 17,6%) and France ((12,6% and 6,6%) combined.
                    2.) On the eve of World War II, trade between the Reich and the USSR was only increasing and it was beneficial to both. England and the United States also actively traded with the Nazis and invested heavily and credited. This was also done for mutual benefit. And this was not prevented all these countries from going on to kill each other all the same. Yes ...
                    Therefore, active trading and insoluble contradictions do not prevent large players from doing business at all, everything can go like clockwork to the critical point, and then ... bang !!! and war.
    3. Kent0001
      Kent0001 9 November 2017 22: 03 New
      0
      They will be more at the bases than flying. Where do they get normal flyers there?
    4. AID.S
      AID.S 9 November 2017 23: 08 New
      +2
      Quote: adma
      It remains to wait for a video about the downed "Apaches" and "Chinooks" in the Hindu Kush mountains.

      Than downed? Comments? You have to wait a long time.
  2. Smog
    Smog 9 November 2017 19: 18 New
    10
    Do they have there this year, an unprecedented harvest of opium poppy? recourse
    1. Masya masya
      Masya masya 9 November 2017 19: 30 New
      +7
      Hello, Konstantin! love
      Quote: Smog
      Do they have there this year, an unprecedented harvest of opium poppy? recourse

      That one, just a feint with your fingers ... although no one excluded opium ...
      1. Smog
        Smog 9 November 2017 19: 40 New
        +4
        Quote: Masya Masya
        just a feint with your fingers ..

        Cheerful feint ....., not only under drugs ....
        Marinochka! love soldier
        1. Masya masya
          Masya masya 9 November 2017 19: 50 New
          +8
          Well, we are without feints, all for good ...

          love
          1. Smog
            Smog 9 November 2017 20: 00 New
            +3
            Quote: Masya Masya
            Well, we’re more and more without feints,

            Good, Marin, good. But,....
            We are without feints
            Like Sanya Pushkin
            no poems wassat (C)
            1. Masya masya
              Masya masya 9 November 2017 20: 14 New
              +6
              Quote: Smog
              We are without feints
              Like Sanya Pushkin
              without poetry (c)

              good
              Nezhdanchik is our distinctive feature! What does Zadornov say? We cannot be formatted! wink
          2. Smog
            Smog 9 November 2017 20: 15 New
            +3
            Quote: Masya Masya
            for good ...

            1. Masya masya
              Masya masya 9 November 2017 20: 35 New
              +7
              You see, Konstantin, our cartoons are good and they teach good ... and what is this ???

              ???? I chose this even more, less decent ...
              1. Smog
                Smog 9 November 2017 20: 45 New
                +3
                Quote: Masya Masya
                I chose this even more, less decent ...

                She took it right from the tongue. It’s still with a kind “human” face, not just some ... Although Marin, we watched Mickey Mouse, Chip and Dale ... Oh, where the world is on, the where is on. This tolerance will not bring to good.
                And a bit of positive
                love
                1. Masya masya
                  Masya masya 9 November 2017 21: 07 New
                  +5
                  Thanks for a bit of positive love
                  Lullaby for the night ...

                  - Sleep, sleep ... And tomorrow again in the battle! wink love
                  1. 34 region
                    34 region 9 November 2017 22: 56 New
                    +1
                    21.07/XNUMX. Masya! But really, Soviet films and cartoons are positive! Although it is interesting to conduct a survey. What emotions cause Soviet films and cartoons? And maybe I just have senile insanity ?! hi
                    1. Young_Communist
                      Young_Communist 10 November 2017 00: 06 New
                      0
                      Quote: 34 region
                      But really, Soviet films and cartoons are positive!


                    2. Masya masya
                      Masya masya 10 November 2017 01: 06 New
                      +6
                      Quote: 34 region
                      interesting to conduct a survey.

                      Do you believe polls?
                      Quote: 34 region
                      And maybe I just have senile insanity ?!

                      Do not slander yourself !!!! love
          3. sir_obs
            sir_obs 9 November 2017 20: 44 New
            +1
            As Al Capone used to say, with a good word and a gun, you can achieve much more than just a good word.
            It’s time to understand this.
    2. Simon
      Simon 9 November 2017 19: 57 New
      +2
      Do they have there this year, an unprecedented harvest of opium poppy? Most likely yes, but where they find so much currency, the country is not rich. request
      1. Smog
        Smog 9 November 2017 20: 04 New
        +2
        Quote: Simon
        the country is not rich.

        Here I am about that. So barter, only barter ...., on white powder.
      2. Paranoid50
        Paranoid50 9 November 2017 20: 38 New
        +3
        Quote: Simon
        Do they have there this year, an unprecedented harvest of opium poppy?

        So, the areas of crops regularly increase. So the mattresses fussed, increased the number of their "VOKhRovtsev". Logistics needs reliable protection. yes And the turntables to the Afghans will be delivered by NATO (most likely mattresses) with the condition of air cover for the same drug transit.
        1. 34 region
          34 region 9 November 2017 22: 58 New
          0
          20.38. Paranoid! What! 300% profit again !? Where is the human face? belay
  3. akims
    akims 9 November 2017 19: 20 New
    +6
    The “white spot” in the biography of this man is noteworthy at a time when the main territory of Afghanistan was under the control of Taliban militants (banned in Russia).
    Talibanil, go.
    1. x.andvlad
      x.andvlad 9 November 2017 22: 28 New
      +1
      Quote: akims
      Talibanil, go

      100%! And at the same time, was selected for courses at the British General Staff.
      Old as the world: "If you can’t defeat the mafia, then head it." What shaves did. These snakes never disdained dirty manipulations. They are ready to “make friends” with anyone against Russia, which they have done more than once. And here are the first results:
      Bahrami's statement cites TASS:
      Now we are receiving helicopters produced by NATO countries, we no longer need Russian helicopters.

      The puppet sang as she should. And this I.O. will certainly become a minister.
  4. Eurodav
    Eurodav 9 November 2017 19: 23 New
    +2
    Speak Tarik, speak ... As if you had no regrets about the words ...
    Puppets are everywhere ... Under the banners of the fight against terrorism, mattresses have gone in and are not going to leave ... Now they have imposed their will on the “proud" Afghans ... It all starts with a small one ...
  5. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 9 November 2017 19: 24 New
    +1
    Acting Minister of Defense of Afghanistan: We no longer need Russian helicopters
    Sorry. After the enema, rest on the left side. Or on the right? What difference does it make after a bucket and with patyphone needles.
    When the fog is in the brain and ..... will pass, call me, there are a couple of cichatuhs or dragonflies ...
    1. Going
      Going 9 November 2017 20: 23 New
      +7
      Even if they refuse from Kalashnikov, NATO will help.
      1. Mavrikiy
        Mavrikiy 9 November 2017 20: 52 New
        +2
        Quote: Going
        Even if they refuse from Kalashnikov, NATO will help.

        I think he won’t drink so much. And if they master, then they will finish their own. And they’ll do it right, you need to understand with whom you sit down at the table. With whose hands are you feeding (I do not want to believe that we are not there), whose weapons are in the hand of the keeper, huh?
      2. Cossack 471
        Cossack 471 9 November 2017 21: 42 New
        +2
        It is impossible to refuse Kalash. they are born with him in his arms
  6. Berkut24
    Berkut24 9 November 2017 19: 24 New
    +5
    Everything is simple here. The Americans pay money, Trump has his own import substitution. What they give is voiced. And what about the Dekhans who will master the flying laptop - the Americans do not care. Together with this Afghan government, they lose to the Taliban and Al Qaeda and the Islamic State. In this situation, helicopters are the tenth business for them. The main thing is to have time to suck on lobbying in Congress.
  7. Mwg
    Mwg 9 November 2017 19: 24 New
    +3
    Someone in Afghanistan received money in a personal account. Much money. American money.
    1. Simon
      Simon 9 November 2017 19: 55 New
      +1
      And apparently not a frail amount of greenery! yes
  8. Barshchik-M
    Barshchik-M 9 November 2017 19: 27 New
    +4
    Afghanistan has not won over its history, but only the USSR is remembered with a kind word for its history!

    We still defeated them morally ..! Now they regret it ... But, it’s too late perfume!
    We became different by learning from the USA!
    1. xetai9977
      xetai9977 9 November 2017 19: 42 New
      +3
      "but they remember the USSR with a kind word"
      Yeah. 15 dead Soviet soldiers. Hundreds of the same helicopters and planes were shot down by Afghans, who "remember with a kind word"
      1. aiden
        aiden 10 November 2017 03: 00 New
        +1
        at least they do not desecrate the graves of our soldiers, but on the contrary take care of them. respect
    2. PalBor
      PalBor 9 November 2017 19: 43 New
      +7
      This is a fairy tale, comrade Vitaliy. They won more than once: the Greeks, Persians, Arabs, Mongols, and the same Babur!
      But when they tried to establish peaceful zest among hundreds of tribes, emirs, and beks, they ran into complete chaos and spat: "Do it yourself!" laughing
    3. 34 region
      34 region 9 November 2017 23: 07 New
      +1
      19.27. Attendant! The question is posed incorrectly. Afghanistan no one won !? What does it mean to defeat Afghanistan? Maybe enough to leave him in the middle ages? Why grow a technological competitor? Maybe for the West it’s best to drive everyone into the Stone Age? No? Why is this done? And Afghanistan is driven into the Stone Age, and other countries are driven there too. According to the West, only the West should have technological superiority, and only the West should be a technological God! What the West is successful and implementing.
  9. Altona
    Altona 9 November 2017 19: 28 New
    +2
    Quote: adma
    It remains to wait for a video about the downed "Apaches" and "Chinooks" in the Hindu Kush mountains.

    --------------------------
    Themselves fall. Errors of pilots and the technology is hardly adapted for flying in the mountains.
  10. PalBor
    PalBor 9 November 2017 19: 36 New
    +2
    I think that for our helicopters there will be goals soon and in the west.
  11. Sergey53
    Sergey53 9 November 2017 19: 38 New
    +1
    Countries that always want to receive do the same. First they ask, then they blackmail me, then they can even threaten. And all for the sake of a one-free freebie. Such people surround us from all sides.
  12. sabakina
    sabakina 9 November 2017 19: 41 New
    +4
    It should be noted that Russia was not going to supply helicopters to Afghanistan itself. Previously, it was the United States that went to Moscow, concluding contracts for the acquisition of Russian helicopters for Afghan troops.

    From Ukrainians or something infected? For those that are not a day, then overpower.
    1. Smog
      Smog 9 November 2017 20: 24 New
      +2
      Quote: sabakina
      From Ukrainians or something infected?

      and then ....
  13. dog breeder
    dog breeder 9 November 2017 19: 42 New
    +1
    Well, you don’t have to go far for an example; our brothers over there are very proud of the decommissioned rubbish of NATO standards, even those that are not suitable for scrap.
  14. Vasyan1971
    Vasyan1971 9 November 2017 19: 48 New
    +2
    "The" white spot "in the biography of this man is noteworthy at a time when the main territory of Afghanistan was under the control of Taliban militants."
    Why are you stuck with a person? Maybe he quietly, enjoying pastoral on his 6 acres, elite poppy varieties spud?
  15. Simon
    Simon 9 November 2017 19: 49 New
    0
    Our helicopters in Afghanistan are full, they will not be able to quickly completely replace our helicopters, in addition, American helicopters are much more expensive than Russian ones. And they will break, where will they take spare parts? request They will come to us soon to bow.
    1. 34 region
      34 region 9 November 2017 23: 17 New
      0
      19.49. Simon! What!? Who is crawling to whom? The challenge is to support the US military-industrial complex. And support for the military-industrial complex will be provided! Not for that the United States entered Afghanistan to help the Russian economy. Put the turntables in debt, repair in debt. Will Russia stand against international laws? It’s getting wider and deeper. Russia, of course, can also lend for bucks. But this will be stupid. And so the situation is interesting. The United States lends turntables. Is Russia weak? War on the ruin of supplies. Russia will pull it?
      1. kos2910
        kos2910 10 November 2017 05: 42 New
        +1
        Quote: 34 region
        Russia will pull it

        Does Russia need this? They don’t want to — their business, they are occupied by NATO countries, what is it all about?
  16. Herlitz
    Herlitz 9 November 2017 19: 50 New
    0
    money is everything !!!
  17. prior
    prior 9 November 2017 19: 53 New
    0
    When Lieutenant General Tarik Shah Bahram, the Taliban will pull the globe, let it not screech - help the shuravi. And there still the Ishilovites from Syria will catch up, cut off all the protruding parts of the body.
    Do not spit in the well - you won’t fly out.
  18. Simon
    Simon 9 November 2017 19: 53 New
    0
    Quote: Sergey53
    Countries that always want to receive do the same. First they ask, then they blackmail me, then they can even threaten. And all for the sake of a one-free freebie. Such people surround us from all sides.

    The Americans will not sell modern helicopters, but they will put outdated and worn-out cars. So let the Afghans jerk.
    1. Sergey53
      Sergey53 9 November 2017 21: 24 New
      +2
      WHY THE Americans BOUGHT US FROM US? Afghans are used to our and can use them. That's right: They are cheaper. And most importantly: ours can work at high altitude in the mountains. Their engines do not pull.
  19. TsUS-Air Force
    TsUS-Air Force 9 November 2017 20: 00 New
    +1
    Hafizullah Amin, too, as a prostitute rushed between the union and the United States. what it led to we know :))))
  20. Piramidon
    Piramidon 9 November 2017 20: 01 New
    0
    And what is already available, who will serve? A techie riding a donkey?
  21. Strashila
    Strashila 9 November 2017 20: 21 New
    +3
    The United States cannot honestly sell its equipment ... that’s how it twists its hands to everyone ... that’s the true essence of all sanctions ... what Crimea ... what human rights ... sales are what is at the forefront of everything.
    1. Going
      Going 9 November 2017 20: 48 New
      +6
      And they clearly monitor the situation as soon as the balance sways in their direction - a noose right away.
  22. Yarik
    Yarik 9 November 2017 20: 54 New
    +1
    Quote: RASKAT
    Well, this is not the first Afghan leader trying to abandon our technology. We’ll wait for a couple of three years, again crawl on their knees. bully


    So what? Why do we need it? Sell ​​8-10 helicopters? The deal is amazing in scale. negative no
  23. Radikal
    Radikal 9 November 2017 21: 07 New
    0
    Quote: Starover_Z
    The acting minister of defense of Afghanistan announced that the country's armed forces no longer need Russian helicopters. According to Lt. Gen. Tariq Shah Bahrami, Afghanistan "does not need Russian helicopters, as the country has begun to purchase helicopters from the countries of the North Atlantic Alliance."

    They probably gave a try a western hamburger!
    ... pork belay
  24. exo
    exo 9 November 2017 21: 39 New
    +1
    Most likely, from the Afghans, there will be only an identification mark. I do not believe that they will be able to operate American equipment. Especially helicopters.
    1. 34 region
      34 region 9 November 2017 23: 25 New
      +1
      21.39. Echo! This is more like the truth. They will be flown not so much by Afghans as by Americans under the identification marks of Afghanistan. And the loan will hang on the Afghans. Here you have the capture of countries! And it seems like there is no capture! And everything seems to be voluntary, by agreement of the parties! The Amertsy are pursuing a tricky policy! And if we add here the increase in the military contingent and the arrival of the Ishilovites, then the situation seems interesting. Is not a springboard being prepared? Poland, Ukraine, Afghanistan, North Korea!
  25. Vlad5307
    Vlad5307 9 November 2017 22: 07 New
    0
    Quote: maxim947
    About the "white" spot is well noticed, and time will put everything in its place.

    Or maybe it will turn out to be not so white at all! repeat
  26. fif21
    fif21 9 November 2017 22: 16 New
    0
    So what? The Americans contain the Kabul regime and decide what to buy, what not. And it is high time for Russia to decide and support those who destroy poppy plantations in Afghanistan and deploy the Afghan economy on a civilized path. hi
  27. The Siberian barber
    The Siberian barber 9 November 2017 22: 25 New
    0
    The donkey is more capable ...
  28. Mercenary
    Mercenary 9 November 2017 22: 31 New
    +2
    In my opinion, everything is easier Vladimir Vladimirovich sent Karzai off the forum! Freeloaders were offended HOWEVER, or they’re used to build a plant, give it, build a school, etc.
  29. shuravi
    shuravi 9 November 2017 22: 51 New
    +1
    As in Afghanistan, the locals exploited the Mi-8.
    This happened not on the day of shooting, but at least a year ago.





    How does it sit? Yes, it’s very simple to carry a car tire and put it under your nose.

  30. mavrus
    mavrus 9 November 2017 23: 16 New
    0
    Quote: adma
    It remains to wait for a video about the downed "Apaches" and "Chinooks" in the Hindu Kush mountains.

    It seems that this Tarik also rolled his lips
  31. mavrus
    mavrus 9 November 2017 23: 19 New
    0
    Quote: mavrus
    Quote: adma
    It remains to wait for a video about the downed "Apaches" and "Chinooks" in the Hindu Kush mountains.

    It seems that this Tarik also rolled his lips

    Only instead of the Apaches, some Polish Falcon is injecting mattresses into him, and what ... Also, NATO. :)))
  32. shuravi
    shuravi 9 November 2017 23: 33 New
    +1
    The Americans themselves on occasion at the Mi-8 are not averse to transfer.

  33. Alexey Pishenkov
    Alexey Pishenkov 10 November 2017 01: 14 New
    0
    In the west, it’s expensive to dispose of old cars, and to keep conserved combat-ready cans even more expensive in warehouses. So what is the junk that, due to the indecency of the fortune, one cannot betray the poor "Eastern NATO" will go to Afghanistan, or does someone think that super modern specimens will go there ...?
  34. Georgievic
    Georgievic 10 November 2017 01: 15 New
    0
    Bahrami is another American prostitute who received a bunch of dibs for lobbying the Apaches. What other helicopters does NATO have?
  35. Leonid Har
    Leonid Har 10 November 2017 01: 55 New
    +1
    So they need to recruit new thinking staff and from scratch to train new entire crew units to manage the expensive Apaches and Chinooks. Purchase new - used American helicopters. In fact, to create from scratch helicopter units of the Afghan army. And this can fly into the big penny of the Afghan state budget and require more time. Retrain the old pilots already having the skills to manage cheap Mi24 seems to make no sense. Again, the old Soviet Mi8 and Mi24 somewhere to put. Take it all on your shoulders for proud statements? The General of the Afghan Army was up to something wrong.
  36. kos2910
    kos2910 10 November 2017 05: 37 New
    0
    So that's great! It is more profitable to have one helicopter, but NATO, than two Russians.
  37. alexmach
    alexmach 10 November 2017 12: 57 New
    0
    Lopatov,
    Well, this was the moment when it was necessary to come to your senses and solve your problems yourself and not get into loans. The elite would not have rotted by this time, and society itself could have done it.
  38. Alexander S
    Alexander S 12 November 2017 19: 31 New
    0
    Another knife in the back. Why are they supplying us with tomatoes? Then the bulldozers to the start!