Vulnerable Helicopters Should Accelerate Iraq Exit

By Stephen Pizzo, News for Real. Posted February 9, 2007.

I'm one of those odd people who believes that sometimes that deja vu feeling is real -- that we really have "been here, done this," before. Well I got that deja vu feeling this morning when I read this:

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- An umbrella insurgent group claimed responsibility for downing a U.S. helicopter and "burning it down completely" near Baghdad on Wednesday, according to a claim listed on various Islamist Web sites. ... CNN was unable to confirm the authenticity of the statement from the group, which includes al Qaeda in Iraq. ... It was the fifth U.S. helicopter to go down in Iraq in almost three weeks.

Hmmm, I thought to myself, after all the bad news out of Iraq in recent months, this felt different ... yet the same. It felt important too, more important than the usual news about roadside bombs and Iraqis using electric drills to make holes in their neighbors before beheading them. This bit of news caught my attention in a different, yet familiar way. But why? Why did it feel different, yet somehow the same? And why did I feel this bit of news marked a new, and final, turning point? So I did a bit of research, and lo and behold look what I found. Deja vu-city! We really have been here and done this before. Well not "us" literally, but someone that acted like we are acting now. Here, read this and I'll rejoin you at the other end:

"... Following the deployment, the Soviet troops were unable to establish authority outside Kabul. As much as 80% of the countryside still escaped effective government control. The initial mission, to guard cities and installations, was expanded to combat the anti-communist Mujahideen forces, primarily using Soviet reservists. The Soviet Army was unfamiliar with such fighting, had no counter-insurgency training, and their weaponry and military equipment, particularly armored cars and tanks, were sometimes ineffective or vulnerable in the mountainous environment.

The Soviets used helicopters as their primary air attack force, supported with fighter-bombers and bombers, ground troops and special forces. Of particular significance was the donation of American-made FIM-92 Stinger anti-aircraft missile systems, which increased aircraft losses of the Soviet Air Force. The inability of the Soviet Union to break the military stalemate, gain a significant number of Afghan supporters and affiliates, or to rebuild the Afghan Army, required the increasing direct use of its own forces to fight the rebels. Soviet soldiers often found themselves fighting against civilians due to the elusive tactics of the rebels. They did repeat many of the American Vietnam mistakes, winning almost all of the conventional battles, but failing to control the countryside. (More)

Yep. And instructive as hell, since we know how that superpowers attempt to straighten out a Muslim nation by force ended. But it's not just that, it's not that it ended in failure, but precisely what it was that ended it. What ended it were Stinger shoulder mounted anti-aircraft missiles, ("Manpads") secretly supplied to the Mujahideen by the US. "Its long range and sophisticated guidance made the Stinger highly effective against Soviet airplanes and helicopters, and Stingers were credited with turning the tide of the war in the Mujahideen's favor, according to the Center for Nonproliferation Studies. (More) In all the Soviets lost over 130 helicopters and other aircraft to these deadly accurate little missiles. (See list here)

While George W. Bush may not be a fan of history, some folks are. Apparently among those history buffs are the Iranians. They took note of what it was that caused the once powerful Soviets to cut and run out of Afghanistan. Which brings me back to why I think that bit of news this morning marks the beginning of the end for the US occupation of Iraq -- and why we've suddenly lost five helicopters in less than three weeks. Because, you see, the Iranians have their own versions of the Stinger, and there is the possibility that a country may provide missiles to anti-US insurgents in Iraq. (See also Anza, a series of Chinese developed, IR-guided shoulder-fired surface to air missiles, under licensed production in Pakistan.) That's why this is feels different, yet the same -- different superpower, same solution.

It's not -- no pun intended -- rocket science. All you have to do is ask yourself this: What was the only tactical advantage the Soviets had over the Mujahideen? Answer: Air power. Except for the lack of air power, the Mujahideen held every other tactical advantage. First, they lived there, while the Russians were just heavily armed visitors. Also, they knew the terrain like the backs of their little brown hands, while Soviet troops were, quite literally, lost much of the time.

See more stories tagged with: congress, iraq, helicopters, shoulder-fired missiles, insurgents

Stephen Pizzo is the author of numerous books, including Inside Job: The Looting of America's Savings and Loans, which was nominated for a Pulitzer.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »