DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Mercs » Merc Chopper Shot Down (Updated)

Merc Chopper Shot Down (Updated)

The tens of thou­sands of for­eign mer­ce­nar­ies fight­ing along­side coali­tion sol­diers in Iraq aren’t just tool­ing around in up-​​armored SUVs sport­ing sub­ma­chine guns. These guys have got heli­copters too that they use to escort con­voys — and one of them has just been shot down over Baghdad, accord­ing to the Associated Press:
abr_sized.jpg

Five civil­ians died in the Baghdad crash of a heli­copter owned by the pri­vate secu­rity com­pany Blackwater USA, accord­ing to a U.S. mil­i­tary offi­cial. The heli­copter was shot down Tuesday over a pre­dom­i­nantly Sunni neigh­bor­hood, a senior Iraqi defense offi­cial said. The crash came three days after a U.S. Black Hawk heli­copter crashed north­east of Baghdad, killing all 12 sol­diers aboard.

Blackwater should have seen this com­ing. Unlike U.S. mil­i­tary heli­copters, which are armored and equipped with coun­ter­mea­sures to defeat shoulder-​​fired mis­siles, Blackwater’s McDonnell Douglas MD-​​369FF Loaches are essen­tially defense­less, unless you count the two mercs hang­ing out the cabin doors with their rifles.
Note that Blackwater’s chop­pers — which fly from the same Green Zone heli­pad used by the U.S. Army and Marines — are just civil ver­sions of the Hughes OH-​​6 Cayuse that the Army began phas­ing out after the Vietnam War due to their vul­ner­a­bil­ity. U.S. Special Forces fly updated H-​​6s, but only at night, when it’s safer. It’s not clear what time of the day the Blackwater bird was shot down, but I’ve wit­nessed these chop­pers buzzing around in broad day­light.
It’s too early to tell what this shoot-​​down means for Blackwater and for merc ops in Iraq. But one thing’s for sure: with the mil­i­tary strug­gling to scare up another 20,000 troops for its so-​​called “surge,” the demand for pri­vate sol­diers isn’t going away.
UPDATE 1/​24/​07: Four of the dead Blackwater men were appar­ently killed execution-​​style, per­haps after sur­viv­ing the chop­per crash, while the fifth was a mem­ber of a sec­ond chop­per crew also at the site of the crash. All this accord­ing to the Associated Press:

In Washington, a U.S. defense offi­cial said four of the five killed were shot in the back of the head but did not know whether they were still alive when they were shot. The U.S. offi­cial spoke on con­di­tion of anonymity because he was not autho­rized to speak on the record. …
Another American offi­cial in Baghdad, who spoke on con­di­tion of anonymity, said three Blackwater heli­copters were involved. One had landed for an unknown rea­son and one of the Blackwater employ­ees was shot at that point, he said. That heli­copter appar­ently was able to take off but a sec­ond one then crashed in the same area, he added with­out explain­ing the involve­ment of the third heli­copter.
The New York Times, cit­ing unnamed American offi­cials, reported that the helicopter’s four-​​man crew was killed along with a gun­ner on a sec­ond Blackwater helicopter.

–David Axe, cross­posted at War Is Boring
UPDATE 01/​24/​07 11:01 AM: Who do ya trust?

Doug Brooks, pres­i­dent of the International Peace Operations Association, an indus­try group that includes secu­rity con­trac­tors, said the type of heli­copter downed, known as a “lit­tle bird,” is among the safest modes of trans­porta­tion in war zones.
“Their crews are the best — they really know their stuff,” he said in an e-​​mail. “They are very good at avoid­ing fire, fly­ing low and fast — and the tiny heli­copters are very hard to hit.”

Doug is a nice guy. But I’ll put my money on Axe as the more objec­tive observer.
UPDATE 01/​24/​07 11:07 AM: Robert Young Pelton has details on the inci­dent — and recent footage of Blackwater chop­pers in action.

Share |

January 23rd, 2007 | Mercs, Planes, Copters, Blimps, War Update | 341414 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2007/01/23/merc-chopper-shot-down-updated/Merc+Chopper+Shot+Down+%28Updated%292007-01-23+20%3A45%3A48haninah_levine You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Iraq’s Deadly Germs | Iran’s Super Missile Will Defeat Great Satan, Steal Your Girlfriend » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Ken Wortman says:
    January 23, 2007 at 5:12 pm

    You make me sick and it is evi­dent you have no clue about the dif­fer­ence between a mer­ce­nary and a US con­trac­tor. fur­ther you have no under­stand­ing of the qual­ity of men who are serv­ing on these con­tracts to pro­tect Department of State off­i­cal. These men for the most part served in the US mil­i­tary in Iraq and Afghanistan. They have cho­sen to fur­ther serve their gov­ern­memt in a civil­ian con­trac­tor sta­tus to ensure the US mis­sion in Iraq and Afghanistan are suc­cess­ful. These are not guns for hire as you and other jour­nal­ist use to describe men who help the United States acheive it’s goals abroad.
    It is easy to sit in the United States and con­dem those who go into harms way, if that is what it takes to make you feel like a man so be it. I am a retired sol­dier and have been work­ing in Iraq since 2003 as a con­trac­tor. I have helped Iraqis, sol­diers, civil­ians and even jour­nal­ist through the years and until a per­son serves and suf­fers they will never under­stand.
    I can only extend my heart­felt regards for the fam­i­lies of the civil­ians who died today in Baghdad. Each of those men were retired or for­mer spe­cial oper­a­tions sol­diers who left fam­i­lies behind and made the ulti­mate sac­ri­fice serv­ing their country.

    Reply
  2. David says:
    January 23, 2007 at 5:44 pm

    Since when were mer­ce­nar­ies a bad thing?

    Reply
  3. campbell says:
    January 23, 2007 at 6:58 pm

    David.….just a note in your defense: I saw no indi­ca­tion what­so­ever of con­dem­na­tion of civil­ian contractors/​mercenaries in your arti­cle.
    One other thing, for you and who­ever else: since we are advanc­ing the “so-​​called “surge”.….are we not then, INSURGENTS?
    It is get­ting hard to tell the dif­fer­ence. Please help us all out and come up with bet­ter THEM vs US label­ing. ;P

    Reply
  4. anon says:
    January 23, 2007 at 8:24 pm

    If you’re doing “con­tract” work for the good of all, then why take the pri­vate con­tract route and get paid more? Why not just reen­list in the Armed forces?
    Here’s a def­i­n­i­tion of Mercenary from Princeton University:
    a per­son hired to fight for another coun­try than their own. If you were fight­ing for the USA, I’d expect to see you in mil­i­tary uni­form salut­ing and fol­low­ing orders.
    It makes ME sick that we’re fight­ing a war with a high per­cent­age of con­trac­tors that have nearly full auton­omy and no oversight.

    Reply
  5. pedestrian says:
    January 23, 2007 at 10:43 pm

    >It makes ME sick that we’re fight­ing a war with a high per­cent­age of con­trac­tors that have nearly
    >full auton­omy and no over­sight.
    You should be happy that we now have con­trac­tors instead of draft. I also imag­ine you are also sick of insur­gents not hav­ing such ROE, not wear­ing any uni­forms, and indis­crim­i­nately attack­ing civil­ians. Contractors are con­ve­nient for use. They are not pun­ished by mar­tial law, and shouldn’t. If they were to be pun­ished, it should be by local laws. They are civil­ians, even they are armed, and have any armored vehi­cles. They work for the gov­ern­ment, but not an orga­ni­za­tion that belongs to the gov­ern­ment. If con­trac­tors were to be pun­ished by mar­tial law, why not insur­gents, espe­cially those hired or paid by Iran, if any? Contractors are con­ve­nient in terms of their envi­ron­ment. They don’t wear uni­forms, and that is an advan­tage to ambush blend­ing in the crowds of civil­ians against insur­gents, if they have per­mis­sion. They may patrol the streets in civil­ian uni­forms in a covert man­ner to counter IED attacks, and any gun­men appear­ing in streets. They add on to num­bers of troops, at least a sub­sti­tute for mis­sions which con­trac­tors may do. Contractors are con­ve­nient also in polit­i­cal terms. Contractors might have more free­dom on quiz­ing detained insur­gents, using more aggres­sive meth­ods to gain valu­able infor­ma­tion. They are not counted as mil­i­tary casu­al­ties, which the media is always aware of. If the media has not been inter­ested in mil­i­tary casu­al­ties count­ing mil­i­tary deaths and scream­ing for each new, maybe the value of con­trac­tors would have been less valu­able. In that term, the media also has respon­si­bil­ity for being indif­fer­ent of count­ing casu­al­ties of con­trac­tors, and scan­dals other than the mil­i­tary alone. As long as con­trac­tors have more flex­i­bil­ity than the mil­i­tary, and as long as the media con­tribute to demor­al­iz­ing the pub­lic as in Vietnam war, I believe con­trac­tors are needed to give the gov­ern­ment more options and chance of vic­tory for the war.

    Reply
  6. RTLM says:
    January 23, 2007 at 10:57 pm

    You have a casual cal­lous­ness about you that is telling. I’d say Bush made an appeal tonight for more such men.
    “Tonight I ask the Congress to autho­rize an increase in the size of our active Army and Marine Corps by 92,000 in the next five years. A sec­ond task we can take on together is to design and estab­lish a vol­un­teer Civilian Reserve Corps. Such a corps would func­tion much like our mil­i­tary reserve. It would ease the bur­den on the Armed Forces by allow­ing us to hire civil­ians with crit­i­cal skills to serve on mis­sions abroad when America needs them. And it would give peo­ple across America who do not wear the uni­form a chance to serve in the defin­ing strug­gle of our time.“
    I think you should reconsider.

    Reply
  7. OleHank says:
    January 24, 2007 at 12:32 pm

    Ken, I’m try­ing real hard here and I still can’t tell the dif­fer­ence between a “con­trac­tor” and a “gun for hire.” The qual­ity of the men, their for­mer career and their spe­cific employer are not at issue, as far as I can tell, but rather the pur­pose they ful­fill. Security/​protection is a tra­di­tional role for mer­ce­nar­ies, what­ever they are named. Care to clar­ify? Otherwise let’s just call a spade a spade.

    Reply
  8. sam says:
    January 24, 2007 at 7:03 pm

    “Doug is a nice guy. But I’ll put my money on Axe as the more objec­tive observer.“
    You’re kid­ding right?!?!?!

    Reply
  9. J.D. says:
    December 17, 2008 at 10:36 am

    I flew with Mr. Laguna sev­eral times out in Iraq. He was a safe pilot and good pilot. I was never scared fly­ing with him, he really knew the UH-​​60. I now work for a con­trac­tor out here in Iraq, going on 3 years now. We do more stuff for the mil­i­tary in a week than the mil­i­tary could do in a year. There is no effort in reten­tion with the mil­i­tary. The funny thing is that the mil­i­tary appre­ci­ates us! I would love to wear the uni­form again but you know what, they don’t pay any­thing. Money makes the world go round. If you don’t pay your sol­diers then you have no army. Screw all you guys that think we are just over­paid merc’s. Most every­one on my team is either retired mil­i­tary or ETSed because they actu­ally want to get paid for being shot at. Take a hard look at your­selves, the pricks writ­ing all the shit talk were prob­a­bly in the rear with the gear. Get a life. Who cares if the gov­ern­ment is fund­ing merc’s, you’re on a need to know basis and you don’t need to know. Just go to sleep soundly in your homes while we do what the gov­ern­ment wants us to do. All con­trac­tors take thier direc­tion from the gov­ern­ment, we don’t make up stuff to do out here. Think out­side the box peo­ple. Would you like the gov­ern­ment to stop build­ing super secret spy planes that con­trac­tors put together and sell our gov­ern­ment so the gov­ern­ment can pro­tect the U.S.? Oh, I get it, that’s dif­fer­ent huh! Go %$^& your­selves! Long live the con­trac­tor and what he does for our gov­ern­ment. Go write your con­gress­man you scoundrals.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

    Most Popular Posts
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • Starship Troopers Meets G.I. Joe
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
    • Dowd's Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Adapting Women to Subs
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Mystery Drone Revealed
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    Recent Comments
    • Sexing up the Headline
      a href="http://www.game4pow er.com">Buy wow...
      buy wow  gold
    • New Army PEO on the way
      To get our AAA quality shoes at reasonable price, Your...
      nike air force ones
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      "And no, the Koran does not say anything about killing...
      bdwilcox
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to...
      DualityOfMan
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      Fascism? Last time I heard, the fascists promoted christianity. Or,...
      DualityOfMan
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      I see an M16 firing, and I see a 40 mm grenade launcher...
      DualityOfMan
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      "I'd say go read some history on fascist ideology and then compare...
      Sam
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      No. I am not saying a grenade launcher on a rifle is a hoax. I...
      Zandor
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      For someone who trashes all the readers of the blog you sure do...
      a1189
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
      These devices vibrate tissue and bone not just...
      WJS
    Recent Articles
    • Semi-​​auto Grenade Thrower
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Airbag Defense
    • Dowd’s Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
    • Lockheed Says Sbirs Still on Track For 2010
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Adapting Women to Subs
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage