National Security

Combat — Or Electrical — Power For Iraq?

By Mark Thompson | @MarkThompson_DC | September 27, 2010 | +

Like any other government juggling competing demands, two recent data snapshots from Iraq tell an interesting tale.

Here’s the first, from the Pentagon:

Here’s the second, from the State Department:

Hard to believe, but Iraq’s electricity shortage today (power generation now is only 56 percent of the need) is worse than it was a year ago (when it met 69 percent of the demand). Wonder if the 24 Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-229 or General Electric F110-GE-129 Increased Performance Engines that are part of the F-16 package can be used as portable power generators?

Related Topics: weapons sales, National Security

  • Latest on Battleland

    Army photo / Sgt. Michael J. MacLeod
    Afghanistan May 16, 2012

    Humpin’ It…And Jammin’ It…

    Reuters
    Pacific May 16, 2012

    China’s ‘Security Dilemma’ Risks Arms Race in Asia

    TOKYO – A shooting war with China may not be inevitable, but a dangerous arms escalation seems a dead certainty. That’s the take from a rare public discussion here this week among naval experts from Japan, the U.S. and China.

    Chris Hondros / Getty Images
    Military Mental Health May 16, 2012

    Mental Ills Top Reason U.S. Troops Now Hospitalized

    Four of the top five non-combat medical conditions sending troops to the hospital in 2011 were mental ailments, the Pentagon reports:

  • stuartzechman

    “Democracy is on the march…“

  • michaelfury

    “Hard to believe”

    ——————————

    “There’s a picture of the World Trade Center hanging up by my bed and I keep one in my Kevlar [flak jacket]. Every time I feel sorry for these people I look at that. I think, ‘They hit us at home and, now, it’s our turn.’ I don’t want to say payback but, you know, it’s pretty much payback.”

    http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2010/04/07/payback/

  • afguy

    “Democracy is ready for takeoff…”
    .
    Gievn that we are talking about F-16 aircraft sales, this is more appropriate.

  • afguy

    Here’s a suggestion – wrap some wire around Ike’s corpse and turn it into a generator.
    .
    Given his warnings about the “military-industrial complex”, I’m sure he’s spinning in his grave fast enough to come up with some serious power.
    .
    Not enough electricity nationally, but we figure they need fighter jets worse?
    .
    Which country’s economy are we trying to rebuild anyway?

  • grape_crush

    Good grief.

  • afguy

    This is going to be a replay of Iran.
    .
    At some point in the future, there will be F-16s with Iraqi markings sitting in the desert outside Tucson, destined for Iraq but unable to be delivered because of deteriorating relations with that country, just as there were F-14s with Iranian markings back in the ’80s.
    .
    Can’t anybody play this game?? (with apologies to Casey Stengel…)

  • centfan

    …Well if Iraq takes the oil money, buys American weapons, and invades and conquers Iran, then they can make immediate use out of the Iranian nuclear power plants.
    -
    We get our money back for the war, Iran’s politics is no longer a problem, Iran’s nuclear industry is no longer a problem, and Iraq is an emerging economy with a high demand for air conditioners and big screen TVs. It’s win win win win win win… win win… win… and win.

  • sacoharry

    ?

    To me, this isn’t discouraging. Look at the numbers. Since Saddam’s overthrow, the country’s electrical production has more than doubled. 2 1/2 times the grid capacity in 7 years is impressive. The demand shows how many people in the country have moved up into the middle class and are demanding what we in the West take for granted — reliable electricity for appliances, climate control (the biggest chunk, judging by the huge demand spikes each summer), entertainment, communication.

    The other side of the coin is that Iraq’s military capacity was decimated by the war. And that’s not a good place to be with neighbors like Syria and Iran. So its purchase of the means to defend itself — and provide equalization in a region often devoid of it — is not bad news.

  • afguy

    So its purchase of the means to defend itself — and provide equalization in a region often devoid of it — is not bad news.
    .
    Is this “foreign aid” from us or a “purchase”? As for the future viability, availability of parts to maintain said new aircraft will have a lot to say about how valuable they will be in the future. If one enters into a war with complex machinery, you better have lots of spares available to continue the effort. FedEx isn’t gonna “overnight” a spare engine or other major part to you under combat conditions.
    .
    Are they prepared to actually defend themselves with this purchase, or it this just another way to make money for General Dynamics?

  • noordijk

    The rise in demand is noteworthy as power demand generally corresponds to economic activity. This is a rise in demand during a global recession, and slight but not sufficient rise in production.

    As far as the planes go. MM. F-16s are a good value platform, a reliable very capable multi-mission aircraft with many users in the area. Turkey, Saudi, Kuwait, UAE, with whom the Iraqis can share maint. costs etc.

    As Iraq currently has no airforce, I suppose the other posters simply expect the USAF and Marines to fulfill that role ad infinitum?

    It isn’t like they are in a pleasant neighborhood, or have no domestic insurrections.

blog comments powered by Disqus