rfordphotos wrote:
Nearly 20 years of training and EQUIPPING the Afghan National Army left them in possession of a huge amount of US made weaponry and munitions. US troops took their materials home with them as they left, the ANA simply dropped their weapons as they gave up and went home.

Good point that all of that equipment and munitions *may* have been given over to the Afghan army. That makes the intelligence failures all the more damning though. But abandoning a huge airbase?

Modelphilia wrote:
Good point that all of that equipment and munitions *may* have been given over to the Afghan army. That makes the intelligence failures all the more damning though. But abandoning a huge airbase?

Just to be clear, there's absolutely no question about it.

As The Atlantic (and many others) summarized "The United States has spent $83 billion training, equipping, and even paying Afghanistan’s security forces since 2001, a mammoth amount."

Remember for many years now, since the U.S. decided it wanted out, the strategy has been to heavily equip and train the Afghan army to do the job INSTEAD of the U.S., allowing the U.S. to leave.

This was NOT a last minute handover of U.S. weapons and equipment.  To heavily equip and train them has been the official policy for a very long time.

Related to that, about 3 weeks ago, before the massive collapse, the Americans formally handed the Bagram base over to the Afghan military.  As agreed between Trump and the Taliban to completely withdraw all American forces (that includes the Bagram base), and that decision was backed when Biden also decided that it was time to cut the U.S. losses there.

So let's not mischaracterize what actually happened.

BUT, it's also critical to realize that the fundamental U.S. planning belief was completely and totally wrong in a much more fundamental way.

Multiple administrations all believed that equipping and training the Afghan forces, for years and years at great expense, would allow the Afghans to continue to be in charge once the U.S. left (best case), or (worst case) buy the Americans lots of time after the U.S. was long gone, before seeing the country collapse.  We all know how that worked out.

LightDreams wrote:
Remember for many years now, since the U.S. decided it wanted out, the strategy has been to heavily equip and train the Afghan army to do the job INSTEAD of the U.S., allowing the U.S. to leave.

This was NOT a last minute handover of U.S. weapons and equipment.  To heavily equip and train them has been the official policy for a very long time.
. . . .

That is among a number of important points you make. However, the impression I got from early reports was of the U.S. forces having left all of *their own* munitions, machines, and technology behind, in addition to whatever was then still in the hands of the Afghan military –such as it was.

John Silva Photography wrote:
. . .  and YOU want then to take out the tanks, artillery and trucks too?!? . . .
John

Logistics is THE major part of ALL military operations. Their entire system is set up to operate through those channels at all times, so what is the excuse?

Modelphilia wrote:

Logistics is THE major part of ALL military operations. Their entire system is set up to operate through those channels at all times, so what is the excuse?

No worries about getting the small arms back, at least, they'll come back but unfortunately with a jihadi terrorist attached to it.

E Thompson Photography wrote:

No worries about getting the small arms back, at least, they'll come back but unfortunately with a jihadi terrorist attached to it.

LoL...., they won't NEED a Jihadist attached to those weapons. All they need to do is supply all those living in their mommies basements with the weapons, throw in a few extra large American flags which I'm sure were all left behind too. Plus add a few big confederate flags, a few thin blue line flags and a couple of Gadsden flags and some sturdy aluminum poles to wave them with, along with a strong dose of Q and all those basement dwelling Proud Babies will be glad to storm the capital all over again!!! LoL
John

John Silva Photography wrote:
. . .  and YOU want then to take out the tanks, artillery and trucks too?!? . . .
John

Modelphilia wrote:
Logistics is THE major part of ALL military operations. Their entire system is set up to operate through those channels at all times, so what is the excuse?

Because the huge corporations that make war machines want the gov't to purchase more war machines,  War is always a money making scheme for defense contractors which would otherwise go broke if the world is at peace.

There were many testimonials about things that happened during the Gulf War, like a $75,000 truck blowing a tire, so the gov't contractors would order a new truck instead of a replacement tire.  It's all about the $$$.

SayCheeZ!  wrote:
Because the huge corporations that make war machines want the gov't to purchase more war machines,  War is always a money making scheme for defense contractors which would otherwise go broke if the world is at peace.

There were many testimonials about things that happened during the Gulf War, like a $75,000 truck blowing a tire, so the gov't contractors would order a new truck instead of a replacement tire.  It's all about the $$$.

i'd be curious about additional details regarding that "testimonial" and its legitimacy.

SayCheeZ!  wrote:
Because the huge corporations that make war machines want the gov't to purchase more war machines,  War is always a money making scheme for defense contractors which would otherwise go broke if the world is at peace.

True, and this Aphganistan-ending episode in particular goes all the way back to the former vice-president & master puppeteer Dick Cheney, re-entering the federal government, and engineering his takeover for Bubba Bush so that he could privatize all possible military needs-fulfillment (from arms, to private armies; from laundry, to meals, etc.). Of course all of that business went back to the company he had just been leading, and from which he was still receiving "retirement" remunerations from. Yeah, old Cheney, that bastard!

Paolo D Photography wrote:
ironically war is probably the least horrible thing that helps drive advancements in technology.

Oh, nice!

That reminds me of the comment I heard uttered in the late-60's , at a high-rise Chicago dinner-party that was made by a commodities-trader during the very height of the war in Vietnam: "It's OK if 10% of the people die in the war if it means the rest of us can live well!"

Nice sentiment that, and yours. And not all that different.

Modelphilia wrote:
That reminds me of the comment I heard uttered in the late-60's , at a high-rise Chicago dinner-party that was made by a commodities-trader during the very height of the war in Vietnam: "It's OK if 10% of the people die in the war if it means the rest of us can live well!"

Nice sentiment that, and yours. And not all that different.

yeah its reality that people put a value on things like that.

my sentiment you quoted was pretty much very different; more along the lines that theres worse things to use as an excuse to profit from, than people fighting over resources or religion.

rfordphotos wrote:
Nearly 20 years of training and EQUIPPING the Afghan National Army left them in possession of a huge amount of US made weaponry and munitions. US troops took their materials home with them as they left, the ANA simply dropped their weapons as they gave up and went home.

The same thing happened in Vietnam-- our units took their goods home, but the BILLIONS of dollars of aid that equipped the South Vietnamese Army and Air Force left a lot of US made weapons for the North Vietnamese to "capture".

The higher tech stuff wont last long in the hands of untrained operators, and we wont be sending them repair parts.......

No but it is a reverse engineering gold mind for China and Russia not to mention the opportunity to stock up their aggressor units, the units that role play as the US against their own forces.

Fun fact, the chinese ejection seat of the late 60's was a clone of an F-4 ejection seat recovered in Vietnam. Why engineer it from the ground up if you can replicate it cheaper?

I haven't seen anything about the night-vision being the highest end generation of equipment being used by Special Ops so it's not really the same kind of loss I just described. We've already encountered the Taliban using captured night vision, it didn't go well for us.

Paolo D Photography wrote:
in which case who cares if war makes money, and its more cost effective to just leave old equipment behind after a long occupation.

Bringing it home is too costly, but more could have been done to destroy what was left in place. Some things were rendered useless like the State Department helicopters. It's mostly going to be the formerly owned Afghan stuff, that will be the problem short term.

SayCheeZ!  wrote:

John Silva Photography wrote:
. . .  and YOU want then to take out the tanks, artillery and trucks too?!? . . .
John

Because the huge corporations that make war machines want the gov't to purchase more war machines,  War is always a money making scheme for defense contractors which would otherwise go broke if the world is at peace.

There were many testimonials about things that happened during the Gulf War, like a $75,000 truck blowing a tire, so the gov't contractors would order a new truck instead of a replacement tire.  It's all about the $$$.

We have some "trucks" with $10k wheels, but that has to do more with the obscene size and weight load.

John Silva Photography wrote:

LoL...., they won't NEED a Jihadist attached to those weapons. All they need to do is supply all those living in their mommies basements with the weapons, throw in a few extra large American flags which I'm sure were all left behind too. Plus add a few big confederate flags, a few thin blue line flags and a couple of Gadsden flags and some sturdy aluminum poles to wave them with, along with a strong dose of Q and all those basement dwelling Proud Babies will be glad to storm the capital all over again!!! LoL
John

Given what's faintly possible for September 18th, I don't find any of that funny. I was there for the last riot.

Optical Prime wrote:

Given what's faintly possible for September 18th, I don't find any of that funny. I was there for the last riot.

I'm sure I've missed it but what has Q predicted for the 18th?
Is the great orange messiah supposed to miraculously reappear and take his rightful place in the white house?
And if so will the Trump kids have to organize a last minute inauguration???
I'm on the edge of my seat for the next ten days!!! LoL
John

John Silva Photography wrote:
I'm sure I've missed it but what has Q predicted for the 18th?
Is the great orange messiah supposed to miraculously reappear and take his rightful place in the white house?
And if so will the Trump kids have to organize a last minute inauguration???
I'm on the edge of my seat for the next ten days!!! LoL
John

your choice of hateful words and how it appears you are hoping for some sort of chaos is saddening.

John Silva Photography wrote:
I'm sure I've missed it but what has Q predicted for the 18th?

Washington is preparing for a possible issue on Sept 18th.  We don't know how serious or not things will actually turn out to be.

What we DO know, is that they are calling for another big rally, returning to the Capitol building in Washington, on Sept 18th.  It's called the "Justice for J6" rally, to supposedly protest the arrest and treatment of 600 "political prisoners" arrested for their January 6th assault on the Capitol Building.

It's apparently been very heavily hyped on the boards that cater to these people.   Will it turn out to be an empty threat?   A small turnout that doesn't cause any problems?  A large group that this time around, doesn't cause any major problems?  Or will things turn serious once again.   We have no idea.

But extensive plans have been made to make sure that they are better prepared for whatever the situation does turns out to be, come Sept 18th at the Capitol.

My personal suspicion is that it will be more of a half-assed, significantly smaller group this time around.  But, naturally, they have to prepare for whatever may come.

Natural Means wrote:
I think rather than focusing on the equipment, focus on the dramatic direction changes. If the decision to go to Afghanistan was right, then the correct way to pull out is to do it incrementally, a dozen or so less per week.

How would you like top be a mid level US Army officer trying to reassure a school principal or mayor or police commander in your next war, "We're here for the long haul, get you kids back to school (or whatever), you're safe, we're here, my word of honour."?

That's a good point I think. The political aspects of the situation should be considered of greater importance than considerations of surplus military hardware.

JSouthworth wrote:
The US DoD and British MOD didn't put enough effort into the development of UAVs and autonomous UCAVs, Unmanned Combat Air Vehicles. This is the technology that could have made a critical difference. Apparently there has been a move within the US military to adopt Isaac Asimov's "law of robotics" that a robot cannot harm a human being, which is unhelpful to say the least. I think they might have been better off reading Harry Harrison or David Drake if they wanted inspiration from science fiction. And I'm reminded of a scene in the film Jarhead ("The bible says thou shalt not kill, but hear this.....")

On the contrary, the SBS and SAS units were vital to success early in the war. The war was lost about this time 20 years ago. We should have never stayed after 2003/4. The mission shifted from capture, kill, destroy AQ/OBL to nation building in a region that was going to take decades to bring about anything meaningful in change. The corruption and flawed strategies and understanding of the culture is ever-present every step the years that followed.

Automated systems when practical have always been designed to follow a version of Asimov's laws of robotics. They just don't always work.

JSouthworth wrote:
Some people have been raising concerns about the aircraft captured by the Taliban. While they do not have the capability of operating them at present, they could potentially acquire some capability in under a decade if other countries, such as China provided assistance with training and technical support. It isn't clear that there is a percieved need on their part to do that.

They are more likely to sell everything they don't have the know-how to keep going. The pilot training dilemma is one of the greatest examples of the cultural impossibilities of lifting that country up.

Optical Prime wrote:

On the contrary, the SBS and SAS units were vital to success early in the war. The war was lost about this time 20 years ago. We should have never stayed after 2003/4. The mission shifted from capture, kill, destroy AQ/OBL to nation building in a region that was going to take decades to bring about anything meaningful in change. The corruption and flawed strategies and understanding of the culture is ever-present every step the years that followed.

Automated systems when practical have always been designed to follow a version of Asimov's laws of robotics. They just don't always work.

They are more likely to sell everything they don't have the know-how to keep going. The pilot training dilemma is one of the greatest examples of the cultural impossibilities of lifting that country up.

The US special forces and the CIA were primarily responsible for the successful early operations against Al Qaida. The book "Jawbreaker" by CIA operative Gary Berntsen makes quite interesting reading.

woodpaint51 wrote:
Agree that this is always a bad issue..,unless you absolutely positively know that the forces from country you just left have a superb chance of survival and total control of those weapons.   Sadly in WWII as carriers came home, they dumped many planes into the ocean, with no idea how many Army Air Force pilots would LOVE to own a fighter plane to fly at home.  Some luckily ended up in fairly shallow waters and SCUBA divers now enjoy visiting them.   Others lost in practice in the cold fresh waters of Lake Michigan, were located and saved, now repaired and in museums.
    But yes, the point of leaving and then finding that valuable , modern weapons get taken by our enemies is very disturbing. Not only do they use them against us, but many many Chinese and old Soviet advances came from them reverse engineering our latest and best weapons of all sorts.  Seems so very likely to happen and so stupid for us to abandon unless we had to beat a hasty retreat for our lives.  Our Stinger missiles that were sneaked into Afghanistan back in mid 80's for rebels to defeat the notorious Soviet HIND gunships, well they ended up in Taliban hands at start of 'War on Terror' post 2001.  Thank goodness that most were aged, dead batteries or other parts that they seldom worked to shoot down any U.S. aircraft.

The CIA had a program for buying back the Stinger missiles after the Soviets withdrew, I believe.
It was'nt just the Soviets and Chinese that reverse engineered things. During World War Two the US copied the German V1 "Doodlebug" flying bomb, they would have been used against Japan if the war had continued a little longer. The V2 rocket, the first ballistic missile, became the starting point for US missile development after the war.