Democrats Really Screw Israel: Taliban on Way w/ $80B Latest Greatest US Weapons

[Mushroom]

It does not matter how long it would take, it is pure stupidity to leave behind even one bullet.

But 98% of the equipment left behind no longer belonged to the US. It had been turned over to the Afghan government years earlier.

Like the UH-1 and UH-60 helicopters left in Afghanistan. Like those landing on the carriers at the fall of Vietnam, those were no longer US helicopters, they belonged to Afghanistan. And the Super Tucano's that were left behind, not US equipment but Afghan equipment. And like in Vietnam, most of the aircraft actually left the country at the fall. The only ones left were inoperable and most of those were destroyed by the US before they left.

That is why the main helicopter used by the Taliban now is the venerable Mi-17,

Quite obviously not US equipment, Bought by or for Afghanistan mostly from Iraq and Pakistan. If one looks, the vast majority of military equipment left behind was never of US origin, it was primarily old Soviet equipment as it was plentiful on the arms market and their military was already familiar with it. And a hell of a lot came from Iraq, as they did replace a lot of their old Soviet era equipment with US made equipment. Afghanistan did not have that much money, so largely got castoffs from Iraq.

The Pentagon bypassed US helicopter makers, choosing to spend more than $1 billion on dozens of Russian Mi-17 helicopters. A study shows the Chinook built by Boeing is a better fit.

Why is US buying Russian helicopters for Afghan military?

The Pentagon bypassed US helicopter makers, choosing to spend more than $1 billion on dozens of Russian Mi-17 helicopters. A study shows the Chinook built by Boeing is a better fit.

www.csmonitor.com

 

[Mushroom]

If troops take the gear with them as they leave, why was so much left behind?

The majority of what was left behind belonged to Afghanistan.

It was their equipment, it was no longer US equipment. Yes, a great deal was of US manufacture, but it was not ours anymore, had not been ours for a decade or more. Just like all that equipment captured in 1975 when South Vietnam fell. That equipment that North Vietnam captured was not US equipment, it was South Vietnam's equipment.

Like the F-5 and A-37 aircraft that North Vietnam captured and continued to use for years. That was not US equipment, it was South Vietnamese equipment. When the US units left, they took their equipment with them.

The only "US equipment" that they actually owned when Afghanistan fell and was left behind was some vehicles and small arms. The rest was all owned by Afghanistan.

 

[Catsnmeters]

The majority of what was left behind belonged to Afghanistan.

It was their equipment, it was no longer US equipment. Yes, a great deal was of US manufacture, but it was not ours anymore, had not been ours for a decade or more. Just like all that equipment captured in 1975 when South Vietnam fell. That equipment that North Vietnam captured was not US equipment, it was South Vietnam's equipment.

Like the F-5 and A-37 aircraft that North Vietnam captured and continued to use for years. That was not US equipment, it was South Vietnamese equipment. When the US units left, they took their equipment with them.

The only "US equipment" that they actually owned when Afghanistan fell and was left behind was some vehicles and small arms. The rest was all owned by Afghanistan.

Well there you go then.

Now we know why Trump drew down troops to a meager amount without taking the equipment in the process.

Thanks.

 

[Crepitus]

You are one dumb sob.

And yet still completely correct, as usual.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You remember when the Taliban said, "Kill all Americans. Death to America." Well....I wonder how long its going to take...

Oddly enough the democrats also say Death to America

 

[Mushroom]

Now we know why Trump drew down troops to a meager amount without taking the equipment in the process.

That happened with a timeline set by the Obama Administration according to the wishes of the Afghan government. Based on the promise that the Taliban would stop their attacks. So trying to point fingers at any administration is rather silly.

If anything, this once again shows that like the North Vietnamese, the Taliban should never have been trusted. Is sad that in arranging an end to a conflict, so many groups simply can not be trusted, and will break their word the first chance they get. That is why most such cases in the last 7 decades have ultimately failed.

 

[Catsnmeters]

That happened with a timeline set by the Obama Administration according to the wishes of the Afghan government. Based on the promise that the Taliban would stop their attacks. So trying to point fingers at any administration is rather silly.

Obama approved the Doha Accords?

If anything, this once again shows that like the North Vietnamese, the Taliban should never have been trusted. Is sad that in arranging an end to a conflict, so many groups simply can not be trusted, and will break their word the first chance they get. That is why most such cases in the last 7 decades have ultimately failed.

 

[elektra]

But 98% of the equipment left behind no longer belonged to the US. It had been turned over to the Afghan government years earlier.

Afghanistan government, not the Taliban.

And in addition to what was already owned by Afghanistan (how did they pay us?) we left behind billions in nice modern USA military equipment.

American Aircraft, Equipment & Armored Vehicles

• 2,000 Armored Vehicles Including Humvees and MRAPs
• 75,989 Total Vehicles: FMTV, M35, Ford Rangers, Ford F350, Ford Vans, Toyota Pickups, Armored Security Vehicles etc.
• 45 UH-60 Blackhawk Helicopters
• 50 MD530G Scout Attack Helicopters
• ScanEagle Military Drones
• 30 Military Version Cessnas
• 4 C-130s
• 29 Brazilian made A-29 Super Tucano Ground Attack Aircraft
• Heavy Equipment, Including Bull Dozers, Backhoes, Dump Trucks, Excavators

 

[Mushroom]

we left behind billions in nice modern USA military equipment.

Actually, that is not really true at all.

What we gave them was generally old and obsolete equipment. For example, first generation HMMWVs and first generation up-armored HMMWVs. Stuff that we have not used in a decade or more. One thing about the early 2000s, a hell of a lot of our equipment got totally revamped, leaving us with a ton of equipment that was obsolete.

For example, here is one of theirs that was destroyed.

That is very clearly to anybody that knows a first generation up-armored HMMWV, literally some replacement parts put on a classic 1980s era vehicle. And not the much more robust vehicles the US was using itself. With multiple layers of armor and a more powerful engine.

The same with the rest of the equipment. We upgraded so fast after 2003 that we had a hell of a lot of older stuff just sitting around. And what in the hell are we going to do with a 1st gen Up-A HMMWV when we were using third and forth gen equipment?

So yeah, sure. "Modern". If you think a two decade old upgrade that was literally slapped onto a 3-4 decade old chassis is "modern".

That is something the US has been doing since before WWII. Selling off their old equipment as they replace it with newer equipment. Oh, and the Afghan forces got as much Soviet era equipment as they did US equipment of roughly the same vintage. Oh, and stuff the Afghans bought themselves. They bought a hell of a lot of equipment from all over the place.



Notice, most of those are unarmored Navistar cargo trucks. That was literally a failed project, as it was intended to be the future cargo truck of the Canadian Army. And it literally is a slightly changed military version of the International WorkStar truck.

But what you see there was mostly the project that was underway when Canada changed their mind, and cancelled the contract. So what was the US going to do with them? We sold some off to Iraq, the rest were sold off to Afghanistan.

In other words, no real different than the Kidd class destroyers (commonly called the "Dead Admiral Class"). Four heavily modified Spruance class destroyers we were building for Iran. Then Iran had a revolution, and we ended up stuck with them. So we named them after four Admirals that were killed in action during WWII, and used them ourselves. Not that we really wanted or needed them. Then finally about 20 years ago we were finally able to offload them to Taiwan, who is still using them.

It is not hard to find photographs of the equipment sitting around the Taliban took. And like the photos above, it is almost all rather old, obsolete, and even rejected military equipment that nobody else wanted.

 

[elektra]

Actually, that is not really true at all.

What we gave them was generally old and obsolete equipment. For example, first generation HMMWVs and first generation up-armored HMMWVs. Stuff that we have not used in a decade or more. One thing about the early 2000s, a hell of a lot of our equipment got totally revamped, leaving us with a ton of equipment that was obsolete.

For example, here is one of theirs that was destroyed.

That is very clearly to anybody that knows a first generation up-armored HMMWV, literally some replacement parts put on a classic 1980s era vehicle. And not the much more robust vehicles the US was using itself. With multiple layers of armor and a more powerful engine.

The same with the rest of the equipment. We upgraded so fast after 2003 that we had a hell of a lot of older stuff just sitting around. And what in the hell are we going to do with a 1st gen Up-A HMMWV when we were using third and forth gen equipment?

So yeah, sure. "Modern". If you think a two decade old upgrade that was literally slapped onto a 3-4 decade old chassis is "modern".

That is something the US has been doing since before WWII. Selling off their old equipment as they replace it with newer equipment. Oh, and the Afghan forces got as much Soviet era equipment as they did US equipment of roughly the same vintage. Oh, and stuff the Afghans bought themselves. They bought a hell of a lot of equipment from all over the place.



Notice, most of those are unarmored Navistar cargo trucks. That was literally a failed project, as it was intended to be the future cargo truck of the Canadian Army. And it literally is a slightly changed military version of the International WorkStar truck.

But what you see there was mostly the project that was underway when Canada changed their mind, and cancelled the contract. So what was the US going to do with them? We sold some off to Iraq, the rest were sold off to Afghanistan.

In other words, no real different than the Kidd class destroyers (commonly called the "Dead Admiral Class"). Four heavily modified Spruance class destroyers we were building for Iran. Then Iran had a revolution, and we ended up stuck with them. So we named them after four Admirals that were killed in action during WWII, and used them ourselves. Not that we really wanted or needed them. Then finally about 20 years ago we were finally able to offload them to Taiwan, who is still using them.

It is not hard to find photographs of the equipment sitting around the Taliban took. And like the photos above, it is almost all rather old, obsolete, and even rejected military equipment that nobody else wanted.

Not to mention apache helicopters, tens of thousands of grenades, machine guns, countless rifles, all given to terrorists. I see you don't mention many many high tech munitions,communication equipment, etc..

 

[Mushroom]

Not to mention apache helicopters, tens of thousands of grenades, machine guns, countless rifles, all given to terrorists. I see you don't mention many many high tech munitions,communication equipment, etc..

OK, got a reference for that? Because as far as I am aware, Afghanistan never used the AH-64 helicopter. In fact, they never even used the AH-1 Cobra.

Afghan Air Force - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

There is an inventory of the Afghan Air Force. They never used the Apache, their attack helicopter was the Mi-24 HIND. Oh please, do some research and do not simply make things up. And I know more than once I had actually listed most of their equipment, and said most of their offensive equipment was actually of Soviet design.

And oh yes, rifles, grenades, that is so freaking "high tech". So super secret and impossible to get, not like there is any freaking difference between a US grenade and one made by Russia. Or any of over a dozen other countries that makes hand grenades. And exactly what "high tech munitions" have we sold them? You can't expect to be taken seriously at all when you make silly claims like that, and not only do not back any of the claims up but are actually shown to be wrong.

And oh wow, "communication equipment". Do you know exactly how worthless that is? The radios we use are actually well over two decades old, and much newer and more capable equipment is available on the civilian market. Their main military radio is only the AN/PRC-1077. That quite literally is only a newer and upgraded model of the ancient AN/PRC-77 that we used in Vietnam for Christ's sake! We just emptied out some warehouses of the things that had been in storage since the Gulf War, as we moved on to the original SINCGARS system like the RT-1439, then the even newer RT-1523 series that is the most common one used now.

You are aware that in my final years until I retired, I did Commo for the Army, right? Hell, I can still make an OE-254 for the PRC-77 with commo wire and MRE spoons, that was something I was taught in Panama back in 1987. Once again, you are showing that you are purely making things up, and do not know what you are actually talking about.

A Datron PRC1077 radio supplied to the Afghan army, and another shows what appears to be a Harris tactical hand-held radio, though the blurred image could also be a cheap push-to-talk radio like a Baofeng.

The U.S has provided nearly 2,667 Harris RF-7850M-HH radios to the Afghan military, according to CDR. Patrick L. Evans, a spokesperson for the Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

Kabul Radios

A recent read of the various newspapers are showing A Datron PRC1077 radio supplied to the Afghan army, and another shows what appears to be a Harris tactical hand-held radio, though the blurred im…

ve3ips.wordpress.com

See that? That's known as a "reference". And yes, the Dalton PRC1077 is just the civilian name of the military AN/PRC-1077. A mid to late 1980's update to the AN/PRC-77 that first saw service in freaking 1968. And yes, non-military models are available on the civilian market, and are little different than those the military uses. In fact, want to own an AN/PRC-1077 yourself? Here, this is exactly how "sensitive" it is.

PRC-1077 (dessert specification) | eBay

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for PRC-1077 (dessert specification) at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!

www.ebay.com

That's right, you can buy them on Flea-Bay. There is absolutely nothing secret or sensitive about that old hunk of junk, we have not used them in over 3 decades.

Sorry, but I just can't take you seriously at all. You are purely making things up, and do not have a freaking clue what you are talking about. You keep trying to talk about all this super secret modern equipment, and I know the equipment they are using and it has been what it always was. Outdated junk from roughly the middle of the Cold War that we have not used in decades. The only ones we will sell our "modern" equipment to is our NATO partners and very select other nations. The rest? Like Iraq and Afghanistan they get old Cold War leftovers that had been sitting in storage depots for decades because they are still popular in third world nations.

 

[elektra]

OK, got a reference for that? Because as far as I am aware, Afghanistan never used the AH-64 helicopter. In fact, they never even used the AH-1 Cobra.

Afghan Air Force - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

There is an inventory of the Afghan Air Force. They never used the Apache, their attack helicopter was the Mi-24 HIND. Oh please, do some research and do not simply make things up. And I know more than once I had actually listed most of their equipment, and said most of their offensive equipment was actually of Soviet design.

???? You must live on shit and in the dark.

I stated what we left behind, not what the Afghanistan Military owned and used.

PRC 77, wow, you can make an antenna out of spoons just like they did in the Mel Gibson movie. How many times did you have to watch the movie before you figured it out. And who cares, it means you know nothing. I was a 2841, which I means I know much more about communication equipment than you.

And yes, we left our equipment behind, billions of dollars worth, fixating on what was owned by Afghanistan has nothing to do with the Air Force Base and the billions in equipment left there. You know I am right, feel free to look for a link. They are everywhere.

What is your next argument, Uzbekistan uses пехотная винтовка образца

 

[my2¢]

Biden has been a disaster but let's not forget the clowns before him like the neoconservatives that got us into this mess and the clown just before Biden that let twice as many Taliban out of jail then the number of American troops he left in Afghanistan.

 

[Mushroom]

I stated what we left behind, not what the Afghanistan Military owned and used.

Then obviously you should be able to give a reference to these Apache helicopters.

And no idea, never saw the movie. We were taught that at Fort Sherman in Jungle School.

All I see is the same time repeatedly. You make claims with no references, I provide references that say you are wrong, and you once again simply insist you are right with no references.

In other words, it is your imaginary friends that tell you that you are right, but apparently nobody else.

 

[elektra]

Then obviously you should be able to give a reference to these Apache helicopters.

And no idea, never saw the movie. We were taught that at Fort Sherman in Jungle School.

All I see is the same time repeatedly. You make claims with no references, I provide references that say you are wrong, and you once again simply insist you are right with no references.

In other words, it is your imaginary friends that tell you that you are right, but apparently nobody else.

You referenced what the Afghanistan military owns not what the USA left behind. A big difference.

It is those who demand google links that are wrong.

And again, it is what we left behind, at the Air Base, billions in weapons, not the tired old Afghanistan military's equipment that we are concerned about.

 

[elektra]

Democrats Really Screw Israel: Taliban on Way w/ $80B Latest Greatest US Weapons

Talib leadership likely prefers they not go but even they cannot reign in the young fighters. They are going, and nothing will stop them. They will get there one way or the other. All Biden had to do was what the best officers were begging him to do, not his Woke yes men. Close Bagram air...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[Mushroom]

You referenced what the Afghanistan military owns not what the USA left behind. A big difference.

It is those who demand google links that are wrong.

Once again, chat-chat-chat and not a freaking thing to back up anything you say.

I am saying you should give references, to prove what you are saying is correct. Holy hell, are you sure you were not an 0311? Because I have seen rocks in the grunts that can follow something like this with more ability than you can.

Got any references to a single AH-64? Because I actually looked, and could not find a single thing. Not the Taliban bragging about capturing Apache helicopters. No photographs, nothing.

Oh, but lots of them bragging about capturing old Soviet equipment.

The Taliban have captured more than 100 Russian-made helicopters in various states of operability, the head of a Russian state arms exporter has said, but will be largely unable to use them with little access to maintenance crews and spare parts.

As the Taliban overran the Afghan army and took control of large stores of arms and vehicles, it also captured at least 100 Mi-17 Hip helicopters, a Russian-made transport aircraft procured by the US for the Afghan armed forces because it was comparatively cheaper and easier to fly than US-made UH-60 Black Hawks.

“The helicopter fleet there is large – more than 100 Mi-17 helicopters of various types,” said Alexander Mikheev, the head of the Russian state exporter Rosoboronexporter, according to the Interfax news agency. “Of course, this fleet requires repair, maintenance and spare parts supply.” A large portion of the fleet could already be grounded, he said.

Taliban have captured more than 100 military helicopters, Russia says

Fleet of Russian-made Mi-17 transport aircraft had been procured by US for Afghan armed forces

www.theguardian.com

See, this is why people that tell the truth are not afraid of references. They are not afraid of the truth, and will provide such things to prove they are telling the truth. Those that lie, they refuse to provide any references and even insult those that do because they think their lies are even more important.

SO once again, any references at all to the Taliban capturing Apache helicopters?

 

[elektra]

Once again, chat-chat-chat and not a freaking thing to back up anything you say.

I am saying you should give references, to prove what you are saying is correct. Holy hell, are you sure you were not an 0311? Because I have seen rocks in the grunts that can follow something like this with more ability than you can.

Got any references to a single AH-64? Because I actually looked, and could not find a single thing. Not the Taliban bragging about capturing Apache helicopters. No photographs, nothing.

Oh, but lots of them bragging about capturing old Soviet equipment.

Taliban have captured more than 100 military helicopters, Russia says

Fleet of Russian-made Mi-17 transport aircraft had been procured by US for Afghan armed forces

www.theguardian.com

See, this is why people that tell the truth are not afraid of references. They are not afraid of the truth, and will provide such things to prove they are telling the truth. Those that lie, they refuse to provide any references and even insult those that do because they think their lies are even more important.

SO once again, any references at all to the Taliban capturing Apache helicopters?

You referenced what the Afghanistan army owns not what we left behind.

This OP is based on what was left behind. So you do have that. It has been reported millions of times. Everyone can see it who cares to look. You can quit your crocodile tear tantrum. The information is there, you have seen it.

references, as if google searches are the arbiter of truth

 

[Mushroom]

This OP is based on what was left behind. So you do have that. It has been reported millions of times.

Great! Ten it should be really freaking easy for you to give us a reference about AH-64 helicopters that have been captured by the Taliban.

You say it has been reported millions of times. Funny thing is, I actually looked and could find nobody talking about that at all, only you.

So come on, if it has been reported millions of times you should be able to give us a refence of that easily. Because I did look, and found absolutely nothing.

 

[elektra]

Great! Ten it should be really freaking easy for you to give us a reference about AH-64 helicopters that have been captured by the Taliban.

You say it has been reported millions of times. Funny thing is, I actually looked and could find nobody talking about that at all, only you.

So come on, if it has been reported millions of times you should be able to give us a refence of that easily. Because I did look, and found absolutely nothing.

This OP references and links to helicopters we left behind. You looked? And have no idea that this thread contains what you claim you can not find.