4 ms·
TL;DR they're mostly self funded (through farming and resource extraction withing Afghanistan). The near complete absence of cell phone videos of AGTM attacks
by throwaway0a5e 5y ago
TL;DR they're mostly self funded (through farming and resource extraction withing Afghanistan).
The near complete absence of cell phone videos of AGTM attacks from that war is a massive tip-off it clear that they don't have a nation state sugar daddy paying the bill (in contrast with groups in Syria).
- baybal2 5y agoThose are not your stereotype fitting "donkey riders" https://i.ibb.co/j3CGjTm/IMG-20190710-173326-1.webp https://i.ibb.co/j3CGjTm/IMG-20190710-173326-1.webp Employing services of such good smooth talkers doesn't come cheap: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWWVy7z9w8Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWWVy7z9w8Y Such guy could've easily billed clients up few thousand bucks per hour if he were to work in the West. And it shows that these guys have both understanding of good PR, and must be spending much on it.
- thatguy0900 5y agoWell,they are religious extremists fighting a underdog fight against a big bad empire. If youre an extremist muslim youll probably take a discount to work with them. They might not be paying that much.
- baybal2 5y agoP.S. I googled on the man, and now I'm taking my words back. My initial impression of him was wrong.
- gruez 5y ago>The near complete absence of cell phone videos of AGTM attacks from that war is a massive tip-off it clear that they don't have a nation state sugar daddy paying the bill (in contrast with groups in Syria). I don't get it, are cell phone videos hard to get a hold of without "a nation state sugar daddy paying the bill"? The other explanation is that Syria has a much higher GDP per capita ($6,373) than Afghanistan ($2,474), so the populace is more likely to have cell phones which means more footage of AGTM strikes.
- kesselvon 5y agoHis point is they can't afford the AGTMs, not the cell phones. AGTMs are expensive, and the Taliban can't afford it.
- gruez 5y agoAh okay, I was thinking the AGTMs were being launched by US/NATO.
- dogma1138 5y agoIf those figures are anywhere close to being real it’s not about money but about logistics. All it means is that they don’t have a sponsor or at least a major one that provides them with sophisticated weapons, during the last civil war the Taliban rode into Kabul on soviet tanks. Syria had tons of weapons to steal, so did Iraq and parties like Iran transferred arms including ATGMs to non state actors involved in the conflict. ATGMs also may not be as useful in a mountainous country like Afghanistan. Right now the Taliban is riding in HMMWVs at least the Americans didn’t give the Afghans M1 Abrams tanks like they did with the Iraqis, Kata'ib Hezbollah and ISIL are rolling in M1’s these days in Syria as they managed to “liberate” them from the Iraqi forces. People overestimate just how easy it is to secure weapons, especially sophisticated ones without a local source. Most illegal arms are those which are bought legally and then transferred illegally or are stolen from those who bought them legally. This means you need either a local adversary or a local ally that has ATGMs in sufficient quantities to get your hands on them, without that even Nick Cage won’t get you your Kornets.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago>ATGMs also may not be as useful in a mountainous country like Afghanistan. They are amazingly useful because you can hit a truck or a group of people miles away way more effectively than with gunfire and way more accurately than with mortar fire. You do this when you have nation states giving you their old stuff. When you have to pay your own way you reserve the ATGMs for actual tanks and whatnot. Look at the videos out of Syria. That's exactly how they're used. >ATGMs also may not be as useful in a mountainous country like Afghanistan. If nation states had serious interest in this conflict "local sources" would materialize like they did in Syria. All those TOWs those guys use didn't come from Iraq.
- loeg 5y agoAGTM?
- rjsw 5y agoMaybe they meant ATGM.
- throwaway0a5e 5y agoExactly what I meant.
- akhosravian 5y agoATGM?
- kook_throwaway 5y agoWhat is ATGM? Seems like something I'm not comfortable searching for.
- jjk166 5y agoAnti tank guided missile These are man portable weapons capable of taking out tanks and other vehicles at decent range. They are expensive and complicated compared to say an RPG.
- kook_throwaway 5y agoThank you. I'm picturing something similar to MANPAD but for tanks.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- LorenPechtel 5y agoATGMs are expensive per target killed and Pakistan doesn't have indigenous ability to manufacture them. Supplying such missiles would pull back the veil a bit, especially if serial numbers were recovered.