4 ms·

Why oh why didn't the military destroy equipment left behind in the wind-down? At least at the bases... where they keep heaps of explosives for the purpose of d

by tomc1985 5y ago

Why oh why didn't the military destroy equipment left behind in the wind-down? At least at the bases... where they keep heaps of explosives for the purpose of destroying things?

hack-news 5y ago
So that we're back at war soon.
lazyninja987 5y ago
i am guessing there is probably some backdoor deal where US will leave equipment behind, and taliban will not take the airport.
XorNot 5y ago
This has been the ongoing incredible thing about all of this: the US just up and leaving fully functional equipment all over the place. I would've thought "slap some C4 to the engine block" would be standard procedure if you're abandoning a base?
- hasmanean 5y ago
  Now you’ve left your enemy a truck and some C4. After the first one would have blown up they would have checked all the other trucks and found it.
  - BBC-vs-neolibs 5y ago
    The idea is to detonate it before you exit the area. Not leaving booby traps.
  - XorNot 5y ago
    Not boobytrapping it, just literally blowing up and otherwise rendering it non-functional.
xwdv 5y ago
Because they can go get it back any time they want, and leaving it behind gives cheap tracking data and analytics.
fighterpilot 5y ago
Because they thought the ANA could potentially hold out for a while and maybe even arrive at a negotiated solution with the Taliban. If you stripped them of equipment, then the probability of that happening goes to 0%, instead of 25% (or 60%, or whatever the estimate was at the time). The above is obviously assuming good faith.
- megous 5y ago
  US reportedly left some big bases like Bagram without telling ANA at all, leaving them to looters, or leaving equipment behind without keys, etc. Sounds like passing useful equipment to ANA was not really a high priority while withdrawing. I wonder if they already reasoned it would not be of any help anyway. https://www.theguardian.com/world/gallery/2021/jul/06/inside-afghanistans-looted-bagram-airbase-after-us-departure-in-pictures https://www.theguardian.com/world/gallery/2021/jul/06/inside...
dncornholio 5y ago
Troops who left more than 5 years already said at that time, we will be back fighting our own weapons. They were right.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
rgbrenner 5y ago
These devices, like most of the equipment the Taliban captured, was in the hands of ANA troops and was abandoned during their surrender/retreat[0]. This equipment was purchased by Afghanistan from the US (using US funds, obviously). So technically, it wasn't US property.. and they had no right to destroy it. 0. https://www.pri.org/stories/2021-08-19/us-biometric-devices-are-hands-taliban-they-could-be-used-target-afghans-who https://www.pri.org/stories/2021-08-19/us-biometric-devices-...
- Shacklz 5y ago
  > This equipment was purchased by Afghanistan from the US (using US funds, obviously) As someone with a slightly pacifist streak and a very strong dislike of the military industrial complex, this statement, as obvious as it is, somehow still makes me furious... I often wonder how people working in these circles or supporting politics in this direction sleep at night. It's so obviously pointless, so obviously destructive, so obviously detrimental to humanity as a whole... I don't know. Maybe I'm just too naive, but I just can't decide if I should feel sad or angry about it. (sorry for the somewhat unrelated rant)
  - bruce343434 5y ago
    They like money!
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - luckylion 5y ago
    My guess is they figure it's better to have a military industrial complex than letting the Taliban conquer the world.
  - the-dude 5y ago
    Are you aware of the strings attached to 'development aid' ?
  - dangerface 5y ago
    If some one starts a fight with you, you need to defend yourself. If some one starts a fight with some one innocent you should probably help defend them. > It's so obviously pointless, so obviously destructive, so obviously detrimental to humanity as a whole Pacifism is a nice ideal and easy to defend when talking about an unjustified war like Iraq. But when I see Afghans so desperate to leave they are clinging onto airplanes I think it's obvious that pacifism is just as pointless and detrimental. No one sleeps easy.
rdevsrex 5y ago
Yeah, I'm thinking of how the German navy while in Scapa Flow, scuttled their fleet. It's the most obvious thing in the world for an army on the run to do. But then you have to have command and control in the first place to do that.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
secondcoming 5y ago
China is already reverse engineering that equipment in order to clone it. It's actually negligent what the US did. The world is now more dangerous.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

Why oh why didn't the military destroy equipment left behind in the wind-down? At least at the bases... where they keep heaps of explosives for the purpose of destroying things?

hack-news 5y ago

So that we're back at war soon.

lazyninja987 5y ago

i am guessing there is probably some backdoor deal where US will leave equipment behind, and taliban will not take the airport.

XorNot 5y ago

This has been the ongoing incredible thing about all of this: the US just up and leaving fully functional equipment all over the place. I would've thought "slap some C4 to the engine block" would be standard procedure if you're abandoning a base?

hasmanean 5y ago
Now you’ve left your enemy a truck and some C4. After the first one would have blown up they would have checked all the other trucks and found it.
- BBC-vs-neolibs 5y ago
  The idea is to detonate it before you exit the area. Not leaving booby traps.
- XorNot 5y ago
  Not boobytrapping it, just literally blowing up and otherwise rendering it non-functional.

xwdv 5y ago

Because they can go get it back any time they want, and leaving it behind gives cheap tracking data and analytics.

fighterpilot 5y ago

Because they thought the ANA could potentially hold out for a while and maybe even arrive at a negotiated solution with the Taliban. If you stripped them of equipment, then the probability of that happening goes to 0%, instead of 25% (or 60%, or whatever the estimate was at the time). The above is obviously assuming good faith.

megous 5y ago
US reportedly left some big bases like Bagram without telling ANA at all, leaving them to looters, or leaving equipment behind without keys, etc. Sounds like passing useful equipment to ANA was not really a high priority while withdrawing. I wonder if they already reasoned it would not be of any help anyway. https://www.theguardian.com/world/gallery/2021/jul/06/inside-afghanistans-looted-bagram-airbase-after-us-departure-in-pictures https://www.theguardian.com/world/gallery/2021/jul/06/inside...

dncornholio 5y ago

Troops who left more than 5 years already said at that time, we will be back fighting our own weapons. They were right.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

rgbrenner 5y ago

These devices, like most of the equipment the Taliban captured, was in the hands of ANA troops and was abandoned during their surrender/retreat[0]. This equipment was purchased by Afghanistan from the US (using US funds, obviously). So technically, it wasn't US property.. and they had no right to destroy it. 0. https://www.pri.org/stories/2021-08-19/us-biometric-devices-are-hands-taliban-they-could-be-used-target-afghans-who https://www.pri.org/stories/2021-08-19/us-biometric-devices-...

Shacklz 5y ago
> This equipment was purchased by Afghanistan from the US (using US funds, obviously) As someone with a slightly pacifist streak and a very strong dislike of the military industrial complex, this statement, as obvious as it is, somehow still makes me furious... I often wonder how people working in these circles or supporting politics in this direction sleep at night. It's so obviously pointless, so obviously destructive, so obviously detrimental to humanity as a whole... I don't know. Maybe I'm just too naive, but I just can't decide if I should feel sad or angry about it. (sorry for the somewhat unrelated rant)
- bruce343434 5y ago
  They like money!
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- luckylion 5y ago
  My guess is they figure it's better to have a military industrial complex than letting the Taliban conquer the world.
- the-dude 5y ago
  Are you aware of the strings attached to 'development aid' ?
- dangerface 5y ago
  If some one starts a fight with you, you need to defend yourself. If some one starts a fight with some one innocent you should probably help defend them. > It's so obviously pointless, so obviously destructive, so obviously detrimental to humanity as a whole Pacifism is a nice ideal and easy to defend when talking about an unjustified war like Iraq. But when I see Afghans so desperate to leave they are clinging onto airplanes I think it's obvious that pacifism is just as pointless and detrimental. No one sleeps easy.

rdevsrex 5y ago

Yeah, I'm thinking of how the German navy while in Scapa Flow, scuttled their fleet. It's the most obvious thing in the world for an army on the run to do. But then you have to have command and control in the first place to do that.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

secondcoming 5y ago

China is already reverse engineering that equipment in order to clone it. It's actually negligent what the US did. The world is now more dangerous.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]