Poll of the Day > This is all the US weapons Taliban now have access to

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://imgur.com/WUIk6I6

:O

---

Biden should be impeached and imprisoned for treason over this.

Wonder how many of those small arms will end up in the hands of warlords and gangs to cause more havoc all over the world.

Too bad the afghanistan army surrendered

---

As long as they don't have nukes, I'm good.

---

Didn't the U.S. army disable some of those weapons before leaving? I saw a story that said they disabled at least some of the planes; I'm guessing they disabled some of the other weapons too.

OmegaM posted...

Didn't the U.S. army disable some of those weapons before leaving? I saw a story that said they disabled at least some of the planes; I'm guessing they disabled some of the other weapons too.

Allegedly. In the long run, as far as the vehicles are concerned l, I wouldnt be too worried. I know for a fact from personal use that the maintenance on at least 4 of those vehicles will leave them useless, and Id be very surprised if any of the aircraft will be able to get off the ground more than once.

the weapons are more concerning, but thats on us.

I would be interested to know where The Times got their information from though.

Most of the vehicles wont be operational because of specific maintenance requirements.

Besides, the taliban love their Toyotas for mobility.

---

How charitable it is for the American military to donate all those armaments to a bunch of religious extremists instead of just selling them.

---

JOExHIGASHI posted...

Too bad the afghanistan army surrendered

This. What were we supposed to do? Leave the Afgan national defense completely defenseless on our way out? That's on them for immediately surrendering.

MartianManchild posted...

Biden should be impeached and imprisoned for treason over this.

Right after Trump for causing the January 6th insurrection. Oh and no he shouldn't. Trump caused this too when created that shitty deal with the Taliban.

Cacciato posted...

Allegedly. In the long run, as far as the vehicles are concerned l, I wouldnt be too worried. I know for a fact from personal use that the maintenance on at least 4 of those vehicles will leave them useless, and Id be very surprised if any of the aircraft will be able to get off the ground more than once.

the weapons are more concerning, but thats on us.

I would be interested to know where The Times got their information from though.

I have been seeing this float around. It says the GAO, but the only GAO report I found was weapons we gave the Afghan government from 2006 and onwards, which has numbers that align with this report, so they are assuming all material given to the Afghan government was captured, which is somewhat reasonable excluding depreciation. I mean, the small arms, body armor and nvgs are probably intact, but I am sure most of the vehicles given are non operational now, so the numbers are not perfect. Regardless, the Taliban should have enough supplies to solidify thier rule, which might have been the plan to start

---

DragonClaw01 posted...

It says the GAO

What is the GAO?

---

That's embarrassing, and Biden called this poor excuse of a retreat a success? He should've at least ordered the destruction of the ordinance prior to retreating, just blow it all up and call it a day.
---

Hop103 posted...

He should've at least ordered the destruction of the ordinance prior to retreating

Again, the question: How much of it was in the hands of the Afghan government forces?

---

Hop103 posted...

That's embarrassing, and Biden called this poor excuse of a retreat a success? He should've at least ordered the destruction of the ordinance prior to retreating, just blow it all up and call it a day.

ordnance*

To be fair, most of their weapons before were also from the US, since we sold them to them in the 1980s.
---

They're already flying the transport helicopters :/

They might have some difficulty flying the Blackhawks .. but they can always sell them :\

Money, equipment, lives and reputation.. gone

.. meanwhile the Dems found it agreeable to impeach the former President over a phone call.

rip America

---

I mean, if you beat the raid boss you get the loot

---

Arcturusisnow posted...

Right after Trump for causing the January 6th insurrection. Oh and no he shouldn't. Trump caused this too when created that shitty deal with the Taliban.

trump blames obama for something, "it's an excuse!"

biden blames trump for something, "he is right!"
---

Zangulus posted...

Of course you wouldnt understand that it depends on what theyre being blamed for. But think of the world in black and white and be wrong.

no black and white about being a drunkard who drives while drunk
---

Arcturusisnow posted...

Right after Trump for causing the January 6th insurrection. Oh and no he shouldn't. Trump caused this too when created that shitty deal with the Taliban.

He didnt cause the insurrection, those nut jobs were planning that protest weeks in advance, what he tweeted out during the riot was inexcusable thou, no question there.

As for Trumps deal with the Taliban, really? You're going to blame Trump when Joe went along with it when he had the option not to?

That's like asking for another card in a game of blackjack, going bust then blaming the dealer, come on man

---

Cacciato posted...

ordnance*

TIL

JixHedgehog posted...

He didnt cause the insurrection, those nut jobs were planning that protest weeks in advance, what he tweeted out during the riot was inexcusable thou, no question there.

He single-handedly spun the "stolen election" narrative out of whole cloth. He spent the last 6 years doing everything he could to convince as many people as possible that the only way he could lose the presidential election was by widespread fraud. Heck, he insisted there was widespread fraud even when he won, simply because he didn't win the popular vote.

Did Trump personally tell people to storm the capitol? Not that I can remember (though, honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if he mentioned it at some point). Was he the progenitor of the entirety of their motivations? Absolutely.

---

adjl posted...

Did Trump personally tell people to storm the capitol?

He did in fact call for people to come to the capitol. If you're asking did he specifically tell them to sack the chambers of congress? No

He just wanted them to peacefully and patriotically make their voices heard

---

Metalsonic66 posted...

He just wanted them to peacefully and patriotically make their voices heard

lol

Nice. Biden built back better.

---

Ok, lets give France a million artillery pieces for the Maginot line

*France surrenders*

This is all Herbert Hoovers fault!

---

Lokarin posted...

Ok, lets give France a million artillery pieces for the Maginot line

*France surrenders*

This is all Herbert Hoovers fault!

Pretty sure Herbert Hoover didn't go into France and spend 20 years shattering the existing governmental structure and demolishing infrastructure, then whine about how bad the French are at running things.
---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Pretty sure Herbert Hoover didn't go into France and spend 20 years shattering the existing governmental structure and demolishing infrastructure, then whine about how bad the French are at running things.

Literally the treaty of versailles

---

Id be more mad about what else the government could have spent that money on if they were just going to donate it to the enemy like that if I were an American citizen.

---

Arcturusisnow posted...

Trump caused this too when created that shitty deal with the Taliban.

The trump administration had already extracted tons of our troops without issue. Coincidentally, the senile wonder takes office and the rest of the withdrawal is a complete fucking disaster

ParanoidObsessive posted...

To be fair, most of their weapons before were also from the US, since we sold them to them in the 1980s.

Tomorrows terrorist group is today's freedom fighter.

Lokarin posted...

Literally the treaty of versailles

Pretty sure Herbert Hoover had absolutely nothing to do with a treaty signed a decade before he was even President. Also fairly sure the Treaty of Versailles would pretty much be the literal opposite of the point you're attempting to make. But nice attempt to continue trying to salvage a completely failed metaphor nonetheless

Nevertheless, the salient point is that you don't get to complain about someone's shitty government when the only reason their government is shitty in the first place is because you proactively destroyed their previous government and then did fuck-all to help them build a new one that actually functions.

It's the equivalent of me coming to your house, breaking both your legs, and then complaining that you're not able to stand up and blaming it on you being too lazy and unmotivated.
---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

But nice attempt to continue trying to salvage a completely failed metaphor nonetheless

I don't even the linguists

---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

To be fair, most of their weapons before were also from the US, since we sold them to them in the 1980s.

People always seem to be unaware/ignorant of this fact.

So the US pulls out of Afghanistan in such a rush that weapons were left. Makes sense I suppose.

---

Zangulus posted...

I'd ask if you'd realize that it's literally cheaper to the tax payers this way... but you obviously don't know what you're talking about.

I guess you dont understand what was said. No surprise there.

---

BUMPED2002 posted...

So the US pulls out of Afghanistan in such a rush that weapons were left. Makes sense I suppose.

Uh, did you not pay any attention to what happened over there? At all?