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?
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-...
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)
> 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.
Non-intervention means "if you attack someone else, I will not help them"
Pacifism = "if you attack me, I will not stop you"
Yeah but the Taliban (or the the Afghanis in general, for that matter) didn't attack anyone.
A bunch of radicals made 9/11 happen, and as it happens, the main guy behind it happened to be in Afghanistan and on somewhat okay-ish terms with the Taliban, but the Taliban themselves were perfectly okay to negotiate his extradition if my understanding is correct. That is, they were, until the first bombs started to drop.
For all I care, Afghanistan was a bloody revenge war, nothing but catharsis for the bruised American soul. It was never about the women or democracy or the well-being of the Afghanis in general, because if that was the case, the US might as well have started with Saudi Arabia (which had probably more to do with al Qaeda than Afghanistan to begin with). In my opinion, it wasn't even about OBL, because otherwise the US would've taken the Pakistani coddling with extremists (and ultimately the sheltering thereof) more serious than they did.
Anyway, I'm already ranting again... I just sometimes wish everyone on this planet was a bit more naive, you know, and just believed in the general good of the people. Yes, there are always a few crazy outliers, yes, there are always those who try to gain advantage and power by manipulating the masses by abusing their fear and primal instincts, but in general, most human beings just want to live a peaceful live, not having to worry about drones and bombs and stray bullets and whatnot. And by believing all together in this common good, I think the world might just be a little bit a better place. At least in my pipe dreams...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/nov/05/afghanistan.te...
The above is obviously assuming good faith.
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...