What's new

U.S. Army to Scrap $7 Billion in Equipment in Afghanistan

EagleEyes

ADMINISTRATOR
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
16,774
Reaction score
25
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
In preparation for a complete exit from Afghanistan by the end of 2014, the U.S. military has destroyed more than 170 million pounds’ worth of military equipment, The Washington Post reported.

Military planners for the U.S. Army have decided not to ship back more than $7 billion of equipment — about 20 percent of what the Army brought into Afghanistan — because the shipping costs are too high and the need for the used equipment too low. Instead, the Army is destroying the equipment in-country: shredding it, crushing it and selling it on the Afghan scrap market.

The equipment destruction is likely to raise questions in both the U.S. and Afghanistan about military planning and whether the U.S. Army should be finding ways for its vehicles and machinery to get reused. Shipping the equipment back to the U.S. or to other allied nations seems too costly, and donating it to the Afghans is complicated owing to thorny rules surrounding giving equipment to other countries, the Post reported. As such, Army officials have opted to destroy it.

Much of the equipment being destroyed comes in the form of mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles, or MRAPs, hulking vehicles built to counter the threat of roadside bombs. MRAPs cost approximately $1 million each, and the Army has labeled about 2,000 of the 11,000 MRAPs in Afghanistan “excess.” The remaining 9,000 will be shipped out of the country for use elsewhere.

Those excess MRAPs are in the process of being dismantled at scrap yards at the four U.S. military bases in Afghanistan. The machines are resilient and were built to withstand explosions, so breaking down each MRAP requires about 12 hours of work with special blowtorches.

Part of the reason for destroying the equipment in-country rather than transporting it elsewhere — as the Army did when withdrawing from Iraq — has to do with the fact that the geography of Afghanistan presents unique challenges for retrograde, or removing military equipment from foreign war zones.

“Afghanistan is landlocked, so everything moving in and out must go by air,” says U.S. Army spokesman Wayne Hall. “This provides challenges for us to get the equipment out.”

Maj. Gen. Kurt J. Stein, head of the 1st Sustainment Command, who is overseeing the drawdown in Afghanistan, told the Post that leaving Afghanistan requires the largest retrograde mission in history.

U.S. Army To Scrap $7 Billion In Equipment In Afghanistan : The Two-Way : NPR
 
If the Americans are actually confident in the ANA, as the Americans claim, then why not give this to the Afghans?

Either they're stupid, or they don't trust the ANA. Either way, it doesn't look good.

Anyways, before anyone asks, they're probably not selling this equipment either because it's highly sensitive, or because no one wants it.
 
simply invade another neighboring country- :coffee:-
 
If the Americans are actually confident in the ANA, as the Americans claim, then why not give this to the Afghans?

Either they're stupid, or they don't trust the ANA. Either way, it doesn't look good.

Anyways, before anyone asks, they're probably not selling this equipment either because it's highly sensitive, or because no one wants it.

it is not about confident, it is their economy to maintain these equipment. afghan has very weak economy. if americans give these equipments to afghanistan then US have to give extra money to support this.
 
If the Americans are actually confident in the ANA, as the Americans claim, then why not give this to the Afghans?

Either they're stupid, or they don't trust the ANA. Either way, it doesn't look good.

Anyways, before anyone asks, they're probably not selling this equipment either because it's highly sensitive, or because no one wants it.

apparently,ANA has enough amount of Armoured Vehicles as well as MaXXPro MRAPs/Trucks(as reports suggests,over 10000 was ordered in which around 7000 will be for ANA).and how could they maintain 11000 "excess MRAPs" when they is in dire need of other weapons and short of cash??
 
If the Americans are actually confident in the ANA, as the Americans claim, then why not give this to the Afghans?

Either they're stupid, or they don't trust the ANA. Either way, it doesn't look good.

Anyways, before anyone asks, they're probably not selling this equipment either because it's highly sensitive, or because no one wants it.

EXACTLY! Similar question wrt Pakistan- if Pakistan truly is seen as a partner in this WoT, why is the US deliberately destroying equipment that would be invaluable to Pakistani forces engaged in their own CT ops?
 
India should have bought some of these MRAPs unless, either we do not have the need or we have something already.
 
Someone was saying that Pakistan Army will be getting these...what happened?

Did you actually read the articles posted previously? they had offered them to Pakistan... which the army refused saying tht the equipment was useless.... who wants humvees or armoured vehicles anyway....any how... lets see what comes out of it..... i hope they buy some arty system if they could..
 
Did you actually read the articles posted previously? they had offered them to Pakistan... which the army refused saying tht the equipment was useless.... who wants humvees or armoured vehicles anyway....any how... lets see what comes out of it..... i hope they buy some arty system if they could..

Tell me if i am wrong..But dont you think MRAP would be much better than a tank in the terrain you are fighting in.(and PA has used tanks)
 
Which terror hotspot terrain do you think will support MRAPs?

I think it would be better to transport troops in MRAP rather than your Range rovers or trucks.Moreoever it can have weapon stations fitted too.Better than deploying tanks..if i am not mistaken your tanks have been destroyed by taliban,right?
 

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom