"Why are Afghan forces losing ground to Taliban?" Topic

"Accelerating desertions and diminishing morale among Afghan government troops add to security woes as the Taliban gain ground across the country. Observers censure the government for the poor state of affairs.

Numbering around 350,000, Afghan government forces have borne the primary responsibility for providing security across the conflict-ridden nation since the end of 2014. That was also the time when NATO's combat mission concluded, leaving its follow-up mission "Resolute Support" to merely observe, advise, and train the Afghan army.

But the foreign troops remaining in the country as part of the mission aren't mandated to assist Afghan forces on the frontlines, although NATO sometimes offers air support to local troops desperately trying to fend off advances by insurgent groups.

The millstone has put the Afghans under enormous pressure, resulting in mounting casualties, accelerating desertions and spiraling cases of government troops either surrendering to or joining the Taliban.
This has caused a jump in the attrition rate, retired general Atiqullah Amarkhail said…"
More here
link

Also…
"The Taliban Is Killing Off Afghan Forces At A Rate Of 18 Per Day"
link

And…
"One week. Hundreds of dead and wounded. How Afghan forces are struggling with heavy casualties."
link

Amicalement
Armand

Damn these reporters are crap.

In the Washington Post:

According to the documents, the Afghans performed 118 total air evacuation missions — the majority of which were with their aging fleet of Russian Mi-17 helicopters and C-208 Cessnas

Err wrong.

The Afghan Mi-17s are not ageing. Most of them are new and were acquired for them by the Pentagon. Some are ex-Czech/Slovak beasts (not many as these guys never obtained large numbers of Mi-17s and instead had older Mi-8s).

Afghan Mi-17S are actually newer than most British and American transport helos!

E.g.
army.mil/article/56256/army-equipping-afghans-iraqis-on-mi-17s

There are virtually no aircraft in Afghanistan today that date from the old 1980s Afghan Air Force.

It's all newly supplied by Americans who were in some instances buying new gear from the Russians.

For air support the Afghans have got a small number of Mi-25/35s (some ex-Indian) and brand new MD530S (basically similar to AH-6 Little Birds).

They're getting A-29 Super Tucanos, again courtesy of US taxpayers.

The Talis have a strong support base in Afghanistan for logistics and replenishment of manpower while the ANA serve the Ameican puppet government in Kabul. It's a lose-lose no matter how you slice it.

A smaller force is victorious over a larger only when the smaller is better-led, the larger is poorly motivated, and the "cause" of the smaller force is greater. Over time, the smaller force will gain momentum and finally achieve victory. You can tell how the main public thinking goes by the outcome. If not for public support, the smaller force must remain on the fringes and will never replace the existing power. "Support" can be nothing more than staying out of the way, i.e. apathy. To achieve the destruction of the smaller force, public sentiment must actively support the Gov't through participation: reporting, resisting, even actively fighting where required, etc. As none of this appears to be occurring in Astan, the evidence is that apathy toward the Gov't, or outright support of the Taliban, is ongoing…………..

Simply because, same as the majority of poulation, they belong to the same religion of Talibans…so, with few exceptions, they could only fight a defensive/survival war (survive to the retaliation deseved by collaborationists) or a fake one

For many of the reasons mentioned here and others … Anymore that the US/NATO/UN does militarily at this point is a waste of time, treasure, and God forbid, blood. Nothing will change in A'stan. Too many factions, too wedded to old ways and habits, etc., … And don't forget AQ and now Daesh is in A'stan. As I have said before, the 1st Big error the US made was supporting the Muj vs. the USSR way back when.

i my humble (and certainly not apreciated by many)opinion..
in case of such troublesome area in wich nobody want peace and above all development of minds, culture, human rights and welfare…as nowdays are Afghanistan, Irak, Lybia ecc..ecc..(not Syria that with Assad and before the civil war was a quite prosperous and civilised country)..the only approach wich could be understood is a kind of paternalistic but severe (from a military point of view) kind of colonisation from Eu and USA untill they come to reason between various groups…no need at all of puppets/corrupted Govts at the expense of the taxpaye….and , as Napoleon teached us, their unexploited resources should be used to pay the for occupation…

The Taliban is willing to fight and die.

The government forces aren't.