"why Bagram was abandoned" Topic

link

Because Biden set a limit of 600 or 700 US troops available -- not enough to cover it.

So it was the military's recommendation AFTER the president gave them a very low ceiling of troops, too few to cover all thta needed to be covered.

He was using the Vietnam strategy, you know, tie one hand behind our military's back and expect them to carry out the mission. But at least he is making sure our military is receiving CRT training. 🤮🤮🤮

Yes, I had posted that somewhere here before. Again the top leadership in DC/WH again made a very bad decision. Not listening to the intel months/weeks ago. And his GENs. Now look at how many US troops and others are on the ground now. They'd be better off at Bagram.

As I said on another thread :

Legion 4 27 Aug 2021 7:59 a.m. PST

If Bagram had been kept open, this wouldn't have happened, since it is far more defendable.

Agree totally …

Aircraft, attack helos, drones, and artillery on the ground could provide a lot of protection for any and all flights, if and when needed.

Yes … agree …

Roads from Kabul to Bagram are not defensible. It's at least an hour's drive depending on conditions.

As I have said before, CH-47s, etc. were used to take people to the Kabul Airport & Bagram. I don't think there was a plan to use the roads very much.

You would need a helluva lot of helos to ferry over 100,000 people to Bagram (that's current number flown out).
It's a case of simple mathematics:

CH-47/53 – 55 passengers (1,818 sorties)
MV-22 – 32 passengers (3,125 sorties)
UH-60 – 11 passengers (9,090 sorties)

That's assuming full loads too and no US personnel onboard save basic crew.

You're also risking having helos shot down by ISIS-K oor Taliban who didn't get the memo.

This was to be a phased withdrawal … not the cluster we see here. You don't try to do this all in 10 days …

BTW I don't think the ACL of CH-47 is 55 … closer to 30 … back when I was a PL & S3 Air in the 101.

From the net[can't find my FMs!?] :

The CH-47D can operate at night and in nearly all weather conditions. The CH-47D is equipped with an air-to-air refueling probe. The Chinook can accommodate a wide variety of internal payloads, including vehicles, artillery pieces, 33 to 44 troops, or 24 litters plus two medical attendants.
IMO 44 people would be sitting on the floor and each others laps to get this ACL. The CH-47 has the power to lift 44 though …

I've worked a little with CH-53s when in the 101, they were USAF. The Army does not has 53s. But here too 55 PAX seems to be too many.

From the Net[wish I knew where my FM are !!!!?] :

The CH-53A carries a crew of four; pilot, copilot, crew chief, and an aerial observer. It can carry various payloads, including up to 38 fully-equipped troops, 24 litters with medical attendants

Again 55 would be sitting on the floor and each others laps, etc., …
In either case it would unsafe to load up 55 PAX.

"It's a case of simple mathematics"

Also along with the Lift Ships there would have to be gunships and maybe CAS, flying with the serials, etc. That how it is done. Or should be … As well as SEADS – Suppression of Enemy Air Defense Systems. Known or suspected … Again that is how it is done. Use different air routes as well ..

Bagram was a fortified position in a sea of jihadis etc. We would not be where we are today with this option, IMO. And other former military of all ranks up to COLs & GENs have said similar … So I'm going with their opinions and in turn mine.

Absolutely no way US could 'RETAKE' Bagram… AND be able to utilise it for evac. Taliban COULD not allow…. would 'blow the top off' any 'agreements'

True that is why it won't happen … it is too late now. It should never have been abandoned in the first place. Bad political decision among many others. Starting with not listening to the intel months/weeks before.

and Bagram would become a mini Stalingrad / Dien Ben Phu. Utterly useless for evac.

Had it not been abandoned this would not have been the case … For the Taliban to do full out attack on Bagram, they'd have to concentrate a very larger number of bodies with all the supporting fires they could muster. They'd be in the open per se and be very good targets. Anyone ever wonder why Bagram was not attacked ? What I just posted is why … Also the Vietminh took horrendous losses at DBP. link

Would the Taliban/AQ risk that ?

What good is intelligence if you're not going to listen to it?
So if it's useless, there's a line item in the budget for cost cutting savings.
And now, there's all the money being spent on Afghanistan that's freed up!

He was using the Vietnam strategy

Biden should know, he supported cutting off all aid to South Vietnam when he was in the Senate in 1975…

What good is intelligence if you're not going to listen to it?

Yes this is a good case of that here … The intel was showing the Taliban were on a general offensive for months. But those at the top chose to ignore it … it appears.

should know,

I appears some have a short memory or it's conditional …

Yes this is a good case of that here … The intel was showing the Taliban were on a general offensive for months. But those at the top chose to ignore it … it appears.

As we who have served there know, August is pretty well the height of the fighting season!

Tally Ho!

Now give the reason to just leave $billions of high tech military equipment and run away, I'll wait for that answer.

I believe we gave the equipment to the Afghan National Army. And most pretty much ran away after the first shot, especially since they had no air support.

Yes this is a good case of that here … The intel was showing the Taliban were on a general offensive for months. But those at the top chose to ignore it … it appears.

Yes, Epic Fail, costing us more lives …

Every Vet I see on the news, etc., from SGT to GEN say the same thing. Bagram should never have been abandoned. The intel was clear for months.

The way I take it even American equipment and personal items all got left without a notice. I don't think the dozens of Blackhawks were Afghanistan

Gifted to the Taliban in the mad rout ordered by the Biden admin.

They may have trouble flying and maintaining some of those aircraft. But the small arms and much of everything else is a formidable inventory. To use or sell off. The Taliban/AQ with use much of the vehicles, weapons, etc. to fight ISIS-K warlords, etc. A'stan will rapidly devolve back into an "un-civil war".

I sure hope we destroy a lot of that equipment, once we're out of the country in a couple of days. ALL of the aircraft should be destroyed.

42,000 trucks?????

I've heard 8500 HMWWVs and thousand of US made pick up trucks e.g. Ford F-350s(?), etc.

I hope we got a good deal buying in bulk all the vehicles … What did someone say about the Military-industrial complex ?

War is bad for business … War is good for business …
No matter what happens someone makes a profit.

169 M113s ? Those are fairly easy to maintain… if you have the parts. Of course they could sell some of them off along with some of those 1000s of trucks/SUVs.

"Somebody makes a profit."

The only way we could destroy any of that equipment … would be thru airstrikes. Probably won't happen.

Maybe if we see a column of AQ or ISIS driving in some of those. How could we tell[who cares!?]? But that may P.O. the Taliban. Well … they can send a harshly worded e-mail to the UN and complain. If they know how to do that ?

I heard a rumor of Apache helos, any truth in that one?

I have no heard that one …