Posted on Oct 10, 2016
I've heard reports of up to 6 billion in military vehicles are being left behind for scrap in other countries when we leave. WHY?
4.11K
26
19
4
4
0
Warfare
Equipment
Vehicle
Responses: 12
4
4
0
3
3
0
3
3
0
SPC Eddie Espejo
so it makes sense to leave behind tanks and MRAPS for them to study our technology so it can be countered in the future?
(0)
(0)
Sgt Wayne Wood
uhh.. sensitive technology is stripped before the vehicle is warehoused... and seriously? MRAPS? if you want that technology ask any southerner.
(3)
(0)
1
1
0
1
1
0
Some are getting near it, but it's a total cost equation of cost to ship, cost to run through Depot refurbishment, cost to inventory and store typically with less than new shelf life. M1 Abrams are a notable exception as we have a fixed number of frames and they're upgraded to the latest from the shell on up. So the number crunchers figure it out. Yes we leave stuff supposedly as MIL to MIL support. Problem is it can wind up in the hands of the bad guys. That's a more recent (past 15 years) experience that takes a bit to get those risk factors into the mix. That should increase the amount of destruction on site conclusions.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Yes, we are, the reason is to help out the countries, we are working with, and it is cheaper to leave the over used non sensitive equipment be hind, we are leaving first gin Hummers, and 1st gin MRAPS with out the EFP blast shields, and other sensitive armor.
My detachment in Pakistan, we left $ 6 million worth of Engineering Equipment behind, but the stuff we left behind was past it's service date times, and our Engineering fleet was being updated, and replaced back in the states. The other stuff that was left behind by the Task Force was a old M.A.S.H. Hospital that is no longer in service. This was the last M.A.S.H. standing 212th M.A.S.H.So again we had no use for this outdated hospital system. Yes it was $2 million, but we gain some partnership with them, in any future U.N. missions, and other help from time to time. We did not leave sensitive Combat gear, and or newer Equipment like our MTVR's. This happens all the time and is how we are able to up date the fleets. By the way they do purchase the equipment under Military to Military Foreign sales, so yes we do get money for the stuff we left behind, example the droller value we left behind in Pakistan.
My detachment in Pakistan, we left $ 6 million worth of Engineering Equipment behind, but the stuff we left behind was past it's service date times, and our Engineering fleet was being updated, and replaced back in the states. The other stuff that was left behind by the Task Force was a old M.A.S.H. Hospital that is no longer in service. This was the last M.A.S.H. standing 212th M.A.S.H.So again we had no use for this outdated hospital system. Yes it was $2 million, but we gain some partnership with them, in any future U.N. missions, and other help from time to time. We did not leave sensitive Combat gear, and or newer Equipment like our MTVR's. This happens all the time and is how we are able to up date the fleets. By the way they do purchase the equipment under Military to Military Foreign sales, so yes we do get money for the stuff we left behind, example the droller value we left behind in Pakistan.
(1)
(0)
SPC Eddie Espejo
its probably the least we can do after bombing the hell out of someone elses country. i wonder why we would bring those old MASH hospitals if they were so old but is that how bad it is that were bringing with us almost outdated equipment?
(1)
(0)
CPO (Join to see)
SPC Eddie Espejo - No that M.A.S.H. was the last one, and was going to be decommissioned, the tent system's were up to date, nothing like the TV show. The thing is they have been replaced with smaller units, and systems that can be more mobile and move with combat troops. Replaced by Combat Surgical Hospitals (CSH), and Forward Surgical Teams (FST). I am not a Medical guy, I'm a Seabee, and we were working in same area, and our camp was located next to them, for FORCPCON security reasons (we had all the crew-served, and small weapons for security and QRF), and we supported them with Engineering assets, most of our work was in the villages, and working with State Depart, and Civil Affairs to support Pakistani Engineers, and Pakistani Rangers.
(2)
(0)
0
0
0
Why? Because the IAF are a bunch of PUS****. Most, not all, run when there is an attack. The enemy/ISIS knows this and lets them run. They might kill a few, but getting 'free' stuff that America STUPIDLY gave them is atrocious.
We should have left that two countries to destroy themselves. The 'leadership'in this country is horrible and has NOT had our interests in top priority for years.
We should have left that two countries to destroy themselves. The 'leadership'in this country is horrible and has NOT had our interests in top priority for years.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
This actually comes down to cost. For example, how much in transportation costs do you think it'd take to move MRAPs, MATVs, etc., from Afghanistan to a garrison base in the US? The cost of fuel alone is in several millions, if not billions of dollars. This comes down to a $400 per gallon price due to several factors, mostly in regards to fuel transport utilizing fuel inefficient vehicles such as . Most of those vehicles were assembled in Afghanistan with parts shipped over, as the logistics of fully assembling vehicles stateside then shipping them over cost too much.
In times like this, the US Military does not have the budget to spend to get them back, and would rather leave them rather than cannibalize or salvage them in other fashions. This is how the US can take the opportunity to sell these vehicles to other countries to recoup the amount of funds spent on these vehicles.
Take a look at the following articles:
http://www.cnbc.com/2014/12/17/you-know-whos-not-getting-cheap-gas-the-us-military.html
http://www.offiziere.ch/wp-content/uploads/us_ad_EnergySecurity052010.pdf
https://warisboring.com/heres-how-the-military-wasted-your-money-in-afghanistan-b392e3e84e5a#.mycwlf5lt
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2010/April/Pages/HowMuchforaGallonofGas.aspx
http://time.com/3651697/afghanistan-war-cost/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/07/29/the-cost-to-maintain-an-afghan-military-vehicle-went-to-51395-from-1889-because-of-pentagon-mistakes-report-says/
In times like this, the US Military does not have the budget to spend to get them back, and would rather leave them rather than cannibalize or salvage them in other fashions. This is how the US can take the opportunity to sell these vehicles to other countries to recoup the amount of funds spent on these vehicles.
Take a look at the following articles:
http://www.cnbc.com/2014/12/17/you-know-whos-not-getting-cheap-gas-the-us-military.html
http://www.offiziere.ch/wp-content/uploads/us_ad_EnergySecurity052010.pdf
https://warisboring.com/heres-how-the-military-wasted-your-money-in-afghanistan-b392e3e84e5a#.mycwlf5lt
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2010/April/Pages/HowMuchforaGallonofGas.aspx
http://time.com/3651697/afghanistan-war-cost/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/07/29/the-cost-to-maintain-an-afghan-military-vehicle-went-to-51395-from-1889-because-of-pentagon-mistakes-report-says/
Cheap oil doesn't apply to the US military
The military pays far more than civilians because of operations and safety and transport.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google