Skip to main content

What Happened In Kabul On The Day That America Lost The Afghan War

Taliban fighters take control of the Afghan presidential palace after President Ashraf Ghani fled the country, in Kabul, Afghanistan, Sunday, Aug. 15, 2021. (AP Photo/Zabi Karimi)  

Anchorage Daily News/Washington Post: Surprise, panic and fateful choices: The day America lost its longest war 

KABUL - On the day that Afghanistan’s capital fell to the Taliban, delivering the definitive verdict on a war that had lumbered on ambiguously for nearly 20 years, one of the city’s top security officials woke up preparing for battle. 

The day before, government forces in the north’s largest city - Mazar-e Sharif, a notorious anti-Taliban stronghold - had surrendered with barely a fight. The same had happened overnight in Jalalabad, the traditional winter home of Afghanistan’s kings and the country’s main gateway to the east. 

As dawn broke over the misty mountains that ring the city, Kabul had suddenly become an island - the last bastion of a government that the United States had supported at a cost of trillions of dollars and thousands of lives. But it was an island that some were still prepared to defend.

“Everyone was ready to fight against the Taliban,” said the Afghan security official, who had spent the previous evening distributing new uniforms to his officers. “All the security forces were ready.” 

Or so he thought. When he prepared to reinforce one of the main checkpoints protecting the city that morning, his commander waved him off. “He told me, ‘Leave that for now,’ " the official recalled. " ‘You can do it in a few days.’ " 

But Kabul didn’t have days.

Read more ....  

WNU Editor: This Washington Post article is a must read. 

The part of the above post that caught my eye was this .... .... In a hastily arranged in-person meeting, senior U.S. military leaders in Doha - including McKenzie, the commander of U.S. Central Command - spoke with Abdul Ghani Baradar, head of the Taliban’s political wing.  

“We have a problem,” Baradar said, according to the U.S. official. “We have two options to deal with it: You [the United States military] take responsibility for securing Kabul or you have to allow us to do it.” 

Throughout the day, Biden had remained resolute in his decision to withdraw all American troops from Afghanistan. The collapse of the Afghan government hadn’t changed his mind.  

McKenzie, aware of those orders, told Baradar that the U.S. mission was only to evacuate American citizens, Afghan allies and others at risk. The United States, he told Baradar, needed the airport to do that. 

On the spot, an understanding was reached, according to two other U.S. officials: The United States could have the airport until Aug. 31. But the Taliban would control the city. 

Fighters were now on the move throughout Kabul, with the group’s spokesman issuing a revision of his earlier guidance: 

The Taliban hadn’t intended to take Kabul that day. But Ghani’s exit gave the group no choice. 

“The government has left all of their ministries; you have to enter the city to prevent further disorder and protect public property and services from chaos,” read a message that pinged on Muhammad Nasir Haqqani’s phone. 

Wow!!!!

This piece of news is being under-reported.

The Taliban had offered both Kabul and the airport to the U.S. to enforce security. But the U.S. refused. 

The Taliban, fearing government offices would be sacked and looted, then made the decision to enter the capital.

Update: Correction. This piece of news is now being reported .... Taliban offered Kabul to US, but Americans said no: report (FOX News).

from War News Updates https://ift.tt/3gNJ9yO
via IFTTT

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

US Navy considers Ford-class aircraft carrier redesign to match Trump's WWII island style preference

On August 16, 2026, the U.S. Navy initiated an operational and technical evaluation regarding whether to move the island superstructure on future Ford-class aircraft carriers from its current far-aft placement toward amidships, following directive preferences from President Donald Trump. The assessment will likely focus on whether relocating the command structure toward a World War II-era configuration would negatively impact flight deck operations, sortie generation rates, and recovery airflow dynamics. This design review also follows an August 13 directive ordering the Navy to replace the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System and Advanced Weapons Elevators on the future USS Doris Miller with steam catapults and hydraulic systems.  Read full defense news at this link... The USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) places its island much farther aft so more aircraft can be parked and moved directly toward the catapults without interfering with landings, whereas USS Enterprise (CV-6)'s amidship...

Bath Iron Works starts building new Arleigh Burke-class Flight III destroyer USS J. William Middendorf

General Dynamics Bath Iron Works has started construction of the future USS J. William Middendorf (DDG 138), a Flight III Arleigh Burke-class destroyer that will strengthen the U.S. Navy’s missile-defense and escort capacity during sustained operations in the Red Sea, Eastern Mediterranean, and Indo-Pacific. The ceremonial first steel cut took place in Maine on May 19, 2026, as the Navy continues relying on Flight III destroyers equipped with the SPY-6 radar and Aegis Baseline 10 combat system to replace the air defense and command role of retiring Ticonderoga-class cruisers ahead of the future DDG(X) program.  Read full defense news at this link... USS J. William Middendorf belongs to the Flight III configuration that began with USS Jack H. Lucas (DDG 125), the first Flight III destroyer commissioned in October 2023. (Picture source: US Navy) Read more... from World Defence News https://ift.tt/tSRkVWI via IFTTT

China’s PHL-191 MLRS Shows How Airburst Munitions Could Transform Modern Battlefield Suppression

 China has showcased what appears to be an airburst-capable munition fired from its PHL-191 long-range modular multiple launch rocket system during a live-fire exercise, highlighting a growing emphasis on suppressing dispersed battlefield targets rather than relying solely on point strikes. Footage released on July 19, 2026, by China Military Online and the Chinese Ministry of National Defense suggests the PLA is expanding its long-range fire-support options with effects designed to disrupt troops, air-defense sites, and lightly protected equipment across a wider area, reinforcing its ability to shape the battlefield before major combat operations begin.  Read Full Defense News At This Link. New PLA footage shows China’s PHL-191 rocket artillery system delivering concentrated, apparent airburst fragmentation effects against dispersed battlefield targets (Picture Source: Chinese Ministry of National Defense) from World Defence News https://ift.tt/jYnGm7H via IFTTT