"The Day America Died..."

 I clipped this from "American Patriot.  I am still so pissed, so disgusted, so embarrassed, so ashamed and just angry on how this went down, and how totally unnecessary it was.  I will probably "do" a rant next week when my hot emotions have calmed down and my logic and common sense can once use the keyboard without using a bunch of invective's and throwing things.

Biden's AFG Retreat Complete — The War Is NOT Over

What Milley, Austin, and the other Beltway high command failed to see was the red flag right in front of them.

Mark Alexander

Amid all the exit fanfare yesterday from feckless Joe Biden and his inept senior military and diplomatic cadres, I was deeply moved by a single sentence that sums up what was conceived as an orderly troop drawdown under Donald Trump, but devolved into a disgraceful retreat under Biden.

"In what f***ing world was it a good idea to just hand over a country to these people."

Those words were from Operation Enduring Freedom combat veteran and former Navy SEAL Dan Crenshaw (R-TX). That post was over a video of a seized Blackhawk helicopter being flown by Taliban militia over an Afghan town — lumbering low over rooftops with one of our former Afghan allies dangling lifeless, hanging by the neck, under the aircraft.

Despite the assertion by Biden and his Leftmedia parrots that our AFG mission is over, take no comfort — this was NOT the end of the war. It is the beginning of a violent purge of those Joe Biden just abandoned — our allied Afghans and their wives and children, along with hundreds of American citizens who were seeking to exit but were left behind. It is the beginning of the rise of a new age of terrorism — Biden has reseeded al-Qa'ida's turf, and demonstrated to far more powerful tyrants in China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea that they have nothing to fear from Biden.

For Biden's boundless ineptitude, we will pay a price much heavier than the disaster we left in Afghanistan. Brace yourself, America.

We disgracefully abandoned our citizens after Biden's commitment not to do so. We also abandoned more than 80,000 Afghan "Special Immigration Visa" holders — those who were already vetted as being clearly allied with our military and now marked for death — along with tens of thousands of others who were waiting on visas. That disgrace was captured by these words from our national security analyst, Gen. B.B. Bell, U.S. Army (Ret.), who described the circumstances as "the single most dishonorable act by my country that I have witnessed since my first day of military service on 5 June 1969." Gen. Bell added: "Today I am ashamed of my country. I am ashamed of my country's political leadership. I am ashamed of our military leadership. Today, in my heart, America died. I hang my head in shame. I'm so very sorry for those Americans and our Afghan allies we have abandoned. May God protect them as we have not."

Announcing mission over but certainly not accomplished, Gen. Frank McKenzie, commander of U.S. Central Command, declared: "I'm here to announce the completion of our withdrawal from Afghanistan and the end of the mission to evacuate American citizens, third country nationals and vulnerable Afghans. The last C-17 lifted off from Hamid Karzai International Airport on August 30, this afternoon at 3:29 pm East coast time..." He added, "No words from me could possibly capture the full measure of sacrifices and accomplishments of those who served, nor the emotions they're feeling at this moment."

Well, here are a few words that put numbers to that sacrifice: Over the last 20 years, 2,461 of our military personnel were killed by Taliban militia, the Islamist extremists who invaded Afghanistan in 1996 and became the hosts of terrorist who struck out against the world, including those who perpetrated the 9/11 Islamist attack on our nation. We suffered more than 20,000 injured veterans, many of whom endured life-altering injuries. We spent $824.9 billion on military operations, but we have spent far more than that when considering care for injured veterans. Over the same two decades, our allied Afghan deaths top an estimated 69,000, and an additional 47,000 civilians were killed.

So we leave the AFG theater, and the Taliban thugs are now in a much more powerful position than when we arrived in 2001. They are far more dangerous and deadly because of billions of dollars in U.S. military equipment Biden left behind, and Afghanistan is a fully restored breeding ground for the world's most deadly terrorists.

The catastrophic failure of our mission and retreat was not because of any lack of courage and commitment from our warfighters. As I have noted, the problem was not the plan; it was the man.

According to Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Mark Milley, "There was nothing that I or anyone else saw that indicated a collapse of this army and this government in 11 days." How could that be? As Tucker Carlson noted: "Our intelligence agencies received a combined $85 billion last year. For perspective, that's more money than Russia, Germany, and the UK spent on their entire annual military budgets."

What Milley, Austin, and the other Beltway high command failed to see was the red flag right in front of them the whole time: Joe Biden. And it is because the Taliban had no fear of Biden that this evil overran the Afghan government and people in just days. With Trump gone, the Taliban summarily discarded all the conditions he set for withdrawal and ousted the Afghan government.

After McKenzie's announcement, Secretary of State Antony Blinken's staffers issued notice that our Afghan embassy had suspended all operations.

Biden then delivered a few prepared remarks thanking his commanders for such a fine job. At the same time, the Taliban was taking over Kabul airport and celebrating the additional armaments and aircraft we left there — and all the caged military service dogs.

Even the Washington Post editorial board declared Biden's retreat was a "moral disaster." They are much too kind.

Regardless of how Biden et al. attempt to spin this disaster, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell was clear about the national security threat outcome. He noted, "This is one of the worst foreign policy decisions in American history, much worse than Saigon," because the withdrawal from Vietnam did not signal a significant threat to Americans. To that point, he added: "Just because we decided to stop fighting doesn't mean the terrorists go away. So they're still out there. They're invigorated. They're emboldened. They're excited about the success they see in bringing America to its knees in Afghanistan."

Biden's compressed Afghan exit schedule was motivated by his desire to take a political victory lap ahead of the 20th observance of the 9/11 Islamist attack on our nation. There will be no victory lap. There will be more Islamist attacks against the U.S.

Gun Trucks....Not just an American thing...the Soviets did it in A-stan

This gave me a chance to pick my Dad's brain again,  on his experiences

When somebody says “Gun Truck”, one tends to think of the improvised US designs from Vietnam. However, the Soviet Union found its troops facing similar problems with route protection during their abortive war in Afghanistan, with the additional problem that enemy forces were often located on steep hillsides where Soviet tanks could not elevate their guns enough to engage – a consequence of their low silhouette. Soviet units developed a number of expedient “gun truck” vehicles such as this one, with improvised sections on armor protecting the cab and what appears to the part of the hull of a (presumably) wrecked BTR APC on the rear flatbed. For some extra firepower, a helicopter rocket pod has been mounted on top of the turret – while one doubts it would be accurate, it would certainly have had a suppressive effect on anything on the receiving end.

I saw this on Farce book and decided to make this a blog post. I had spoken with my Dad who rode a lot in the convoys as part of his job as an CID investigator.in 1968. He also told me that they would use Gun trucks in the convoys and they were very effective and the people in the gun trucks would watch the people in the rice patties while they were farming see them drop their farming tools then scoop up their AK's out of the mud and start shooting or dive into the mud and know that an ambush was fixing to happen. He also said that the best place to be was right behind the lead jeep, the VC/NVA would never bother the lead vehicle, they would go after the tankers first, they burn better. The VC/NVA knew that they only had 2 to 3 minutes to cause mayhem before the air support would arrive because air support was always on call. The favored weapons of the VC/NVA was the RPG-2 followed by the RPG-7 using HEAT rounds The RPG-2, they called it the B-40 or the B-50 which was supplied by the Chinese and the RPG-7 supplied by the Soviets. The Americans also would strap claymores on the sides of the gun trucks in case they got swarmed, the Soldiers would hit the clickers and"Sweep off the Gooks" as the terminology went. It was a favored tactic for Charlie to hit the convoy because the convoys supplied the various firebases. He also told me that one of the favorite vehicles to have in a convoy was this bad boy...

M-42 Duster

Max rate of fire 240 rounds a minute both tubes(336 rounds stored) plus an M-60 7.62 machine gun, it worked exceedingly well against people that were pajama thick in the armor department. Another favorite vehicle was the V-100

Like I said, I enjoyed picking my Dad's brain, he also shared some of the cases he worked, All I can say is "Dayam".

Part truck, part APC, all King Kong.

A largely forgotten part of the war in South East Asia was the one fought by the U.S. Army’s gun trucks as part of convoy operations through the heart of enemy territory.

While Hollywood would tell you everything moved by chopper in Vietnam, the hard fact of life was that it was truck convoys that schlepped the bulk of the food, fuel and ammo to American and allied units stationed in the countryside. However, these predicable routes became target for enemy ambushes.

One of the worst supply runs was that along Route 19, some 150 miles of winding nowhere that became known as “Ambush Alley” for the motor transportation guys having to make the drive.

The response: hit the scrap piles and, using salvaged steel, sandbags and anything else they could find, up-armor Deuce and a Half and later 5 ton trucks then pile on whatever ordnance they could mount. In some instances, this ran all the way up to entire M113 armored personnel carrier bodies.

While these gun trucks look right out of Mad Max, they predated the movies by generations– and honestly were a magnitude of times better armed. While M60 machine guns and M2 “Ma Deuce’s” were popular, quad .50 Maxson M45 mounts known as meat choppers,

Then of course there were mini-guns , which depended on vehicles  which are always good for breaking up ambushes from guys whose ballistic protection was only pajama-thick. but on the lighter vehicles would vibrate so bad would shake the vehicle apart.by breaking the welds.

The only known remaining Vietnam-era gun truck is Eve of Destruction, which was shipped back to the states before the fall of Saigon and is now restored and on display in the Army Transportation Museum at Fort Eustis, Va.

However, the Museum has an online record of more than 90 of these trucks at their website, where the bulk of these images are from.

Of course this concept was later rebooted in later U.S. military experiences in Southwest Asia— but that is the subject of another post.

[ Army Transportation Museum ]

Karzai wants the U.S. to guarentee 2 billion annually

I am missing something here, the corrupt Afghan president after crapping all over us during the Koran incident the repeatedly green on blue incidents, and throwing us under the bus internationally now wants the United states to give them 2 billion dollars to train the Afghan military and police.  Lessee the level of corruption in the Afghan armed forces and the police is already legendary, the Officers regularly steal from their their own troops, they stiff their training and rip off their pay and rations to self enrich themselves.  I wonder how much of this money will " vanish" to super secret accounts in Switzerland and other places once we pull out they will have a nice nest egg to live lavishly after the taliban sweep in because of the rampant corruption of the government officials have impacted the average Afghan.

Afghan President Wants US to Guarantee $2 Billion Annually

April 17, 2012
Brian Padden | Islamabad, Pakistan
A day after Afghan forces with NATO support fought off multiple attacks by Taliban militants, Afghan President Hamid Karzai is focusing on ensuring international financial support after most Western combat troops leave in 2014. In a speech Tuesday, Karzai said he wants the U.S. to guarantee at least $2 billion annually to fund the Afghan army and police under a strategic partnership agreement now being negotiated between the two countries.
Both the U.S. and Afghanistan want a strategic partnership agreement to demonstrate America's commitment to stay engaged in Afghanistan after 2014. Karzai said negotiations have stalled over whether or not to include in the agreement a minimum of $2 billion dollars a year to fund the Afghan army and police.
Karzai said the U.S. side indicated that in the future it may want to increase the amount of funding, but that he wants the strategic partnership document to include a written guarantee that Washington will provide at least $2 billion to Afghan security forces annually.
U.S. officials said they could pay up to about $4 billion a year to fund Afghan forces. But they also said the strategic pact is not meant to be a detailed aid package, but rather a broad framework committing both sides to continue to work together for years to come.
Sunday's attacks by Taliban militants in the Afghan capital and in the eastern Nangarhar, Logar and Paktia provinces have raised concerns about the readiness of Afghan forces to maintain security without U.S. and NATO support.
U.S. officials are pushing to sign the deal before a NATO conference in Chicago in May.
But negotiations over the long-term pact with the U.S. have dragged on for months as Karzai has asked for specific commitments before signing. The biggest of these demands - that the U.S. transfer authority over detainees and night raids to the Afghan government - have been recently resolved.
The Afghan president's comments suggest a growing concern on the Afghan side that the U.S. will not follow through on its promises after most American soldiers leave.
The U.S. has already greatly reduced some funding for development programs in Afghanistan, and a number of NATO nations are accelerating their withdrawal timetables. On Tuesday, Australia announced it would to pull out its troops nearly a year earlier than planned.

Only a matter of time.....

I saw this and it did resonate with me, I hate to mention the "V" word, the left trotted that word out a lot in the  70's and 80's until Desert Storm buried that one.   I am a student of history and I am seeing a lot of parallels from then and now.  When 20% of our casualties come from the people we are trying to train and save their own country.   The cultural differences I think are insurmountable.  We as western based individuals prize the belief of the individual, the middle east is what tribe you belong to, what family,  if you are an infidel or a believer.  Until Islam grows up, I think they will fight for the next several hundred years.  All we seem to do is waste our treasure.  I am not a defeatist by any stretch, but I am a realist. and I think we just need to quarantine the middle east until they kill each other off.   Does that sound brutal?   I am just to that stage.

Ralph Peters is retired military and author and a very trustworthy person.  This letter by him is very discouraging.

 

It Was Only a Matter of Time Before One of Our Men Broke Down           Ralph Peters

On Sunday, just before dawn, an American staff sergeant walked away from his post in the badlands of Kandahar Province, Afghanistan, went into a nearby village, and methodically murdered sixteen civilians, including women and children. This didn't happen in the confusion of a firefight amidst the "fog of war." It was the brutal act of a veteran who cracked. The deed cannot be excused. But I believe it can be explained.

For a final analysis we'll have to wait until all of the facts come in, but it appears that a soldier who had served honorably during multiple tours in Iraq broke down and went mad in Afghanistan. We should not be surprised that this happened. We should be surprised that it hasn't happened sooner and more often: The shock of this incident after a decade of hopeless, meandering efforts that have thrown away the lives and limbs of our troops while ambitious generals lie about progress, seek promotion, and engage in military masturbation is actually a tribute to our men and women in uniform out on the front lines (to the extent that "front lines" exist).

That staff sergeant-who turned himself in after the killings-is guilty of murder in a degree yet to be determined, but the amazing thing is how disciplined, patient and tenacious our troops have been. Given the outrageous stresses of serving repeated tours in an environment a brand-new private could recognize as hopeless (while his generals fly back and forth congratulating themselves), it's remarkable that we have not seen more and even uglier incidents. The problem in Afghanistan isn't our troops-although craven generals routinely insist that everything is the fault of "disrespectful" soldiers-it's a leadership in and out of uniform that is bankrupt of ideas, bankrupt of ethics, bankrupt of moral courage-and rich only in self-interest and ambition.

If there's a "battle cry" in Afghanistan, it's "Blame the troops!" Generals out of touch with the ugly, brute reality on the ground down in the Taliban-sympathizing villages respond to every seeming crisis in Afghan-American relations by telling our troops to "respect Afghan culture."

But generals don't have a clue about Afghan "culture." They interact with well-educated, privileged, English-speaking Afghans who know exactly which American buttons to press to keep the tens of billions of dollars in annual aid flowing. The troops, on the other hand, daily encounter villagers who will not warn them about Taliban- planted booby traps or roadside bombs, who obviously want them to leave, who relish the abject squalor in which they live and who appear to value the lives of their animals above those of their women When our Soldiers and Marines hear, yet again, that they need to "respect Afghan culture," they must want to puke up their rations.

When I was a young officer in training, we mocked the European "chateaux generals" of the First World War who gave their orders from elegant headquarters without ever experiencing the reality faced by the troops in the trenches. We never thought that we'd have chateaux generals of our own, but now we do. Flying down to visit an outpost and staying just long enough to pin on a medal or two, get a dog-and-pony-show briefing and have a well-scripted tea session with a carefully selected "good" tribal elder, then winging straight back to a well-protected headquarters where the electronics are more real than the troops is not the way to develop a "fingertips feel" for on- the-ground reality.

Add in the human capacity for self-delusion, and you have a surefire prescription for failure.

Right now, our troops are being used as props in a campaign year, as pawns by dull-witted generals who just don't know what else to do, and as cash cows by corrupt Afghan politicians, generals and warlords (all of whom agree that it's virtuous to rob the Americans blind).

What are our goals? What is our strategy? We're told, endlessly, that things are improving in Afghanistan, yet, ten years ago, a U.S. Army general, unarmed, could walk the streets of Kabul without risk. Today, there is no city in Afghanistan where a U.S. general could stroll the streets. We may not have a genius for war, but we sure do have a genius for kidding ourselves.

Karzai regime. Right now, our troops are dying to preserve a filthy Kabul government whose president blatantly stole the last election and which has no hope of gaining the support of its own people.  Meanwhile, despite repeated claims that the Taliban is on its last legs, the religious fanatics remain the home team backed by Afghanistan's Pashtun majority. (If the people didn't back them, the Taliban would, indeed, have been long gone-we need to face reality.)

Recently, another friend, who clings to (now-retired) General Petraeus's counterinsurgency notion that, if we just hang on and give the Afghans enough free stuff, they'll come around to the American way of life, told me, yet again, "You should hear the intercepts we get from the low-level Taliban fighters…they're in a panic…"

That's the old Vietnam line: "We win every firefight!" Sure, we whip the Taliban every time we catch them with their weapons (if they're not holding weapons, we can't engage, even if they just killed Americans). But we dare not attack the Taliban leadership in Pakistan, where it's protected by our "allies." And no matter how many Taliban we kill, they still attract volunteers willing to die for their cause. The Afghans we train turn their guns on us.

It appears that the staff sergeant who murdered those Afghan villagers had cracked under the stresses of a war we won't allow our troops to fight. But the real madness is at the top, in the White House, where President Obama can't see past the November election; in Congress, where Republicans cling to whatever war they've got; and in uniform, where our generals have run out of ideas and moral courage.

That staff sergeant murdered sixteen Afghans. Our own leaders have murdered thousands and maimed tens of thousands of our own troops out of vanity, ambition and inertia. Who deserves our sympathy?

In war, soldiers die. But they shouldn't die for bullshit.

Nothing added......

All I have to say....

Afganistan: Secret files reveal taliban take control once NATO leaves.

I got this from U.K. Online.

       I hate to make comparisons, but this looks like another Vietnam, We dumped a pile of national treasure and lives on that one also to see the sacrifice made by the soldiers in vain because the locals were too corrupt to see past their own personal interest.

So is it all worth it? Secret files reveal Taliban will retake control of Afghanistan when NATO troops withdraw

• Report compiled by U.S. forces claims Pakistan security agency is assisting Taliban attacks against NATO forces
• Afghans bracing for return of Taliban when foreign troops withdraw in 2014
• Taliban detainees claim Pakistan employs network of spies to give strategic advice to militants
• Pakistan Foreign Ministry dismisses claims as 'frivolous' and insists it is committed to non-interference in Afghanistan
• 10-year conflict has seen nearly 3,000 service personnel killed

By David Williams

The Taliban is set to return to power in Afghanistan when British and Coalition forces end their combat role in 2014, a damning leaked confidential report reveals.
Despite 10 years of fighting by NATO forces and their huge sacrifices - 397 members of the British military alone have been killed and thousands wounded - the report says that in the past year there has been unprecedented interest, even from within the Afghan government, in joining the Taliban.
And it points accusingly at Afghanistan's neighbour Pakistan, a key ally of NATO, where powerful elements in the security and intelligence services support the Taliban and describes how insurgent leaders maintain homes within the heart of the capital Islamabad.

Scroll down for video

Sacrifice: Jack Sadler was killed by a roadside bomb in Afghanistan in 2007

Trooper Jack Sadler was repatriated to RAF Lyneham five days after his death in December 2007

Poised: A Taliban militant holds a grenade launcher in Herat. A secret U.S. report claims the insurgent movement is poised to regain control of Afghanistan when NATO troops withdraw

Unbowed: The document claims Taliban fighters are being supported by Pakistan intelligence services across the border

Based on 27,000 interviews with over 4,000 Taliban and Al Qaeda prisoners, the detailed report effectively questions the Coalition’s own assessment that it is winning the war in Afghanistan.
The report - The State of the Taliban - was described as ‘devastating’ yesterday (W) by former soldier Ian Sadler, whose son Jack, a 21-year-old reservist serving with the Honourable Artillery Company, died in a roadside bomb blast in Helmand in December 2007.

 

'It has been a waste of time operating in the way that the British have,' he said, 'Hearing details of the report makes me wonder why our soldiers were sent there in the way they were and the cost that has been paid.'
The report compiled by U.S. forces describes how weapons and vehicles given to Afghan forces have in turn been passed on to the Taliban and says that Pakistan's feared Inter-Services Intelligence Agency (ISI) is actively colluding with the insurgents by actually directing attacks.

Attacks: An explosion after an airstrike in Nanagarhar, Afghanistan. The report, based on interrogation of insurgents, claims Taliban fighters are being given weapons and training by Pakistan-backed militants

Cost: The remains of Private First Class Cody R. Norris arrive at Dover Air Force Base, Delaware. More than ten years after the U.S.-led conflict in Afghanistan, the Taliban are poised to regain control

'Pakistan knows everything,' the report states, 'they control everything. The Taliban are not Islam. The Taliban are Islamabad.
'ISI officers tout the need for continued jihad (holy war) and expulsion of foreign invaders from Pakistan.
'The government of Pakistan remains intimately involved with the Taliban.
'ISI is thoroughly aware of Taliban activities and the whereabouts of all senior Taliban personnel. Senior Taliban leaders meet regularly with ISI personnel, who advise on strategy and relay any pertinent concerns of the government of Pakistan.'
Those questioned, including senior Taliban commanders, told how Islamabad uses a complex network of spies and intermediaries to provide strategic advice to aid the Taliban in fighting the coalition.
Explaining why new recruits are turning in large numbers to the Taliban, fighters said : 'When the Karzai government was established, we thought there was a chance of something good. The harassment, corruption and abuse are unbearable. We chose to fight. We chose the Taliban.'

No confidence: An Afghan border police officer receives his graduation certificate. There are concerns that the police, security forces and Afghan army will not be able to maintain order in the country when NATO forces leave

Unpopular: The Taliban is playing on public opinion of President Hamid Karzai's government

In a bleak conclusion, it paints a picture of Al Qaeda’s influence diminishing but the Taliban’s influence increasing, stating : 'Afghan civilians frequently prefer Taliban governance over the Afghan government, usually as a result of government corruption.'
The report has evidence that the Taliban are deliberately hastening NATO's withdrawal by reducing their attacks in some areas and then initiating a comprehensive hearts-and-minds campaign.
The findings could heap further pressure on David Cameron, and U.S. President Barack Obama, as they face strengthened calls to withdraw troops before the 2014 deadline.
It could also reinforce the view of Taliban hardliners that the group should not negotiate peace with the U.S. and President Hamid Karzai's unpopular government while in a position of strength.
Significantly, the Taliban yesterday said that reports they were about to begin talks with the Karzai government in Saudi Arabia were untrue.
'The unfortunate reality is that this is a failure of the allied strategy in Afghanistan. They have not been able to achieve the goals they set out to achieve,' said Mahmud Durrani, a former Pakistan army general and ambassador to Washington.
Fresh accusations of Pakistani collusion with the Taliban are likely to further strain ties between Western powers and Islamabad, which has long denied backing militants seeking to topple the U.S.-backed government in Kabul.
Critics say Pakistan uses militant groups as proxies to counter the growing influence of rival India in Afghanistan. The belief that Pakistan supports the insurgents is widely held in Afghanistan.

PAKISTAN JETS BOMB HIDEOUTS

Pakistani fighter jets bombed the hideouts of two militant commanders along the Afghan border today, killing up to 31 insurgents.
One of those killed was reported to be a Pakistani Taliban leader in the Orakzai region, Moin ud Din.
The strikes followed clashes between soldiers and militants over a strategic mountain in Kurram last week, in which more than 60 people were killed.
In recent years, the Pakistani military has launched a series of offensives against militants in the border regions - which are only nominally controlled by the central government.
Large areas remain under the effective control of extremists, who use the region to plan attacks in Pakistani cities and Afghanistan.
Gunmen also attacked a Pakistan paramilitary checkpoint in the Marwah area of Baluchistan province last night, killing six troops.
And the bodies of seven unarmed men were discovered near the checkpoint.

Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar on a one day visit to the Afghan capital Kabul, dismissed the claims which she said were not new and could be disregarded.
'This is old wine in an even older bottle. I don’t think these claims are new. These claims have been made for many, many years,' she said.
In Brussels, a NATO official said the prisoners also claimed that the Taliban retain wide public support throughout Afghanistan, particularly in the countryside.
The official, however, cautioned that the document was not based on any intelligence analysis of the situation on the ground, but is a summary of thousands of interrogation reports.
'It's a very lopsided perspective because some of them are motivated to portray the picture in their favour,' said the official.
The extent of Taliban support from within local forces was underlined yesterday when an Afghan soldier shot and killed a NATO service member in southern Afghanistan.
It was the sixth report since December of an Afghan soldier turning his weapon on the international troops working to train the Afghan security forces.
Two weeks ago, an Afghan soldier killed four French soldiers prompting President Nicolas Sarkozy to speed up the exit of French troops from Afghanistan said it would ask NATO to hand over all combat operations to Afghan forces in 2013 instead of by the end of 2014.
At least seven British soldiers have been killed by so-called trusted 'colleagues' while there have been at least 35 attacks on international troops since 2007 by Afghan soldiers, police or insurgents wearing their uniforms. The number rose sharply last year to 17, up from six in 2010.
Tory MP John Baron, a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee and a long-term opponent of the Government's policy on Afghanistan, said: 'This confirms what a number of us have suspected for some time.
'The Taliban insurgency is intact, it is supported by local people and it is getting help from the Pakistani intelligence services. This proves that the Taliban will not be beaten and recent offers of talks should be positively responded to and taken up by the U.S. and UK.
'It is possible to talk and fight at the same time - we proved that in Northern Ireland.'
Mr Baron, who believes it is vital to find a political solution in Afghanistan, said the military campaign had become bogged down in 'mission creep' because it did not have clear goals. 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2094755/Afghanistan-Secret-files-reveal-Taliban-retake-control-NATO-troops-withdraw.html#ixzz1lC11UzPV