Let's talk about the Soviet–Afghan War Veeky Forums

Let's talk about the Soviet–Afghan War Veeky Forums

Other urls found in this thread:

nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB57/soviet.html
youtube.com/watch?v=RodrZ2we_hQ
youtu.be/Iknh6sQtDnM
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_9th_Company#Historical_parallel
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cyclone
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stilyagi
twitter.com/AnonBabble

No.
It's a Shit

Fun tidbit - there are soldiers from the Baltics who fought in both the Soviet, and the NATO war in Afghanistan.

How is it a shit

Because the Soviets spent most of the war going in circles on the betonka
slaugthering random kislyaks and screaming "cykablyat".

i read the russian general staff's account of it. literally the first paragraph of it is them call out the soviet government for getting into this war for vague bullshit political goals, kek

They call Afghanistan the Graveyard of Empires for a reason.

*drops MOAB*

>THE SOVIET EXPERIENCE IN AFGHANISTAN: RUSSIAN DOCUMENTS AND MEMOIRS

>Recently declassified documents from archives in the former Soviet Union and memoirs of senior Soviet military and political leaders present the complex and tragic story of the ten years of the Soviet military involvement in Afghanistan. Most observers agree that the last war of the Soviet Union created or aggravated the internal dynamics that eventually culminated in the dissolution of the country itself. The documents presented here shed light on the most important moments in the history of the Soviet war in Afghanistan—the Afghan government’s requests for assistance, the Soviet Union’s initial refusal of troops, the reversal of this policy by a small group of the Politburo and the Soviet decision to invade; the expansion of the initial mission to include combat operations against the Afghan resistance; early criticism of the Soviet policy and of the People’s Democratic party of Afghanistan (PDPA) regime; and the decision to withdraw the troops. Taken together, these materials suggest some lessons that might be drawn from the Soviet experience of fighting a war in Afghanistan.

nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB57/soviet.html

Ok, have some footage here youtube.com/watch?v=RodrZ2we_hQ

>neo-80's synthcore
Like itty bitty baby
youtu.be/Iknh6sQtDnM

do you have full bideo?

The full footage is a part of a movie called Afgan: the Soviet Experience
It's 40 minutes long and comprises of an American reporter's interviews with Soviet soldiers. It's pretty saddening honestly. It used to be on YouTube, but you can probably find it somewhere else
The same guy also did a documentary on the Afghans during the war, called Jihad

Date December 24, 1979 – February 15, 1989
(9 years, 1 month, 3 weeks and 1 day)
Location Afghanistan

Mujahideen:

75,000–90,000 killed
75,000+ wounded (tentative estimate)[24]

Civilians (Afghan):

562,000[27]–2,000,000 killed[28][29]
5 million refugees outside Afghanistan
2 million internally displaced persons
Around 3 million Afghans wounded (mostly civilians)[30]


Can we agree that soviets were more violent than americans?

Didn't the Soviets lose due to big bosses sabotage?

I think they just got bored.

>Can we agree that soviets were more violent than americans?
Was this ever disputed?

They came as liberators.

Now I feel like playing ArmA 2 again.

what are nuclear weapons?

I like the sequel better

Balalaika best lagoon

> "we fear not the russians, we fear their helicopters"

...

Like usual, the US collaborated with a band of psychopathic murderers to destroy a left-wing government.

would they not be too old to fight in the modern afghan war?

How you're supposed to survive that?

you don´t

They're called NSEs; Non-Survivable Events

People do not lose wars to the Afghans.

People fight for so long until they realize that there's nothing in Afghanistan worth fighting for, and then they leave.

Even in proxy actions like this one, where we were giving the mujaheddin shoulder fired surface to air missiles called Stingers.

They tend to adhere less to the laws of land warfare, and they tend to care less about collateral damage.

They also get all rapey when they win.

Were there ever any Soviet civilians/hippies that complained about collateral damage or civilian deaths?

I am pretty sure that hippies are not the only ones who should be pissed off when your gov blasts largely tribal and oblivious shepherds out of sheer frustration with its incompetence.

Weapons that the Soviets made the largest version of.

You are not supposed to.

fuck yes my negro

fight as in they were probably high ranking officers devoid of any danger and starting as conscripts under ussr

...

this

t. Mr. Goebbels

Propaganda label.

Afghanistan government invited the USSR on two occasions to fight the US backed religious extremists.

Afghan/USSR vs. US/terrorists

Didn't the Americans AND Saudis give a stupid amount of money and support the Mujahideen, which would later give rise to Al-Qaeda?

'muricans will always gonna defends their gud rebels

Is 9th company accurate in any way

No, and it is shit
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_9th_Company#Historical_parallel
Fedor Bondarchuk does not deserve to be the son of Sergei Bondarchuk

Questions:
What was so important about Afghanistan that the Soviets felt the need to invade it?

Why did the U.S feel the need to get involved and arm the mujahideen?

Why was Mahmoud Ahmad Shah assassinated and does it have to do with 9/11 since the assassination was 2 days prior?

Was this pointless war the catalyst that drove the collapse of the USSR?

Why did Osama bin Laden as a rich Saudi fight amongst the mujahideen?

>tfw youll never fight in Afghanistan with your fellow country men

...

...

*teleports MOAB behind you*

We didn't care who was willing to fight the USSR, and they didn't care who was willing to fight the USA.

Proxy wars. Get used to them.

>What was so important about Afghanistan that the Soviets felt the need to invade it?

It was disintegrating into anarchy because of incompetent commies. The worry was that the Islamist unrest would spread from Afghanistan to the Muslim parts of the USSR.

>Why did the U.S feel the need to get involved and arm the mujahideen?

Because Pakistan was a big, centrally located US ally and the Reds were within spitting distance of them. We were always worried about the Soviets pushing into the Middle East and taking our oil.

>Why was Mahmoud Ahmad Shah assassinated and does it have to do with 9/11 since the assassination was 2 days prior?

Al Qaeda knew that the US would invade Afghanistan after 9/11, in fact, that was the primary goal of the attacks; to force America into an unwinnable war in the hopes that they would collapse the same way the USSR did. Massoud was the person most capable of defeating the Taliban when the US showed up.

>Why did Osama bin Laden as a rich Saudi fight amongst the mujahideen?

He was an intellectual by all accounts. Soft-spoken, well read, and quoting the Koran about everything. He had a deeply held ideology, and the infidels were getting in the way of it.

>being an imperialist

it was rough

things that only killed 200k people?

>tfw you will not fight for an islamic non racist theocracy with your muslims bros from all parts of the world, from west africa, from chechnya, from albania, and marrying a qt pasthun.
Why live?

Hey there, fellas.
Mind if I single-handedly tip the scale of the Afghan war in-between my whore-banking sessions?

It was like Vietnam for the USSR except shittier

Here's what I'd like to know. Did the US actually directly back the Mujahideen or did we only give MANPADS to the Northern Alliance and just kind of let the Muj do their thing?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cyclone

>eventually culminated in the dissolution of the country itself.

A-stan has NEVER been a "country", and never will be. It's a conglomeration of tribes trying to exploit any idiot willing to give them money, be they Paki's in the east, Iranians in the west, Saudi's down south, or the U.S. in Kabul today.

BTDT

Muslims are retarded and can't fight their way out of a paper sack.

>Did the US actually directly back the Mujahideen

We used 2 approaches. One was to give the Paki's a shitload of cash so THEY could fund and equip the Muj....and this was and absolutely stupid approach, but it gave us plausible deniability. The second approach was direct funding through various agencies like CIA, state, etc, that worked directly with individual Afghani groups.

No we don't. Soviet-Afghan war was only one war, bloody but just one. The U.S. started a lot of wars killing a lot of civilians all over the world: Korea, Vietnam, 2 times Iraq, Afghanistan. They also financed and supported a lot of terribles dictatorships.

They don't had hippies in USSR, great country

underrated post

Please like and follow Occupy Democrats on Facebook

Afghan. Afghani is the currency. But was the direct funding to the muj then? Or is it a little like the YPG communists versus the Kurdish army now? That's a little bit of a stretch I know but that's sort of how I think of it.

Very good movie tbqh

It was mostly through the Pakistanis.

This is why the snackbar jihadist Mujis got more guns and money than the more secular ones.

>anything that counters my imperialist narrative is liberal propaganda

>Not Revy
Delete your accounts

I'm sure they had them, it's just a lot easier to pretend like they don't exist when the state controls the media.

Prove it, I'm genuinely curious about soviet hippies

pretty sure any soviet hippie openly opposed to the war was diagnosed as mentally insane or some shit and locked up until they changed their mind

Give me evidence of this. We have a lot of evidences of american police beating hippies, but I never heard about hippies in USSR

Seconded, I'm interested in counter-cultural stuff in Russia in general.

>counter-cultural
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stilyagi

but this stilyagi stuff is fron the40's to the 60's. Anyway interesting stuff

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stilyagi
That's actually pretty cool, I had no idea.

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stilyagi

can this be a meme now