Saddam statue toppled in baghdad - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

By John Doe
#7150
Spretsnatz,

I must say, your response was one of the most disingenuous pieces of gabbling nonsense I've read in a long time. In all seriousness... do you have some sort of a learning disability that makes you unable to keep track of when events occured?

You claim Vietnam was an illustration of the Soviet Air Defense in Depth Doctrine. The Battle of Bekka Valley (an air battle, not a ground battle as you incorrectly keep insisting) took place in 1982 whereas the air battle in Vietnam took place primarily in the late 60's. You are correct in stating that the SAM batteries were successful against the F-4 Phantoms. However, that war was NOT fought under the doctrine that came to be known as Air Defense in Depth. They used the older Soviet Continental Air Defense doctrine.

Vietnam did trigger both sides to re-evaluate their doctrines as it became clear to both that future wars need not immediately escalate to nuclear conflicts. The Soviets misinterpreted their success with the heavy concentrations of SAMs surrounding North Vietnamese cities and invisioned a very deep web of SAM batteries that, coupled with strict ground control of aircraft, would insure air supremecy over their lines. The US developed more modern jets with a greater thrust ratio for manuever, loosened fighter/bombers from strict ground control, and developed a series of missles that could suppress enemy radars or engage enemy fighters from any angle of attack.

Nobody -- except you apparently -- doubts that the Battle of Bekka Valley was the first test of these new doctrines on both sides. In three days the Isreali airforce wiped out all of the SAM batteries and shot the Syrian airforce out of the sky at minimum cost to themselves. In all engagements since American doctrine has trumped the old Soviet doctrine. Witness the ongoing war -- where the Iraqi airforce never even bothered flying, and for the most part the SAM batteries kept their radars turned off.

BTW, the land component of the Isreali move into South Lebanon is called, by people with even passing knowledge of the affair, Big Pine. The eventual withdrawl from Lebanon occured three years AFTER the air battle of Bekka Valley. I will of course by happy to suggest reading material so you can correct your very obvious deficiency of knowledge over those events.
Last edited by John Doe on 11 Apr 2003 23:28, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By hank
#7156
Comparisons between Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq are as laughable as comparisons of Hussein's Ego, and that of my nephew's hamster.

Vietnam was Vietnam. There wasn't one before it, there won't be another after it. Let it lie in the peace it so richly deserves, and quit spitting on my father.

Afghanistan was a desperate land grab by an imperialistic monolith that wanted a sixth "-stan" in it's gas pump. For what...8 years?...18 year-old Soviet youths...who HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO ENLIST...went and died in the stinking, yak-vomit strewn mountain passes of Afghanistan against a team that really knew how to make the most of their home field advantage. After being part of Iran for a millenia...you would think Afghans would have the right to not be invaded by someone who wants to add them to an ugly-ass pink splotch on everyone's globe. The soviets got their asses handed to them because they underestimated the possibilities...like "We want to be free...go home or die."

Iraq is a desperate attempt to grant freedom by the cop of the world, the United States, and Constable Britain...who used to run Iraq afterthe Turks coughed it up post WWI. For what...4 weeks...18 year-old American and British youths...who VOLUNTEERED TO FIGHT FOR DEMOCRACY...have fought and died in the stinking, camel-crap strewn desert passes of Iraq against a team that really wanted to be free, it turns out, because they were being oppressed by someone they couldn't tell the world they hated for fear of death. After being prisoners...and occassional murder victims...of their own government for thirty years...you would think the world would be supportive of the efforts of Iraqis to finally not be persecuted and develop their own culture...without being annexed by another country. The Iraqi Government got their asses handed to them because they underestimated the cries of their people's spirit...like "We want to be free...or we will die."

Hmmm. On second thought, YOU'RE right. They're IDENTICAL... :roll:
User avatar
By Boondock Saint
#7157
Let it lie in the peace it so richly deserves, and quit spitting on my father.


Um ... while I find your post interesting and points well thought out ... I got really confused by this part ... care to shed any light on that?

Anyway ...

Um ... :knife:
By John Doe
#7159
His father must be as Vietnam Vet. Makes me feel old. :(
By Tovarish Spetsnaz
#7178
The US developed more modern jets with a greater thrust ratio for manuever, loosened fighter/bombers from strict ground control, and developed a series of missles that could suppress enemy radars or engage enemy fighters from any angle of attack.


You have just described the developments carried out by EVERYONE in the past 30 years...

Nobody -- except you apparently -- doubts that the Battle of Bekka Valley was the first test of these new doctrines on both sides.


Apparently...Either way...I will say it again...the tacticks used by the Syrians were NOT those of the USSR...nor were the weapons used nor the numbers. Syrian MiG-21s were send outside GCI control to engage Israeli F-15s...a foolish thing...and something for which mig-21s were not designed to do nor something the USSR would have send them to do.

19Syrian SAM batteries...against the entire Israeli air force...Why do I get the feeling the USSR would have used a tad more SAm batteries than that...

In three days the Isreali airforce wiped out all of the SAM batteries and shot the Syrian airforce out of the sky at minimum cost to themselves.


In three days the Israelis destroyed the Syrian SAMs in the Bekaa Valley...which themselves were not well established since Syria had just moved them in that area. And again...there were only 19SAM batteries there...and Israel was carrying out attacks with duzens of planes at a time....such as on June 9 when Israeli attacked Syrian SAM and radar positions in the Bekaa valley with no less than 92 aircraft!! The Syrians responded by sending up 54 aircraft... Syrians managed to shot down 3 Israeli aircraft that day...but lost probably a duzen...mostly MiG-21s. Syrian radars could not see beyound the Lebanon mountains...so the MiG-21s and MiG-23s were send in blind...while the F-15s had USN E-2C AWACS helping them out.

Yes...as I said...Israel DID win the air war in the Bekaa Valley...mainly becasue of its numerical superiority....

But it did not do so with 0 losses as the Israeli claim...not even 2 or 3 or 5...but considerably more. British journalists in the Bekaa Valley report seeing at least one F-16 destroyed. Furthermore...the Syrians did NOT lose 87 planes. They lost about 50 planes to Israelis...37 MiG-21s, 12 MiG-23, 1 MiG-25...and about 6 Su-17s (3 to fracticides) They lost some more helicopters to the Israelis...and the Israelis captured a handful of helicopters..and apparently a few Syrian planes were shot down by their own AD accidentally (3 Su-17s for example were destroyed by a cluster bomb from their own wingman). Israel added up all the Syrian losses in combats and accidents and fracticeds...and said it shot them all down themselves. That is not true...

Nor do the Syrians claim anything like 67 Israeli planes. Highest Syrian claim is 23 Israeli planes...

But how can you say there was no ground war??? Israeli and Syrian forced had a major battle in June 1982...the Israelis lost more than 300 tanks and the Syrians more than 400 tanks...

On June 6, Israel launched an invasion of the Bekaa Valley. On June 9, Syria launched its first major counterattack. Tanks from the 91st brigade, including T-72M and M1s, led the assault. Facing these were some 500 Israeli tanks, including 300 Merkava Mk.1. Syria launched a major counterattack on a 100km front and by June 10 Israeli advance was stopped and even turned back. Israel was thus forced to call for an armistice. On June 11 Syria launched its own attack, but was stopped by heavy Israeli air strikes. On June 11 Israel attacked towards the Beirut-Damascus highway to try and cut off the Syrian Army. This is where the heaviest fighting occurred. Syrian T-72s and T-62s were able to stop the Israeli advance and drive them back 20km from the highway. The Israeli army in Bekaa Valley was crushed. They had lost 160 tanks. Israel was forced to agree to an armistice. It was not until July 18, that Israel launched another attack but was immediately crushed, losing 150 tanks this time, mostly to At-4 ATGMs. Israel agreed to a ceasefire and to remove its forces from the Bekaa Valley within 10 days.

Here is a picture of an Israeli M-60 destroyed by the Syrians in the Bekaa Valley...a tank which acording to you was never in the Bekaa Valley. I have plenty more pics of both Israeli and Syrian tanks in the Bekaa Valley in 1982...

Image

In all engagements since American doctrine has trumped the old Soviet doctrine.


In all engagements since...American aircraft have been of the latest generation...and have faced numerically inferior much older Soviet equipment. In Iraq US F-15s faced Iraqi MiG-21s and MiG-23s and Mirage F.1s...1 or 2 generations behind them...and mostly Sa-2 and Sa-3 SAMs...1960s missiles against 1980s aircraft. 3000 US aircraft in 1991 against no more than 100 Iraqi SAM batteries....

In 1991...the contemporary Soviet systems were S-300, Buk-M1, Tor, and such systems...not Sa-2 and Sa-3.

Witness the ongoing war -- where the Iraqi airforce never even bothered flying,

:eh: ...Iraqi AF has been under 12 years of embargo...most of their aircraft can't even fly...the 5-6 aircraft that can even fly...won't fly becasue the US has several hundred aircraft there. What are you talking about??? A derelict air force that can't even fly...and you claim victory over them??? I guess you showed the Taliban AF with its 5 MiG-21s who was boss!!

and for the most part the SAM batteries kept their radars turned off.


All 20 systems that were half-operational!!

BTW...Israel withdrew from Lebanon only a few years ago...

Jane's Information Group is one of the sites that charges a subscription. I checked google but found nothing at all..


For Jane's you need to buy their books...but those cost an insane ammount of money...and they don't have armor estimates or such.

looks like ahab took tovaz up on the 'our tanks are better' pissing contest


Well everyone knows I can piss furthest here...

Vietnam was Vietnam. There wasn't one before it, there won't be another after it. Let it lie in the peace it so richly deserves, and quit spitting on my father.


I am not spitting on your father...it has nothing to do with it.

The soviets got their asses handed to them because they underestimated the possibilities...like "We want to be free...go home or die."


Yes..."free"...to be brutalized by 13th century religious fundamentalists. The fact is...the Afghani government of the 80s was the best hope the Afghani people ever had to be free...and the USSR was there only to keep Afghanistan from falling into the hands of the Mujahideen...the ones who rule Afghanistan today. The truth is...the Mujahideen won becasue the USSR was politically weak...and becasue they had the support of the whole anti-communist world...with billions of dollars in aid going to them.
By ahab
#7180
Tovarish Spetsnaz wrote:Well everyone knows I can piss furthest here...
*unzips fly* Now this, is something I can win!

I really don't care to argue for who has the best tanks/tactics/whatnot as we really can't predict how things would really go. If we'd go by that sort of thing the French would have defeated Germany. SOUMAs were one of the best tanks of the time and it's owners lost. Shermans were an all around bad tank, but it's owners won. Americans/Russians in Vietnam/Afghanistan were better prepared, but lost.

No proxy war was ever a realistic representation of an actual NATO-Warsaw conflict. There is no way that victories/losses in those proxy wars would correlate directly to the real conflict that never happend.
By Proctor
#7208
I'd just like to point out that in this thread there are eight people discussing three unrelated topics.

This post only adds to the general chaos.
User avatar
By hank
#7452
Tovarish Spetsnaz wrote:
The US developed more modern jets with a greater thrust ratio for manuever, loosened fighter/bombers from strict ground control, and developed a series of missles that could suppress enemy radars or engage enemy fighters from any angle of attack....the tacticks used by the Syrians were NOT those of the USSR...nor were the weapons used nor the numbers. Syrian MiG-21s were send outside GCI control to engage Israeli F-15s...a foolish thing...and something for which mig-21s were not designed to do nor something the USSR would have send them to do...there were only 19SAM batteries there...and Israel was carrying out attacks with duzens of planes at a time....such as on June 9 when Israeli attacked Syrian SAM and radar positions in the Bekaa valley with no less than 92 aircraft!! The Syrians responded by sending up 54 aircraft... Syrians managed to shot down 3 Israeli aircraft that day...but lost probably a duzen...mostly MiG-21s. Syrian radars could not see beyound the Lebanon mountains...so the MiG-21s and MiG-23s were send in blind...while the F-15s had USN E-2C AWACS helping them out...the Syrians did NOT lose 87 planes. They lost about 50 planes to Israelis...37 MiG-21s, 12 MiG-23, 1 MiG-25...and about 6 Su-17s (3 to fracticides) They lost some more helicopters to the Israelis...and the Israelis captured a handful of helicopters..and apparently a few Syrian planes were shot down by their own AD accidentally (3 Su-17s for example were destroyed by a cluster bomb from their own wingman). Israel added up all the Syrian losses in combats and accidents and fracticeds...and said it shot them all down themselves. That is not true...nor do the Syrians claim anything like 67 Israeli planes. Highest Syrian claim is 23 Israeli planes...Israeli and Syrian forced had a major battle in June 1982...the Israelis lost more than 300 tanks and the Syrians more than 400 tanks...launched its first major counterattack. Tanks from the 91st brigade, including T-72M and M1s, led the assault. Facing these were some 500 Israeli tanks, including 300 Merkava Mk.1. Syria launched a major counterattack on a 100km front and by June 10 Israeli advance was stopped and even turned back. Israel was thus forced to call for an armistice. On June 11 Syria launched its own attack, but was stopped by heavy Israeli air strikes. On June 11 Israel attacked towards the Beirut-Damascus highway to try and cut off the Syrian Army. This is where the heaviest fighting occurred. Syrian T-72s and T-62s were able to stop the Israeli advance and drive them back 20km from the highway. The Israeli army in Bekaa Valley was crushed. They had lost 160 tanks. Israel was forced to agree to an armistice. It was not until July 18, that Israel launched another attack but was immediately crushed, losing 150 tanks this time, mostly to At-4 ATGMs. Israel agreed to a ceasefire and to remove its forces from the Bekaa Valley within 10 days...I have plenty more pics of both Israeli and Syrian tanks in the Bekaa Valley in 1982...In Iraq US F-15s faced Iraqi MiG-21s and MiG-23s and Mirage F.1s...1 or 2 generations behind them...and mostly Sa-2 and Sa-3 SAMs...1960s missiles against 1980s aircraft. 3000 US aircraft in 1991 against no more than 100 Iraqi SAM batteries...In 1991...the contemporary Soviet systems were S-300, Buk-M1, Tor, and such systems...not Sa-2 and Sa-3...Iraqi AF has been under 12 years of embargo...most of their aircraft can't even fly...the 5-6 aircraft that can even fly...won't fly becasue the US has several hundred aircraft there...I guess you showed the Taliban AF with its 5 MiG-21s who was boss...and for the most part the SAM batteries kept their radars turned off...All 20 systems that were half-operational...Israel withdrew from Lebanon only a few years ago...For Jane's you need to buy their books...but those cost an insane ammount of money...and they don't have armor estimates or such...


Either you can cut and paste with the best of them, comrade, or you need to go out and get laid and quit playing with your books about weaponry and do something bloody useful...if the ever have a "Trivial Pursuit Armamants Edition"...I want you on MY side... :eek:

Now...

Yes..."free"...to be brutalized by 13th century religious fundamentalists. The fact is...the Afghani government of the 80s was the best hope the Afghani people ever had to be free...and the USSR was there only to keep Afghanistan from falling into the hands of the Mujahideen...the ones who rule Afghanistan today. The truth is...the Mujahideen won becasue the USSR was politically weak...and becasue they had the support of the whole anti-communist world...with billions of dollars in aid going to them.


There's a reason.

The Soviet Union was dying. Why spread the cancer into the cells of people already suffering in a religiously oppressive state? Why take them out of the frypan and thrust them into the coals?

And whether the Afghans were doomed under the Mujahadeen or not was entirely up to their people. No one can truly have total control over such a place. Revolutions come. They need not come out of oppression by a regional bully like the Soviet Union...who had so much trouble in their own over-stretched borders that they had NO REASON to be trying to save someone else. Don't try to turn over the noble card for the CCCP, tovarisch. It doesn't suit them...
By Tovarish Spetsnaz
#7521
Either you can cut and paste with the best of them, comrade, or you need to go out and get laid and quit playing with your books about weaponry and do something bloody useful...if the ever have a "Trivial Pursuit Armamants Edition"...I want you on MY side...


Some people have hobbies...
By Tovarish Spetsnaz
#7522
They need not come out of oppression by a regional bully like the Soviet Union...


Hmm...are you aware HOW the revolution in Afghanistan came about...and WHY the USSR went in??? Clearly not...but...I'll let you go back to the History Channel...
By Yukon
#7530
KurtFF8 wrote:I doubt that we will install a dictator in Iraq now.



Who do you think put Saddam in power and who supported Bin Laden ? I'll tell you - RONALD REAGAN !
User avatar
By hank
#7630
Yukon wrote:Who do you think put Saddam in power and who supported Bin Laden ? I'll tell you - RONALD REAGAN !


Saddam was in power before Reagan was. Nice try, Biafra...
By Yukon
#7813
Your buddy Reagan armed Saddam and Bin Laden. In doing so Reagan is complicit in the murder of thousands and in the attack on the WTC. He and his croonies should have been charged for treason and terrorism. He did not express America ideals at all.
By ahab
#7819
Yukon wrote:Your buddy Reagan armed Saddam and Bin Laden. In doing so Reagan is complicit in the murder of thousands and in the attack on the WTC. He and his croonies should have been charged for treason and terrorism. He did not express America ideals at all.
The world changed since then. If he hadn't of done those things the US might have collapsed and the USSR might still be around. (doubtful, but ya never know) Communism and the USSR were considered a far greater threat than terrorism then.
User avatar
By Boondock Saint
#7881
Yukon wrote:Your buddy Reagan armed Saddam and Bin Laden. In doing so Reagan is complicit in the murder of thousands and in the attack on the WTC. He and his croonies should have been charged for treason and terrorism. He did not express America ideals at all.


Well, with that kind of logic ...

France is really to blame ...

I mean, without France helping the US in the first place way back in the days of its revolution Reagan never would have been in power in the first place!!!

Oh and lets not leave the other accessories out ...

The UK - responsible from teh get go ... I mean without them there would be no US.

Russia - Back when it was the Soviet Union lets face it, it was an aggressive player in the world and forced the US to take drastic steps to slow the growth of the USSR down.

Japan - Well shiz, had they not attacked the US at pearl harbor the US might not be the powerhouse it is today.

China - I dont know, but since they are responsible for this whole SARS thing .. I think they should get some of the blame too.

Germany - Do you know how many Americans there are of German descent?

Ireland - Lets face it, had they put up a better fight against the Brits then maybe the US would not be ... that goes for Scotland too!

... There are plenty more but I will leave it at that.

So ... as you see there are alot of people responsible for what is going on in the world ... looks like we got alot of work to do ...
User avatar
By Seven
#7905
Boondock Saint wrote:
So ... as you see there are alot of people responsible for what is going on in the world ... looks like we got alot of work to do ...


Saint,

I'm guessing Yukon is from that wonderful socialst neighbor of ours to the north....that wouldn't turn down an immigrant even if they listed their current occupation as "Terrorist"....

Let's start the worldwide cleanup there! It's close to home and we could use the land for something...lots of natural resources to exploit. ;)

7 8)
By de oppresso libre
#7956
Ummm let me guess as to the real reason the Red's went into Afghanistan, at least in your delusional world.

Back in the 1950s and 1960s, the King of Afghanistan embarked on a serious program of liberalization for his ancient land. He substantially loosened the laws regarding burkas and other forms of social control. He initiated legal reforms to cut down on corruption. He allowed women to receive educations. He expanded the parliament, and intimated that he intended to convert the country to a Constitutional Monarchy, voluntarily giving up most of his enormous power. Kabul, in particular, developed a reputation for being a loose, hip, cosmopolitan sort of place, with the fleshpots of Babylon easily savored, and friendly relations with Westerners as well as the Soviet bloc.

Unfortunately, as awful as it sounds, the move toward democracy was probably a terrible mistake. The Soviet Union had designs on Afghanistan. As they so often did, they infiltrated the democratically elected government, and helped to engineer a coup. The King was toppled. Afghan communists took over and more or less destroyed the parliament. However, they faced internal friction and resistance from non-communists. Within a couple of years, under the guise of bringing "stability," the Soviets rolled in with tanks and took over--coincidentally killing many of the communists who they had helped just a few years earlier.

During the Soviet occupation, between 1.5 and 2 million Afghans were killed, out of a population of about 15 million. Millions more were dislocated. As always happened under communist rule, the economy was destroyed, and brutal repression reigned supreme. Political dissidents were routinely tortured and killed.

The Soviets had all sorts of innovative methods for "pacifying" villages that were suspected of collaborating with rebels. One was to kidnap a woman, take her up a few hundred feet in a helicopter above her village, strip her naked, and push her out the door. The Soviets would also do things like leave toys laying around the countryside for children to find--said toys being wired to bombs that would dismember or kill any child foolish enough to try to pick them up.

A standard method of "pacifying" a particularly troublesome village was to walk into town with tanks and troops, and start chucking grenades into people's homes. Then they'd shoot anyone--any age, any sex, armed or unarmed--who fled out the doors.

Literally millions were killed, while the Soviets simply took all the oil and food and other goods they could from the country. The U.S. helped the resisters with weapons and money, and was instrumental to getting the Soviets to finally pull out. Then, unfortunately, we left the country alone to the remaining warlords, which allowed bin Laden and the Taliban to take power within a few years of the Soviet exit.

But then Tov....you will probably give us the Pravda version in all its unvarnished truth eh?

Now can you get back to the topic of this thread?
By Tovarish Spetsnaz
#8023
Oh most suerly!! What you just gave us was the usual Regan BS about Afghanistan...all of it fake.


One little point...for example...on the explosive toys...this was a completely fabricated story...and has been proven to be completely fabricated!!! It appeared in US newspapers during the war...and Regan made a big deal about it...but it was all fake!!

What democratically elected government??? The king ruled absolutely...

Kabul, in particular, developed a reputation for being a loose, hip, cosmopolitan sort of place,


Oh yes...Kabul was smokin' back than!! Why with the 40 year life expectency, 25% infant mortality rate and 90% illiteracy rates....not a single mile of railway...Afghanistan was indistinguishable from any western country of the time...

Oh Ihave heard crap in my days...but this tops it ALL!!!

Afghanistan was in the 14th centry at the time...with one dentist for half a million people...if even that!!

Here is the REAL history of Afghanisatn..

In 1973...Mohammad Daoud...a member of the ruling Royal family...overthrow the king of Afghanistana nd established a republic. He did this mainly with the support of the PDP...the Afghani People's Democratic Party...

Daud however soon broke his allinace with the PDP. In 1978...he had the PDP leader killed...and arrested hundreds of their members in an attempt to destroy the PDP (this is the...liberalization....you talk about oppresso...)

Daud...after suppressing the PDP...expelled Soviet advisors from Afghanistan...and forged an alliegence with the Shah of Iran...meaning with the US.

In 1978...the PDP along with the army overthrew Daud's government....which was neither a democracy nor a republic.


The PDP were NOT communists...but progressives....Their reforms included land reform (while still retaining private property)...controls on prices and profits...and strengthening of the public sector...separation of church and state, eradication of illiteracy, legalization of trade unions, and the emancipation of women in a land almost entirely Muslim.

Furthermore...they canceled the debts the peasants owned to the landlords..and eliminated that system where the peasants were oppressed by the rich landlords. Also schools and hospitals were oppened in the country side...somethng which Afghanista had never seen...

The new government was not anti-Islamic. They called for Islam to exist within a secular state.

The Mujahideen...who had not changed much in centuries...saw this as of course a major threat to their way of life...as primitive and oppressive as it was. They said that the PDP's new laws allowing women to work and go to school and not requiring that they wear the traditional Islamic dress...and laws prohibiting child marriges or selling of women...all these laws threatened their way of life (what a beautiful argument).

Either way...the PDP was NOT communist...

In March 1979...Taraki...the president...went to the USSR and asked them to send in the Red Army to prevent the Muajhideen from overthrowing the government. The USSR refused to send its military into Afghanistan...saying it was an internal matter..and if they did the world would think the USSr was invading Afghanistan.

In September 1979 Taraki....the president...was removed from power by his vice president...Amin. Amin was not as progressive as Taraki...The PDP was opposed to Amin taking over power...and requested once more that the USSR send in troops.

Amin purged the PDP...removing pro-Soviet and progressive elements...many of which went to the USSR. He also stated to the US ambassador that he wanted to renew relations with the US (even though at the same time..the US was supporting the Mujahideen)...So Amin was betraying the Afghani revolution...and turning it back towards where it was...another mirror image of Iran.

USSR did send in troops eventually...and removed Amin (read...VDV troops assaulted his stronghold and killed him). Karmal was placed in power by the PDP...and the government returned to normal.

The PDP and the Soviets accused Amin of having been a CIA agent who overthrow Tataki to take over Afghanistan for the west.

This has never been proven...but the fact reamins that Amin was president of the ASA...the Afghanistan Studnet's Association...an organization based in the US (where he was studying)...and which was funded by the CIA and the Asia Foundations...a CIA front in Asia. So in all likelyhood...Amin was indeed associated with the CIA in some way.

And than off course all the rest followed...with the Mujahideen recieving aid from the US...with pakistan saying it felt threatened by a "expensionist Afghanistan" (go figure)...


And now why did all this happen??? Becasue the US got involved...by helping the Mujahideen...by attempting to take over the government in Afghanistan...

Why couldn't the US allow the PDP government in Afghanisatn to continue??? Becasue it was progressive??? Becasue it wanted to drag Afghanisatn out of the feudal age???

The PDP was not communist...it was siply progressive. But to the US...any progressive government is a communist government...

Had the US not gotten involved...the Mjahideen would have been defeated...Afghanistan modernized and pulled out of the medieval age...and none of the problems that come out of that area would have happened.

The model for the PDP...were the Islamic Soviet republics just above them. After all...their cousins in the North were modern, educated and free people...and Afghanistan could have achieved that as well!!!


But that was not to happen....becasue the US had to support the "freedom fighters"...of Afghanistan. [/quote]
User avatar
By uglygoat
#8024
i've heard it said that the reason the us helped the muj, mainly by funneling money and arms through the pakistani intelligence service, was that they wanted to see the great bear stumble over their own 'vietnam' in afganistan.

the explosive toys...this was a completely fabricated story...and has been proven to be completely fabricated!!!


comrade, perhaps you have a source that we could all see?

any way, you are right about the backwardness of some of the muj fighters, especially in regards to womens rights. they weren't so oppressive as the taliban regime that emerged after the soviets left, but they were inherently tribal, and their tribal mores called for secluding their women, and keeping them outta the public eye.

edit: i shall write more later, my lovely wife requires the computer! :D
By ahab
#8025
t1master wrote:
the explosive toys...this was a completely fabricated story...and has been proven to be completely fabricated!!!


comrade, perhaps you have a source that we could all see?
It is a hard story to believe, the USSR wouldn't have much to gain by doing that. They'd kill children, woo big threat there, and they'd get the civilians against them.

This or this and the BBC support Tovarish. From the BBC article:
the Afghan communist party, the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan - or PDPA -
That is a the largest difference I could find after a quick skim. I'd rather live under the worst demonizations of communism than under the mujahideen. I don't think anyone knew then just how bad the mujahideen would make things. Unfortunately the mujahideen was pro-US and the PDP were at least communist sympathizers and the Truman Doctrine was in full force. The US didn't trust the USSR to not set up a puppet gov't. The USSR and US did not trust each other at the time, and still plenty of people don't trust the US.

I'm seeing more and more parallels between USSR-Afghanistan and US-Iraq all the time.

as long as we are on the subject... I remeber being told that the war in Afghanistan was being kept secret, even from those in the USSR. I don't remember hearing about the war while it was going on, but I was 7 when it ended soo...

No one would be arrested if protesters did not dis[…]

Nope! Yep! Who claimed they were? What predat[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

It seems a critical moment in the conflict just ha[…]

The Crimean Tatar people's steadfast struggle agai[…]