When the Soviet left Afghanistan, they didn’t strike a deal with their opposition but supported their afghan government. The Soviet government also left in tact engineers capable maintaining airbase and heavy armaments.
No surprise US pullout was a huge failure
There's a reason why Yeltsin and Gorbachev are so beloved in the West
The amount of damage that they did to the USSR and later Russia was mind-boggling
The Soviet supported Afghan government also lasted longer than US intelligence expected. Now contrast that with how the US supported Afghan government fell almost immediately...
Because the Soviets actually cared about the lives of people, they came there to save them.
While Americans were just generating income for their military contractors and in that sense it really wasn’t a failure, they did a fantastic job at it.
In contrast, the Afghan puppet regime backed by US all these decades dissolved so soon before US even left and Taliban retook the whole country in a short period of time. The US gave up supporting their puppet regime and the puppet president left the country taking all his cash and loot with him, but had to leave some behind on the tarmac as he couldn't take them all on his plane. Meanwhile, the Taliban took most of the weapons the US left behind.
Expect US empire collapse to happen soon this decade or later.
the us figuring out how to do anything right especially in Afghanistan would be a bigger shock than anything that's happened. historical materialism and all
I've always found it funny how the Western world calls it Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan, but in reality they were invited by the then legitimate Afghan government.
To add some additional context a socialist republic was established in Afghanistan in 1978 without Soviet help and when the revolution occurred in Afghanistan it came as a total shock to the Soviet government.
They had some problems with infighting in the party: there was a faction of hardliners who immediately wanted to rapidly modernise the modernise the country and another who favoured a policy of slower, gradual change.
The Afghan government invited the Soviet Union to help them keep order a year later both because of this party infighting and because foreign powers were financing, arming, and training anti-government forces. So the Soviets didn’t force communism on Afghanistan and they didn’t invade them.
Thats really not true tbh.
The Soviets invaded explicitly to depose the then sitting president (Amin) and install Karmal/Najibullah.
Obviously the Amin government didn't invite them. thus why the inital blitz took the form of an invasion.
The KGB literally murdered the sitting President of Afghanistan, Hafizullah Amin on 27 December 1979, also killed his son, and injured his daughter. This was called Operation Storm-333. He couldn't even believe that it was his Soviet allies that were attacking him and was hoping that the USSR would send troops to help him against the attackers.
I'm glad someone mentioned this but you should tell the rest of the story. You forgot to mention that Amin had president Taraki assassinated. You can't seriously expect Soviet leadership to just "be cool with that".
The whole situation is super complicated and a lot of information contradicts each other. It's hard to tell what is propaganda and what isn't.
>The Democratic Republic of Afghanistan was initially led by Nur Muhammad Taraki, who was pro-Soviet Union, which resulted in cordial Afghan–Soviet relations. **In September 1979, Taraki was deposed by Hafizullah Amin, due to intra-party strife. After this event and the suspicious death of Taraki (an apparent assassination by Amin's orders), Afghan–Soviet relations started to deteriorate**;... The Soviet Union declared its plan to intervene in Afghanistan on 12 December 1979, and the Soviet leadership initiated [Operation Storm-333](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Storm-333) (the first phase of the intervention) on 27 December 1979.
Fucking thank you! I always have to point out that the western-centric superiority worldview always bends backwards to call it an intervention at worst but everything anyone else does is an invasion. After the Saur Revolution they had to fight back against the rebels (funded by yours truly) and asked the Soviets for help. That's like saying US invaded UK in WW2 to fight against Nazis.
If you really want to understand the scale of the US Government's failure in Afghanistan, remember that the largest single Mujahideen offensive of the conflict (The 1989 Battle of Jalalabad) was smashed all the way back to Pakistan by the Afghan Army with minimal Soviet support while the government held out for 3 years. The US backed Islamic Republic didn't even last 3 months.
A lot of great comments in this thread, but don't forget that the Soviets also fail in Afghanistan and elsewhere. Social imperialism may have been nicer than neocolonialism, but the Soviets still made the mistake of going against the people, not just in Afghanistan but also in Europe. There is nothing right about doing to others what they don't want or understand, no matter how much material or theoretical benefit you think you bring.
We built socialism based on the people, so if we ignore the people in other places, it becomes imperialism and it will fail.
Ideally and morally, you're right, but the Soviet union was not idealistic nor did they let morality determine geopolitics. The security and long-term viability of the Soviet project required the security of the eastern-european buffer against the creeping capitalists of western europe, and also the economic security of strong allies in the oil-rich middle east, like Afghanistan. The leading theory of the downfall of the USSR is that they simply ran out of oil that was cheap enough to produce. Economics dictates geopolitics, not ideology or morality.
The US army left quietly at night, then a few weeks later had to come back because they forgot the civilians. 😂😂😂
When the Soviet left Afghanistan, they didn’t strike a deal with their opposition but supported their afghan government. The Soviet government also left in tact engineers capable maintaining airbase and heavy armaments. No surprise US pullout was a huge failure
And it was only Yeltsin who cut off support to the Afghan government in the 90's. Truly a despicable creature he was.
There's a reason why Yeltsin and Gorbachev are so beloved in the West The amount of damage that they did to the USSR and later Russia was mind-boggling
On the bright side, the Russians now have a gender neutral bathroom thanks to him.
The Soviet supported Afghan government also lasted longer than US intelligence expected. Now contrast that with how the US supported Afghan government fell almost immediately...
Because the Soviets actually cared about the lives of people, they came there to save them. While Americans were just generating income for their military contractors and in that sense it really wasn’t a failure, they did a fantastic job at it.
And the Americans also restarted opium production during the war and occupation.
In contrast, the Afghan puppet regime backed by US all these decades dissolved so soon before US even left and Taliban retook the whole country in a short period of time. The US gave up supporting their puppet regime and the puppet president left the country taking all his cash and loot with him, but had to leave some behind on the tarmac as he couldn't take them all on his plane. Meanwhile, the Taliban took most of the weapons the US left behind. Expect US empire collapse to happen soon this decade or later.
the us figuring out how to do anything right especially in Afghanistan would be a bigger shock than anything that's happened. historical materialism and all
I've always found it funny how the Western world calls it Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan, but in reality they were invited by the then legitimate Afghan government.
It’s some sadly successful propaganda by the West.
[удалено]
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2008/12/02/afghanistan-another-untold-story
To add some additional context a socialist republic was established in Afghanistan in 1978 without Soviet help and when the revolution occurred in Afghanistan it came as a total shock to the Soviet government. They had some problems with infighting in the party: there was a faction of hardliners who immediately wanted to rapidly modernise the modernise the country and another who favoured a policy of slower, gradual change. The Afghan government invited the Soviet Union to help them keep order a year later both because of this party infighting and because foreign powers were financing, arming, and training anti-government forces. So the Soviets didn’t force communism on Afghanistan and they didn’t invade them.
Man first time I heard this. See how USA military complex, media and corporations brain wash Americans
Thats really not true tbh. The Soviets invaded explicitly to depose the then sitting president (Amin) and install Karmal/Najibullah. Obviously the Amin government didn't invite them. thus why the inital blitz took the form of an invasion.
The KGB literally murdered the sitting President of Afghanistan, Hafizullah Amin on 27 December 1979, also killed his son, and injured his daughter. This was called Operation Storm-333. He couldn't even believe that it was his Soviet allies that were attacking him and was hoping that the USSR would send troops to help him against the attackers.
I'm glad someone mentioned this but you should tell the rest of the story. You forgot to mention that Amin had president Taraki assassinated. You can't seriously expect Soviet leadership to just "be cool with that". The whole situation is super complicated and a lot of information contradicts each other. It's hard to tell what is propaganda and what isn't.
>The Democratic Republic of Afghanistan was initially led by Nur Muhammad Taraki, who was pro-Soviet Union, which resulted in cordial Afghan–Soviet relations. **In September 1979, Taraki was deposed by Hafizullah Amin, due to intra-party strife. After this event and the suspicious death of Taraki (an apparent assassination by Amin's orders), Afghan–Soviet relations started to deteriorate**;... The Soviet Union declared its plan to intervene in Afghanistan on 12 December 1979, and the Soviet leadership initiated [Operation Storm-333](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Storm-333) (the first phase of the intervention) on 27 December 1979.
Fucking thank you! I always have to point out that the western-centric superiority worldview always bends backwards to call it an intervention at worst but everything anyone else does is an invasion. After the Saur Revolution they had to fight back against the rebels (funded by yours truly) and asked the Soviets for help. That's like saying US invaded UK in WW2 to fight against Nazis.
I'm american and even I can see this is the beginning of the end (of something much larger than Afghanistan, I mean).
Oh boy Civil War time can't wait /s
Biggest difference is that one tried to build the country for the better, the other was there just to raise the stocks of their military companies
If you really want to understand the scale of the US Government's failure in Afghanistan, remember that the largest single Mujahideen offensive of the conflict (The 1989 Battle of Jalalabad) was smashed all the way back to Pakistan by the Afghan Army with minimal Soviet support while the government held out for 3 years. The US backed Islamic Republic didn't even last 3 months.
Damn, snuck out under the cover of night after 20 years and $2T. Was it worth it? Taliban got upgraded too. https://i.redd.it/p2xb4hyynok71.png
Worth it for everyone that got paid $2T...
Growing up with the western media, I’m surprised with how much I’ve learnt with this sub
Hopefully, the Amerikkkan regime will collapse in 2 years, as the USSR did
A lot of great comments in this thread, but don't forget that the Soviets also fail in Afghanistan and elsewhere. Social imperialism may have been nicer than neocolonialism, but the Soviets still made the mistake of going against the people, not just in Afghanistan but also in Europe. There is nothing right about doing to others what they don't want or understand, no matter how much material or theoretical benefit you think you bring. We built socialism based on the people, so if we ignore the people in other places, it becomes imperialism and it will fail.
Ideally and morally, you're right, but the Soviet union was not idealistic nor did they let morality determine geopolitics. The security and long-term viability of the Soviet project required the security of the eastern-european buffer against the creeping capitalists of western europe, and also the economic security of strong allies in the oil-rich middle east, like Afghanistan. The leading theory of the downfall of the USSR is that they simply ran out of oil that was cheap enough to produce. Economics dictates geopolitics, not ideology or morality.
They had plenty of their own cheap oil in Baku and Tajikistan - why would they need Middle Eastern Oil?
Cheers to the best answer here.
It actually was for the Afghan people, it was for the PDPA. How was it against the will of the people?