Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Active ]
[ Login ]
Log-in to remove these advertisements.

The Red Army and the Afghanistan War

POST REPLY
MoX
[+-]
Soviet cogitations: 62
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 27 Feb 2005, 14:24
Pioneer
Post 23 Nov 2005, 19:41
LOOOL what about oil ? Nothing !

Remeber that Military industry need wars to support the national economy ...

They produce bombs, they destroy houses, and then, american compagny build a brand new iraq ... this is good for economy, because since Cold war is over, both Russia and USA got an over-sized military complex.

For exemple, in the 80's, France planned to buy 1200 Leclerc, then in the 90's, only 400 ! So Tank Factory (GIAT industrie) got a lot of economical problems, I think this happend in USA too, so they need to fight against a new kind of fear, Rogue State ... this can justify high cost military programms, it's a bit to complicate for me to explain, but remember, Capitalist society are better with fear.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2820
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 16 Feb 2005, 02:51
Party Bureaucrat
Post 24 Nov 2005, 00:29
Quote:
The Soviets knew that the communist Afghani government wouldn't last long without their help, but they left anyway, partially because of the internal dissent that


==In reality, Afghani communist government actually out lived Soviet Union, and idn't complete collapse until 1992.
Image
Soviet cogitations: 44
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 17 Nov 2005, 23:56
Unperson
Post 24 Nov 2005, 02:57
Roy wrote:
==In reality, Afghani communist government actually out lived Soviet Union, and idn't complete collapse until 1992.


Quoted for truth.

In complete reality, the USSR's military performed exceptionally well given circumstances. In the beginning of the so-called "war" the casualties were as little as a man per three days. A good ratio compared to current American-Iraq occupation statistics.

Also, Afghanistan, during the time of the Russian "war" was particularly built up in infrastructure and industry, thanks to Soviet aid. Kabul was actually a splendid city under the Socialist government which was comprised of a palace even, which the Red Army eventually used as the army HQ. So, at this level one could argue that Iraq and Afghanistan of the 1980s were on the same level or at least approaching it in progression. The Soviet Union had done good against the Afghan insurgents and resistors, almost to an extent of over a million Afghan rebels were put to death, whilst only losing at most fifteen thousand troops. However, if we are to look at the American casualty number, we can see that it has already exceeded the very worst year of Soviet casualties, around 2100 soldiers. Both superpowers had the same objective-to occupy the country, with small variants (ie: the Soviet Union was defending a legitimate government, USA is replacing one with another). Another factor to be seen is the United State's involvement with the Afghan-Russo war, in which it supplied the Afghan rebels with weapons such as the "Stinger" missile, and small arms, like the M-16 rifle. To this end we can also see, that other than what foreign Arab resistors bring to the Iraq war, the Iraqis have no foreign aid whatsoever. Putting them at a greater disadvantage. Yet, American casualties still exceed the worst year of Soviet casualties in ten years of fighting.

To this end, I would have to say that the USSR is more efficient in dealing with insurgency and rampant rebellion than the United States. Partially due to the emphasis on small arms, light and dependable equipment and to some varying degree better training.

soviet78 wrote:
1. The United States did not go to Iraq for oil


Mostly for the water I'd say, a water source for Israel equates to thickly lined American pockets.

Quote:
2. The Soviets went because they felt they had much to lose politically and geopolitically if the communist government of Afghanistan (established before the Soviet intervention) collapsed.


With all due fairness to the PDAP, they did hail the Soviet Union for increasing amounts of military aid, in which the Soviets honoured.

Quote:
In 2003 before the war oil prices were sitting at $25 US a barrel. The estimated cost of the war then was $50 billion. Today this sits at around $200 billion. Iraqi oil production sat around 2 million barrels a day prior to the war (today its slightly less than that). To buy Iraqi oil for one year at 2 million barrels a day would cost $18 250 000 000. Accepting the eventual goal of turning the oil over to the Iraqi government, it simply cannot be argued that oil was the main reason for war. If the occupation is costing $9 billion a month, and Iraq is exporting only 2 million barrels or less, the US is paying $150 a barrel for Iraqi oil. Consider also the risks that the US faced of destabilizing the Middle East, of bankrupting their economy, and of allienating their allies. Oil alone cannot explain US motivations for going to war (unless you accept that the Bush administration was completely and thoroughly coerced and influenced by oil companies, which may be a plausible, although unlikely argument).


You must remember that the leaders of the United States will not remain so forever, so why would they be concerned with the economy, when it is much more simple to profit short-term to retire to a distant Pacific isle? If George W. Bush has stocks in an oil company, which is deeply inbedded within Iraqi oil wells generating revenue, then the company will still gain profit (think about it, they would not be there unless it was so). So, when the revenue increases and stocks become more profitable, what is to stop George W. Bush to simply sell his stocks prior to his next election? Even if he loses the next presidential election he is still to gain huge monetary assets, as will all his lackeys. Besides, why should the reigning American leaders care what happens to the United States after their departure? Why not make a quick dollar and dissappear into the general wealthy class after you are ousted? Considering the state of both the outstretched American economy and the Republican Party it is doubtful that it will reign victorious in another federal election, so how is it hard to believe that it is individual gain and not the American economy that is in the ruling classes best interests?

With Socialist greetings:

-GF
Soviet cogitations: 132
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 21 Dec 2005, 17:31
Pioneer
Post 26 Dec 2005, 01:11
The Soviets set out to stabilize the Afghan government, and they did just that. Troops moved in, kicked out the rebels and stabilized the central government. But the problem was that they got only 20% of it. The rest scattered all over, almost impossible to find and secure. Fighters for a couple key reasons deterred the soviet military. One, the soviet troops had no training in mountain war combat. They were not used to it. This also meant that their huge heavy vehicles were able to manoeuvre or traverse this landscape. So the feel of their full force was never established. But did this little conflict result in the dispersion of the Soviet Union? No.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 344
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 15 May 2005, 17:11
Komsomol
Post 28 Jan 2006, 17:48
The USSR performed much better in Afghanistan than the US did in Vietnam, they lost just 13000 men, compared to the 70000 americans in Vietnam.
And they stabilized Afghanistan, keeping the Taliban and other fundamentalist Islamic movements at bay
Image
Soviet cogitations: 3
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 05 Dec 2010, 11:40
New Comrade (Say hi & be nice to me!)
Post 06 Dec 2010, 11:03
hi every one i am student of university and study political geography im verey interestung to study about soviet afghan war but i have a main and important question about this great war that how many casualitiies and losses of soviet in segment of their nationalities and former-republics of soviet

how many armenians?
how many azeries?
how many tajiks?
how many uzbeks?
how many moldovans?
how many ukranians?
how many turkmens?
how many gherghiz?
how many kazaghs?
how many russians?
how many people from krasnoyarss ekaterinborg chelbiansk grozny tatarestan.....?
can you tell me this statistics and informations ?
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 381
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 15 Nov 2010, 16:48
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 12 Dec 2010, 06:20
The war in afghanistan is the reflecetion of CIA or MI6 agent gorbacchev's Frag

During the war Soviet Minorities were pushed in the hardest parts while Russians would do less risky jobs, but in the end the afghan war was worse and more soiling to the soviet image than anything. In the Afghan war years was the mutation of the soviet union from a superpower with a high idealogy to simply a superpower.
anyhow the war wasn't popular in armenia and not alot of armenians fought it, i don't know about it in the other republics

One thing i can declare easily: If my country didn't do it, the Americans never will
Image

In the Soviet Union you destroy free-market, In America free-market destroys you
Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 11879
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2009, 23:17
Philosophized
Post 12 Dec 2010, 11:09
Quote:
During the war Soviet Minorities were pushed in the hardest parts while Russians would do less risky jobs

Source this please.
Soviet cogitations: 2407
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Nov 2003, 13:17
Ideology: Other
Forum Commissar
Post 13 Dec 2010, 03:09
What about those from the Baltics, such as Lithuanians, Latvians or Estonians? Were they trusted to serve in Afghanistan and did they also do more rough tasks?
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 381
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 15 Nov 2010, 16:48
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 13 Dec 2010, 03:42
When i say hard part i mean the most dangerous position were secured by minorities

as for the source, go to maplewood avenue LA ask my uncle personally
Image

In the Soviet Union you destroy free-market, In America free-market destroys you
Soviet cogitations: 3
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 05 Dec 2010, 11:40
New Comrade (Say hi & be nice to me!)
Post 13 Dec 2010, 13:07
hi comrades
i search the russian language website and find this information about soviet casualties in Afghanistan
According to some data, in Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989 killed:
Russian - 6888
Ukrainians - 2378
Belarusians - 613
Uzbeks - 1086
Kazakhs - 362
Turkmens - 263
Tajiks - 236
Kirghiz - 102
Georgians - 81
Azerbaijanis - 195
Armenians - 95
Moldovans - 194
Lithuanians - 57
Letts - 23
Estonians - 15
Abkhazians - 6
Balkars - 9
Bashkir - 98
Buryat - 4
Jews - 7
Ingush - 12
Kabardian - 25
Kalmyks - 22
Karakalpaks - 5
Karels - 6
Komi - 16
Mari - 49
Mordovians - 66
peoples of Dagestan - 101
Ossetians - 30
Tatars - 442
Tuva - 4
Udmurtia - 22
Chechens - 35
Yakut - 1
other nations and nationalities - 168

Loss by age:
to 20 years - 8655, including 2 officers
20-25 years - 3557, including 842 officers
25-30 years - 878, including 640 officers
30-40 - 573, including 396 officers
More than 40 years - 170, including 99 officers. Publicity. - 1991
sourse: http://phorum.bratishka.ru/viewtopic.php?t=1076
Soviet cogitations: 2407
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Nov 2003, 13:17
Ideology: Other
Forum Commissar
Post 13 Dec 2010, 17:31
Quote:
When i say hard part i mean the most dangerous position were secured by minorities

as for the source, go to maplewood avenue LA ask my uncle personally


Oh I see. Thank you for this information. Sadly I cannot go to your uncle as he is in America but would be fascinated by what he has to say.

Navid, from that list it is quite surprising the number of Baltics killed in that war. From my understanding the Soviets never trusted their Baltic republics because they were vehemently nationalistic so it is surprising they sent them to Afghanistan to fight.

I read a very interesting article about how many Russian soldiers switched sides, converted to Islam and fought with the Mujahideen.
Soviet cogitations: 3
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 05 Dec 2010, 11:40
New Comrade (Say hi & be nice to me!)
Post 18 Dec 2010, 06:02
Political Interest
hi please help me to that very interesting article you read about how many Russian soldiers switched sides, converted to Islam and fought with the Mujahideen.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 716
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 04 Aug 2007, 23:25
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 17 Jan 2011, 12:54
The Soviets lost the Afghan War because of the US massive aid to the mujahedeen terrorists.
Even after the collapse of the USSR, the only reason why the mujahedeen ultimately won the war is American aid, nothing else.
Image

"Communism is more about love for mankind than about politics."
Me
Soviet cogitations: 1
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 22 Mar 2011, 05:57
New Comrade (Say hi & be nice to me!)
Post 22 Mar 2011, 06:56
YA byl pilotom Mi 24 . Amerika ne byla zhopy . Soedinennye Shtaty vynuzhdeny raketnoĭ nakopleniya my poluchili takoĭ bolʹshoĭ Soyuz raspalsya . ot vesa

Englaskie
I was pilot of MI 24. no Amerika was assholes. The United States forced Missile buildup we got so big the union collapsed. from weight
(the ruskie yaziek up top for friend in Nhisni-Novgarad. I have people that dont speak ehnglish . That at top is not cyrillik for russian speaker. I wish you support the russian alfebet so russians can post on site about My homeland and the land i fight for in 1986.
As an American since 1993 citizen in 1998. i can deal with no russian on russiya history site. Why not make for Russians that dont speake english too? Not all people live in Stant peterburg or moskva
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 5137
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Nov 2007, 06:31
Embalmed
Post 23 Mar 2011, 14:30
The moderators/administrators don't speak russian so they can't enforce the rules if someone speaking russian breaks them. It's unfortunate because we need more international comrades like you.
Image
Soviet cogitations: 2407
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Nov 2003, 13:17
Ideology: Other
Forum Commissar
Post 19 Sep 2011, 08:21
With that list of nationalities who served in the war, were those people actually of the ethnicity of the country listed or were they Russians living in different Soviet republics?
Soviet cogitations: 4
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 09 Dec 2011, 18:55
New Comrade (Say hi & be nice to me!)
Post 09 Dec 2011, 22:43
The Soviet-Afghan War was justified, The Democratic Republic of Afghanistan begin to take shape after The Saur Revolution.
The political party that founded The Democratic Republic of Afghanistan was named "PDPA" (People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan)

The PDPA was Pro- Poor and Pro-Farmer with many Socialist ideas, they reformed the Education system. Giving Education to all Citizens
not just the men. They gave farmers more land rights, Also they OUTLAWED forced Marriages and raised the age of Marriage.
Women were free to choose what they wanted the wear.

After the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan was founded, the Islamic fundamentalists didn't like the changes because it went
against the repressive force of Islam. This group called the "Mujahideen" wanted to reclaim Afghanistan and declare it as a Islamic State.
This is when the PDPA asked the Soviet Union for help fighting against the fundamentalists.

After the Soviet Union decided to help The Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. The US called it an un-justified war. The US along with many other Western countries provided Billions of dollars to the Mujahideen to fight against the PDPA and The Soviet Union. The Untied States funded TERRORISTS like Bin Laden during the War. With The help of the USA, the Mujahideen made the Soviet Union end their war
(Almost 10 years) Soon after the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan turned into The Islamic State of Afghanistan, the reforms on Education and Women's rights were over turned and replaced with Sharia Law.

Now in the year 2001 the US and other Western countries decided to invade The Islamic State of Afghanistan to try to defeat
the Mujahideen and its allies. I don't understand why the US would support the Mujahideen and then a few years later
they are fighting against them.

I really do believe that if the US backed the Soviet Union, The Democratic Republic of Afghanistan would have won
against the Mujahideen, and the whole middle east would be a better place then it is now.



Thanks for reading this long post, but I pretty much covered everything.
Pug
[+-]
Soviet cogitations: 74
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2011, 22:25
Pioneer
Post 03 Jan 2012, 21:45
Are any here any people who reads russans books?
I recommend you to read the Memoirs of Igor frolov, the flight techician of Ni-8 helicopter. Hi has very good sense of humor

And of course, he'd been to Afganistan.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 301
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Jun 2004, 17:01
Komsomol
Post 27 Apr 2012, 14:37
Quote:
The invincible Red Army wasnt able to defeat resistance fighters.


Well in a way they didn't need to.

They were able to maintain control of 80-90% of the country. Like now, the armed gangs just stayed in the mountains and occasionally came out to raid. That's it.
Image
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.