Derek 2.0 Posted February 3, 2016 Report Posted February 3, 2016 Afghanistan for the Russians was very similar to the US/SEATO involvement in South Viet-Nam. Both invited-in by the current government...both compelled to leave for reasons other than defeat on the battlefield. Exactly, though the Soviets limited failures on the battlefield can be attributed to the porous Pakistani border (much like today), and likewise the CIA supplying Stingers forcing the Soviets to alter their own air mobility doctrine, these didn't loose the war for the Soviets. What lost it for them was they ran out of both political and financial capital with the demise of the Soviet Union itself....Glasnost lost the war for them at home, and their failed economy lost the war for them in Afghanistan. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted February 3, 2016 Report Posted February 3, 2016 Exactly, though the Soviets limited failures on the battlefield can be attributed to the porous Pakistani border (much like today), and likewise the CIA supplying Stingers forcing the Soviets to alter their own air mobility doctrine, these didn't loose the war for the Soviets. What lost it for them was they ran out of both political and financial capital with the demise of the Soviet Union itself....Glasnost lost the war for them at home, and their failed economy lost the war for them in Afghanistan. 100%, Derek. Good to 'see' you. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.