re: Watched Rambo III - why was Russia interested in Afghanistan?

FTR, Afghanistan was only part of Reagan's pressure on the USSR. Lots of action in parts of Africa and Central America.

As far as Charlie Wilson, he was the perfect congress critter due he needed no bacon for his district, they just wanted to be left alone by the Feds. So he could vote for bacon in exchange for support

Also, note that libertarian Dana Rohrbacker, as a Reagan aide, played as large or larger role than Charlie. Their gaol was to fund the Norther Alliance, not the Pashtun opium drug lords which the CIA and Dept of State gave money too with little action.

quote:

---

The Soviet defeat by 1988 contributes to the saying “Afghanistan is where empires go to die.” The Brits lost, the Soviets lost, and we lost.

---

By what standard do you say that we lost?

Even if you can find a way to define the U.S. objectives and outcomes in a way to show that the U.S. lost, it will be in no way equivalent to the Soviet experience.

quote:

---

Our defeat will be more total.

They were there for a decade, we’ve been there for twenty years, and we have nothing to show for it.

---

What kind of disinformation is this?

Our Objectives: Disrupt Taliban/Al Quaeda training centers; locate and kill Bin Laden; keep the fight against terrorism “over there”; continue to keep pressure on terror training cells; mollify/stabilize Afghani ruling regimes to establish neutral, if not even pro-western, sentiment.

Goals met? Some were met 100%, others were partial successes.

The word “defeat” is not applicable.

quote:

---

Disrupt Taliban/Al Quaeda training center

---

Didn't really do that, because of the nature of these groups, AQ in particular. The Taliban might even be stronger than they've been since the invasion.

quote:

---

keep the fight against terrorism “over there

---

A massive failure. It was an idiotic vision by Rumsfeld, who just doesn't understand the region.

quote:

---

mollify/stabilize Afghani ruling regimes to establish neutral, if not even pro-western, sentiment.

---

The Afghan government is extremely weak, and the foreign influence in the country is no better than it was in the 70s. Iran, Pakistan, China and India all have some influence there outside of the US. It will continue to be a battleground for a while.

The deal we negotiated in 2020 could have easily been negotiated in 2002. It was an absolute waste of money, time and American lives to be there at all.

You’re describing tactical successes. We spent twenty years mowing the grass.

The Soviets did the same thing.

quote:

---

If you can’t acknowledge that the Soviets and the U.S. had different objectives then this discussion is useless.

---

We had the same objective, building a state.

They wanted to build a communist state.

We wanted to build a western aligned state.

Both missions failed. Because Afghans have no sense of national identity. Identity is ethnic, religious, and tribal.

Geography also doomed our project. One of the reasons Afganistán is so divided, is that it’s physically divided. And so people live in isolation from each other.

If you were creating countries from scratch, you’d actually slice Afganistán in two, on a line running from the SW corner to the NE corner.

And then you’d cut off the tribal districts in Pakistan, and give them to southern Afganistán.

Another reason our project failed, is technology, and the advancements in small arms. Once upon a time, Kabul had a significant firepower advantage over the tribes. Now, it’s insignificant.

What will happen, as we withdraw, is that Afganistán will go back to what it was in 1999. It will be as if we were never there.