Im gonna be honest i dont remember if this is the right comm
this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2025
75 points (98.7% liked)
Slop.
720 readers
467 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What was wrong with the USSR in Afghanistan besides the fact they lost?
Isn't that kind of enough proof that it wasn't the right strategy? Warfare against guerrilla groups armed by the USA in their local territory was a horrible idea.
They could have applied other types of power in the region, and started to do that earlier. There were plenty of people in central Asia who could have been trained as "socialist missionaries" in the decades preceding that for example, bringing gifts and aid to the rural areas of Afghanistan in which the Mujahideen dominated. I'm just making up the example, but my point is that the fact that it wasn't the right strategy is proven by the results.
this kind of sidesteps the moral dimension of the Soviets were there to help a project to improve people's lives and the US was there to grow opium and pretend to revenge 9/11
I'm having a conversation with comrades here. Obviously if I were having a conversation with a lib I'd make a point to spend some minutes talking about the cold war, how it's ultimately the US fault funding and arming radical militias in the area, and how if Afghanistan had been in the area of control of the Soviet Union it would be similar to Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan in terms of development and human rights nowadays.
Bold to assume libs know what those countries are
Agreed! I'm always feeling like comrades don't realize that being 'correct' but losing isn't useful or valuable. Learning from those mistakes is the only way to interact with strategic losses
The Afghan government was already aligned with the soviets, they had a communist government. You are talking as if they were trying to conquer them and that was the wrong strategy. You are talking about a strategy that doesn't make sense given the situation.
Well, the afghan government was also partially propped up by the Soviets.
The soviets lost because the afghan socialists were trying to do atheism in afghanistan. The failure lies with the policies of the afgahn communists, not really the soviet union (well maybe because they didnt correct them enough)
That wasn't the only issue, and the soviets told them to not do that anyway. State atheism is just an easy scapegoat.
Edit: And anyway, if we're going to look at the history of communist movements. Not one has ever managed to maintain a fruitful relationship with religious authorities no matter how many concessions they give. State atheism is a necessity for any real communist movement at some point.
Nothing, necessarily. But the Communist Party of Afghanistan itself had some pretty hostile lines towards the peasantry, which didn't help matters.
war crimes