[ home / overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / music / 777 / posad / i / a / lgbt / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internets about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Captcha
Tor Only

Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Matrix   IRC Chat   Mumble


File: 1627641854605.jpg ( 188.7 KB , 1200x675 , 9C0608C4-6E46-4AB2-B377-56….jpg )

 No.410783

The PDPA killed tens of thousands, pushed unpopular policies that hurt people, and the USSR waged total war killing 500k to 2m civilians. If you think Maoists and even anarchists being part of the mujahideen in the opposition of that is bad, then that's disgusting. The Mujahijdeen were freedom fighters, not terrorists. A small faction of veterans of the war broke off to oppose the mujahideen government.
U.S., China, Egypt, Pakistan, U.K., and the entire muslim world funded the mujahideen. In fact, most Mujahideen-funding came from private muslim organizations across MENA because their cause was just.
Every military-aged man was Mujahideen in the 1980s. Bin Laden and Omar literally made their own groups after the Soviets left literally to oppose the Mujahideen Islamic state government, helping aid in the fight against the PDPA and the genocidal USSR was good.
>>

 No.410784

>>410783
Look at that man's wholesome face, just give him Afghanistan, he deserves it.
>>

 No.410785

>killed tens of thousands
Compared to hundreds of thousands under the US and British occupation, that’s a huge improvement.
>unpopular policies
>[citacions needed]
Most working infrastructure in afghan today are still Soviet-built.
>the USSR waged total war killing 500k to 2m civilians
>the US backed mujahideen kill no civilians
Maximum retardation.
>>

 No.410789

File: 1627642636710.jpg ( 72.15 KB , 801x1011 , 1625589565223.jpg )

>NOOOOOO THAT DAMN PDPA FIGHTING LITERAL FEUDAL WARLORDS AND TRYING TO ERADICATE ILLITERACY POVERTY BUILDING SCHOOLS AND HOSPITALS FOR PEOPLE THIS IS LITERALLY 1984!!!!!
>>

 No.410793

>>410785
It wasn't tens of thousands. Over a million civilians died

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet%E2%80%93Afghan_War
>>

 No.410798

>>410783
USSR's invasion of Afghanistan wasn't good. That said, Soviet troops weren't genocidal, and whatever claims of gazillions dead are simply stupid. The absolute worst USSR did was putting minefields in mountain paths, which is bad by itself that it came to this, but that's nowhere close to retarded shit USA army, navy and airforce did on the regular.
>>

 No.410799

>>410789
The U.S. would say the exact same thing about bringing civilization to the barbarians. But the barbarians have a way of defeating the "civilized" empires over and over again. Whatever the subjective intentions, it's very easy to fall into a quagmire.
>>

 No.410800

>>410793
>wikipedia

Ah, here we are. USSR wasn't doing "their internationalist duty", as it said, but killing civilians this much? Lol, fuck off. There's like zero memoirs about Soviet troops murdering civilians, zero deliberate events with Soviet troops targeting civilians, and so on. But if you read american propaganda you'll obviously find some "eyewitnesses" reports to the contrary, which contradict all other reports and all data.
>>

 No.410801

>>410783
You are just trying to justify the latest exploit of socialism with chinese characteristics which is siding with the talibans for their stupid fucking silk road
>>

 No.410803

>>410800
Ok say wikipedia is bullshit. Where do you source that the total deaths were "tens of thousands"?

Go ahead and post it. Everywhere claims upwards 500k to millions died in afghan war and Soviets alone claim they lost tens of thousands of soldiers

To me it reads entirely like that poster was downplaying the death to make USSR look better here
>>

 No.410806

>>410800
It's very hard not to kill civilians in a war like that. You can't tell combatant apart from civilian especially when conducting air strikes. Doesn't matter how well-intentioned you are if you barbecued some family "on accident."
>>

 No.410807

>>410799
No, USA comes to replace or subjugate feudal lords with their own guys, while USSR came with trotskyist intentions of building socialism immediately, meaning taking away peasants' property and nationalizing everything, and basically seizing all property in a country by the state/Party. That's entirely different thing, even if it failed.

>>410803
>Everywhere claims

Fuck off, I don't need to disprove unproven bullshit to begin with.
>>

 No.410809

>>410789
>>410785
>>410784
>>410793
>>410798
>>410799
>>410800

I want to be clear: nobody is claiming that the U.S.-backed Mujahideen killed no civilians. In all wars, civilian casualties happen. What matters is how, and why, and how many. The USSR indiscriminately bombed villages and cities.
>Compared to hundreds of thousands under the US and British occupation, that’s a huge improvement.
1. Which occupations are we also talking about? Afghanistan? Neither the US nor UK conflicts killed hundreds of thousands.
>unpopular policies
2. Cancelling UN programs, land reforms, mass murdering dissidents in Pul-e-Charkhi prison, among countless others that I could educate you on.
>Most working infrastructure in afghan today are still Soviet-built.
Your claim about infrastructure is simply not true. The PDPA was only in full power for like 2 years. I would love a citation, lmfao.
>>

 No.410810

>>410807
Yes you do. That poster claimed only tens of thousands died. Soviets alone claimed they lost tens of thousands soldiers. Don't be a total retard
>>

 No.410811

>>410806
Again, USA military has a clause where all civilians in a combat zone are labelled combatants, while USSR had no such bullshit. Most civilian deaths came IIRC from the minefields, and that's horrible and was the result of degradation of Soviet military after Stalin.

>>410810
No, I don't. Wash your brain off western propaganda.
>>

 No.410812

>>410811
>Claim of only tens of thousands dead in entire war when soviets claim they alone lost that many soldiers and get mad when someone says that bullshit

You are an idiot. It's illogical to claim only tens of thousands died and you have nothing to backup besides scream about west. What happened only soviet soldiers died the entire conflict? Use your brain dumbass
>>

 No.410815

File: 1627644148033.png ( 3.2 MB , 2048x1888 , ClipboardImage.png )

>>

 No.410817

>>410815
>stagnate growth
Bet you are a dengist piece of shit
>>

 No.410837

File: 1627646013439.jpg ( 693.63 KB , 2151x1606 , anti soviet warrior.jpg )

>>410783
>Glowies still haven't gotten off of this bullshit narrative.
The Soviet Union invaded to put the Parcham faction back in power after the Khalq faction performed a coup with the CIA's help and was going to go neutral. It had nothing to do with oppressing Muslims.

Claiming to be the victims of genocide seems to be a favorite tactic of Sunni Islamists when they're losing a conflict. They're also spreading some bullshit about a "Sunni genocide" in Syria because the Sunni Islamist militias are getting rekt by Assad.

The Mujahideen Islamists were opportunists taking advantage of the political instability caused by the Soviet intervention. You can't even claim that they were trying to reverse the PDPA policies because Afghanistan was a secularizing monarchy before the PDPA came into power. They were sharks that smelled blood in the water.

There was no meaningful difference between the Taliban, Al Quada and the "good Mujahideen" the US was backing beyond the fact that the "good Mujahideen" were American puppets and maybe that they had more of a taste for "Bacha Bazi" than the Taliban, which outlawed the practice on pain of death. None of them were "freedom fighters", they were fanatical reactionaries.

It's hilarious that people still believe US propaganda surrounding the Soviet-Afghan war decades after it was debunked by history.
>>

 No.410840

>>410799
The only reason US is bad when they say that is because its a cheap propaganda trick that doesn't actually deliver. If US imperialism would really bring about what it claims, then I'd argue it would at least be as worthy of support as the Northern bankers were in their struggle against southern slavers.
>>

 No.410845

>>410799
>muh "civilizing mission"
The PDPA were Afghans, you retard. They predated the Soviet invasion. The monarchy they overthrew was also considered extremely progressive for the time and also pursued secularization. So you can take those crocodile tears about ebil colonialist empires and their "civilizing missions" and shove them up your ass.
>>

 No.410854

>>410837
Do you unironically think the SAUR revolution was funded by the CIA? How delusional are you? You think the khalq's killed Mir Akbar Khyber?
>>

 No.410856

>>410817
>anti-development
bet you're a smelly anarcho-bitch
>>

 No.410858

>>

 No.410861

>>410856
you'll never be black
>>

 No.410865

>>410854
Intelligence documents pointed to Amin working with the CIA.
>>

 No.410869

File: 1627648877032.png ( 127.39 KB , 680x349 , AMERIMUTTS AND YUROFAGS VS….png )

>>410861
lmao keep coping snowroach
>>410858
no u
>>

 No.410870

>>410783
pure retardation, basically us cold war propaganda
fuck off retard
>>

 No.410877

File: 1627649159530.jpg ( 93.65 KB , 1334x750 , RDT_20210707_1619376276184….jpg )

unpopular doesn't mean bad. Against religious fundamentalists any action taken is justified. In fact, razing Afghanistan to the ground is preferrable to giving it to the Taliban. If anything the soviets were not nearly ruthless enough. 2 million killed for the right cause is better than 3 people for the wrong one.
>>

 No.410878

>>410817
>>410856
>>410858
>>410861
>>410865
>>410869
fuck off to /b/
utter shit thread
>>

 No.410880

>>410877
>Uses that logic
>Collapses due to overextension and popular domestic discontent with what amounts to genocidal war
>Oopsie, guess we didn't go far enough
While I share the sentiment that Afghanistan needed to be dragged kicking and screaming into socialism, the opprotunity costs were too high. Best action for Soviets was not to play, maybe cut some deal with China where it becomes their problem and thus doesn't directly concede to US.
>>

 No.410883

>>410880
tbh in the cities the socialists/seculars were popular ,the tribal leaders told the goat herders what to support thus islamism
>>

 No.410885

>>410865
By intelligence documents you mean the word of Soviet leadership to justify and convince the Soviet soldiers and commanders to go through with the assassination.

There's quite literally zero evidence of this outside of soviet accusations to justify ending him.
>>

 No.410887

>>410885
Then why do you think they intervened? Because they were evil commies who wanted to oppress Muslims? The Soviets basically only intervened if a pro-Soviet government looked like it was going neutral or was going to switch sides, otherwise they didn't give a shit.
>>

 No.410889

killing 10.000 islamists to save 10 secularists is a perfectly acceptable ratio tbh. Idgaf if good practices are unpopular and bad practices popular. That's why we have stronger socialist forces like the USSR to force the good policies into power. The entire defense of the mujahideen is basically "they wanted to live under a giga reactionary theocracy". uygha who cares Stockholm syndrome is a thing. If all radicals in history politwly asked the population whether they wanted a revolution, they wouldn't have gotten anywhere.
>>

 No.410892

>>410793
>Wikipedia
Primary sources or gtfo. Only brainlets use that glowsite without reading what it’s quoting.
>>

 No.410894

>>410887
Because they wanted another soviet satellite state in the region. This is widely known.
>>

 No.410895

>>410887
Provide evidence he was "CIA".
>>

 No.410896

>leftism is when you don't invade
>>

 No.410900

This is one helluva shitpost, also the Maoists actually broke off from the mujihadeen proper and fought their own people’s war - which was fairly inconsequential - the mujihadeen were a CIA/Israeli feudal Lord death squad that came to power oj the back of a CIA coup, pushing out the pro soviet leader, hence soviet invasion.

Please get a fact.
>>

 No.410901

>>410894
The government was already pro-Soviet. Amin was just going to go neutral. This was a lie by the Islamist to pretend that they were for national sovereignty or whatever, instead of just being Islamists, which is what they actually were.
>>410895
Never said he was CIA. The USSR had received intelligence reports that Amin had been working with the CIA to come into power, though he thought he was taking them for a ride, but planned on making Afghanistan neutral (which would have effectively given the CIA what they wanted).
>>

 No.410908

>>410887
1. He didn't want to "go neutral", he wanted to be less dependent on the USSR.
2. Yes, the government was pro-Soviet, which is why the USSR didn't want the country to be controlled by non-communists

Amin was literally a stalinist.

>Never said he was CIA

Really? I thought you were the one who said ”Intelligence documents pointed to Amin working with the CIA.”

Anyway, what you said in RE: to No.410895 never happened.
>>

 No.410912

>>410908
The Intel the Soviets had pointed to Amin wanting to move away from the USSR and cozy up to NATO powers.

Or, in other words, go neutral.

And you do realize there's a difference between working with an organization and being in that organization, right?
>>

 No.410918

This is just another post of dengists coping with the fact china is now directly in allegiance with a CIA group again kek
>>

 No.410919

>>410912
>The Intel the Soviets had pointed to Amin wanting to move away from the USSR and cozy up to NATO powers. Or, in other words, go neutral.
There was no evidence of this.
>And you do realize there's a difference between working with an organization and being in that organization, right?
He did neither.
>>

 No.410930

>>

 No.410944

File: 1627652386561.jpg ( 320.53 KB , 1200x800 , E7er9tBX0AEDZol.jpg )

>>410918
The CIA group that was fighting the U.S. for the past 20 years? The "Dengists" who are hiding under your bed are coping because of this? I think the lesson from the Soviet Union in Afghanistan is that you shouldn't do things beyond your ability, because if you do, then in the end you will fail and blow a bunch of resources for no gain. You can send thousands of troops and so on, no matter your intentions, and still fail and that'll be a blow to legitimacy. And there have been many empires which have tasted that in Afghanistan.
>>

 No.410947

>>410918
Socialism and allegiance with the CIA is perfectly compatible
>>

 No.410948

>>410944
the lesson was to nuke pakistan, dipshit
>>

 No.410954

>>410948
Wouldn't matter. You'd still lose.
>>

 No.410959

>>410954
wrong, retard
>>

 No.410978

File: 1627654324914.jpg ( 148.74 KB , 1024x696 , brzezinski-obit-2-jumbo.jpg )

I think the truth is that the U.S. baited the Soviets into their own "Vietnam." Zbigniew Brzezinski – Carter's national security advisor – authorized aid to the Mujahideen in July 1979 before the Soviet intervention. Brzezinski later admitted that the Carter administration had "knowingly increased the probability" that the Soviets would intervene militarily.

Brzezinski then stated:

>"Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter: We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war."
>>

 No.410981

>>410799
you understand that there's a difference between locals fighting to make life better and foreigners coming in to turn you into a resource colony?
>>

 No.410997

>>410783
Soviets were too soft and should just put all locals on re-education camps and move harmful elements to Siberia. The only language these animals know is violence. Taliban makes terror attacks you nuclear bomb entire city. The animal fiddlers will know which side to choose.
>>

 No.411029

>>410997
Can you stop with the falseflags OP? You have already been debunked several times.
>>

 No.411160

>>410809
>The USSR indiscriminately bombed villages and cities.
Proof?
>Afghanistan? Neither the US nor UK conflicts killed hundreds of thousands.
Yes they did, who are you trying to lie to here? The total number of casualties in Afghanistan exceeded 100,000 back in 2019, and that was with the USs clause which doesn't count certain civilian casualties if they are caught in the middle of a US attack. Iraq had more the 200,000 as well.
>2. Cancelling UN programs, land reforms, mass murdering dissidents in Pul-e-Charkhi prison, among countless others that I could educate you on.
What exactly is wring with any of those things save for the alleged execution of dissidents in prison?
>Your claim about infrastructure is simply not true. The PDPA was only in full power for like 2 years. I would love a citation, lmfao.
1978 to 1992 is not 2 years idiot. Soviet infrastructure isn't even a hidden secret, everyone from those who are sympathetic to those who are rabidly anti-communist admit to it.
https://www.rbth.com/international/2016/08/18/5-soviet-infrastructure-projects-that-survived-the-afghan-wars_622105
https://www.rferl.org/a/What_The_Soviets_Got_Right_In_Afghanistan/1958521.html
Radio Free Europe being the obviously rabidly anti-communist one.
>>

 No.411220

sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage sage
>>

 No.411247

jihadists deserve to die
>>

 No.411272

>>410944
>the CIA was fighting for 20 years
You think the CIA would just do that? Just back two sides of a conflict? Yes. Kek, they would, and there are numerous examples. What do you think the American goal in Afghanistan was?
>dengists under the bed
Oh please, right when China moves in and suddenly a load of autists are calling the taliban freedom fighters. You’re fooling nobody.
>>

 No.411301

File: 1627665475003.jpg ( 50.43 KB , 596x819 , 1622611968299-0.jpg )

>pushed unpopular policies that hurt people
Idk if you're new to leftism fed, but land reform is a GOOD thing not a bad one. Git gud, your glow is showing

>If you think Maoists and even anarchists being part of the mujahideen in the opposition of that is bad, then that's disgusting. […] U.S., China, Egypt, Pakistan, U.K., and the entire muslim world funded the mujahideen

We know reactoids side with reactoids, is this supposed to be a gotcha? China chose the wrong side to piss off the soviets every time, Anwar Sadat was a neolib US puppet, and pakistan was a islamist hellhole from the start

>The Mujahijdeen were freedom fighters, not terrorists

Freedom to what, deny women access to schools? So progressive!!

>Bin Laden and Omar literally made their own groups after the Soviets left

Hey boys we did a whoopsie again :(((

Not today CIA. Also: Death to america
>>

 No.411324

File: 1627666902436-0.png ( 256.46 KB , 2396x1120 , screen.png )

File: 1627666902436-1.png ( 6.19 MB , 2186x2200 , ClipboardImage.png )

>>

 No.411345

>>410815
Bro didn't know APL gang was powerful enough to coup people back then
>>

 No.411432

I blame khalqis for being so fucking domatic and ultra they literally could've saved the country and make it a great place but instead they went full autism and fucked everything up
>>

 No.411480

In reality the Soviets didn't learn from Cuban commanders in Angola thus never had any rational doctrine for such theatres, instead the Soviets tried to shoehorn its WWIII doctrine into Afghanistan. You simply not going to get anywhere using large front and deep operations doctrines when you fighting in Afghanistan, they would have also benefited by making Afghanistan a full Warsaw Pact operation so they could get officers from outside the USSR to help brainstorm, for example the NVA of the GDR had better experience in training forging troops.
>>

 No.411557

Reactionary landlords, headchoppers, slavers, drug lords, fat imams with four wives, islamist parasites and stooges of imperialism who kept the Afhgan workers and peasants in ignorance, illiteracy and filth, who burnt down schools and hospitals with weapons given to them by NATO, deserved and indeed still deserve nothing but a swift death, like islamists do today.
https://archive.org/details/the-true-face-of-afghan-counter-revolution

>>411301
Great picture.
>>

 No.411868

>>411160
>1978-1992 is not 2 years
The PDPA was not actually governing until 1992. They were consistently fighting a conflict.
>>

 No.411873

>>411160
>What exactly is wring with any of those things save for the alleged execution of dissidents in prison?
Because the UN programs included literacy programs, the land reforms literally decreased the efficiency and quality of economic output, and murder is bad. What is wrong with you?
>>

 No.411874

>>411160
>Yes they did, who are you trying to lie to here? The total number of casualties in Afghanistan exceeded 100,000 back in 2019, and that was with the USs clause which doesn't count certain civilian casualties if they are caught in the middle of a US attack. Iraq had more the 200,000 as well.
1. Casualties means deaths and INJURIES. The deaths are around 50k since 2001.
2. We aren't talking about Iraq.
>>

 No.411879

File: 1627690332241.jpg ( 55.1 KB , 850x839 , yk5yahsiy5g41.jpg )

>you will never be a soviet soldier killing CIA backed goatfuckers and liberating afghanistan from ignorance and poverty
>>

 No.411881

>>411846
>Literally every source is HRW and Helsinki
>No evidence besides alleged eyewitness reports provided by Helsinki
I don't deny that warcrimes may have occured, but do you really expect me to buy this shit?
>>

 No.411882

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0959378094900035#:~:text=Total%20emissions%20in%20the%20USSR,USA%20per%20unit%20of%20GNP

Leninist nations have done far more damage with their state-owned companies to the environment. It can be empirically proven that leninist nations, historically, were worse polluters per capita.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0959378094900035#:~:text=Total%20emissions%20in%20the%20USSR,USA%20per%20unit%20of%20GNP

This is literally about the USSR in the 80s, not the industrialization 40 years prior. Total emissions in the USSR in 1988 were about 79% of the US total. Considering that the Soviet GNP was only some 54% of that of the USA, this means that the Soviet Union generated 1.5 times more pollution than the USA per unit of GNP.(USER WAS MASSACARED BY SOVIET TROOPS FOR THIS POST)
>>

 No.411883

>>411882
How is this related to afghanistan? You tree hugging faggot.
>>

 No.411886

>>411868
>The PDPA was not actually governing until 1992. They were consistently fighting a conflict.
Infrastructure can still be built during this time anon, the conflict didn't full escalate until later.
>>411874
>1. Casualties means deaths and INJURIES. The deaths are around 50k since 2001.
The deaths are actually near 80,000 if you are to take US estimates at face value, which also don't take into account which casualties later on die from wounds sustained.
>2. We aren't talking about Iraq.
It's related to the topic overall.
>>411882
>Total emissions
What's it per capita?
>>

 No.411925

>>

 No.411932

>>411886
Yeah, but I already know that under the PDPA, the building of infrastructure was pathetic and not of note.
>>411881
I literally provided a primary source in the first link, and then provided other massacres on top to illustrate what the USSR's rules of engagement was like.
>>

 No.411934

>>411886
>The deaths are actually near 80,000 if you are to take US estimates at face value, which also don't take into account which casualties later on die from wounds sustained.

You're just wrong.
>>

 No.411978

The USSR was 100% right to invade. Should've killed all of them tbh to make sure subhumans like OP were never born
>>

 No.412050

>>411932
>Yeah, but I already know that under the PDPA, the building of infrastructure was pathetic and not of note.
Except it wasn't, and even the west admits it wasn't. See >>411160.
>>411932
>I literally provided a primary source in the first link, and then provided other massacres on top to illustrate what the USSR's rules of engagement was like.
The "primary source" are literally the two sources I mentioned.
>>

 No.412057

>>411934
>You're just wrong
<About 241,000 people have been killed in the Afghanistan and Pakistan war zone since 2001. More than 71,000 of those killed have been civilians.
https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/civilians/afghan
And this is with the clauses the US uses and the data made "available".
>>

 No.412078

From what I’ve read, seems to me like the SU was right in seeing that the Afghan communists were generally retards who were going to set their country alight.
>>

 No.412200

Why are you even here then if communism is so evil? Go back to /pol/ reactionary
>>

 No.412283

>>411882
Based mods lmao
>>

 No.412302

if it takes killing most of the population to get rid of the reactionary scum than im all for destroying countries
>>

 No.412408

>>412078
The SU was retarded as well. They did the exact opposite of trying to build a stable government by coup’ing the only competent guy and replace him with their yesman. Cuba and Vietnam were right in following general soviet lines while keeping their leadership from being completely controlled.
The war was justified. But a lot of the unnecessary retardation wasn’t. If the Soviet had truly played their cards right, Afghanistan would be a stable socdem state. That didn’t just immediately collapse with the fall of the USSR.
>>

 No.412472

>>412057
>>412050
idk why you keep bringing up iraq when i dont support the iraq war.
> About 241,000 people have been killed in the Afghanistan and Pakistan war zone since 2001. More than 71,000 of those killed have been civilians.

>https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/civilians/afghan…


>And this is with the clauses the U.S. uses, and the data made "available".

Yes, and? We’re talking about Afghanistan.
>Except it wasn't, and even the west admits it wasn't. See
literally where in this article does it say the PDPA created most the infrastructure
>>

 No.412507

>>412472
>Yes, and? We’re talking about Afghanistan.
This is Afghanistan you idiot. Read it again.
>literally where in this article does it say the PDPA created most the infrastructure
Who here argued they created most of the infrastructure in use today? The argument initially made by the anon earlier in the thread was that most working infrastructure in Afghanistan was Soviet built, which implies for me infrastructure that functions without being in a state of disrepair and possesses no large risk of failing outright.
>>

 No.412560

>>410783
PDPA was correct and their cause was just, also the soviets built up the country, the "brave" mujahedeen completely destroyed any infrastructure.

Goals of the PDPA
>The Main Outlines of the Revolutionary Tasks’ proclaimed the eradication of illiteracy; equality for women; an end to ethnic discrimination; a larger role for the state in the national economy; and the abolition of ‘feudal and pre-feudal relationships’ – code for the power of landowners, traditional leaders, and mullahs, especially in the countryside. As for Islam, when Kryuchkov visited Kabul on a fact-fi nding mission in July 1978, the new President, Taraki, told him to come back in a year, by which time the mosques would be empty.

>A woman was appointed to a top political position for the fi rst time in modern Afghan history. Anakhita Ratebzad (1930–), a doctor by training, was one of four women members of the Afghan parliament in 1965, a founding member of the PDPA, and a member of Parcham.


To get a look at what the people who opposed PDPA believed in, let us look at the Herat revolt here the resistance to the PDPA began.

>He said that the peasants in an outlying village, incensed by a decision of the local Communists to force their daughters to school, rose up, killed the Communists, killed the girls for good measure, and marched on the city.5 Others said that the rising took place on orders from émigrés in Pakistan, who had planned for a countrywide rebellion.


Literally a protest against women's education and an extremely brutal one at that, those who opposed the PDPA were people who believed that women were property and that the words of a paedophile 1200 years ago were the way society should be structured.

Destruction wreaked by the "Brave freedom fighters"

>Th e 40th Army made it clear enough to its soldiers what would happen if they misbehaved. In 1985 they produced a little booklet ‘Th e Life, Habits and Customs of the Peoples of Afghanistan: Rules and Norms of Behaviour for Military Personnel Serving outside their Own Country’.1 Th is described the country and its people, their religion, their fi erce sense of independence, their housing, clothing and food, their customs of mutual hospitality and vendetta, the rituals surrounding birth, marriage, and death. It continued with some simple rules of behaviour: remember that you are a representative of the army and be worthy of your historical mission; know and respect the customs of the local people, even if they do not correspond with your own; be very careful to respect Afghan women; do not interfere with a Muslim at prayer and do not go into a mosque without a very good reason; beware of enemy spies; do not drink water from irrigation canals; do not leave camp or accept hospitality without permission. Th ere were strict injunctions against trading, especially in narcotics. Th e booklet concluded: ‘Soldier, remember! … you are criminally responsible for military crimes under the Criminal Code, whether committed negligently, carelessly, or deliberately.’ Deliberate killing could be punished by up to ten years; the death penalty could be imposed if there were aggravating circumstances, which included being drunk. Robbery with violence and smuggling into the Soviet Union could both be punished by up to ten years in prison.


> At one time the notorious prison in Pul-i Charkhi outside Kabul held two hundred Russian soldiers accused of a variety of off ences against the Afghan population, including murder. By the end of the war over two thousand five hundred Soviet soldiers were serving prison sentences, more than two hundred for crimes of premeditated murder.


>Perhaps it was because of the horrors that followed that the Afghans did not in the long run seem to nurture a grudge against the Russians. Leonid Shebarshin returned to Herat only nine months after the 40th Army had pulled out, expecting to be met with fear, hatred, and hostility. Not a bit of it, his Afghan interlocutors told him: you lived with one lot of feelings while the fighting was going on, but once the war was over you had to forget the bad things that had happened. Th e Russians were not so stand-offi sh as the Americans, who had no interest in Afghanistan itself, and who looked like Martians with their elaborate equipment, their menacing body armour, and their impenetrable Ray-Bans when they briefl y emerged from the high walls behind which they barricaded themselves. The Russians, I was told, had built the elements of industry, whereas now most of the aid money simply ended up in the wrong pockets in the wrong countries. In the Russian time everyone had had work; now things were getting steadily worse. The last Communist president, Najibullah, had been one of the best of Afghanistan’s recent rulers: more popular than Daud, the equal of Zahir Shah. Video recordings of Najibullah’s speeches were being sold round Kabul, with their warnings – which turned out to be true – that there would be civil war if he were overthrown.
>>

 No.412563

>>412560
In summary the Russians and PDPA were right, they should have expanded their base(PDPA) but also ruthlessly crush the mullahs and Islam along with the feudal landlords.
>>

 No.413574

File: 1627763984721.pdf ( 4.17 MB , 197x300 , AFGANTSY THE RUSSIANS IN ….pdf )

>>410783
>The PDPA killed tens of thousands, pushed unpopular policies that hurt people, and the USSR waged total war killing 500k to 2m civilians.
I think this should be prefaced by the fact the Soviets did not order the original coup, nor were they particularly happy when the PDPA seized power. According to Afgantsy, there was actually panic at the Kremlin when it happened as they had a good relationship with Daoud's government.
In the year leading up the invasion, they were doing everything possible to avoid a direct intervention, they did not believe Afghanistan was ready for a revolution. They only decided to intervene after Amin killed their favorite, Taraki, despite a Soviet guarantee to protect him. Amin is the one who committed most of the excesses. He idolized Stalin to a pretty extreme extent and ignored everything Stalin did except for the purges which he tried to replicate. It got so bad that the entire country was thrust into an, at first low level, civil war. That's why the Soviets moved in and killed Amin. Their first objective was to stop the massive purges and unpopular policies, not support them. After Amin was killed, the PDPA took a much more moderate approach which alleviated a lot of the immediate issues, but, at that point, the US and Pak had taken notice and turned a ragtag guerrilla force into a somewhat modern army with modern equipment.
Also, I find that 2m figure incredibly unlikely, almost like it specifically calculated to be higher than the civilian death toll during Vietnam. The Soviet force in Afghanistan was tiny compared to the American force in Vietnam.
>If you think Maoists and even anarchists being part of the mujahideen in the opposition of that is bad, then that's disgusting.
Bro, most of them fucking sucked, not all of them, but groups that received the most funding were often the most violently religious. Hekmatyar cut his teeth throwing acid on women who attended university. They were counter revolutionaries not freedom fighters, the civil war initially began because the PDPA granted women equal rights. The Mujahideen was funded by wealthy Imams and feudal landlords who were pissed their land was being redistributed. Not to mention Wahhabi funding from Saudi by way of Pakistan and the Chinese playing 5d chess.
>In fact, most Mujahideen-funding came from private muslim organizations across MENA because their cause was just.
No it fucking wasn't. They were religious zealots who wanted to maintain the feudal peasant relationship. They wanted women to continue being slaves and the peasants to continue working land that wasn't their own. Again, their funding came from the most reactionary of Gulf leadership and eventually the most reactionary figures within the American Government.
>Every military-aged man was Mujahideen in the 1980s.
Where did you even get this from?
> Bin Laden and Omar literally made their own groups after the Soviets left literally to oppose the Mujahideen Islamic state government
Those groups were created to fight the PDPA Government, not the "mujahideen Islamic state." The PDPA remained in power until the Taliban took Kabul and brutally murdered the popular PDPA president.

I may as well throw this book in. You should read it, It's easily one of the best book written on the subject. Roderick Braitwaite was the UK ambassador to the Soviet Union in the last years of the war, so it's not even tankie propaganda or whatever you'd call it.

Unique IPs: 46

[Return][Catalog][Top][Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / music / 777 / posad / i / a / lgbt / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]
ReturnCatalogTopBottomHome