Follow TV Tropes

Following

Discussion UsefulNotes / SovietInvasionOfAfghanistan

Go To

You will be notified by PM when someone responds to your discussion
Type the word in the image. This goes away if you get known.
If you can't read this one, hit reload for the page.
The next one might be easier to see.
Eilevgmyhren Since: Nov, 2012
Jan 21st 2017 at 11:54:37 AM •••

I recommend that "Operation Cyclone" should be mentioned here - because this is an essential part of the picture. This originated, as one could expect, in the secret meetings of the CIA, the president of the US at the time, Jimmy Carter, and his security advisor, Zbigniev Brzezinsky (a pole with very poor opinions on the Soviet Union). Brzezinsky, more than anyone else, are blamed for the operation, because of his thought of actually training the Mujahedeen. The insurgency in Afghanistan began quite rightly in early 1979, and this is, according to conflcting sources, the reason the Soviets actually were invited in (not unlike the Putin-Assad alliance later on). The upper officials in the Kremlin, however, hesitated, because they were afraid to be bogged down there, and the most hesitant was Brezhnev himself. But he had suffered from two strokes at the time, and was ailing, while some of the younger brass thought they could handle it. That is the reason the Soviet army entered the conflict in december. Thus, one might argue that old Polish Zbig had his plans in order to push the Soviet Union over the egde, and thus destroy the detente from the Ford years.

Edited by Eilevgmyhren Hide / Show Replies
JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
Jan 21st 2017 at 1:11:39 PM •••

Politicians and Secretary of States in the Cold War were prone to lying, exaggeration and bad faith, making Indy Ploy sound like some grand vision or something. Kissinger is one example, Brzezinski is another. Most of the stuff is still classified at CIA so we don't really have a way to objectively assess rumors and self-aggrandizement like that.

It's much better to focus on the facts on the ground and take what is available rather than overestimate the level of agency one actor among others could concievably had had.

Eilevgmyhren Since: Nov, 2012
Jul 24th 2017 at 10:12:18 AM •••

It seems the narration is satisfyingly detailed anyway. Just to give this a perspective, I present an academical study on the subject. It might be of interest, although I am aware of the problems connected to the Ban on Politics issues. http://www.academia.edu/2897792/Operation_Cyclone_1979-1989_A_Brief_Analysis_of_the_U.S._Involvement_in_the_Soviet-Afghan_War

JulianLapostat Since: Feb, 2014
Jul 24th 2017 at 11:10:56 AM •••

I think the focus should be on what the conflict meant for the people of Afghanistan and the USSR's role as an invading and occupying power. Because ultimately the USSR invaded Afghanistan for the same reason they sent tanks to Hungary, Prague and so on. To protect their borders and neighboring states.

Top