If you wanted to fight for the Soviet Union and sustain them and their military goals, you should have, you could have served communism then and still can, but it is too late for you to fight to preserve the Soviet Union.
Keeping the Soviet Union together is a lot over the top. But it seems to me Russia should have remained PO’ed at Afghanistan (because of all the casualties they took) by the time we decided to start kicking Afghan butts, and should have been a lot more help in cleaning out the Taliban and al Quida just for revenge. The Soviets were trying to keep a lid on that mess, which may well be the only halfway positive thing they’d ever done.
But after the fall, they just shrank to being reactionaries, merely resisting the US at every turn, mindless of any central foreign policy philosophy. Sort of like liberals, who think the Taliban is just great so long as they’re killing Americans. They don’t understand that if there was a world-wide Caliphate the godless liberals would be the first against the wall.
I had older friends talk about what a carphole Viet Nam is, but that country has a lot more going for it than just about any of the ‘Stans.
You completely miss my point. By covertly assisting the Soviets and NOT helping the mujahedin in the 1980s, we could've forestalled the rise of radical islam in that area. As for "serving communism," did allying with Stalin in WWII do the same?
I'm talking strategy here -- playing one enemy against another -- not cozying up to a system that is anathema to our own. Open your eyes and see we're in this sh*t neck deep with the mohammedans over there as a result of our past actions, in case you haven't noticed.