[WOSG]

Several lessons: 1. Without Afghanistan, Gorbachev wouldnt have felt the need to revamp Soviet policies. Glasnost and the ultimate breakup of the Soviet Union and the End of the Cold War was a consequence.

2. Reagan was responsible for the above through his various actions, supporting Solidarity in Poland and supporting Afghan rebels, etc.

3. We used Stalin to help us defeat Hitler. Then we had to face Stalin. We used Islamic fundementalists to defeat the Soviet Union.

4. Given the above, it is clear that even if we accept the FALSE PREMISE that support Afghan rebels led inevitably to Afghanistan becoming a terrorist sponsoring state, it was a bargain that was well worth it.

5. The premise is false, when it become clear that the US was supporting generals like Massoud, the man Bin Laden assasinated just prior to the WTC bombing. The Taliban were the creatures of Pakistan, not the US, and were created on Clinton's watch, not Reagan's.

[meenie]

I can buy the theory that the US was looking out for its cold war interests by backing the Afghan resistance. The question that I have never had answered was how it was in our interest to back the KLA in Kosovo and the terrorism they committed against the Serbs with our backing. Does anyone have any ideas why?

[wonders]

Actually, while Afghanistan was rather demoralising to the USSR, it was economics (esp. low oil prices) which brought the USSR down, not a li'l ol' war in Afghanistan.

[madrussian]

Several lessons: 1. Without Afghanistan, Gorbachev wouldnt have felt the need to revamp Soviet policies. Glasnost and the ultimate breakup of the Soviet Union and the End of the Cold War was a consequence.

This is a "what-if" scenario, which is not a valid analysis tool. Economy may have been torpedoed by lower oil prices and continuing deterioration in command economy. Decay really started with Khruschev, who formulated rising living standards as the goal, and continued with Brezhnev.