US facing Soviet-style defeat in Afghanistan: Hekmatyar

thenews ^ | January 24, 2007 | na

[CJ Wolf]

Bingo

[WoofDog123]

i am under the impression that 'afghanistan' is not a place so much to be conquered as it is a place to put quasi-friendly tribes in nominal control of various territories who will not allow a return to export of terrorism. Some parts of it are so geographically disconnected from the rest of the world that that is the only possible thing to hope for.

Opium exports, on the other hand, appear to have improved (increased) post-taliban from what I have read.

[spetznaz]

It would have collapsed had they simply left, however Afghanistan wouldn't have been the defeat it was for the Russians either. I'd bet that if the Soviet leadership had a functioning crystal ball, and looked into the future to see what was set to happen, then they would definitely have left Afghanistan. They would have seen that adding such a nation ('place' is a better term)to their orbit wasn't worth the cost. And the thing is it is far easier to win a war than to occupy a nation (eg take the Ethiopian-Somalia scenario ....Ethiopia had, and will continue to, whoop the a$$e$ of the Islamic courts. However if they decide to stay in Somalia (which they said they will not) then you'd see the situation start to change as the cowardly Somalis resort to terrorist style attacks (although the Ethiopians are not as PC as we are, thus I think they would hit back and hit hard).

Now, the Soviet Union would still have collapsed even if they had never set foot in Afghanistan, but I think it might have taken longer and happened (for what its worth) with greater 'dignity.'

[dighton]

The United States faces a Soviet-style humiliation in Afghanistan, a fugitive Afghan warlord claimed . . .

Someone tell him that hash is meant for export, not personal consumption.

[dr_who_2]

Will the pared-down Soviet Union succeed in Chechnya?