“In 1991, curiously enough, after the Soviet debacle in Afghanistan, Russians under Michael Gorbachev supported Bush the Elder’s western coalition in Gulf War I.”
You believe that? I sure as hell don’t!
Gorbachev’s Soviet Union was broke. It was fiscally defeated. It was simply easier to proclaim Perestroika than admit defeat.
The Russian diplomats and military advisers were shuttling weekly to Baghdad to give advice and intel for maximizing Coalition casualties. Even tho the Iraqi air force and air defense was never developed to oppose Western air power they knew enough about it and its systems to significantly oppose it and reduce its effects.
The Russians realized there were two sides in the war and played both to obtain their goals. Minimize Iraqi destruction and maximize coalition casualties. WhTF do you think gave the Iraqis satellite-based targeting solutions for their Scuds? You think those were INS-based range and bearing shots? And I KNOW KGB provided all kinds of support from 2003 onwards. Even bumped into one of their 3-man teams in BIAP heading south to Basrah weeks before the EFPs started being used there.
No, Russians/KGB were deep and dirty in basically all Iraq operations since the 1970s including the Iran war (atheist KGB protege vs. deist Khomeini.
quoting BJK: “In 1991, curiously enough, after the Soviet debacle in Afghanistan, Russians under Michael Gorbachev supported Bush the Elder’s western coalition in Gulf War I."
Justa: "You believe that? I sure as hell don’t!...
"...No, Russians/KGB were deep and dirty in basically all Iraq operations since the 1970s including the Iran war (atheist KGB protege vs. deist Khomeini."
Thanks for educating me, I should have said something like "Gorbachev didn't publicly oppose Gulf War I", leaving room for your suggestions that the Old Soviet KGB was still doing its dirty-work behind the scenes, as always.
What's curious to me is that our pro-Russian propaganda repeaters here have also adopted the stance that:
- Gulf War I = good
- Gulf War II = bad
- Every other NATO or US action = bad
Thus, aligning their views with the public stances of Gorbachev and Putin, as opposed to alleged American "neo-cons".
All of this alleged NATO bad behavior is then claimed to morally & legally justify, or at least "normalize" & enable, Vlad the Invader's "special military operations" in Ukraine.
Such arguments are given weight by Donald Trump's political opposition to the Bushes and his strategic dislike of "war mongers", "nation building" and "globalists", though Trump himself does not use the term "neo-conservatives".
I suppose he still wants their votes and so doesn't mock them as such directly.
Unlike our pro-Russian repeaters here who have no concerns for anything except shutting down American support for Russkiy Mir's victims.
