boroda

[Boroda]

Originally posted by Dago
Tell me then Boroda, tell me of the great Russian victories in Afghanistan.  Tell me that Russia didn't pull out with it's tail between it's legs.  Tell me that your troops weren't continually ambushed and killed.

My best friend served in airborne troops there in 85-87. List of victories is definetly much longer then American combat achevements in last 3 years. Passing through Panjsher galley loosing only 2 (two) soldiers is one of the things that your amateur army will never repeat.

Tail between the legs? Really? Better try to remember how your glorious "fighters for peace and democracy" ran away from Vietnam, and your bellybutton still must be aching. JFYI: Soviet troops were withdrawn because of Gorbachev's strange policy. Entering Afghanistan was a stuidity, but withdrawing was a crime. It brought the same war to Soviet Central-Asian republics, and guess who's peace-keeping force is there now...

About "continually ambushed and killed" - this applies more to American troops there now. My friend was stationed in Kabul, they didn't get "vacations" in the city, but they usually left their quarters without permission, and he doesn't remember any accident when anyone was "ambushed and killed", kidnapped or even treated in an impolite way. Shuravi are still respected people in Afghanistan.

Originally posted by Dago
Then tell me what Russia has been doing in Afghanistan up until the USA came in and kicked the snot outta the Taliban.

 

USA came in and kicked the snot outta the Taliban?! LOL! I thought it was NA troops armed and trained by Russians. While US of A was carefully breeding Taliban and assisting them to get the power - Russians kept supporting field commanders who supported them. I bet you'll never hear anything about it in your brainwashing media. Unfortunately Estel is at the vacation now, you should ask him, he made over 600 combat sorties at Tajik-Afghan border in mid-90s. At that time glorious US of A was making friends with Taliban and even had a Taliban ambassador (just like they had talks with Chechen "ambassador" Akhmadov that is on an international terrorist list and nevertheless have got political asylum in your country).

Originally posted by Dago
Tell me about all the Russian occupiers who must have still be there to greet them, as you must have still had a controlling force there since you had no troubles.

I fail to understand what you meant by this.

USSR withdrew all the troops from Afghan by Feb. 15th 1989. JFYI: Afghani government stood for 3 years after all the assistance from Russian Federation was stopped, while your country was still giving full-scale support to terrorists and gangsters there.

Originally posted by Dago
Please, find some leftover communist propaganda rag from the 70s that tells of the great and glorious victories over the capatalist pigs or filty mongrels.  

Very clever. You are no doubt as wise and clever as Cicero.

Originally posted by Dago
Someday, you will be exposed to more truths than you know existed, more realities than right now you can conceive, and on that day you will be dizzy with confusion and angry with the betrayal you will feel.  I pity you that day, and rejoice in the hope you will see that day.

I am exposed to many "truths" now, and I am open to any source and opinion, while you are stuck in your provincial narrow-minded americentric propaganda. Otherwise you could admit that your policy of supporting terrorism worldwide, that your country still follows, have done no good to nations you fight against as well as to your own people.

[Dago]

When discussing the Soviet/Afghan war, this is what Boroda had to say.  Anyone who paid any attention to the Soviet experience in Afghanistan, and is not a complete idiot, realizes the falacy in his statement.  Ridiculous to the point of awe inspiring.

 

Most of them say that they didn't have such troubles that they see on TV from Iraq  

They didn't have such troubles???  The Russians were chased out of Afghanistan.  The Russians did have troubles with native guerilla fighters.  The Russians did experience ambushes and death.  I never heard of any Afghannis supporting or working with the Russians.

The US military in Iraq has not been chased out of Iraq.  The US military has support of the majority of the population.   The US military is making great improvements in many peoples lives there.  Iraq has now an established government and the police and military security services are growning and improving greatly.

How can Boroda make such a stupid comment comparing the Russian experience in Afghanistan as better than the US experience in Iraq??

BTW, I never said the Mujhadeen were better fighters then the Russian troops.  Pay attention.  It was never about that.


dago

[Boroda]

Instead of a civilized discussion you again stick to one phrase, that is 100% true. Noone of my friends who served "behind the river" remembers any cases of kidnapping Soviet servicemen or accidents when Soviet soldiers or officers were killed in the streets at Kabul or other city.

Your brave armed forces started an unprovoked agressive war against Iraq and now occupy the country, and don't tell me about "government" or "police forces" on "new" Iraq. OTOH Soviet troops in Afghanistan took part in a civil war, on the side of legitimate government, while your country was supporting terrorist groups there, and later did it's best to install a Taliban regime, not recognized by any country except USA and Pakistan.

Soviet Army was not "chased out of Afghanistan". It was a planned retreat ordered by political leadership of USSR. Najibulla's regime lasted for about three years after USSR/RF stopped any assistance. Let's see if current Iraqi collaborators will be able to last for three hours without sitting on American bayonets.

Majority of Afhganis did work with Russians and support them. Even now most of the NA commanders as well as civilian workers can somehow speak Russian. Afghanistan has traditional links with USSR/Russia since 1920s. "Shuravi" ("Soviet") is a word of respect in Afghanistan. OTOH in Iraq I see collaborators who want to join the "police" being blown up at conscription offices almost every day.

Your army has three times more personell in Iraq then Soviet Army had in Afghanistan, and you can not even make it look like you control the situation. Agression against Iraq turned out to be a much worsr political and military failure then Soviet interference in Afghanistan. Your only advantage is that you can withdraw without being afraid of the same war coming across your border, like it happened with USSR in 1989.

Indeed, how can Boroda make such a stupid comment comparing the Russian experience in Afghanistan to the US experience in Iraq??...  

Get real. Stop watching TV and try to develop your own opinoin based on facts, not on your provincial americentric anti-Soviet propaganda.

[Momus--]

Originally posted by Dago

Then tell me what Russia has been doing in Afghanistan up until the USA came in and kicked the snot outta the Taliban.  

dago

Afghanistan is still a basket case and in many provinces the Taliban in all but name are still running the show. And given that the US is largely responsible for inflicting the Islamofascist scourge on that poor benighted country in the 1st place, I'd suggest you either learn about a subject before posting or STFU.

[anonymous]

Originally posted by Momus--
Afghanistan is still a basket case and in many provinces the Taliban in all but name are still running the show. And given that the US is largely responsible for inflicting the Islamofascist scourge on that poor benighted country in the 1st place, I'd suggest you either learn about a subject before posting or STFU.

yeah americas fault again. damned if we do damned if we dont. if wed tried to influence who led afghanistan after soviets leave wed have been imperialists. because us choose to not interfere with anything in afghanistan after soviets pull out now we are responsible because taliban come in after warlords beat each other down trying to take power. and you think america largely repsonsible? saudi pakistan uk and others equally responsible for helping afghanis because they couldnt make it work amongst themselves is no ones fault but afghani leaders. i would seriously consider taking your own advice.

[anonymous]

boroda your analysis of whats going on in afghanistan and iraq right now is not very accurate.

[Dago]

Boroda,

Your misinformation stuns me.  I really do wonder if you actually believe what you are saying?  

I strongly suggest you save some money, buy a ticket to another country, go to their library, do some reading, then, with whatever money you have left, buy a clue.

BTW, there are a number of video clips on the internet showing those Russian troops "not experiencing" any problems. (helicopter shoot down, personel carrier blown up,  soldier crawling away then executed).   Yeah, we know all about how they didn't have any of those problems in Afghanistan.  

Also, if they were just helping out in a civil war  (lol), why did you refer to it as the Russia/Afghan war?

dago

[Boroda]

Originally posted by anonymous
boroda your analysis of whats going on in afghanistan and iraq right now is not very accurate.

I know it

I just want to say that my friends who served "behind the river" find many things they see on TV about Iraq horrible and impossible in Afghanistan in the 80s.

And if we compare Soviet assistance to Afghani government in the 80s to war against soverign state of Iraq - it's absloutely clear that Soviet soldiers were on the right side, while Americans are occupants and the war complies with a definition of "agression" according to UN regulations.

OTOH, just like Soviet Army in Afghanistan - if you leave Iraq now it will literally blow up the whole Middle East and Central Asia

[anonymous]

Originally posted by Boroda
I know it

I just want to say that my friends who served "behind the river" find many things they see on TV about Iraq horrible and impossible in Afghanistan in the 80s.

And if we compare Soviet assistance to Afghani government in the 80s to war against soverign state of Iraq - it's absloutely clear that Soviet soldiers were on the right side, while Americans are occupants and the war complies with a definition of "agression" according to UN regulations.

OTOH, just like Soviet Army in Afghanistan - if you leave Iraq now it will literally blow up the whole Middle East and Central Asia

boroda iraq signed ceasefire in 1991. we had them on the ropes they were running with much of army cut off waiting to be destroyed and we signed ceasefire to prevent further loss of life. that any with arab forces in coalition may have gotten complicated if we drove into iraq. but ceasefire signed by sadaam and he spit in face of us and other for ten years after that. if he signed ceasefire with russia in 1991 and did what he did to us and others russians would have crushed him like a bug in 1993 at latest and it would have been right thing to do.

[Boroda]

Originally posted by Dago
Boroda,

Your misinformation stuns me.  I really do wonder if you actually believe what you are saying?    

Don't you think that I am a little closer to the sources of information about Afghan war? I envy people who have blind faith in some things.

Originally posted by Dago
I strongly suggest you save some money, buy a ticket to another country, go to their library, do some reading, then, with whatever money you have left, buy a clue.

JFYI: even in USSR we had all sorts of Western literature published and availible to public. I doubt that you have an access to any Soviet sources of information on many affairs.

The problem is that there are no serious studies of Afghan war other then your Ministry of Propaganda brainwashing anti-Soviet crap about Rambo.

Originally posted by Dago
BTW, there are a number of video clips on the internet showing those Russian troops "not experiencing" any problems. (helicopter shoot down, personel carrier blown up,  soldier crawling away then executed).   Yeah, we know all about how they didn't have any of those problems in Afghanistan.  

Beautiful. Ignorance a it's best.

JFYI: Russian army fights international terrorists in a Chechen republic, that is a part of Russia for 200 years. Chechen terrorists are supported by organisations like Al Quaeda, different Moslim foundations and some Western governments, US and UK included. The films you mention are the reports and evidence that terrorists have to provide to get further fundings. Just like Afghani snipers who got paid in dollars (from American military budget) for shooting Soviet officers.

Unfortunately your country fights terrorism only in pathetic statements of your president, at the same time giving political asylum to known terrorists, providing them with political and material assistance and openly supporting regimes that host terrorist bases (Georgia).

Originally posted by Dago
Also, if they were just helping out in a civil war  (lol), why did you refer to it as the Russia/Afghan war?

dago

Where did I say anything about "Russia/Afghan war"? This conflict is called in Russia an "Afghan war", or, officialy, "operations of the limited contingent of Soviet troops in Afghanistan" or "international assistance to Afghanistan".

[Boroda]

Originally posted by anonymous
boroda iraq signed ceasefire in 1991. we had them on the ropes they were running with much of army cut off waiting to be destroyed and we signed ceasefire to prevent further loss of life. that any with arab forces in coalition may have gotten complicated if we drove into iraq. but ceasefire signed by sadaam and he spit in face of us and other for ten years after that. if he signed ceasefire with russia in 1991 and did what he did to us and others russians would have crushed him like a bug in 1993 at latest and it would have been right thing to do.

I am sorry, but it's difficult for me to read your posts.

I think that any sane person has to admit that a war against Iraq was an act of agression. Iraq didn't threaten US of A in any way, and it wasn't a state that started the hostilities. Spitting in anyone's face doesn't justify the use of force, so it is an agression according to any international documents. Sorry.

[Boroda]

I am sorry for spelling "aggression" with one "g". Just checked in the dictionary and found that I was wrong writing it as "agression" copying the Russian spelling

[anonymous]

Originally posted by Boroda
I am sorry, but it's difficult for me to read your posts.

I think that any sane person has to admit that a war against Iraq was an act of agression. Iraq didn't threaten US of A in any way, and it wasn't a state that started the hostilities. Spitting in anyone's face doesn't justify the use of force, so it is an agression according to any international documents. Sorry.

my typing sucks. let me try and go slow here and make sense. in 1991 gulf war hostilities ended when coalition offered iraq a cease fire. this was offered when majority of iraqs army was cut off in or near kuwait or getting murdered trying to retreat into iraq. the cease fire was offered to prevent further loss of life. with iraq military no longer a threat to coalition or kuwait the coalition reasoned that killing iraqi soldiers stuck in kuwait or trying to flee into iraq was pointless. the cease fire had many provisions one of them being sadaam allowing full and unrestricted access to un wmd inspection teams so us uk and others could be assured of dismantling of iraq wmd programs and removal of any wmd capability. this provision and many others having to do with iraq not attempting to rearm itself in a manner that made it capable of offensive actions against neighbors were blatantly violated by sadaam for over ten years. the west wanted to avoid another war if possible but they were played for suckers for years. all i am saying is that the attack was not "illegal". sadaam was in clear violation of more than one aspect of a cease fire agreement that he signed on. what i am saying is that if sadaam had been in violation of cease fire granted by russians out of mercy they would have crushed him all the sooner and it would have been right and a wiser decision. all "trying to be nice" accomplished was tens of thousands of iraqis starving or dead during the years sadaam played games and abused oil for food program.

[Boroda]

UN resolutions didn't give any conditions that could allow any military action against Iraq. Any use of force had to be approved by Security Counsil or General Assembly.

Iraq have allowed UN inspectors to check supposed WMD sites.

No WMD were found in Iraq after the occupation.

Cease fire agreement of 1991 doesn't have any relations with American agression. Looks like you repeat an "official" American version that shows you as "brave fighters for peace and democracy", but, as usual, contradicts with reality, international laws and common sence Just as in 1999 criminal war against Yugoslavia - you are an agressor, and there is nothing that can justify your actions It's the case when Charter of the United Nations simply can't be misinterprited.

[Dago]

Iraq didn't threaten US of A in any way,  

Ignoring reality again?

It has been established that Husseins governent was in contact with Al Queda.

It has been shown there were plans to develop nuclear weapons in Iraq.

Iraq did have an extensive WMD program in place that was dismantled because of USA pressure.

Iraq was in direct violation of the peace accords signed that ended Desert Storm and as a result was subject to attack.

Iraq was in violation of multiple UN resolutions

Iraq was in violation of the "Oil for Food" program.

Iraq attempted to assinate a  United States President.

etc etc etc


dago