Originally posted by Edbert1
You may indeed have a point there, the only conflicts the Arabs have won were against the French so perhaps their long line of defeats against western hardware (try 150 to 0 with Migs versus McDonnel-Douglas in Lebannon) were not the result of deficient Soviet equipment.
Of course the Soviet-bloc weapons use by Soviet operators didn't fare so well in afghanistan now did they?
1) 150:0 in Lebanon? I guess you mean 1982? Bekaa valley? According to Soviet data - Syrian air force did much better then that

21s as a bait and 23ML as a long-range killers vs Jewish F-15s - by modest estimations it was at least one 21 for one F-15. 150:0 is probably right only if you speak about initial strike against Syrian airfields.
2) Israeli propaganda never mentions losses from Soviet SAMs in 1982. USSR sent several regiments (including conscripted personell) to Syria in 1982, and their tactics is in PVO learning books now. They didn't invent anything, my Uncle said that they worked mostly on manual tracking from ambushes in Vietnam. Uncle was a targeting officer on S-75 in Vietnam, 4 confirmed kills, got severely wounded by one of the first HARMs.
3) I am on Israeli side now. They are the only nation that completley supports Russia in Chechnya.
4) In Afghanistan USSR did pretty well, withdrawal in 1989 was only a political decision, in fact - a crime.
5) In 2001 Russia sent lots of hardware to Northern Alliance, armour, small arms, etc, NA commanders wanted it badly, so we had to install two pontoon bridges across Pianj river on the border line. AFAIK it never reached Western media.