danger/u/
Trump defends Soviet Union's 1979 invasion of Afghanistan

| "Russia used to be the Soviet Union. Afghanistan made it Russia because they went bankrupt fighting in Afghanistan. Russia. So you take a look at other countries. Pakistan is there. They should be fighting. … But Russia should be fighting. The reason Russia was in, in Afghanistan was because terrorists were going into Russia. They were right to be there. The problem is it was a tough fight. And literally they went bankrupt.


| They went into being called Russia again as opposed to the Soviet Union."

The Wall Street Journal editorial board reacted strongly to Trump's comments in an op-ed Friday: "Right to be there? We cannot recall a more absurd misstatement of history by an American President. The Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan with three divisions in December 1979 to prop up a fellow communist government."



|
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/03/politics/trump-cabinet-meeting-afghanistan-soviet-union/index.html


| >The reason Russia was in, in Afghanistan was because terrorists were going into Russia.
That's historically false...
>They were right to be there.
That's arguable...
>The problem is it was a tough fight.
Before the post-soviet islamophobia we know from todays right-wingers, islamists were welcomed allies against everything that was considered to be "communist". A Certain Intelligence Agency played a prominent role supporting radical islamists. Better allahu-akbar than red, huh?


| >>519873
>played a prominent role in supporting radical islamists
Oh you could at least have given the name of the leader of that group.
One Osama Bin Ladin, the name may be vaguely familiar to some people.


| Among others. He wasnt the only one. No real reason to explicitly focus on him oyher than the shock value of it.


| >>519993
Osama Bin Laden was never the leader of the CIA...


| They played many roles in order to stop reds. Rumor has it the Khmer Rouge were, ironically, formed because king Norodom Sihanouk had very obvious commie leanings. Eventually however, it became a movement of it's own and ruined the country it was in. Same thing probs happened to Al-Qaeda.


| >>520207
The khmer rouge were supported by the USA as a revenge on the vietnamese, that liberated cambodia from Pol-Pots mad stone-age communism. Most anticommunists were (and still are) zealous fundamentalists that rather wipe out the population of a whole country to "stop the red". Most of this "reds" were in fact anti-colonialist, nationalist liberation movements that eventually became economical and technological development dictatorships like in russia, china and vietnam.


| >>520384

Pol Pot is the leader of the Khmer Rouge, dipshit. Where the fuck did you get your history from?

You must be talking about the Khmer Issarak, the og anti-colonial anti-communist movement, before being involved with the Viet Minh.

The KR was a part of the KI, but defected because many Cambodians really hate the Vietnamese. The US then indirectly supported them in hopes that the Viets won't have total domination.

~sincerely, a Cambodian.


| >>520384
Also, you can say what you want about it actually being 'fascism', but fact of the matter is, is that the poorer were manipulated into this situation by bitter idealogues who dropped out from their overseas education under the banner of 'communism'. So far, the only ones willing to wipe out their own population are these 'misguided' lunatics.


| >>520410
In never doubt Pol Pot was the leader of the khmer rouge. I was talking about the communists vietnams intervention in 1978, where they could liberate cambodia from the khmer rouge. They had to flee in the jungle and fought a guerilla warfare against the vietnamese "occupants" (in fact liberators) whereat the USA with their anti-communist zeal and also revanchism supported the stone-age communist khmer rouge to pay back the Vietnamese for their resistance to the USA.


| >>520410
>because many Cambodians really hate the Vietnamese.
Yeah, they hate so much that they married, just like my parents.

~sincerely, a german of cambodian-vietnamese origin.


| >>520445
There are exceptions. You live in Germany, so you obviously don't know that the xenophobia in Cambodia. I've had to sit back and listen as my relatives tell me to be careful of my Cambodia-born Vietnamese friend because 'they remember their blood' or the fisherman because 'he's a double agent'.
And iirc a couple of years ago people lynched a Vietnamese couple when they got in a car accident.
Nowadays however people are more worried about the Chinese.


| Still, I must say the history of Vietnamese hate has gone very long, since when the Ayutthaya and the Dai Viet were spitroasting the Angkor Empire from both ends.
Hell, some people, even the old, have been excusing Pol Pot's crimes because he also hated Viets.
Oh, and this has been written off history, but there is the Blood River during the Lon Nol regime, where people were putting the Vietnamese on stakes and floated them on rafts down the Mekong to South Vietnam as a warning.


| >>520442
I will concede to your point. The US seems to love to make idiots rise up and ruin their own countries. You'd think they'd stop but nope, surprise Arab Spring.
Many here are still pretty nationalistic, continuing to accuse the Viets as simply taking the opportunity to finally make Cambodia their territory, something I agree (they've been buying 99 year concessions on many areas).


| >>520452
>Hell, some people, even the old, have been excusing Pol Pot's crimes because he also hated Viets.
Well, I know this kind of bias from old people from soviet-russia (who love the viets^^). They mostly are glad that the soviet union is over but at the same time they sympathize with stalin (I even once saw an icone).
>when the Ayutthaya and the Dai Viet were spitroasting the Angkor Empire
It's hard to imagine this is still a thing. I don't know anyone who lived back then...


| >>520524
>They mostly are glad that the soviet union is over but at the same time they sympathize with stalin (I even once saw an icone).
I think it was either a meme or an act of idiocy. Although in russia people are conflicted about Stalin, i don't think that the church would approve it, knowing how many religious buildings were demolished or used as warehouses during his reign


| >>520600
>i don't think that the church would approve it
Even thought the church gains back influence in russia, I doubt the majority had issues with how the soviets treated them back then. Capitalism may has a demand for some religious opium and religious fundamentalists (to channel its inner contradictions) - the majority of people will still prefer warehouses over churches.

Total number of posts: 19, last modified on: Sat Jan 1 00:00:00 1547137307

This thread is closed.