Taliban vs. USSR

[J. J.]

In terms of what was known in the early 1980’s, our efforts in Afghanistan were a logical response to Soviet imperialism.  That is the point I ws making.

Sure, I agree; Soviets were our enemies, were obviously supposed to be working against them.

But tend to go with the line of thought that if Afghanistan was allowed to become a puppet-state, we'd have largely curbed the rise of Wahhabism into the mainstream in these countries in the long-run.

Prevented  Embassy bombings, first WTC attack, U.S.S. Cole, 9/11, thus preventing Iraq-Afghanistan.

Well, the problem with this logic is that you are only looking at one set of events.  The Soviet Union might well still be in existence without our aiding the mujaheddin.  This still strong empire could have dominated Pakistan and Iran.  We could be confronting an enemy armed with nuclear weapons and a mass delivery system; it very possibly could have been used. 

That's far worse than 9/11.

[J. J.]

Does anyone honestly believe the Soviet Union could've lasted through the 90s?

Yes, with different people in the leadership.  Communism was faultering in the mid-1950's, but that didn't stop it from expanding.

Beria, before he was killed, advocated a change to a capitalist system in 1953.

In the period from 1970-80, the USSR was expanding its influence worldwide.  Internally weaker than the US, it was a match, and for a few years superior, externally.

[J. J.]

The Cold War was fought not with guns or even morale but with the laws of nature. The Berlin Wall, the race to the moon, China's defection to the market in 1978, the Solidarity movement, were all indicators of which side understood nature better. By the late 1970s, the Soviets had already lost. Thanks heavens Gorbachev didn't prolong the pain by trying to keep onto power. He is truly one of the world's greatest leaders. Reagan as well for his moral leadership and convincing Gorbachev to reform.

In 1980 about the only person who thought the USSR would fall soon was Senator Monyihan of NY.

I never new Monyihan (who I have a lot of respect for) said that.

I will add that in the early 1980's, anyone that talked to, including my father and a Russian culture instructor at my university, insisted that the USSR was going to dominate the world eventually.  They thought I was naive because I though that a robust US would hold up.

Nobody saw the breakup in 8-9 years.

[J. J.]

I will add that in the early 1980's, anyone that talked to, including my father and a Russian culture instructor at my university, insisted that the USSR was going to dominate the world eventually.  They thought I was naive because I though that a robust US would hold up.

Nobody saw the breakup in 8-9 years.

J.J. I have one thing to say about that:

Thank God for Ronald Reagan.

Keep in mind that this was 18 months into the Reagan presidency.  I certainly didn't think that within 10 years, the Soviet Union would peacefully break up. 

My father was very liberal and my professor rather conservative.   While there were questions about true Soviet military strength, expecially training, it was thought to be stong enough to easily survive in the the next century.

My position was that both sides could hold out for decades, but that the West would eventually prevail, but to advanced technology produced by a free market.  That was thought to be "optimistic."

Even fictional accounts from the period never contemplated a peaceful breakup.  The closest was The Third World War:  August 1985 (1978) by Gen. Sir John Hackett, which depicted the Soviet nationalities revolting after a nuclear exchange.

I'd love to see a link to the Monyihan prediction; he might have been the only national politican to get it right.