When the USSR waged war in Afghanistan, fewer local people died than in "peace" time


The war in Afghanistan, into which the Soviet Union was drawn for a whole decade, can hardly be called victorious. True, there is a moot point, depending on how you count.


Afghan war results for Afghanistan


If we take the situation in Afghanistan itself before and after the introduction of our limited contingent, then no improvement has occurred. Moscow was neither able to extinguish the conflict in this country, nor to plant a loyal ruler in it "on the throne".

But there is another side to this issue. During the ten years of the war in Afghanistan, several thousand Soviet citizens died, most often the figure is 15 thousand people. In the same decade, the lowest mortality rate was recorded among the inhabitants of this Central Asian country compared to previous and subsequent years. If from 1985 to 1990, 291 thousand people died in Afghanistan for various reasons, then during the period from 1950 to 1980 (before the Soviet troops were deployed) and from 1990 to 2010 (after their withdrawal) not one of the "five-year plans" the mortality rate did not fall below 350 thousand people in five years. And the highest mortality rate in Afghanistan since 1950 was recorded from 2005 to 2010, amounting to 496 thousand people in five years. It turns out that when the Soviet Union waged war in Afghanistan, fewer local residents died than in "peace" time.


Some people think that the entry of the Soviet army into this country was the lesser of two evils. They believe that the situation in Afghanistan threatened the USSR, especially its Central Asian republics, since it could destabilize the situation there. But it’s hard to judge the extent of this threat. True, it cannot be ruled out that the entry of troops into a neighboring country may have pushed this danger away.

The Soviet Union did not come out as a clear winner


If we consider the consequences of the Afghan war for our country more globally, then there will be a lot of minuses. The Americans now no longer hide the fact that they deliberately created the conditions for the USSR to be forced to send troops into Afghanistan and become stuck there for a long time. The Soviet leadership for a long time did not dare to introduce a contingent, despite the numerous requests of the inviting party. And when our military was already in Afghanistan, the Kremlin was not going to keep them there so much time. And they didn’t plan to fight the local forces, they were just going to become garrisons and protect strategic facilities and communications.


But it turned out how it happened. The introduction of the contingent into Afghanistan was followed by economic sanctions against the USSR, a boycott of the Moscow Olympics, and deterioration of relations with many countries. There is even an opinion that the participation of the USSR in the Afghan war pushed him to collapse. This point of view, of course, is controversial, but as one of the versions also has a right to exist. She, by the way, is shared by Donald Trump.

In addition, the former "Afghans", returning from the war, unfortunately, continued to fight further. Some became participants in numerous multinational conflicts that flared up on the outskirts of the USSR shortly after the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan. Others joined the ranks of the fighters of numerous criminal gangs, which from about this time began to grow in the country, by leaps and bounds. But, of course, there were a lot of those who, having arrived from Afghanistan, returned to civilian life and settled in well. These are people of honor who to this day work for the good of the Fatherland.

In general, whatever one may say, the USSR did not win the unequivocal and indisputable victory in the Afghan war.

But the defeat concerns precisely the Soviet political leadership, and not the Soviet army. Here she is, I think, she definitely did not lose this war.

Afghan war winners


For example, the chief of the General Staff of the USSR Armed Forces, Marshal Akhromeev, believed that most military operations in Afghanistan were carried out flawlessly, but not everything depended on the military:

There is not a single military task that would be set, but not solved, but there is no result. We control Kabul and the provincial centers, but we cannot establish power in the occupied territory. We lost the fight for the Afghan people.


And here is what Colonel General Gromov, who held the post of commander of the 40th Army during the years of the Afghan war:

I am deeply convinced that there is no reason to argue that the 40th Army was defeated, nor that we won a military victory in Afghanistan. At the end of 1979, Soviet troops entered the country unhindered, carried out — unlike the Americans in Vietnam — their tasks and organizedly returned to their homeland. If we consider the armed forces of the opposition as the main enemy of the Limited Contingent, the difference between us is that the 40th Army did what it considered necessary, and the Dushmans only what they could.

And how to argue with him here! Although the Mujahideen at times managed to win victories over the Soviet troops, for all the years of the war they did not capture a single large settlement, did not carry out a single serious operation.

But our limited contingent, although it had many defeats in this war, won brilliant military victories throughout the entire period while it was in Afghanistan.

Victories of the Soviet Army in the Afghan War


As you know, the large-scale entry of Soviet troops into Afghanistan at the invitation of President Hafizullah Amin was preceded by the assault on December 27, 1979 by the Soviet secret services and the assassination of the president.

The special operation was carried out so quickly and flawlessly that subsequently it was carefully studied by special forces of many countries of the world.

This event was very peculiarly described in the Pravda newspaper:

As a result of the rising wave of popular anger, Amin, along with his minions, appeared before a fair people's court and was executed.

At first, the Soviet units were only supposed to guard the facilities and communications, and the responsibility for combating the local Islamists was entrusted to the government troops of Afghanistan. But soon our contingent had to start hostilities.

Oddly enough, some of the government units that rebelled were among the first opponents of the Soviet military in Afghanistan. Already in early January, such clashes began. For example, on January 9, the 4th Afghan artillery regiment rebelled and killed military advisers from the USSR. The rebellion was crushed by Soviet soldiers, a hundred rebels were killed. Our losses amounted to only two people killed.

Then there were many such cases, and our military carried out a series of successful raids using ground forces and aviation against the rebels. From that moment on, the war for our contingent went into the active phase. Soviet troops, along with Afghan government loyal to the government, switched to full-scale operations.

From mid-November 1980 to early December, Operation Center was under way in the country's central provinces, in which about 16 Soviet and Afghan troops participated with the support of aviation, armored vehicles and artillery. Then 500 militants were destroyed and more than 700 captured.

Since 1981, the active seizure of fortified areas and Mujahideen bases across the country begins.

Separately, it is worth noting the fifth Panjshir operation, which was carried out from May 15 to June 2, 1982, where about 12 thousand Soviet servicemen of various military branches participated. In the course of its implementation, the first mass landing was carried out during this war. In the first three days of the operation, about 4 thousand fighters landed from helicopters.

In the battle of Khost, which lasted about a month and a half in the summer of 1985, almost two and a half thousand "dushmans" were destroyed.

A big problem for Soviet aviation was the appearance of Mujahideen MANPADS "Stinger", which they began to supply them with the Americans in the fall of 1986. But almost immediately after the appearance of this latest at that time weapons The militants from the reconnaissance group of Major Belov managed to capture three samples of such complexes near Kandahar.

You can also mention some successful operations to destroy caravans that delivered weapons and much more from Pakistan and Iran.

Successful military operations were conducted by the Soviet army until January 1989, and in February, troops were withdrawn from the country. Of course, during the Afghan war there were not only victories, but failures also took place, and quite serious ones. At the same time, on the whole, successful actions by the contingent did not affect the general situation in the country. The conflict continued, with the majority of the population supporting the Mujahideen.

Results of the war


Actually, without the support of the USSR, the new government in Afghanistan could not hold out for a long time. The results of the peace talks that were held in Geneva without the participation of the Mujahideen, remained only on paper. After the withdrawal of our troops, the war for the Afghans did not end and continues even now.

And then, immediately after the withdrawal of Soviet troops, Afghan President Najibullah quarreled with his own government, many of whose members went over to the side of the opposition. Naturally, he could not stay “at the helm”. By 1992, Taliban seized power in Kabul, and Najibullah was hanged.

And today, Afghan old men, who shot Soviet soldiers from mountain ambushes in their youth, compare the Russian military with the American, who are in Afghanistan today. And the comparison is usually not in American favor. Afghan old-timers recall that the Russians built schools and hospitals, power plants, roads and airports.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

76 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Doccor18 8 May 2020 07: 10 New
    • 18
    • 3
    +15
    As one of the officers said
    Soviet intelligence: "we learned fast, and soon did whatever we wanted with the Mujahideen."
    Soviet army definitely
    all tasks that
    before her were put in
    Afghanistan. But then changed
    political vector and all.
    1. Grandfather 8 May 2020 07: 19 New
      • 11
      • 3
      +8
      and the first photo is Commissioner Cattani!
      1. Mitroha 8 May 2020 07: 28 New
        • 12
        • 5
        +7
        When the USSR was in Afghanistan, schools and industries were built there. And during the US stay, the amount of drug production only increased. And the country completely slipped into the wild Middle Ages. There you have the difference between socialism and capitalism
      2. Mordvin 3 8 May 2020 07: 35 New
        • 6
        • 1
        +5
        He is. I didn’t notice right away.
      3. Insurgent 8 May 2020 07: 45 New
        • 10
        • 1
        +9
        Quote: Dead Day
        and the first photo is Commissioner Cattani!

        no "Comisar Corrado Cattani" is theirs, Italian character, ours - Major Bandura
        1. Catfish 8 May 2020 09: 12 New
          • 10
          • 1
          +9
          But in both roles, the Italian Michele Placido.
          I read the script in the movie collection before the movie was released, and it was much better than the picture taken on it.
          There at the very end was an interesting phrase, or rather the thought of our major during the approach to the rescue of our turntable: "... the birds of death fly and bring them numbers ..."
          By the way, according to the script, unlike the film, the major remains alive.
      4. Glory1974 8 May 2020 09: 26 New
        • 7
        • 0
        +7
        and the first photo is Commissioner Cattani!

        The film was shot in 201 divisions in Tajikistan. For the filming of the Dushmans' attack, they set up a convoy of equipment, in between the real cars, imitations of cars. the machine gunner was instructed where to shoot, but something went wrong. As a result, the dummy of the R-140 radio station was not injured, and the radio station itself was shattered!
        An eyewitness told me, my teacher at the school, the chief of communications of 201 divisions.
      5. Lara Croft 27 May 2020 16: 42 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Dead Day
        and the first photo is Commissioner Cattani!

        movie "Afghan break"
    2. Basil50 8 May 2020 07: 42 New
      • 7
      • 1
      +6
      dockor
      You are absolutely right.
      Please take a look at what is happening in Afghanistan from a different * angle *
      Asian * mentality * there manifested itself in all its ugliness. Mountainous terrain allows small-town bandits to show themselves and hold onto power over a local clogged population that knows no other way of life. The highest ideal there is still: harem-slaves and compulsory scratching of the heels. For the sake of this, they are ready for EVERYTHING, up to carving relatives or selling them into slavery.
      Since the twenties of the last century, the Soviet Union has helped Afghanistan with weapons and the destruction of the Basmachis and the supply of goods.
      But * national traditions * only allow robbing.
      Afghanistan is just a classic example of permanent anarchism. There are even no thoughts about their own children, grandchildren - * the day has passed and glory to Alah *.
    3. tihonmarine 8 May 2020 08: 27 New
      • 17
      • 5
      +12
      Quote: Doccor18
      But then changed
      political vector and all.

      They simply brought the traitor, Mishka Gorbachev, to power, and everything flew into tram cars.
      1. naburkin 12 May 2020 08: 57 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        “When I went to meet with the Soviet secretary general, I expected to see a“ comrade ”in a Bolshevik coat and astrakhan cap. But they introduced me to a gentleman dressed in a fashionable French suit with a watch << Rado Manhattan >>. Looking at them, I thought - Yes, this will sell us everything "(c) Ronald Reagan.
        1. tihonmarine 12 May 2020 09: 18 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: naburkin
          Looking at them, I thought - Yes, this one will sell us everything "(c) Ronald Reagan.

          The smartest words. Ronald recognized his brother as an “outfit."
    4. Lopatov 8 May 2020 08: 43 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      Quote: Doccor18
      But then changed
      political vector and all.

      Then came the urgent need to make peace with China.
      Well, the control of Afghanistan was leaked to the sly, merged Mongolia and merged the Vietnamese.
      Performing Chinese Wishlist called "Three Obstacles" Which were prerequisites for the beginning of the dialogue
    5. Civil 8 May 2020 16: 51 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      Quote: Doccor18
      As one of the officers said
      Soviet intelligence: "we learned fast, and soon did whatever we wanted with the Mujahideen."
      Soviet army definitely
      all tasks that
      before her were put in
      Afghanistan. But then changed
      political vector and all.

      1. Exactly. There are no questions to the army regarding the military victory in Afghanistan.
      2. But the snickering officials nullified all these victories with their defeat in the ideological confrontation with the West.
      3. As well as the population decomposed from the abundance of social achievements of the Soviet regime, but capitalism did nothing for the collapse of the USSR in face, be healthy.
  2. Carnifexx 8 May 2020 07: 15 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    May I have a link to mortality data?
    1. Kuzmitsky 11 May 2020 22: 31 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Many refer to this table. Here, offhand one of the links: http://www.kulichkovvk.ru/otechestvennay_istoriy/afganskaja_voina/poteri_storon/poteri_afganistana/index.html
  3. Evil 55 8 May 2020 07: 24 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    And on the screen saver, the Italian Michele Placido in the "Afghan break" .. The paradox ..
  4. Pvi1206 8 May 2020 07: 25 New
    • 6
    • 3
    +3
    One of the mottos of the USSR was this: man is friend to man ... In the USA, everything is different ...
    1. tihonmarine 8 May 2020 08: 28 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      Quote: Pvi1206
      In the USA, everything is different ...

      Man, man wolf, comrade and brother.
      1. AU Ivanov. 8 May 2020 10: 25 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Wolf wolf friend, comrade and brother. A flock of like-minded people.
  5. Nyrobsky 8 May 2020 07: 30 New
    • 8
    • 4
    +4
    Knowing that the mattresses were badly spoiled in Afghanistan throughout our presence, we also had to "make friends" with the Taliban in terms of delivering weapons to them, in order to increase the losses of Americans as three or four times.
  6. Carnifexx 8 May 2020 07: 42 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    At the same time, on the whole, successful actions by the contingent did not affect the general situation in the country. The conflict continued, with the majority of the population supporting the Mujahideen.
    Something reminds me, but I just can’t remember exactly what
  7. Free wind 8 May 2020 07: 46 New
    • 8
    • 0
    +8
    The title is so pathetic, it did not die but died. In the Soviet newspapers they wrote: Finally, Afghan women dropped the veil. And here in Russia, in some regions, (I don’t remember which ones) women put on hijabs. Although neither their mothers, nor grannies, had no idea what it was.
    1. Lopatov 8 May 2020 08: 23 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: Free Wind
      Although neither their mothers, nor grannies, had no idea what it was.

      Yes? They "just scarves" worn in public?
    2. Plantagenet 9 May 2020 08: 21 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      "And here in Russia, in some regions, (I don’t remember which ones) women put on hijabs."

      “We must remember that the Muslim population of Russia will grow rapidly. The population growth in the country is just due to Muslims. The problem here is not at all demographic and not religious, but political ...
      All over the world, in any country where there are Muslims, there are fundamentalists, politically active Islamists, and just radicals who are ready to take up arms. "
      "Leonid Mlechin" Empire of Terror "
  8. The comment was deleted.
  9. Glory1974 8 May 2020 09: 22 New
    • 6
    • 2
    +4
    Actually, without the support of the USSR, the new government in Afghanistan could not hold out for a long time.

    Quite normally, the new government was held in Afghanistan. The Americans had to click on Yeltsin, and he, wanting to please new friends, refused to supply Afghans with fuel, ammunition and other materiel. That is, in essence, he imposed sanctions, although Najibullah did not ask for free, but was ready to pay.
    Therefore, the army without technology equaled the bandits, and the power collapsed. But held on for 3 years.
  10. Vitaly Tsymbal 8 May 2020 09: 27 New
    • 15
    • 1
    +14
    When they ask me what we (I) did in Afghanistan? - I answer: for 9 years we, the bulk of the shurawi from 18 to 25 years old, at the cost of our lives provided for the peaceful life of Soviet people who worked quietly, created families and gave birth to children .... We left Afghanistan and the war came to our country to our home. Maybe if not for Afghanistan, then the war would have come to our house in 1980 ???
    There are many myths around our Afghanistan, some of which are repeated by the author. What happened in Afghanistan 79-89 requires rethinking, because the opinion and analysis of the situation and history of OKSVA was carried out by the "democrats" of the Gorbachev era of perestroika .... by individuals like Sakhorov !!!! This question was raised last year, but the authorities are not interested in this: as soon as the question of Afghanistan is raised, the deputies "point a finger" at the President and the President at the deputies ...
    A year ago, in the school number 44 of Stavropol, we created a museum of internationalist warriors, the guided tours are carried out mainly by schoolchildren, not only children, but also many adults who leave the museum say: “But we didn’t know anything about this time, about what the USSR was doing in Afghanistan - it turns out not only fought !!!! .... But the Soviet soldiers turned out to be not there invaders and punishers ".....
    1. Kisa 8 May 2020 19: 01 New
      • 1
      • 5
      -4
      I was taught at school that we were fulfilling the INTERNATIONAL DUTY there (didn’t realize what kind of concept it is ?!)
      in Syria - they didn’t even formulate this ... even though we don’t spend money on schools there.
      Afghanistan lost Chechnya1 and only during Chechnya 2 they learned to level out attack aircraft. as indeed the Americans after Vietnam
      1. Disant 13 May 2020 11: 45 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        you betrayal1 and attack aircraft2 recorded in one deck. and yet these are different things.
        About Afghanistan for people like you, the unconscious, you have already answered above several times, but again you did not remember.
  11. Pessimist22 8 May 2020 09: 32 New
    • 5
    • 6
    -1
    Yeah, I don’t understand why so many lives and resources were given to these savages? Like the former khanates of Central Asia, they could have mastered the Far East for this money, there is no international debt.
    1. Lopatov 8 May 2020 10: 16 New
      • 16
      • 2
      +14
      Quote: Pessimist22
      Yeah, I don’t understand why so many lives and resources were given to these savages?

      It is certainly more convenient to fight drugs, banditry and terrorists at home. But much less effective.
      As practice shows.
      1. AU Ivanov. 8 May 2020 10: 30 New
        • 7
        • 5
        +2
        It was not necessary to build Afghan infrastructure and supply the Afghans with goods that were in short supply in the Union.
        1. Lopatov 8 May 2020 10: 43 New
          • 4
          • 4
          0
          Quote: AU Ivanov.
          It was not necessary to build Afghan infrastructure and supply the Afghans with goods that were in short supply in the Union.

          We just could not afford what the Americans are doing now. That is, "live as you like"
        2. Carnifexx 8 May 2020 11: 07 New
          • 2
          • 4
          -2
          Yes, the result is still the same. And if you don’t see the difference ...
          1. Lopatov 8 May 2020 11: 32 New
            • 7
            • 1
            +6
            Quote: Carnifexx
            Yes, the result is still the same.

            Is it?
            Do we now have as many drugs from Afghanistan as there were under the USSR?
            1. Carnifexx 8 May 2020 13: 26 New
              • 3
              • 5
              -2
              You have fallen out of context.

              1It was not necessary to build Afghan infrastructure and supply the Afghans with goods that were in short supply in the Union.

              2Yes, the result is still the same. And if you don’t see the difference ...

              3?Do we now have as many drugs from Afghanistan as there were under the USSR?


              Regarding your question. It is not relevant, yet there are many variables, and their influence is great. So I would not be in a hurry to say that the Soviet-style military intervention is what will help in the fight against heroin in Russia. Europe is doing pretty well without burning poppy fields in Afghanistan. I think it is necessary to raise the standard of living - it definitely works.
              http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/system/files/publications/12078/20192630_TD0319332ENN_PDF.pdf
              1. Lopatov 8 May 2020 16: 38 New
                • 6
                • 2
                +4
                Quote: Carnifexx
                You have fallen out of context.

                No.
                USSR built. There were few drugs in it.
                Russia is trying to fight "on the spot." Drugs sea.

                Quote: Carnifexx
                Europe is doing pretty well without burning poppy fields in Afghanistan.

                laughing laughing laughing
                Does it cope well with consumption?

                Dear, there must be some limit in trying to hang noodles on your ears
                1. Carnifexx 8 May 2020 17: 18 New
                  • 1
                  • 3
                  -2
                  No.
                  USSR built. There were few drugs in it.
                  Russia is trying to fight "on the spot." Drugs sea.
                  Was it not enough that he was building? I have already said that the variables are sea, and the only intelligible dependence is the inverse relationship between living standards and drug addiction.
                  I hope you will not be heard at the top, because there is still war, thousands more dead, and it is not clear for what, because there is no guarantee that the addiction will go away.

                  Does it cope well with consumption?
                  Much worse than the Russian Federation. Moreover, worse and worse, poor Europe is coping with consumption. I threw off the report, it is not in bright colors, but compared to the Russian Federation and the USA it is very life-affirming.

                  Dear, there must be some limit in trying to hang noodles on your ears
                  I will not see the arguments, dear?
                  1. Lopatov 8 May 2020 18: 25 New
                    • 6
                    • 0
                    +6
                    Quote: Carnifexx
                    I threw off the report, it is not in bright colors, but compared to the Russian Federation and the USA it is very life-affirming.

                    Are the reports of the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs more life-affirming? Or not?
                    laughing laughing laughing

                    Let's get back to the origins of the dispute, for you are clearly trying to chat about it.

                    I argue that preventing the production of opiates in Afghanistan will reduce the number of drug addicts.
                    You say no. Let them produce more, and it is only necessary to increase the welfare of the population, so that with orders of magnitude more affordable drugs the number of drug addicts does not increase, but decreases

                    Do you realize how crazy this is?
                    1. Kisa 8 May 2020 19: 13 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      sorry to interfere. dredge production is a problem in poor countries. I hope you will not campaign to demolish Colombia where a kilo of coke is 4 thousand price tags. there is a demand and an offer. in neighboring Jordan, dragons are chopped off for drag. would the will of the UN long ago sanction strangled countries exporters
                      1. Lopatov 8 May 2020 19: 19 New
                        • 5
                        • 0
                        +5
                        Quote: kitty
                        I hope you will not campaign to demolish Colombia

                        No.
                        This is an American problem.
                        And by the way, the Americans work there preactively.
                        At the same time, "we cannot deprive the poor peasants of their income" do not bleat, as they did in Afghanistan

                        Quote: kitty
                        sanctions would have strangled exporters long ago

                        Sanctions give nothing. Destruction of crops, destruction of laboratories.
                    2. Carnifexx 9 May 2020 11: 33 New
                      • 1
                      • 2
                      -1
                      Let's get back to the origins of the dispute, for you are clearly trying to chat about it.
                      You have some strange ideas about me.

                      I argue that preventing the production of opiates in Afghanistan will reduce the number of drug addicts.
                      Also you
                      And by the way, the Americans there (South America - my approx.) Work more proactively.
                      At the same time, "we cannot deprive the poor peasants of their income" do not bleat, as they did in Afghanistan
                      Well, what about drug use in the US? You either put on your pants or take off the cross.

                      You say no. Let them produce more, and it is only necessary to increase the welfare of the population, so that with orders of magnitude more affordable drugs the number of drug addicts does not increase, but decreases
                      Soooo, and what do richer people have? Maybe if there are more alternatives to drugs, there will be fewer addicts. More advanced medicine and psychiatric care make the addict easier to cure.
                      In the USA, the problem of drug addiction concerns primarily poor people in the midwest (see "death from despair").
                      I will notice that it is better to fight against alcoholism in the Swedes. It's funny that supporters of the restriction see this as their victory.
                      Do you realize how crazy this is?
                      The way you understand it. I can’t imagine how you understand this, you even have different intuitions - you stubbornly don’t understand that the availability of DEMAND is not solved by gunmen.

                      There are synthetic opiates, so even if Afghanistan is razed to the ground, this will not solve the problem. wink
            2. Finn 12 May 2020 14: 08 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              More than in the USSR, but only because there is more demand generating supply. The Americans wanted to fill up the USSR with drugs, it didn’t work. Now try number two. Happened.
      2. Carnifexx 8 May 2020 11: 15 New
        • 3
        • 4
        -1
        As practice shows, the drug problem (and drug gangsters is secondary) is the drug demand problem. The struggle with manufacturers, smugglers and traders in itself only increases the price of the dose, and therefore attracts new adventurers to the dangerous business. There is a situation when some drug lords are killed and others come in their place, instantly. By the way, since such money is spinning, it is corrupt law enforcement. Improving living standards is much more effective.
        1. Lopatov 8 May 2020 11: 31 New
          • 6
          • 1
          +5
          Quote: Carnifexx
          As practice shows, the drug problem (and drug gangsters is secondary) is the drug demand problem.

          There is no product, there is no demand for it.

          Quote: Carnifexx
          The fight with manufacturers, smugglers and traders in itself only increases the price of a dose,

          So it's great .. It's orders of magnitude better than cheap and affordable drugs.
          1. Carnifexx 8 May 2020 13: 06 New
            • 2
            • 2
            0
            There is no product, there is no demand for it.
            There is no product - there is a huge demand for it and the one who delivers this product will get rich. Empiricism demonstrates this. Read an economics textbook for grade 10.
            So it's great .. It's orders of magnitude better than cheap and affordable drugs.
            Maybe if this did not entail an increase in crime (a dose needs money) and corruption (profits from the sale of expensive drugs go into the pockets of border guards and the Ministry of Internal Affairs).
            1. Lopatov 8 May 2020 16: 45 New
              • 6
              • 1
              +5
              Quote: Carnifexx
              No product - there is a huge demand for it

              Perfectly. But there is no product. And this demand has not been realized.

              Quote: Carnifexx
              Read an economics textbook for grade 10.

              I'm afraid your ideas are based on such textbooks.
              laughing


              Quote: Carnifexx
              Maybe if this did not entail an increase in crime (a dose needs money) and corruption (profits from the sale of expensive drugs go into the pockets of border guards and the Ministry of Internal Affairs).

              Not "maybe", but for sure.
              1. Carnifexx 8 May 2020 17: 24 New
                • 0
                • 1
                -1
                Perfectly. But there is no product. And this demand has not been realized.
                OK, clear. Where are no drugs?

                I'm afraid your ideas are based on such textbooks.
                Ok, rudeness. But just in case, take an interest in supply and demand curves, then it will be easier to understand why the drug trade does not disappear, even if the whole cartel is covered and destroyed.

                Not "maybe", but for sure.
                Do you really think that everything is so simple?
                1. Lopatov 8 May 2020 18: 17 New
                  • 4
                  • 3
                  +1
                  Quote: Carnifexx
                  Ok, rudeness.

                  laughing laughing
                  Yeah !!!

                  Quote: Carnifexx
                  But just in case, take a look at supply and demand curves

                  You are so funny ...
                  A drug is not a sausage.
                  For example, AIDS. Fatal incurable disease. No virus, no disease.
                  Similarly addiction. Deadly incurable. No first trick, no drug addict. No addict, no demand.

                  Imagine a cure for fulfomitoxia. Expensive, inaccessible. But with zero demand, because there are no patients with such a disease. This is the analogue of drugs

                  Are you here with your nonexistent textbook laughing


                  Quote: Carnifexx
                  Do you really think that everything is so simple?

                  Absolutely simple. Little of. it is elementary
                  If the drug is not transported across the border, then not a dime goes into the pockets of border guards.
                  If a drug that doesn’t enter the country is not distributed, then the Ministry of Internal Affairs has nothing.

                  Is this really trying to dispute in the mythical "textbook of economics for grade 10"?
                  laughing laughing laughing
                  1. Carnifexx 9 May 2020 11: 08 New
                    • 0
                    • 2
                    -2
                    Similarly addiction. Deadly incurable. No first trick, no drug addict. No addict, no demand
                    And this is me funny. There are many ways to make drugs, I won’t go into details but it is IMPOSSIBLE to exclude the production of narcotic substances.

                    Imagine a cure for fulfomitoxia. Expensive, inaccessible. But with zero demand, because there are no patients with such a disease. This is the analogue of drugs
                    I did not understand the analogy. There is a demand for drugs, so much so that submarines are made to satisfy it.

                    Absolutely simple. Little of. it is elementary
                    Well, yes.
                    If the drug is not transported across the border, then not a dime goes into the pockets of border guards.
                    If a drug that doesn’t enter the country is not distributed, then the Ministry of Internal Affairs has nothing.
                    Great, but there is a problem - it is IMPOSSIBLE to exclude psychoactive substances. I will give an elementary example - alcohol. Some tried to ban it, ask how it happened.
                    Is this really trying to dispute in the mythical "textbook of economics for grade 10"?
                    They would read more, would not argue with empiricism.
      3. arlekin 8 May 2020 12: 05 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        Quote: Spade
        Quote: Pessimist22
        Yeah, I don’t understand why so many lives and resources were given to these savages?

        It is certainly more convenient to fight drugs, banditry and terrorists at home. But much less effective.
        As practice shows.

        The first drug addicts in our city were just “Afghans”.
    2. fruit_cake 8 May 2020 10: 55 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      why did the US give so many lives and resources to the Korean savages? now you see them as manufacturers of electronics, cars and other things, and in the year 46 they were poor, hungry Asians
      1. Carnifexx 8 May 2020 11: 09 New
        • 1
        • 2
        -1
        Yes, but also in Afghanistan, the United States poured my reverence. And before that, the USSR poured. Think about it. Apparently simple financial injections do not solve. In Korea, the United States poured orders of magnitude less money.
      2. AU Ivanov. 8 May 2020 11: 12 New
        • 3
        • 2
        +1
        Americans are able to count money, unlike us. The Koreans, like the Japanese, had potential. He is not in Afghanistan. Therefore, American investment there is not observed. This is all the time we are trying to make the whole world happy, at the expense of our people.
      3. Maki Avellevich 8 May 2020 20: 36 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        Quote: fruit_cake
        why did the US give so many lives and resources to the Korean savages? now you see them as manufacturers of electronics, cars and other things, and in the year 46 they were poor, hungry Asians

        something is not visible on the Afghan electronics market.
    3. DDT
      DDT 10 May 2020 17: 03 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Pessimist22
      Yeah, I don’t understand why so many lives and resources were given to these savages? Like the former khanates of Central Asia, they could have mastered the Far East for this money, there is no international debt.

      I completely agree with you the pessimist! What for you Uruses generally climbed into Asia ?! They would have given everything to the Anglo-Saxons and would not have warped. You look and would accept you into the "large and friendly European family of peoples." Ato parted here, you understand, Kemsky volost back to take away ... Build all kinds of empires, dream of a great power ... wassat
  12. Carnifexx 8 May 2020 11: 06 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Entertaining games with statistics, I like it.
    As for the conclusions of the post and in the comments about the holy USSR, or about the dichotomy of the USA-USSR, American-Russians, socialism-capitalism is painful to read. Speech about Afghanistan, look at the fate of everything that both Russians and Americans did there? Crash. They built infrastructure and they poured a lot of money there - everything is broken up. the Americans (and the early USSR, the USA decided to do almost the same hoping for a different result - you can make a diagnosis yourself) have proved that institutions decide, not financial injections and military operations.
  13. Vladimir_2U 8 May 2020 11: 22 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    several thousand Soviet citizens died, most often called the figure of 15 thousand people

    Even 15 thousand, this is not "several tens of thousands." Losses of SA killed and dead 13 people.
  14. Aviator_ 8 May 2020 12: 07 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Moscow was neither able to extinguish the conflict in this country, nor to put in it “on the throne” a loyal ruler to us.

    The author is mistaken. Najibullah was seated on the throne, who led the policy we needed for three years. And only his betrayal by EBN put an end to all our efforts, in the end we got an adder in Central Asia.
  15. Kushka 8 May 2020 12: 32 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    For 9 years, Americans lost 60 thousand in Vietnam.
    Well, and who did they defeat there? Another question - who answered?
    USSR for 10 years in Afghanistan lost 14 thousand
    And what, someone won? The same question - did someone answer?
    1. Kisa 8 May 2020 19: 30 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      complement
      for 18 years in Afghanistan, Americans lost 2 thousand people
      we have the first Chechen - 6 thousand
      2nd Chechen - 4 thousand .....
      and yes, for some reason no one mentions logistics - or we have to cross the border with Tajikistan or drag an army of hundreds of thousands across the ocean
      1. Kushka 8 May 2020 20: 32 New
        • 0
        • 2
        -2
        In the sky of Ukraine and further south every day you can see
        iverses - one there, one back - Americans through
        Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria carry everything to Afghanistan - from cigarettes
        to ammunition - a soldier is dressed, shod, fed, armed to
        teeth and all his own. Flight - thousands, tens of thousands of kilometers, hundreds of thousands
        tons of fuel and so 365 days a year. How many years fly, did not consider.
        How many million dollars - I won’t add up; I did not study well at school.
      2. cvetkoff.peter 11 May 2020 14: 55 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        where do you get such numbers
  16. faterdom 8 May 2020 16: 03 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Actually, without the support of the USSR, the new government in Afghanistan could not hold out for a long time.

    Very indisputable thesis. Do you know how much Najibullah’s power lasted after the “tag” (the withdrawal of the OKSV)?
    Not a month or a year, despite the fact that his opponents (Peshawar Seven and Masood), the West, China and Iran with Pakistan actively continued to help, and we refused even cartridges and fuel and lubricants!
    1. strannik1985 8 May 2020 16: 11 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Very indisputable thesis.

      EMNIP the first 3 years after the withdrawal of OKSVA from Afghanistan, the USSR helped the government of Najibullah with weapons, ammunition, food, etc. in the amount of from 2 to 6 billion dollars per year.
  17. faterdom 8 May 2020 16: 13 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: strannik1985
    Very indisputable thesis.

    EMNIP the first 3 years after the withdrawal of OKSVA from Afghanistan, the USSR helped the government of Najibullah with weapons, ammunition, food, etc. in the amount of from 2 to 6 billion dollars per year.

    After the withdrawal of the USSR, he himself no longer existed for three years. I would say that he has not died since August 1991 (although formally - since December)
  18. Kushka 8 May 2020 16: 29 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    Perch and pike lived in a puddle next door.
    Wet each other in black (not sparing the elderly and children)
    You decided to get into this puddle at the most ... You will be waist-high,
    and put things in order (you are of course perch - they are with red "flags")
    Piled up to pike - the highest class - perches could at any time of the day or night
    to walk with a brood and without consequences. And pike bit your ass
    for the most, well, you understand and you had to urgently bring down from this puddle.
    And what do we see in the end? Ah, it’s not interesting for you anymore (it was a matter of business -
    let others try). Just do not need GREAT MEANING in this matter
    sculpt.
  19. Walrus fang 8 May 2020 16: 48 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    The war in Afghanistan, into which the Soviet Union was drawn for a whole decade, can hardly be called victorious. True, there is a moot point, depending on how you count.

    That's it, how to count .. negative
    For all my life I remembered an interview with a Soviet evil officer (when the troops withdrew from Afghanistan) ..
    Question; Are you glad that the contingent of Soviet troops to withdraw from Afghanistan?
    Officer viciously: Yes, glad ... But the spirits will follow us ..
    And after all, they went and the collapse began precisely with our withdrawal from Afghanistan, or rather flight by order .. And then the avalanche went.
  20. Gnefredov 8 May 2020 23: 34 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    I have my own memory of this war. I was engaged in the operational repair of the SU-25. In places often not adapted for repair. I acted as a civilian, and wherever I was (in any part) everywhere the commanders provided an incredible cordon and protection of the repair area. Really, it was even inconvenient for me, but this was only until the first time I came under mortar fire.
    Years passed 14. Around 1996, Moscow. A restaurant. At the next table bandyugan bulls. From the table the “closet” rolls over and poking a finger at me, calls by name. Trying to remember where I saw him. Ahead of me, it reminds me, and this is a former platoon lump who during a mortar attack pulled me off the plane and covered me with his body. I then knocked out four teeth and was very angry with him.
    Yes. It is a pity that Ivan did not survive the "perestroika". You rest in peace, buddy.

    Here is a story. Off topic, of course, but somehow the memory stirred.
  21. Sniper Amateur 9 May 2020 15: 25 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    We should also note the fifth Panjshir operation

    That's what she was fifth - speaking about the "win" of the previous four. For those who know what war is? - at least...
  22. abvgdeika 9 May 2020 15: 57 New
    • 0
    • 5
    -5
    I read the comments, how much people have powdered brains !!!! And in Afghanistan, of course, we won soldier But it is not exactly
  23. naburkin 12 May 2020 09: 44 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Pvi1206
    One of the mottos of the USSR was this: man is friend to man ... In the USA, everything is different ...

    Under socialism, the main person, under capitalism is profit.
    1. Procyon lotor 13 May 2020 16: 08 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      This is of course a trifle, but during this period, namely from 1979 to 1989, the population of Afghanistan decreased by a couple of million (from 13 million to 11 million). Probably from a good life.
  24. ycuce234-san 13 May 2020 21: 26 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Afghanistan is also interesting in that when restoring this country African methods of developing the industry of poor and undeveloped states are not used - this refers to the development of mining industry, heavy industry and the transfer of labor-intensive manufacturing and assembly industries. These methods work exactly in African and Asian conditions - Western TNCs have proved this in practice by removing industry from developed countries. Afghanistan is rich in minerals: Afghanistan is the mountains, and the mountains are the ores. And their deposits are successfully located precisely in remote mountain areas that are problematic in terms of banditry. A permanent civil war is also going on in Africa, which does not interfere with the extractive industry in the least, which means that in Afghanistan this will not interfere with the industrialists.
    Purposeful urbanization will also be useful, which will make it possible to pull the local peasantry out of the wilderness and make their descendants townspeople who are not connected with the traditions of feudalism.
  25. stalker 75 13 May 2020 21: 37 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    What kind of nonsense is this? - What are the Taliban in 1992 with whom did Najibullah quarrel? The rebellion raised in March 1990 was suppressed. About the photo and talk is not hunting.
  26. German Titov 14 May 2020 21: 53 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Procyon Lotor
    This is of course a trifle, but during this period, namely from 1979 to 1989, the population of Afghanistan decreased by a couple of million (from 13 million to 11 million). Probably from a good life.


    Yes, yes! “Shuravi” are such “buggers by bullets”. Schools were built so that "probably children would die en masse from studying sciences." For 10 years, only 2 llamas of the population were gobbled up (Sakharov "bleated about a million"). Now in Afghanistan, "hosanna" sing "soldier-liberator from the United States"? Personally, I remember the "Roses of Herat", and the "cistern", which I delivered from the "Herat bridge" with a wound to my hip. Thanks to you, I understood, I delivered it for experiments. Speaking of experiments. Does your mother not want to give birth to you again? You are worth it ...