Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Idea Of The Day -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (41051)	10/15/2001 4:04:23 PM
From: vampire	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50167

But doesn't the fact that the Soviets did not have the backing of the world have anything to do with their defeat?

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (41051)	10/15/2001 9:08:18 PM
From: BubbaFred	Respond to of 50167

It was US and British support with armaments that made such difficult situation for the Russians. Without such support, we would be hearing a different story. Is there now any supplier(s) of armaments for counter-attacks by Talibans?

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (41051)	10/16/2001 1:36:32 AM
From: sandeep	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50167

Iqbal, pls tell us the exact source of your postings. You start with "According to US Army" and then near the end, add some comments from some pakistani general. From your posting it is not clear if the general was quoted by the US army in its report. I doubt that such a foolish statement would be included by the US army. Whether the general said it not, the US army wouldn't like to include this quote because its inclusion implies that the US had not much to do with the collapse of the Soviets and also that Soviet Union was the greatest empire of the modern times. Neither of these conclusions seem to gel with the US version of history and hence such a foolish quote doesn't deserve to be in a military studies document.