I find it difficult to morally blame Reagan for Afghanistan

submitted by Salos60000Pragmatic European Nationalism from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Back then, there was a real fear that the Soviet Union (and by proxy, Communism) was going to envelope the world and threaten our way of life.

But, you want to know something? The way the Soviets had expanded predates Afghanistan. Go back as early as 1917 and the October Revolution, the Soviets already had their eyes on foreign countries Poland, the Baltics, Finland etc.

Stalin, bizarrely enough, was almost a bit of a good guy. Since he was the only Soviet leader who opposed exporting his own country's politics, that a certain Leon Trotsky would have done if he had power instead. We then had WW2 where Germany & The Axis where the only ones who tried to put an actual stop to Soviet influence, by trying to conquer them entirely. But unfortunately, when the Axis failed, it left behind the power vacuum where now both the USA and USSR hated each other, but the threat of nukes prevented them from settling their differences in an all out invasion of one another.

Long story short, the Cold War was a symptom of previous failures of not neutering the Soviet's ability to project power much earlier. To Reagan, it obviously looked good to support any enemy that the Soviets hated, but now that the USSR is dead, we are left behind with their mess that our current rulers still don't know how to approach the subject rationally. Like the way Trump & Biden forced a pull out meant that Afghanistan was always going to collapse and be retaken by the Taliban. However, the speedy withdrawal has once again, fucked us over, because the same Afghans are crying they don't want to live in their own country anymore, and are trying to demand "refugee" status in the West.

[–]FrenologistSaving the World 1 Cranial Exam at a Time 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The fear of communism was never real (at least not real for Western leaders and militaries). The fear was engineered for the populace. If the fear of communism was real why did the Allies fight with the USSR against Japan and Germany and why did the USA proceed to carve up Eastern Europe in a fashion extremely favorable to the USSR? If the Western World truly feared communism why did it turn its back on Rhodesia while the USSR and China openly funded/trained communist armies in Africa which, were then used to seize control of Rhodesia?

The truth is that communism has and always will be a mechanism used by the globalist elites to destroy wealthy/successful nations so that the wealth can be looted into the coffers of the globalist bankers. The Russian Empire was one of the wealthiest, industrialized nations in the world and the bankers used communism to destroy and loot it. They're doing exactly the same here in the USA. Sometimes the communist infiltration doesn't work as planned and a nationalist/fascist movement takes its place (see Nazi Germany) but, their Plan B is always a united front (global) against the nationalist threat.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The fear of communism was never real (at least not real for Western leaders and militaries). The fear was engineered for the populace. If the fear of communism was real why did the Allies fight with the USSR against Japan and Germany and why did the USA proceed to carve up Eastern Europe in a fashion extremely favorable to the USSR?

You're ignoring too many variables. At the start of WW2, both Germany and the USSR had made a secret agreement to invade and take over Poland. Trying to fight both countries at the same time may have put off Germany's plans to actually invade the Soviets since the agreement didn't stop there (for a time, they were receiving food and other raw materials as part of the deal).

In actuality, the USSR didn't become part of the allies until 1941, when Hitler had launched his Eastern front invasion, while already taking over Western Europe as well.

In regards to why did the U.S let Eastern Europe get carved up? It was the Soviets who were crazy enough to throw endless amounts of bodies at the German machine. The race to Berlin was basically one big propaganda stunt by two Soviet generals to claim victory over Germany, even if the logistics of doing so was heavily rushed.

I'd like to think the allies wanted to do more back then, but they were already fighting a war on multiple fronts on every continent. It's all hindsight to say they could have also finished off Communism in the 6 years they were at war with other nations. Especially when the Soviet Army saw massive increases during this same time period as well.

If the Western World truly feared communism why did it turn its back on Rhodesia while the USSR and China openly funded/trained communist armies in Africa which, were then used to seize control of Rhodesia?

I don't deny this. They were absolutely in the wrong to have let this country fall to the Communists. The only thing I say, is from the perspective of the U.S, they may have turned a blind eye to this because Rhodesia was considered a rogue territory from the U.K, so maybe the U.S didn't want to piss off their British allies back then? But again, everything is hindsight. Looking at Zimbabwe today, the U.S would have been better off ignoring their relationship with the U.K and save the Rhodesians instead.