Our troops in Afghanistan: Hail RED ARMY!!☭ (2/2)

[kimilsungfan]

Glory to heroic great red army who brought peace to afghanistan !!!

[crochebo]

USA built nothing for Afghanistan, no road, no building, just bombing for back to the stone age, so thanks for the démocratie with AH-64, Abrams M1A2 and Predator like she are!

Russian attack the Afghanistan but she built many road etc..

Get the fuck out of there!

Or go home on plastic bag.

[Afghanistanie1]

russsia is 100000000000000000000000000000­00 better than usa army they dont war .they want only freedom every where and usa want to war every where

[hafiidz3]

ALLAHUEKBAR ! LIVE FOR ALLAH DIE FOR ALLAH ! THAT IS WHAT IN OUR DAILY PRAYER ! 5 TIMES A DAY !

[GastO1]

For Ever Red Army!

[jumpnjza2]

The Red Army went soft, if Stalin was in power, thousands of islamic militant scum would have been rounded up, shot and buried in a mass grave. Revolutions are secured by using state power ruthlessly, not by negotiating with fanatic scum who want women to wear curtains.

[ZwolennikMLK]

"Hail the Red Army in Afghanistan!"

[idreesaman]

afghanistan really made a big mistake fighting with soviet union , nw look its condition ,

[kavkaz7kavkaz]

@idreesaman why should a nation accepts to be invaded? afghans are not cowards, they rather die, than to accept occupation. soviets did a mistake by invading, look now! they lost so much money. and lost the whole

[idreesaman]

@kavkaz7kavkaz dear we (soviets) never invaded afghanistan their leader invited us check the history will ya

[kavkaz7kavkaz]

@idreesaman the leaders were puppets of the soviets, its like mobutu asking for american help in congo. the people in afghanistan revolted even in the first weeks, in herat the peasants and students and all the heratis attacked with bricks and knives the occupiers. soviet union is death, thx to the murder of millions of afghans who choosed deaht before communism

[FIFA07Addicted]

@kavkaz7kavkaz thats because most of afghan ppl are retarded and cant understand shit of what was happening it had nothing to do with communism dumbass... ur a retard, look at how happy those ppl were, kids watching a tv for the first time etc etc, the soviet bring happiness to afghans, unlike america and their nato puppets.

[kavkaz7kavkaz]

@FIFA07Addicted living in portugal and speaking about afghanistan. the afghan peasants, students and workers ressisted soviet invasion. afghans rather live in caves and are hungry than to accept invasion and foreign rule, but you retarded freak dont realy know what freedom means. it was against communism, they were against communist school education, communist preachings, communist TV propaganda. get over it. you dont know afghans, millions were killed.

[FIFA07Addicted]

@kavkaz7kavkaz foreign rule? your a dumbass. they had their own government yeah u stupid little mentally retarded prick. the communist era in afghanistan was the best era they ever had in history u idiotic piece of worthless garbage... if you think that freedom means women walking around with their face covered, and being forced to follow a retarded religion, than nuff said, your retarded and stupid.

[kavkaz7kavkaz]

@FIFA07Addicted have you been in afghanistan? do you know normal afghans? every culture is different, and if they want to live islamic, its not your problem. but you dont know the culture nor the people and sit at home talking bullshit. thats why most communist were killed by the locals, they hanged them. students, peasants and workers attacked the communist. get the facts and piss off

[realpaktia]

it is quite obvious for the world why the WEST, r in afgh now, so stop this shit......after the 09.11. the 42 countries in afgh, which is why........? Since that the country faced more trouble and corruption, than before. It is rediculios that 42 contries n afgh, n still no result..... why? The last thing i have to state, as far I know my ppl, if u cam for good mean, u will be succed, otherwised will be kicked off wid big shame........... Just sory for the lost of inocent ppl

[realpaktia]

wen the soviet came to afg, the USA suported these ppl, but after the withro of soviet soldier from afgh, n folowing by the coming of barbarian to kabul n fighting for power, they kiled ten Tz of inocent ppl. So where was then the USA, NATO AND OTHER SUCKERS? we r the most CIVILIZED PPL, IF U LET US IN PEACE, N DONT GIV WEPEN TO MY NEIGHBOR TO KILL ME..........

[realpaktia]

Let me tell u (silenz), that afghanistan never atacked any country, neither involved n any terorist atack, it is all u that came in this coutry n destroy our beloved country. if tody we r caled uncivilized, it is thanks to all, specialy USA. if any coutry is now in afgh, it is due to their own interest, not for the sake of this poor ppl. this is the land of lion n brav ppl, who fight for thir fredom. if u r loking for terorist go to pakis or arab country where thy cam from

[groskino]

i am not sure if i get this right, but i was not suggesting that the ussr had imperialist interest, i.e. imperialism in the capitalist sense, evaluated by lenin. nevertheless, the kremlin tried on every opportunity to size controll of various revolutionary struggles, turn them harmless so not to endanger the status qou. that means, use them as change in their deals with washington. if a movement grew out of controll, the stalinst used to cut em off.

[groskino]

it is true, trotsky defended the ussr. he did so by considering the class charakter. this was principled in opposite to the fashioned slogan of state capitalism. trotsky led withhin the SWP a struggle against shachtman, burnham, who considered more and more open the ussr as state capitalism, with the beureocracy as new exploiting class. trotsky not only proved this false, he also showed the petty bourgeoise standpoint of the two, hostile class pressure, their rejection of historic materialism.

[groskino]

altough i do not consider the presence of the red army as equal to that of us/nato forces, there are still important questions. why stepped the ussr into afghanistan? to fullfill what task? in the 1980, the ussr was in a quite different state than in the years shortly after sizing of the power by the masses and their party. in the civil war the red army was led by leon trotsky, by whom it was led in afghanistan? by what policies and what principles? this video equals stalinism with communism!

[sweetpotos]

You misunderstand the perspective of this video. Nobody claims that the USSR had anything but imperialist motives in invading Afghanistan, and nobody claims that the Stalinists were "progressive". However, the presence of the Soviets did strengthen the revolutionary coalition struggling against Islam and Feudalist Reaction. That the Red Army could do that is thanks to its historic roots in the October Revolution, which survived in pieces despite Stalinism.

[groskino]

the role of the usa, jimmy carter and of his securtiy adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, is quite important for that time as well contemporay. the stage up of islamic fundamentalism in afghanistan as well in the pakistan border region, should weaken the ussr on its souther territory. the carter administration sought to drive the ussr in its own vietnam. nevertheless, it would have been impossible if the ussr had been a WORKERS state, the proletarian in charge of political power, not selfish stalinist

[hectorbolshevik]

What were the Soviets' "imperialist motives"?

[sweetpotos]

To preclude the American encirclement of the USSR in the middle east, through setting up a puppet regime in Afghanistan.

Obviously the Stalinist Bureaucracy did not have the interests of the revolution at heart when they invaded; are you suggesting they did? Not even the Spartacist League, which came up with the slogan of "Hail Red Army in Afghanistan", suggested that.

[hectorbolshevik]

The left-wing "puppet" regime in Afghanistan came to power before the Soviet intervention. This regime was the only hpe to bring Afghanistan out of the stone age. The Soviet intervention was to secure its southern border, and by supporting this PDPA regime fought on the side of social-progress. There was NO invasion. I attend meetings of the Spartacist League. I never said the Stalinist had revolution on their mind. But writing the USSR of as "imperialist" is irresponsible.

[hectorbolshevik]

And I noticed from an earlier post you admit that Soviet troops fought on the side of progress because of the Red Army's historical roots. Yet you call the USSR "imperialist"; that's a big contradiction. The Kremlin Stalinists used this war only as a bargaining chip with the imperialists; revolution never was their interest. The slogan of the Spartacist League "Hail Red Army in Afghanistan" should been upheld by every leftist. Sadly most were wrapped up in the anti-Soviet frenzy.

[sweetpotos]

What other way is there to characterize the USSR's action than imperialist? The only other way is revolutionary, which it definitely was not. And the "contradiction" is not mine, but in reality. The USSR supported progressive forces in Aghanistan purely by accident, not by the nature of the regime itself. And of course the USSR stabbed Afghanistan in the back when it was in their interests. I agree with the slogan but clearly some have taken it as a carte blanche support for the USSR.

[hectorbolshevik]

Intervening in Afghanistan was one of the Kremlin Stalinists' few truly Red causes. Regardless of their motives, Soviet troops in Afghanistan defended the USSR's southern borders and fought on the side of progress and women's liberation. Praising Soviet action doesn't mean praising the Stalinist bureaucracy, who sold out Afghanistan as you noted. Trotsky supported and defended the USSR to the day he died. USSR was NOT imperialist as Maoists, various Stalinists, and fake Trotskyists claim.

[silenzioso84]

Poor guys...

they had their asses kicked. :-//

[5oorok]

I think that was a mistake of our government. You shouldn't blame our soldiers.

[silenzioso84]

No, I didn't blame anyone. I just tried to refer to the fact that the Soviet troops were surprized by the tactics and aggressivity of the Mujahedeen. It is similar to what we see today in Afghanistan. But I believe that this country needs to be civilized and the tribal structure of the socitey eliminated because it is still a threat not just to the USA but to Russia too.

[seabear145]

dont worry, they created the taliban and the same force are kicking there ass now.

[hectorbolshevik]

To defend its southern borders from imperialist backed Mujahideen, and to support their left-nationalist allies who's programs were nothing less than revolutionary. The decision was made by Leonid Brezhnev, in which case he defied the Stalinist lie of "Socialism in one country". This video defends the Soviet action in Afghanistan as every Communist and leftist should. There is no support for Stalinism here.

[CommunistChannel]

ver en alta calidad

[goat414]

another great one!