"We are leaving (Song of Soviet veterans Afghanistan. 1988)" Topic

Song by "Kaskad" (Musical group of veterans of the war in Afghanistan) about the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan. Performed in East Berlin, 1988.

The song has a line about the third toast. This is now a traditional toast in the post-Soviet space, which came just from the time of Afghanistan. This toast is raised to those who had died in battle. All Stand Up, no one clinks their glasses, says anything. The most popular prase "for those who are not with us" and "for those who did not return".

YouTube link

Another version of the translation of this song:

YouTube link

Interesting. I am sure that it is still part of the Russian psyche. Afghanistan is probably quite beautiful in its own way, providing people aren't trying to kill you. It only took them nine years to figure out it was time to leave.

I think that the psychological trauma in Russian society from these events is comparable to the events in Vietnam for American society.
However, it was quickly obscured by a much larger tragedy – the collapse of the USSR.

The collapse of the USSR wasn't a tragedy for all the non Russian peoples who didn't want to be a part of the Soviet Russian Empire.

This is a very big lie.
The overwhelming majority of citizens of the USSR of all nationalities and peoples wanted the preservation of the Soviet Union.

link

Not according to the people I have personally spoken to: Hungarians, Estonians, Czechoslovaks and Poles. I realise that some of these countries were not part of the USSR but they were behind the Iron Curtain and forced to have Communist Governments. The Hungarians and Czechoslovaks tried to leave but were crushed by Russian tanks. So much for free choice.

BTW who wrote the article? Overwhelmingly every nation who could leave the Soviet Union did. And referenda mean nothing when you've flooded the countries concerned with Russian immigrants.

To misquote Voltaire the USSR was neither Soviet nor Socialist nor Republic.

BTW the only protest that I have ever participated in was against the USSR invasion of Afghanistan in 1979.

The United States has intervened in various ways in the internal affairs of 50 countries of the world 130 times since the end of World War II. "And these people forbid us to pick our noses?" (this is a common meme in Russia – I don't know if it is known in the USA).

Any Soviet soldier in Afghanistan or at the border could leave the country. And there were such – but there were only a few of them. And often those who fled to the West who had good prospects obtained thanks to their excellent education and professionalism, which they received for free, at the expense of Soviet society. In fact, they are thieves who robbed those who invested money in them.

Anyone can write an article on Wikipedia. Administrators only verify the authenticity of sources. Do you have doubts about the authenticity of the referendum? It's funny – it was carried out in the time of Gorbachov under the active supervision of the Western press. You are the first to dispute its results.

You have not participated in the protests against the US invasion somewhere? Didn't you care about the fate of other peoples, for example the same Afghans?

And yet the Soviet Union collapsed despite the supposed results of the referendum.

The Berlin Wall showed how enthusiastic the East Germans were about staying in East Germany.

I don't think it would have been that easy to leave the USSR during the Cold War. Border troops tended to be the most highly indoctrinated precisely to prevent this.

I stopped protesting because it is a futile gesture and made absolutely no difference. And the US invasion of Afghanistan was designed primarily to capture Osama bin Laden not to prop up a Soviet puppet regime. But there are things that the US has done that I don't agree with. So for me it is a choice between the lesser of two evils. At least in the US you can state your opinion without being locked up or poisoned with Novichok.

The Soviet Union collapsed for a variety of reasons. But among these reasons there was no desire of citizens to abandon a single union state. The people were promised that instead of a union of communist states, a new union state based on a market economy would be created – the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). Similarity to the United States, by the way.
The disappearance of a unified state as a result is simply unseemly games of local politicians who wanted their own power, unlimited by any common center.

Many thousands of Soviet specialists worked at various foreign construction sites, thousands of Soviet sailors went ashore every day in all ports of the world, Soviet scientists and cultural workers in thousands visited foreign countries for the necessities of their profession …
Yes, it was not easy to leave the USSR (the Soviet border was the border of the Cold War, which was appropriately guarded). But if necessary, very many could stay in the West – but they did not want it. There were only a few traitors.
And by the way, in the USSR there was such a punishment – deprivation of Soviet citizenship. The person was simply expelled from the country. Solzhenitsyn, for example.

As far as I remember, Bin Laden has long been dead, and the US is leaving Afghanistan only now)))
In the US, you can express their opinions without fear? I see that this is no longer the case)))
A newbie is the safest poison that I know))) No one has died from him yet, not counting the drunken homeless woman from the English trash heap. And then, this is if you take her death from "Novichok" at face value.

Actually to all intents and purposes the Soviet Union did not collapse but just changed name. It lost a few outlying provinces which it in the process of recovering (the Ukraine) or has recovered (Crimea). It is still not a democracy, is ruled by a "strong" man, spends way to much on weapons and crushes dissent in all forms.

It's interesting that you describe people wanting to live and work in other countries as traitors. Freedom of movement is taken for granted in the rest of the world although there are restrictions on immigration. In NZ people get educated and leave for overseas all the time. (at least pre covid). And before being expelled Solzhenitsyn was exiled to the gulag – he wrote a book about it.

The US found like the USSR that it had a tiger by the tail once it was there. They've been trying to stabilise the situation so that when they leave it looks like they haven't been defeated. It's very much the same as South Vietnam was.

Can you provide examples of not being able to express your opinion in the US?

Is Alexei Navalny a drunken old woman? Have you heard of his poisoning? :abc.net.au/news/2020-09-03/what-is-novichok-russia-alexei-navalny-poison-symptoms-explained/12624142. Of course you are going to say that it is just propaganda.

And the use of a chemical weapon that kills a civilian in a foreign country is an act of war or at least terrorism, even if she is "a drunken old woman from the trash heap". Have you no compassion? Did she deserve to die? And it does not seem very Socialist of you to make such a judgement about the value of a human being.

The Soviet Union consisted of 15 republics and they all left this union. Moreover, Russia was the first to leave the USSR, announcing the superiority of internal laws over the laws of the USSR)))
I know that today's Russia cannot be called a real democracy. But this is much better than the "democracy" that we had in the 90s. Democracy in Russia looked like chaos and anarchy, with rampant crime, wars and widespread poverty.

Do people in New Zealand get their education at the expense of taxpayers?

A traitor is one who has broken an oath once given. In this case, I was talking about military personnel and civil servants.

Solzhenitsyn got into the Gulag during Stalin's time, during the Second World War. I personally believe that this was his way of deserting from the front. To write anti-Soviet letters, knowing that these letters, with a 100% guarantee, will be viewed by the military censorship is a desire to deliberately leave the war. Let it be the GULAG camp. The chances of staying alive in prison are incomparably higher than dying at the front.

The American media shut their mouths to anyone who goes against the mainstream (Trump for example))) Such people are in danger of ostracism, dismissal from their jobs, bullying in the "free" press … Isn't it?

Alexey Navalny is alive. And the nerve poison that we are talking about is a military poisonous agent that must destroy all living things in the most insignificant concentration. Of course I will say that this is propaganda. Why do we need poison, which for the second time cannot kill anyone? Why isn't it a gun, dagger, hammer, or truck? Everything would be much simpler and more efficient. But would an ordinary murder have caused such a resonance as the use of a chemical warfare agent? Of course not. If Putin needed Navalny's corpse, no one would have saved him.

I don't believe the old woman was killed. I think this is a common provocation of the special services. Too many coincidences that happened too in time … I cannot sympathize with the British special services, who killed the old woman (however, she may have died a natural death) for the sake of unleashing a new round of the next Cold War.
By the way, has the trial already passed in this case? Are there any convicts? Or are you ready to accuse people of murder without trial?

So is Russia not a part of the Commonwealth of Independent States?

Education in NZ is a combination of taxpayer funded and student loans. But I'll admit that people defaulting on their student loans and travelling overseas is an issue.

Actually I think that your chances of dying in a Gulag during Stalin's time were probably greater than at the front.

Trump supporters claim to be muzzled but in truth they've had more than enough publicity. And can you imagine what would happen if protestors tried to force their way into the Russian Parliament?

I can't understand why you think that Novichok is not lethal. Both the Skripals and Navalny were only saved because they received intensive hospital care in time. And the reason it was used is because in small doses it mimics medical complaints.

There is no trial because Russia completely denied any responsibility and would not extradite the suspects. It's hard to have a trial with no one to try. And where did the British Secret Service get Novichok? I don't think that it's freely available on the internet.

And the woman was killed as a by product of the agents dumping the bottle after they had dosed the Skripals. The autopsy revealed the presence of the Novichok. I say Russian agents and you say British agents. Why would the British try to start the Cold War again? Far more likely that Russia would seek revenge against a "traitor".

What the CIS is now is an empty formality. This is not at all what we were promised.

The horrors of the GULAG are greatly exaggerated. The archives have long been opened and available. If you are interested in this topic, then check out the works of a real historian, whose work was carried out using scientific methods, and did not take numbers from gossip and rumors:
link

The problem is that not only Trump supporters are silenced – everyone who goes against the "neoliberal" system in any area is silenced.

I am not a medic, and nevertheless I am perfectly aware of the existence of many poisons that kill effectively and do not leave traces. Similar drugs have been used since the middle of the last century. And why not arrange a primitive car accident? Too difficult, ineffective, and a lot of salutary coincidences … I'm not ready to believe in this.

"Novichok" has long been synthesized in the West. Moreover, the scientist who created it has been living in the USA since 1996 …

The trial of such crimes may well be conducted without the presence of the suspects. You can also interview them on the territory of Russia. As far as I know, no one interfered with this. The verdict may be passed in absentia. But who will be held responsible if later it turns out that the accusations and evidence were lies?
While it was just an informational occasion, nothing more.

The use of a chemical warfare agent on the territory of another state is an act of armed aggression. In fact, it is a ready pretext for war, and certainly for increasing global pressure on Russia. Why should Russia take such risks? Wouldn't it be easier to just shoot Skripal and reduce everything to primitive crime, even if the killer had been arrested?
Why take revenge on a traitor who has long been of no value? He was exposed and convicted in Russia already in 2006. He was in a Russian prison for four years, was pardoned and exchanged for a Russian spy in 2010. Who needs it and why? If they wanted to kill him, he would never have been released from a Russian prison, and, moreover, he would not have gone to the West.

Cuprum I think we should agree to disagree. I've spent enough time arguing this and may be you have too.

Do you play wargames or are you here for the history side of the hobby?

I play wargames, was producing and selling figurines for wargames … and fond of history)))

Do you concentrate on any particular era or are you like me and do anything from Ancient to Science Fiction?

But the Napoleonic era was my original favorite and I keep coming back to it.