Chinese shun Pakistan Exodus

[Reason]

You did not read the text. I said why did Indian then cross the international border with all this support from the US? It still crossed the border. Attacked Pakistan and invaded the territory. Nixon’s actions helped in no way when we were being attacked and my people being killed.

His threat was regarding West Pakistan. He wanted to help in East Pakistan but couldn’t because all of Congress and nearly all the public and media favored Bangladesh/India because of the atrocities Pakistan committed there. Why did Gandhi stop at Bangladesh and not go after Kashmir or other parts of Pakistan?

Back up yur claims with sources. Those figures are incorrect.

The 15,000 figure is well-known. Here is a source: page. 307 of The Soviet Colossus. The one million figure is more murky but it is clear that at least hundreds of thousands of Afghans died, far more than the number of Soviets who died.

[

[URL=“Map of the War in Afghanistan”]Afghanistan](Map of the War in Afghanistan) (1979-2001): 1 800 000 [make link]
[ul]
[li]Soviets vs. Mujahideen vs. Govt. vs. Taliban [estimates listed chronologically][/li][LIST]
[li]War Annual 6 (1994): 1,000,000[/li][li]Britannica Annual (1994): 1,500,000[/li][li]Wallechinsky (1995): 1,300,000[/li][li]D.Smith (1995): 1,500,000[/li][li]B&J (1997): 1,500,000 (1979-95)[/li][li]Dictionary of 20C World History (1997): 1M[/li][li]CDI: 1,550,000 (1978-97)[/li][li]29 April 1999 AP: 2,000,000[/li][li]Dict.Wars: >2M[/li][li]23 May 1999 Denver Rocky Mtn News: 1,800,000[/li][li]Ploughshares 2000: 1,500,000[/li][li][MEDIAN of latest five: 1,800,000][/li][/ul]
[li]Partials[/li][ul]
[li]Soviet Phase and immediate aftermath only[/li][LIST]
[li]Isby, War in a Distant Country: Afghanistan (1989): Civilian deaths:[/li][LIST]
[li]1986 voluntary aid study: 600,000[/li][li]1987 USAID study: 875,000[/li][li]1987 Gallup study: 1,200,000[/li][/ul]
[li]2 June 2002 LA Times: 670,000 civilians during 10-year Soviet occupation[/li][li]Toronto Star (6 May 1991): more than 1,000,000[/li][li]SIPRI 1990: 1,000,000 total dead (the 1988 Yearbook estimated 100-150T battle dead)[/li][li]Minneapolis Star-Tribune (14 Sept. 1991): 1,500,000[/li][li]FAS 2000: 1-2M Afghans (1979-89)[/li][li]USA Today (17 Apr. 1992): more than 2 million.[/li][li][MEDIAN: 1.5M][/li][/LIST]
[li]20 Sept 2001 Christian Science Monitor: 400,000 civilian deaths in the 1990s[/li][/LIST]
[/LIST]

Twentieth Century Atlas - Death Tolls

Secondly victory on the battlefield as per the rules of engagemet is per the last man standing or who holds the most ground. Signalling a retreat which is what the Russians defacto did is a loss. Its not based on numbers, its based on who controls Afghanistan and the Afghans did. That is a victory for them.

They never had more than 2% of their troops in Afghanistan. Do you think the Afghans, who took nearly a decade of fighting each other to resolve their civil war, could have won if the USSR sent even 10% of their troops (500,000)? How about half? 2.5 million? The Soviets fought a limited war with limited objectives. If they fought a total war they would have won easily.

In modern warfare one has the standard military battle and then prepares for the guerrilla war that is to follow.

Iraq’s democratic government has not fallen. Is not this the standard you used in Afghanistan where the Communist government fell? Iraq is increasingly improving. Its economy is growing and the number of terrorist attacks have plummeted.

The americans should have remembered that considering the failure in Vietnam.

There were no separate military and guerrilla phases in Vietnam. The Vietnam effort was a combination of both.

Good post, Raj. It is ridiculous how many fail to see that there is a thing called Islamist ideology and believe any horrendous act committed by a Muslim has to be an Israeli, US, or Indian (in the case of Pakistanis since Arabs don’t care about India) plot.