If the Jan 6 insurrectionists woulda been native or black USA and Canada woulda activated NATO and b0mbed Czechoslovakia and Hungary the next week just like the Ussr
Speaking of Warsaw Pact, I'd love this channel to do a dive into why Yugoslavia never signed up, or why they split with the USSR, or something along those lines. Just an excuse for Tito's letter to Stalin to make an appearance.
I was told by a US Army intelligence officer that in fact some Warsaw Pact forces did eventually make it to Afghanistan, though not in large numbers. Mostly intelligence and logistical types.
I can definitely see intelligence guys going to Afghanistan to observe and learn. Especially since Mujahideen was equipped with NATO weapons and they would definitely want to see how Soviet equipments and strategies fare against those. Edit: I initially wrote Taliban instead of Muhahideen, that's just a slip of my brain.
This is more complicated. There is a parellel in the US experience in Vietnam so I will use that to explain. NATO wasn't involved in Vietnam, but AUS was due to them also seeing the groth of Communism in thier back yard as a threat. Ther Bitish had an exchange officer program and some British officers did serve in Vietnma with AUS units. Likewise many Canadians joined the US Army and also served in Vietnam. The US also had an exchange officer program with the UK as well, and the British MOD lists only one casualty in Vietnam, one of these exchange officers. Interestingly the US Draft is not based on Citizenship but Visa Status and there was at least one UK BBC Jourbalist in the US that was drafted and sent to Vietnam. The SOviets had parallels of all of these programs, exchange officers, and foriengers from Warsaw nations joining the Soviet Military. These people however where considered a formal part of the Soviet(Russian) Miliatary and not the militaries of thier home countries. Exchange officers are considered full(caveats) Officeres off the military they are exchanged with, as distincnted from a liason officer who is assigend to a forigne military post as a representative of that nation.
@@zeroyuki92 Mujahideen, the taliban and the Mujahideen are not the same thing and actually where opposing factions. The Taliban never fought the Soviets. The Taliban formed later after the Soviet War during the Afghan Civil War and were never trained, equiped or had any contact with the west. A brief history, the mujahideen was a loose collection of anti soviet factions, this was the group NATO supplied and supported. After the Soviets left this group fell to infighting between the Northern Alliance primarily led my Ahmed Sha Massoud and various groups in the south primarily the HIG led by Gulbudddin Hekmetyar. This war distabilized the region. The Taliban formed at this time amoung madrassa students in Kanahar. They grew in power allegedly with outside support from various Islamic extreamist groups and forigen goverments that want ed to keep Afghanistan unstable. They eventually where strong enought to take over the south and lay siege to Kabul. This led to the next phase of the Civil war between the Northern Alliance and the Taliban, which was the situation in the country on 9/11/2001. After which the US reestablished contact with the northern Alliance, the Mujahideen it had supported earlier, against the Taliban. The US War in Afghanistan ensued with the Taliban becoming the insurgency and the Northern Alliance(mujahideen) becoming the GIROA.
@channel you call it invasion, but the Afghan gov actially called for help to the Sovjets. And US counter measures led to the attrition war which then happened.
0:11 It should be noted that, while a number of countries sent troops to Vietnam to support the Americans, none of those countries were in NATO. The US instead relied on allies in the Pacific like Australia, Korea and the Philippines.
Hello, historian of the Afghan wars here. A great video but I’d say the soviets were very much concerned about that the international opinion of their invasion was. They leaned heavily on the Afghan governments request for aid as their justification. They were just willing to risk international outrage because the thought the conflict would be over relatively quickly. The politburo and foreign ministry were very active after the invasion trying to mitigate the damage.
@@SeverityOne that type of thinking took place in many countries around the globe during different time periods. In fact, that particular though led countries into long wars in the first place. World Wars, Russo-Japanese, Finno-Soviet, Folkland Islands, Napoleon, this list may go on forever. One thing for sure: countries attack when they are convinced of their invincibility
@@livethefuture2492 closed off? It was actively engaged in the Cold War. Afghanistan was a close and historic friend who held a position of influence among the non-aligned nations movement. It had also recently sponsored two successful communist coups in Africa and wanted to prove itself in the Middle East as well. Just because the Soviet internal society was closed off doesn’t mean it wasn’t very active in international relations. It wanted as many friends as possible.
@@Unicalnetwork Yes, very much so. And we may add another one: countries don't particularly think beyond the victory. Even if you score an easy victory after an asymmetric war, after that you need to manage the presumably occupied country. And not think: "We gave them freedom, so everything is solved now."
Sapkowski, the author of the Witcher books, wrote a book about a Polish soldier serving in the Red Army in Afghanistan (until a bunch of weird magical stuff happens). It was called "Viper".
@@LittkeTM Yeah bro you are right, every modern story with mythological creatures in it is a rip off. You can't have werewolves, vampires, dragons and so on, very logical.
@Łukasz Porycki Cool story bro, too bad he takes entire characters and plots, changes some words, and resells it as his own. The Witcher is a point for point retelling of The Elric series and every other series or he has made has another story predating his that "inspire him." He's less creative than JK Rowling.
@@crispykneecaps7209 _because russia wanted to convince the world it was still a superpower by invading another nation and that it could do it on its own. Also, because of already existing tensions and issues present within the alliance pushing for assistance would likely strain their relationship further._ Yeah, it certainly does rhyme
These videos are always gems, but the newspapers are my favorite parts. So much wit crammed into a tiny newspaper that shows up on screen for around 2 seconds
Fun fact: Many former Warsaw Pact countries (like Poland, Czechia and Hungary) actually had troops stationed in Afghanistan back when the US had a go at invading the country. They were operating under the ISAF-mission (international Security Assistance Force)
Once in a blue moon there were noticeable cracks in the Warsaw Pact alliance. Like when the East Germans were upset the USSR made them boycott the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics (payback for the American-led boycott of the 1980 Moscow Games). They told the Soviets that they would defy any boycott calls of the 1988 Seoul Olympics despite South Korea being on the other side of the Cold War.
@@Eygam1 or that other time they invaded their own member.........or the other time they (basically) invaded their own member..........................
It seems like how the CSTO isn't joining Russia in Ukraine right now. I'm sure some of those countries are providing some kind of intelligence support.
Or when the Soviet Troops began marching onto Warsaw during party elections in Poland. Long story short the new first secretary has historically been aligned with Bukharin against Stalin which was frowned upon even after destalinization and acted quite liberal (he wasn't)
@@garcjr Isn't the CSTO only 3 other states? Kazakhstan, Belarus, and Armenia. Kazakhstan idk about, while Belarus is definitely providing logistical support, but Armenia is having it's own dispute with a neighbor and tried to invoke the CSTO defense pact but Russia literally ignored them so I doubt they're keen on providing any support. Something about their foreign policy of bullying weaker neighbors into unfavorable terms seems to leave them with few steadfast and useful allies.
It is worth mention that the USSR had successful experience of fighting against the insurgents in the former Central Asian part of the Russian empire, getting it under control and pacifying it in the 1920-1930s, ("Basmachi movement"). That included two interventions in Afghanistan in 1929 and 1930. Most likely, party high ranks remembered that and thought something similar could work again.
The political situation was different, more Afghans were radicalized against "communist" influences after the Saur revolution and disastrous reforms by the PDPA that followed. The previous interventions were just the Soviets playing kingmaker with local despots that the average Afghan didn't care about, but by trying to restructure their society at a fundamental level the USSR and PDPA ended up pissing off the tribal elites and commoners.
My relatives who were in the PDPA and the army were a part of a faction that didn’t want the Saur Revolution to happen. They believe it was too soon! We were not ready! They were right.
This channel answers all sorts of interesting questions I never knew I needed answered, and it does it in a really entertaining way. The little South Park style people squinting suspiciously and (my personal favorite) sliding in close to each other to emphasize menacing intent is really funny.
The Warsaw Pact had no obligation to help the Soviets in Afghanistan, as it was a defensive alliance and thus was only obligated to step in if Warsaw Pact territory was attacked, not to help in offensive military operations. It’s the same principle for why NATO had no obligation to help the US during its invasion of Iraq.
Yeah, that's like theory but in practice all members acted as vassal states or satellites to be more era correct. US never had nowhere of the control over NATO members as USSR of Warsaw Pact countries. So no obligation and not having means to force them to help, did they liked it or not, are two different things entirely.
@andrzejnadgirl2029 The USA exercises much more control over NATO members than the USSR over the Warsaw pact, or the Russian federation over CIS members. Do you ask as much more compliance, and it’s foreign policy goals from its alliance members than the Russians have ever gotten from theirs. The US also much more sharply punishes members who do not comply with its wishes. Example sanctioning and boycotting France after it refused to go all in on the Iraq invasion insanity in 2003. Then there was kicking Turkey out of the F35 program over purchasing weapons from non-alliance members. And most notably back in July, there was the attempt at overthrowing the Georgian government, because the Georgians refuse to go all in all the hate Russia craze, but they also attempted to pass a law that would disclose the origin of foreign money in their politics. Russia, by comparison does not rope all of its allies in on its current projects, and allows a much greater degree of freedom in its coalition.
These are always great videos. Now he needs to do videos on the following subjects: 1. Why did the revolution of 1848 fail in Germany and Spain? 2. Why do people drive on different sides of the road in different countries?
They drive on the left in Britain because of farmers. And every other country that drives on the left is because of the British Empire. Either through being a colony, or Britain helping industrialize the nation (Japan). Although Japan's left side use of pathing predates British involvement, the fact they DRIVE on the left side is very much due to how they were industrialized rather than their history. Worth noting that Okinawa was under US control after WW2 and were made to drive on the RIGHT. When they were re-integrated with Japan, they switched back to the LEFT side.
I absolutely loved this episode! I always wondered why the Warsaw Pact didn't get involved in the USSR's invasion of Afghanistan, and your explanation makes complete sense. It's fascinating to see the different factors that played a role, from the defensive nature of the pact to the limitations of the member countries' militaries. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and insights. Keep up the great work!
I mean while America ropes, Veneto club into whatever its current adventure is invades far more countries, and yet somehow talks about being a force for peace
Hahahaha, that newspaper at 2:24 is once again BRILLIANT! "...who agreed to speak to us on condition we guard the door for him" somehow it is just too funny in that context. Also, 2 children in a trench coat running off with 22% of Soviet GDP made my day hahaha. Best history channel in the world 🤣
It's funnier, because it was only due to P. Vlasov interviewing that he could not guard the door to Kremlin, which allowed the children to steal the pens.
It should be noted, however, that some Warsaw Pact countries did dispatch "Advisors" to Afghanistan, that helped train the Afghan Army, I put that in quotations, because many of those advisors were actually intelligence troops that worked with the Soviets. It is known, that the East German STASI send operatives to Afghanistan, working alongside KGB units there. Cuba, while not a Warsaw Pact country, also helped out with advisors and such.
I heard that Some communist allies of USSR (East Germnay, Cuba, Vietnam, Bulgaria and Czechoslovakia) did secretly send some troops, numbering around 100,000 troops (This was reported by two officers of the communist Afghan secret service 'KhAD' who defected to Pakistan). I saw a documentary about the Mujahideen fighting the Soviets around Kandahar. The footage showed a dead Cuban soldier (one of the Afghan resistance fighters himself said that in Pashto) East German Stasi and Indian government was also involved in Afghanistan
If this was the case these were probably volunteers and not regular troops. Like the Spanish troops who fought against the Soviets in WW2 (Blue Division). This does not mean either that Spain or the Spanish Army itself fought in WW2.
Stasi? Stasi were normal people who ratted out their neighbors to the government. They weren't really some kind of elite secret police. My dads stasi files were as thick as a book and he knows exactly which neighbors were selling his info to the state, you can request them from the government now when you were alive back then.
@@dabbasw31 This must be it because I met a AA mechanic many years ago who told me about growing up in Czechoslovakia and when he learnt I was in the military he told me how he served in Afghanistan. Absolutely wild.
@@josecipriano3048 It really wasn't like that. You should know that Thai people have no ill-will towards Viet Nam or Vietnamese people. Even Vietnamese want to move on from that conflict. Thailand's main concern was stability of a region it traditionally had an interest in. To put things very simply, things during the Indo-China conflict got very out of control. Thai and Vietnam today are part of ASEAN and generally have very good relations.
This channel is perfect, and not just because it is very fun and informative, but also these guys are making videos in an academic view. The organization and quality of your videos are tremendous. Thank you for bringing us, history nerds, such pleasure.
Can you make a video why in the Lybian Civil War each sides´ supporters were so weird (similar to the nigeria CW video), and also make a video why Napoleon wasn´t just executed after all the chaos he brought?
AKs throughout the Communist countries, M14s for the Americans in Viet Nam, I absolutely love the attention to detail given to these videos. Thanks for all you do for us!
@John Williamson in the first couple of years of the war (1965-1967) the standard issue us rifle was the m14 depicted in the video. Only after 1967 did it become the standard us service rifle.
2:24 Pravda, Dec.1. 1979: Leonid, or Leon to his chums, has made a formal plea to Poland, East Germany and Romania to provide as many men as possible. "We can literally drown this country in dudes. Just chaps in uniform all over the place. They literally won't stand a chance and odds are they'll run out of ammo before we run out of your kids."
Funny, I was asking the same question the other day when I was writing my alternative history where the Soviets won the cold war and expanded the Warsaw pact west.
I think that the USSR avoided bringing the intervention in Afghanistan into the discussion of the Warsaw Pact because it would have met opposition. Romania would certainly have opposed it as it did to the intervention in Czechoslovakia in 1968.
I read somewhere that the Warsaw Pact was abit different from Nato. Basically the USSR had several bilateral defence treaties with eastern european countries and packaged them into one alliance. Except unlike Nato which is the social media group where all members were admins, warsaw pact had one admin who decided how each group member was treated. Just what i read.
@@ebrim5013 So what? That does not change the truth: members of NATO are our slaves. When we say: "die four our cause" they say: "where and when?" As an american, i'm proud of our government.
Funny in the Anime Black Lagoon The Russian mafia leader was a paratrooper during that war saying she knew Romanian because some fought alongside the USSR
Maybe it would makes more sense if she was a Soviet advisor that fought in Angola. Since there were also some Romanians involved with very small numbers as well
Europeans hasn't yet settled the east coast at the time of the civil war, but (native) Americans had formed the Iroquois Confederacy, a political union which some scholars believe inspired the Framers.
Well put. I'd say that in 1979, they didn't really care about whether satellites had a military capability to be of any help, and at the latest after 1981 Jaruzelski coup in Poland, they couldn't draw forces from Warsaw Pact even if they wanted to. Despite not sending any troops, however, Warsaw Pact countries were involved in providing economic aid to Soviet puppet government in Afghanistan.
@@recoil53 Also true. They could get uppity if they got any sort of military competence. That said, I think that Soviet military was at that point pretty inept, too. Corruption, endemic alcoholism, promotions based on political loyalty instead of merit, lack of professional NCOs, relying on hazed conscripts. It just had the numbers and in conventional fight, it usually pounced on a much weaker target. What kept that dumpsterfire around for so long was the nukes. That is not to say that some of Soviet military equipment was not top notch.
@@kingofcards9 The Soviets never sponsored the coup. The Saur Revolution of 1978 was done by majority Khalq party members and they wanted to distance themselves from the Soviets a little bit. That’s what differentiated them from the moderate Parcham faction. The coup and its plans were so secretive that even Soviets who were already in Afghanistan prior to the coup were unaware until it actually happened, or when the PDPA stormed RTA station. My grandpa, an Afghan Army officer in 1978, had no knowledge of this coup and thought we were being invaded by Pakistan. Suddenly, he sees they’re Afghan soldiers so he just walks home to see the news. RTA station has been taken by the communists.
not prevent but to stop it. The Islamists existed as a party in the 60s and started militant activities in 1974 but they only had PAkistani support. After 1978 they got american support which is when the Afghan gov asked the Soviets for help.
Russia's Vietnam. But yes at the same time, since Russia dominated the USSR politically and culturally. Russia can try to conquer Ukraine, but the longer the war takes, the more it's being humiliated on the world stage. As well as more war crimes.
@@ecurewitz Ukraine is a full-blown first-half-of-the-20th-century-like international conflict, not some anti-partisan grinding across a jungle/desert.
@@yarpen26 Exactly, not comparable at all. The Russians are actually suffering major strategic defeats. It's not just some guerillas blowing stuff up.
@@samoldfield5220 Being an asshole and being a genius are not mutually exclusive. I call it Sherlock Holmes Effect. Dr. House Effect if your under 30. Tony Stark Effect if you're like...12 or something? Idk
Good video, although I have a few doubts about the Warsaw Pact being purely defensive, and the militaries of countries like Poland and East Germany being designed just to hold off NATO because in the 60s the Polish Military was planning for an invasion of Denmark. Yes, really. Edit: It was, of course, a part of larger Soviet offensive plans, not a Polish idea.
There were no NATO plans to invade Eastern Europe. In the European area, Russia + Warsaw Pact had about 50,000 tanks (yeah, a lot of f*cking tanks) compared to about half that on the NATO side, so even if NATO wanted to (which it did not) the idea of a NATO invasion was a pipedream. Further, part of NATO defense plans was for US soldiers to fly into Europe and pick up tanks that were pre-positioned there. That is to say, a lot of NATO tanks tasked with defending Europe didn't even have their soldiers stationed on the same continent. The question was how long it would take the Sovs to get to Atlantic once the balloon went up - one week? Two? Another big difference between NATO and Warsaw Pact - NATO had a no first use of nuclear weapons policy, Soviet Union did not. In fact, the Soviet Union, in many ways, viewed tactical nukes as just another weapon to use, whereas it was a big fricking deal to shift from conventional to nukes on the western side. Cold War projections about what a Soviet invasion would be like were insane. The projected lifetime for a tank entering the battlefield was something like a minute.
I don't they were planning to invade Denmark. They drew up plans for an invasion of Denmark because it's the military's job be prepared for such things, but that doesn't mean that they were actually planning on doing it. Something I always like to point out is that the US, UK and Nazi Germany all drew up plans for an invasion of Ireland. But none of them every really had plans to actually invade, they were just preparing for every eventuality.
That was probably meant in the way that the invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviets couldn't be framed as a "defensive" action since the Warsaw pact was not attacked by the Mujahedeen. The reason all of NATO got involved in AFG was that article 5 was invoked as a result of 9/11, unlike in Iraq, where most of the US's allies did not take part.
Soviet Army 1979: Comrades! we can embark on this glorious heroic endeavor alone! Russian Army 2022: Comrades! we can embark on this glorious heroic endeavor alone!
@@ShinigamiInuyasha777 Except they did beat them. They took over Afghanistan in literally 2 weeks with only 5 casualties or something. Then they removed all their troops. They only left a very small amount of troops in the country and the Taliban almost never attacked them because they knew they didn't stand a chance. Instead they attacked the forces of the Afghan government. The America military in no way struggled with the Taliban. They just didn't have enough troops to cover the whole country because the US didn't want to do a large scale occupation.
@@Hollows1997considering they attacked first, its probably more like that spongebob episode where he charges someone enthusiastically and then gets knocked flat and tries again
This channel has a skill for answering questions that I never knew I had, and yet desperately needed the answers to
Yea
so true
Ong
If the Jan 6 insurrectionists woulda been native or black USA and Canada woulda activated NATO and b0mbed Czechoslovakia and Hungary the next week just like the Ussr
Agreed
Speaking of Warsaw Pact, I'd love this channel to do a dive into why Yugoslavia never signed up, or why they split with the USSR, or something along those lines. Just an excuse for Tito's letter to Stalin to make an appearance.
Hell yeah! I love Tito's letter so much!
Because Yugoslavia was a "neutral" nation and it also wasn't a puppet of the Bolsheviks so it wasn't necessary or beneficial for them to sign it.
That was done a while Adam.
Well, seeing your comment, I had to go and Google Tito's letter to Stalin, and I was not disappointed - thank you!
The letter is fake, Stalin explicitly told his confidants that murdering Tito wasn't an option. We have a transcription of that conversation.
I was told by a US Army intelligence officer that in fact some Warsaw Pact forces did eventually make it to Afghanistan, though not in large numbers. Mostly intelligence and logistical types.
And the secret services of Warsaw Pact nations were involved, like the East German Stasi.
Interesting
I can definitely see intelligence guys going to Afghanistan to observe and learn. Especially since Mujahideen was equipped with NATO weapons and they would definitely want to see how Soviet equipments and strategies fare against those.
Edit: I initially wrote Taliban instead of Muhahideen, that's just a slip of my brain.
This is more complicated. There is a parellel in the US experience in Vietnam so I will use that to explain. NATO wasn't involved in Vietnam, but AUS was due to them also seeing the groth of Communism in thier back yard as a threat. Ther Bitish had an exchange officer program and some British officers did serve in Vietnma with AUS units. Likewise many Canadians joined the US Army and also served in Vietnam. The US also had an exchange officer program with the UK as well, and the British MOD lists only one casualty in Vietnam, one of these exchange officers. Interestingly the US Draft is not based on Citizenship but Visa Status and there was at least one UK BBC Jourbalist in the US that was drafted and sent to Vietnam. The SOviets had parallels of all of these programs, exchange officers, and foriengers from Warsaw nations joining the Soviet Military. These people however where considered a formal part of the Soviet(Russian) Miliatary and not the militaries of thier home countries. Exchange officers are considered full(caveats) Officeres off the military they are exchanged with, as distincnted from a liason officer who is assigend to a forigne military post as a representative of that nation.
@@zeroyuki92 Mujahideen, the taliban and the Mujahideen are not the same thing and actually where opposing factions. The Taliban never fought the Soviets. The Taliban formed later after the Soviet War during the Afghan Civil War and were never trained, equiped or had any contact with the west. A brief history, the mujahideen was a loose collection of anti soviet factions, this was the group NATO supplied and supported. After the Soviets left this group fell to infighting between the Northern Alliance primarily led my Ahmed Sha Massoud and various groups in the south primarily the HIG led by Gulbudddin Hekmetyar. This war distabilized the region. The Taliban formed at this time amoung madrassa students in Kanahar. They grew in power allegedly with outside support from various Islamic extreamist groups and forigen goverments that want ed to keep Afghanistan unstable. They eventually where strong enought to take over the south and lay siege to Kabul. This led to the next phase of the Civil war between the Northern Alliance and the Taliban, which was the situation in the country on 9/11/2001. After which the US reestablished contact with the northern Alliance, the Mujahideen it had supported earlier, against the Taliban. The US War in Afghanistan ensued with the Taliban becoming the insurgency and the Northern Alliance(mujahideen) becoming the GIROA.
I love how these videos ask questions I never thought about or ever cared to think of but the answers are satisfyingly simple and logical
I love when I find other based Hungarians in the comment section, love my nation being educated😏😉 Üdv a magyarhonból✌🏽
Stolen comment
I love how I see the same comment under every video.
Wait... I don't
@@aayushbhatt449 No. Just a very common one.
@channel you call it invasion, but the Afghan gov actially called for help to the Sovjets. And US counter measures led to the attrition war which then happened.
0:11 It should be noted that, while a number of countries sent troops to Vietnam to support the Americans, none of those countries were in NATO. The US instead relied on allies in the Pacific like Australia, Korea and the Philippines.
Indeed; Canada, the UK, and France outright refused to participate.
I wonder why
@@albertrex6851: Regional interests dictated priorities, probably, on both ends.
Yet when the US invaded Iraq, and Afghanistan every NATO member state had soldiers on the ground at some stage
Yup. History Matters did a video a few years back, “Why Didn’t Britain Fight in Vietnam?”
James Bissonette simply told the Warsaw Pact he could handle it himself.
Yes but Boogly Woogly and Spinning Three Plates provided funds and arms for James' invasion.
Nah, James Bissonette would have actually won.
That was a gambit of his, only to later not help the Soviets, whom he secretly hated, and help ending the USSR.
Well played Bissonette, well played.
@Rzepki ….nah
It was a plot by Kelly Money Maker to undermine the influence os the soviets with the help of certain intel agencies and 'students' movement. haha
I love the amount of effort you put into the newspapers lol
Poor P.Vlasov
@@Dourkan His career is finished
22% GDP
Always gotta pause the video and read the news!
Can we appreciate the amount of effort he puts into creating Pravda the newspaper
Hello, historian of the Afghan wars here. A great video but I’d say the soviets were very much concerned about that the international opinion of their invasion was. They leaned heavily on the Afghan governments request for aid as their justification. They were just willing to risk international outrage because the thought the conflict would be over relatively quickly. The politburo and foreign ministry were very active after the invasion trying to mitigate the damage.
Thinking that the war will be over quickly appears to be a recurring theme in Russian/Soviet military thinking.
@@SeverityOne that type of thinking took place in many countries around the globe during different time periods. In fact, that particular though led countries into long wars in the first place. World Wars, Russo-Japanese, Finno-Soviet, Folkland Islands, Napoleon, this list may go on forever. One thing for sure: countries attack when they are convinced of their invincibility
Why would a closed off nation like the ussr care about their image?
@@livethefuture2492 closed off? It was actively engaged in the Cold War. Afghanistan was a close and historic friend who held a position of influence among the non-aligned nations movement. It had also recently sponsored two successful communist coups in Africa and wanted to prove itself in the Middle East as well. Just because the Soviet internal society was closed off doesn’t mean it wasn’t very active in international relations. It wanted as many friends as possible.
@@Unicalnetwork Yes, very much so. And we may add another one: countries don't particularly think beyond the victory. Even if you score an easy victory after an asymmetric war, after that you need to manage the presumably occupied country. And not think: "We gave them freedom, so everything is solved now."
Sapkowski, the author of the Witcher books, wrote a book about a Polish soldier serving in the Red Army in Afghanistan (until a bunch of weird magical stuff happens). It was called "Viper".
Yeah, he took one of the Soviet military urban legends about Afghanistan and turned it into a book.
@@ДенисЯсников-ы8я So he plagiarized yet again?
@@LittkeTM Yeah bro you are right, every modern story with mythological creatures in it is a rip off. You can't have werewolves, vampires, dragons and so on, very logical.
@Łukasz Porycki Cool story bro, too bad he takes entire characters and plots, changes some words, and resells it as his own.
The Witcher is a point for point retelling of The Elric series and every other series or he has made has another story predating his that "inspire him."
He's less creative than JK Rowling.
@@LittkeTM If you say so.
“History never repeats itself, but it does often rhyme.”
-Mark Twain
I am aware of this wonderful saying, but was ignorant about the attribution. Now I know. Thank you!
Video in 40 years time, "Why didn't CSTO help Russia in Ukraine?"
@@crispykneecaps7209 _because russia wanted to convince the world it was still a superpower by invading another nation and that it could do it on its own. Also, because of already existing tensions and issues present within the alliance pushing for assistance would likely strain their relationship further._
Yeah, it certainly does rhyme
I have my gripes with Twain but I fully agree with this statement.
I thought that was a James Bissonette quote...
These videos are always gems, but the newspapers are my favorite parts. So much wit crammed into a tiny newspaper that shows up on screen for around 2 seconds
History Matters: UA-cam's only channel with a watch time longer than the videos ;-)
I’m hoping he can do one on the origin of the gold standard and why it became the default for currency basing
There will be videos from other YT creators, though not quite as funny.
Followed by the origin of the fiat standard and why it became the default for currency debasing
@@phil2544 ?
@@clouds-rb9xt??
that would be a much longer video...
Fun fact: Many former Warsaw Pact countries (like Poland, Czechia and Hungary) actually had troops stationed in Afghanistan back when the US had a go at invading the country. They were operating under the ISAF-mission (international Security Assistance Force)
Ah yes, I Saw Americans Fighting. 😁
Well yeah NATO was in Afghanistan because of Article 5
Once in a blue moon there were noticeable cracks in the Warsaw Pact alliance. Like when the East Germans were upset the USSR made them boycott the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics (payback for the American-led boycott of the 1980 Moscow Games). They told the Soviets that they would defy any boycott calls of the 1988 Seoul Olympics despite South Korea being on the other side of the Cold War.
Or when they like... invaded their own member.
@@Eygam1 or that other time they invaded their own member.........or the other time they (basically) invaded their own member..........................
It seems like how the CSTO isn't joining Russia in Ukraine right now. I'm sure some of those countries are providing some kind of intelligence support.
Or when the Soviet Troops began marching onto Warsaw during party elections in Poland. Long story short the new first secretary has historically been aligned with Bukharin against Stalin which was frowned upon even after destalinization and acted quite liberal (he wasn't)
@@garcjr Isn't the CSTO only 3 other states? Kazakhstan, Belarus, and Armenia. Kazakhstan idk about, while Belarus is definitely providing logistical support, but Armenia is having it's own dispute with a neighbor and tried to invoke the CSTO defense pact but Russia literally ignored them so I doubt they're keen on providing any support.
Something about their foreign policy of bullying weaker neighbors into unfavorable terms seems to leave them with few steadfast and useful allies.
It is worth mention that the USSR had successful experience of fighting against the insurgents in the former Central Asian part of the Russian empire, getting it under control and pacifying it in the 1920-1930s, ("Basmachi movement"). That included two interventions in Afghanistan in 1929 and 1930. Most likely, party high ranks remembered that and thought something similar could work again.
The political situation was different, more Afghans were radicalized against "communist" influences after the Saur revolution and disastrous reforms by the PDPA that followed. The previous interventions were just the Soviets playing kingmaker with local despots that the average Afghan didn't care about, but by trying to restructure their society at a fundamental level the USSR and PDPA ended up pissing off the tribal elites and commoners.
My relatives who were in the PDPA and the army were a part of a faction that didn’t want the Saur Revolution to happen. They believe it was too soon! We were not ready! They were right.
@@meatiest1989 Are your relatives, are you Aryan or Abd Berber?
@@عليياسر-ذ5ب Pashayi Indo Aryans, similar to Nuristani people
@@meatiest1989 You are from the Vikings tribe, why did your most recent Vikings leave and go with their Aryan brothers?
This channel answers all sorts of interesting questions I never knew I needed answered, and it does it in a really entertaining way. The little South Park style people squinting suspiciously and (my personal favorite) sliding in close to each other to emphasize menacing intent is really funny.
These 3 minute history lessons always have laughs thrown in for good measure!
The Warsaw Pact had no obligation to help the Soviets in Afghanistan, as it was a defensive alliance and thus was only obligated to step in if Warsaw Pact territory was attacked, not to help in offensive military operations.
It’s the same principle for why NATO had no obligation to help the US during its invasion of Iraq.
This. It is annoying to see this treated with such reflexive disdain that would never be applied to a similar western organization.
but nato helped during the invasion of libya even tho it was offensive
Yeah, that's like theory but in practice all members acted as vassal states or satellites to be more era correct.
US never had nowhere of the control over NATO members as USSR of Warsaw Pact countries.
So no obligation and not having means to force them to help, did they liked it or not, are two different things entirely.
This was literally explained in the video.
@andrzejnadgirl2029
The USA exercises much more control over NATO members than the USSR over the Warsaw pact, or the Russian federation over CIS members.
Do you ask as much more compliance, and it’s foreign policy goals from its alliance members than the Russians have ever gotten from theirs. The US also much more sharply punishes members who do not comply with its wishes. Example sanctioning and boycotting France after it refused to go all in on the Iraq invasion insanity in 2003. Then there was kicking Turkey out of the F35 program over purchasing weapons from non-alliance members. And most notably back in July, there was the attempt at overthrowing the Georgian government, because the Georgians refuse to go all in all the hate Russia craze, but they also attempted to pass a law that would disclose the origin of foreign money in their politics.
Russia, by comparison does not rope all of its allies in on its current projects, and allows a much greater degree of freedom in its coalition.
These are always great videos. Now he needs to do videos on the following subjects:
1. Why did the revolution of 1848 fail in Germany and Spain?
2. Why do people drive on different sides of the road in different countries?
1. No real central leader for Germany and Spain was in a Civil War at the time.
2.Much like many other things in history, Napoleon and Imperialism.
They drive on the left in Britain because of farmers. And every other country that drives on the left is because of the British Empire.
Either through being a colony, or Britain helping industrialize the nation (Japan).
Although Japan's left side use of pathing predates British involvement, the fact they DRIVE on the left side is very much due to how they were industrialized rather than their history.
Worth noting that Okinawa was under US control after WW2 and were made to drive on the RIGHT. When they were re-integrated with Japan, they switched back to the LEFT side.
Thank you once again for answering a question nobody knew they wanted the answer to
"Die slowly..." for me as a Polish guy - it is funny and sad at the same time. Good vid as always.
I wish there were screenshots of the newspapers; they're never clear enough for me to read all the stories. Another interesting video.
Have you tried manually setting the video to 720p or higher?
I absolutely loved this episode! I always wondered why the Warsaw Pact didn't get involved in the USSR's invasion of Afghanistan, and your explanation makes complete sense. It's fascinating to see the different factors that played a role, from the defensive nature of the pact to the limitations of the member countries' militaries. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and insights. Keep up the great work!
I mean while America ropes, Veneto club into whatever its current adventure is invades far more countries, and yet somehow talks about being a force for peace
Hahahaha, that newspaper at 2:24 is once again BRILLIANT! "...who agreed to speak to us on condition we guard the door for him" somehow it is just too funny in that context. Also, 2 children in a trench coat running off with 22% of Soviet GDP made my day hahaha. Best history channel in the world 🤣
It's funnier, because it was only due to P. Vlasov interviewing that he could not guard the door to Kremlin, which allowed the children to steal the pens.
I love pausing the video to read the letters and newspaper articles, they never disappoint.
Wonderful upload!
oh my lord
Finally, the mastermind has shown himself.
James Bissonette, what were you doing from 1933-1945??🤨
We shall bow to you and fight in your name, our great King.
A video about trade relations between the eastern and western blocks of the Cold War would be an interesting video
Very interesting insight, I learned a lot about the Warsaw Pact's purpose!
Great video, I hadn't thought about it before but it's great information. Keep up the great work.
It should be noted, however, that some Warsaw Pact countries did dispatch "Advisors" to Afghanistan, that helped train the Afghan Army, I put that in quotations, because many of those advisors were actually intelligence troops that worked with the Soviets. It is known, that the East German STASI send operatives to Afghanistan, working alongside KGB units there. Cuba, while not a Warsaw Pact country, also helped out with advisors and such.
My uncles were in the Afghan KHAD intelligence agency during this time and they got sent to Warsaw Pact countries and Uzbekistan
I heard that Some communist allies of USSR (East Germnay, Cuba, Vietnam, Bulgaria and Czechoslovakia) did secretly send some troops, numbering around 100,000 troops (This was reported by two officers of the communist Afghan secret service 'KhAD' who defected to Pakistan).
I saw a documentary about the Mujahideen fighting the Soviets around Kandahar. The footage showed a dead Cuban soldier (one of the Afghan resistance fighters himself said that in Pashto)
East German Stasi and Indian government
was also involved in Afghanistan
If this was the case these were probably volunteers and not regular troops. Like the Spanish troops who fought against the Soviets in WW2 (Blue Division). This does not mean either that Spain or the Spanish Army itself fought in WW2.
Stasi? Stasi were normal people who ratted out their neighbors to the government. They weren't really some kind of elite secret police. My dads stasi files were as thick as a book and he knows exactly which neighbors were selling his info to the state, you can request them from the government now when you were alive back then.
@@dabbasw31 This must be it because I met a AA mechanic many years ago who told me about growing up in Czechoslovakia and when he learnt I was in the military he told me how he served in Afghanistan. Absolutely wild.
Of course the Cubans went. They tried to involve themselves in every communist war that happened around the world.
Do you have any proof or anything for the KHAD statement? I have six known uncles who were in KHAD so I’m interested
"Die slowly" OMG! Love it 1:48
This channel is great. man. The newspaper was fantastic!
You’ve done a lot of these, so I was thinking of a good video Idea:
Why did Thailand join the Axis? They joined Japan’s side in WW2.
They also joined the fascists during the Vietnam war.
@@josecipriano3048 how were south vietnam fascist
@@josecipriano3048 It really wasn't like that. You should know that Thai people have no ill-will towards Viet Nam or Vietnamese people. Even Vietnamese want to move on from that conflict. Thailand's main concern was stability of a region it traditionally had an interest in. To put things very simply, things during the Indo-China conflict got very out of control. Thai and Vietnam today are part of ASEAN and generally have very good relations.
Its actually a very simple question
Thailand want to keep the western empires out of their borders
This channel is perfect, and not just because it is very fun and informative, but also these guys are making videos in an academic view. The organization and quality of your videos are tremendous. Thank you for bringing us, history nerds, such pleasure.
This is a question I haven't even considered before, but it makes sense. Sending in Warsaw Pact soldiers would have gotten quite messy.
Ahhh. Missed the skipping through the daisies. ❤️
Fantastic take on Mrs Thatcher too.
Brilliant detail.
Answering the questions no one asked
I think James Bissonette should have his own patron page so we can say thank you to him.
Can you make a video why in the Lybian Civil War each sides´ supporters were so weird (similar to the nigeria CW video), and also make a video why Napoleon wasn´t just executed after all the chaos he brought?
Because the French decided that killing their leaders was so 18th century.
This is the first time you presented something that I never considered.
AKs throughout the Communist countries, M14s for the Americans in Viet Nam, I absolutely love the attention to detail given to these videos. Thanks for all you do for us!
@John Williamson in the first couple of years of the war (1965-1967) the standard issue us rifle was the m14 depicted in the video. Only after 1967 did it become the standard us service rifle.
@johnwilliamson3752 No, M14s. Look at the video.
Its always a good day when History Matters uploads, especially when its your birthday
Well, the nations of the Warsaw pact were supposed to fight in the area of the world where the pact's namesake is located. That being eastern Europe.
And West Germany. 🤣
Really loving Brezhnev's *slightly* thicker eyebrows
jesus, now that is a good observation if i ever saw one.
2:24 Pravda, Dec.1. 1979: Leonid, or Leon to his chums, has made a formal plea to Poland, East Germany and Romania to provide as many men as possible. "We can literally drown this country in dudes. Just chaps in uniform all over the place. They literally won't stand a chance and odds are they'll run out of ammo before we run out of your kids."
Soviet Military Strategy be like
2:24 is comedy gold. Especially the one about the 'anonymous' KGB agent.
Funny, I was asking the same question the other day when I was writing my alternative history where the Soviets won the cold war and expanded the Warsaw pact west.
I love your work, been a viewer for years :)
Love your videos! I'd love to see more content on the Caucasus and Middle East.
Your videos are very informative. If you shared the sources of information from your videos, I would subscribe.
Leaping through the flowers never gets old 😂
Excellent summation!
I think that the USSR avoided bringing the intervention in Afghanistan into the discussion of the Warsaw Pact because it would have met opposition. Romania would certainly have opposed it as it did to the intervention in Czechoslovakia in 1968.
Another amazing video
Can you do what happened to the japanese and german warships and tanks when they were dimilitarized and occupied after world war ii
Many of the survivors got nuked at Bikini Atoll.
@@mikeynth7919 idk why, but my brain immediately thought the survivors you were referring to were the crews of the ships.
Yes, I did enjoy this episode. Please keep up the great work!
GF's thoughts: I can't wait to plan our wedding
BF's thoughts : why didn't the soviet union's allies help in Afghanistan
Underrated comment
Read the newspaper in these videos. It’s always worth it.
“Pravda: Man Sneaks into Kremlin” Can that be the next video?
Very in-depth and well put together video thanks for the information blessed be.
I read somewhere that the Warsaw Pact was abit different from Nato. Basically the USSR had several bilateral defence treaties with eastern european countries and packaged them into one alliance. Except unlike Nato which is the social media group where all members were admins, warsaw pact had one admin who decided how each group member was treated. Just what i read.
there is only one admin in NATO to be fair.
@@ikipemiko yeah, that’s why Finland and Sweden are already in the alliance… oh wait…
@@ebrim5013 So what? That does not change the truth: members of NATO are our slaves. When we say: "die four our cause" they say: "where and when?" As an american, i'm proud of our government.
2:23 these news papers get me every time, they are just so funny
What about a video on the reason why Brazil kept the war against Paraguay after Argentina and Uruguay had already stopped it?
Nice to know as usual.
Can you do a video about the boer wars?
Not the Pravda newspaper. "The children managed to escape with three pens and a paperclip. Roughly equivalent to 22% of Soviet GDP in this period" 😂
I love that little spec in the Warsaw Pact
Funny in the Anime Black Lagoon The Russian mafia leader was a paratrooper during that war saying she knew Romanian because some fought alongside the USSR
Maybe it would makes more sense if she was a Soviet advisor that fought in Angola. Since there were also some Romanians involved with very small numbers as well
Love it.
Can you do one on what people in America were doing during the English civil war. Pls?
Europeans hasn't yet settled the east coast at the time of the civil war, but (native) Americans had formed the Iroquois Confederacy, a political union which some scholars believe inspired the Framers.
There was plenty of settlers in the new world by the 1640s, thousands came from 1620-1640 alone idk what you’re talking about
There were loads of English people settled in America by the time of the English civil war. But there never mentioned buy books on the subject.
I heard they simply stayed out of it, when Cromwell ruled they chilled and when the monarchy came back they supported Charles II
The ability to to distill an appreciation of a country's disdain via small changes in cartoon eyes is fucking magic.
1:06 I feel like that is now the case for csto
nice touch with the news paper ^^
I love these afghan videos
I noticed that, beginning at 1.03 (with one odd exception), the red Warsaw Pact zones on the maps leave out West Berlin. Nice touch.
They were too busy with invading James Bisonette land
Very original, thank you!
I love that even all these years into this channel, there's still no agreement on how to spell that guy's last name
@@mybodyisamachine your very welcome
I think you mean The Sovereign Republic of Bissonettia
Which they obviously failed miserably
Well done! Very good job!
Am I the only person to just look through his older vids cause they're so good.
No, you aren’t!
Wdym older vids this is brand new
No, you aren't my friend
Love your channel.
Well put. I'd say that in 1979, they didn't really care about whether satellites had a military capability to be of any help, and at the latest after 1981 Jaruzelski coup in Poland, they couldn't draw forces from Warsaw Pact even if they wanted to. Despite not sending any troops, however, Warsaw Pact countries were involved in providing economic aid to Soviet puppet government in Afghanistan.
Russia also wouldn't want the Warsaw Pact countries to gain military competence.
@@recoil53 Also true. They could get uppity if they got any sort of military competence. That said, I think that Soviet military was at that point pretty inept, too. Corruption, endemic alcoholism, promotions based on political loyalty instead of merit, lack of professional NCOs, relying on hazed conscripts. It just had the numbers and in conventional fight, it usually pounced on a much weaker target. What kept that dumpsterfire around for so long was the nukes. That is not to say that some of Soviet military equipment was not top notch.
@@JakeBassCZ You just described the Russian military in the majority of the post-Renaissance era.
@@recoil53 Russian army was top tier in about 1750-1850
thank you for answering this question I had in mind.
“In 1979, the Soviets thought they should have their own Vietnam, and they invaded Afghanistan to prevent a US-sponsored Islamic insurgency.”
Sneak 100
They invaded to help support the communist coup d'etat they sponsored.
@@kingofcards9 The Soviets never sponsored the coup. The Saur Revolution of 1978 was done by majority Khalq party members and they wanted to distance themselves from the Soviets a little bit. That’s what differentiated them from the moderate Parcham faction.
The coup and its plans were so secretive that even Soviets who were already in Afghanistan prior to the coup were unaware until it actually happened, or when the PDPA stormed RTA station. My grandpa, an Afghan Army officer in 1978, had no knowledge of this coup and thought we were being invaded by Pakistan. Suddenly, he sees they’re Afghan soldiers so he just walks home to see the news. RTA station has been taken by the communists.
not prevent but to stop it. The Islamists existed as a party in the 60s and started militant activities in 1974 but they only had PAkistani support. After 1978 they got american support which is when the Afghan gov asked the Soviets for help.
@@DRAZindabad najibullah zindabad Watan ya kaffan
Everyone talks about James Bissonette, but very few know of the power of Kelly Moneymaker.
Fun fact: this is commonly referred to as the USSR’s equal to the Vietnam war.
Now they have a second one in Ukraine
Russia's Vietnam. But yes at the same time, since Russia dominated the USSR politically and culturally.
Russia can try to conquer Ukraine, but the longer the war takes, the more it's being humiliated on the world stage. As well as more war crimes.
@@ecurewitz Ukraine is a full-blown first-half-of-the-20th-century-like international conflict, not some anti-partisan grinding across a jungle/desert.
@@ecurewitz The Ukraine war is not comparable to Vietnam. Russia have already lost more troops in Ukraine than the US did in Vietnam.
@@yarpen26 Exactly, not comparable at all. The Russians are actually suffering major strategic defeats. It's not just some guerillas blowing stuff up.
The "I bring you dudes" killed me 🤣
The Soviets never watched the Princess Bride, which clearly stated: "Never get involved in a land war in Asia." 🤷🏻♂️😂
I appreciate what you’re doing
What's interesting is that all of these reasons are actually fairly rational.
Realpolitik makes you an arsehole to your contemporaries and a genius in the history books.
@@samoldfield5220 Being an asshole and being a genius are not mutually exclusive. I call it Sherlock Holmes Effect. Dr. House Effect if your under 30. Tony Stark Effect if you're like...12 or something? Idk
2:24 without a comma, this banner headline means something else.
"Invade" is a hilariously bold statement given that the Afghan government *requested* military help against the US funded Mujahideen.
So like south Vietnam *requesting* help from America around 1963 against the Viet Cong?
The only channel I sit through the "credits" 😁
Good video, although I have a few doubts about the Warsaw Pact being purely defensive, and the militaries of countries like Poland and East Germany being designed just to hold off NATO because in the 60s the Polish Military was planning for an invasion of Denmark. Yes, really. Edit: It was, of course, a part of larger Soviet offensive plans, not a Polish idea.
Basado
Based
There were no NATO plans to invade Eastern Europe. In the European area, Russia + Warsaw Pact had about 50,000 tanks (yeah, a lot of f*cking tanks) compared to about half that on the NATO side, so even if NATO wanted to (which it did not) the idea of a NATO invasion was a pipedream.
Further, part of NATO defense plans was for US soldiers to fly into Europe and pick up tanks that were pre-positioned there. That is to say, a lot of NATO tanks tasked with defending Europe didn't even have their soldiers stationed on the same continent. The question was how long it would take the Sovs to get to Atlantic once the balloon went up - one week? Two?
Another big difference between NATO and Warsaw Pact - NATO had a no first use of nuclear weapons policy, Soviet Union did not. In fact, the Soviet Union, in many ways, viewed tactical nukes as just another weapon to use, whereas it was a big fricking deal to shift from conventional to nukes on the western side.
Cold War projections about what a Soviet invasion would be like were insane. The projected lifetime for a tank entering the battlefield was something like a minute.
I don't they were planning to invade Denmark. They drew up plans for an invasion of Denmark because it's the military's job be prepared for such things, but that doesn't mean that they were actually planning on doing it.
Something I always like to point out is that the US, UK and Nazi Germany all drew up plans for an invasion of Ireland. But none of them every really had plans to actually invade, they were just preparing for every eventuality.
That was probably meant in the way that the invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviets couldn't be framed as a "defensive" action since the Warsaw pact was not attacked by the Mujahedeen.
The reason all of NATO got involved in AFG was that article 5 was invoked as a result of 9/11, unlike in Iraq, where most of the US's allies did not take part.
Although this is offtopic, I would like a video explaining what happened to italian colonies after ww2 as it is lightly touched on by people.
If only the USSR and the Warsaw pact had the backing of James Bizzonette, world would've been very different.
I always thought that had to be it, nice video
Short answer: Because the Warsaw Pact only invades its own members. (Czechoslovakia 1968)
Hungary 1956
2:24 the newspapers always contain some gold
Soviet Army 1979: Comrades! we can embark on this glorious heroic endeavor alone!
Russian Army 2022: Comrades! we can embark on this glorious heroic endeavor alone!
Russia and Belarus
The US after losing Two wars of over ten years each in less than ten years sure love give lessons of war
@@ShinigamiInuyasha777 The US military is the best on Earth.
@@yoloswaggins7121 Couldnt beat teenagers with AKs or shepheards in 20 years
@@ShinigamiInuyasha777 Except they did beat them. They took over Afghanistan in literally 2 weeks with only 5 casualties or something.
Then they removed all their troops. They only left a very small amount of troops in the country and the Taliban almost never attacked them because they knew they didn't stand a chance. Instead they attacked the forces of the Afghan government.
The America military in no way struggled with the Taliban. They just didn't have enough troops to cover the whole country because the US didn't want to do a large scale occupation.
The mock newspaper front page is genius beyond all means
Can you make a video about how Japan reacted to the US declaration of war in WW2?
I'd imagine it was something similar to assuming the fetal position and crying uncontrollably.
Or Italy
@@Hollows1997considering they attacked first, its probably more like that spongebob episode where he charges someone enthusiastically and then gets knocked flat and tries again
1:14 Yeah, who else but this person to hold up that sign.
If only the USSR had their finances managed by James Bizonette