Did the USSR really intend to attack Pakistan?

[AAtish]

Actually your "logic" is flawed here, how does it make any sense for them to kill someone who was supportive of them? The Soviets weren't stupid as you are describing them to be. Hafizullah Amin was playing a double game with Soviets which is why they killed him.

Hafizullah Amin

As for why the Soviets invaded Afghanistan:
Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (1979) -- Britannica Online Encyclopedia

At the height of the Soviet Afghan war there were more than 500,000 Red Army soldiers in Afghanistan backed by artillery and air support, if they wanted they could have invaded Pakistan, but they did not because it would be of no benefit to them.

Why are you trying to play us fools?

Afghanistan government in large was pro-Soviet, the pro-Islam sections were being slaughtered.. If Amin thought of going towards west and American he had all the rights to do so, it was a matter of sovereign country.. Afghanistan has all the rights to chose its friends and alliances..

So are you trying to imply that Afghanistan was 'punished' because they tried to get free from USSR? If so, then there are more reasons to believe that USSR would had attacked Pakistan, One, because it was in American block, and Two, if was against and biggest threat of pro-USSR India..

Besides, it was a globally known fact that USSR was looking for access to warm waters..

There are people talking about the might of USSR if they wanted to invade Pakistan.. who is denying that? USSR was way ahead of US at that time in technology but if they had not been busy in Afghanistan for as long as they did, and their economy would had not stretched to the limit it was because of Afghan war, they would certainly had tried on Pakistan also..

That was the sole reason of Pakistan keeping USSR busy in Afghan for as long as it can.. war does play havoc with the economy of a country, and so, the USSR paid the price..

If we are speculating then so are you my dear friend.. do you have any proof to state that USSR would not had attacked Pakistan???

So in short, we did what we thought best for OUR country at that time.. and that is the whole truth..

 

[Solomon2]

The Soviets had hundred of heavy transport aircraft as well as a large fleet of refueling aircraft. Moreover, the Soviets built roads, bridges, public transportations systems, hospitals, schools, power stations, fuel depots, factories and many other things -

I don't doubt you. I do doubt that in 1980 the USSR and Afghanistan possessed these things in sufficient quantity to even dream of a campaign to conquer and hold a Pakistani seaport.

 

[AAtish]

And where are those facts? You do realize that the Soviet military was given orders not to engage Pakistani forces? You also realize that the Soviet military had full control of Afghanistan from day one correct? Every major town and city was under Soviet control, air ports, fuel depots and other strategic value targets were under Soviet control. The Soviet Union had entire Armies in Afghanistan, there was nothing stopping the Soviets from making a push into Pakistan. If the Soviet wished they could have assembled the largest army in history on the Pakistani border and simply rolled in to Pakistani.

You mean to say foot patrols along with hand held shields and bows are arrows??.. what are you talking about mate?? A new war front would had created a disaster for USSR, they would had required more "money" to support their new war.. their 'rolling in'..

USSR went into economic turmoil, that was the sole reason for it not invading Pakistan.. its economic instability after a long Afghan war was the real cause.. just like US right now, they could not afford full frontal war with Pakistan at that time.. and that was due to the reason that Pakistan stretched the resistance in Afghanistan to limits which Soviets never thought of...

And besides, Whole of the west was against USSR anyways, so it had no 'global image' saving problem.. so yes! USSR would had invaded Pakistan or Iran next..

 

[somebozo]

The whole of afghan soviet war was led out of bigotry and American obsession to defeat soviet union at any cost. And we are paying a heavy price for that today. Matters between Pakistan and Soviet union were just a dialogue away as initiated by ZA Bhutto. Pakistan had no intrested by either rescusing Afghanistan or breaking Soviet Union. It was all under the self serving American loyalist Zia regime. Think of how different regional realities would be had there been no Afghan-Soviet war in the 80's??

A little known gem of Bhutto and Faisal diplomacy were absolute neutrality between the affairs of super powers. Both of them advocated a balanced foreign policy of own intrests first rather than blind alliance with the powers. And the result, both of the leaders were eliminated by planned murders perpetuated by pro-American middle men.

 

[Tshering22]

You mean to say foot patrols along with hand held shields and bows are arrows??.. what are you talking about mate?? A new war front would had created a disaster for USSR, they would had required more "money" to support their new war.. their 'rolling in'..

USSR went into economic turmoil, that was the sole reason for it not invading Pakistan.. its economic instability after a long Afghan war was the real cause.. just like US right now, they could not afford full frontal war with Pakistan at that time.. and that was due to the reason that Pakistan stretched the resistance in Afghanistan to limits which Soviets never thought of...

And besides, Whole of the west was against USSR anyways, so it had no 'global image' saving problem.. so yes! USSR would had invaded Pakistan or Iran next..

At what costs? Something that is tearing your country today.

Again, you need to stop seeing that the whole world is jumping on you. Right now it is but it wasn't doing so at that time.

 

[AAtish]

The whole of afghan soviet war was led out of bigotry and American obsession to defeat soviet union at any cost. And we are paying a heavy price for that today. Matters between Pakistan and Soviet union were just a dialogue away as initiated by ZA Bhutto. Pakistan had no intrested by either rescusing Afghanistan or breaking Soviet Union. It was all under the self serving American loyalist Zia regime. Think of how different regional realities would be had there been no Afghan-Soviet war in the 80's??

Are you trying to imply that it was USA which asked USSR to invade Afghanistan? and countries take measures to protect their interests at all costs.. Pakistan did the same.. we developed in those years, otherwise you'd be a 'province' of India right now not a nuclear power..

I second on what Zia and Akhtar abdul Rehman did at that time.. had Benazir not ruined their 'Khalistan' plan, we would had an independent country on our east and Kashmir would had been free by now.. so if you want to talk against someone, talk about BIBI and its traitor party.. All these problems we are facing right now are because of these 'traitors', not from the plans of Zia..

 

[AAtish]

At what costs? Something that is tearing your country today.

Again, you need to stop seeing that the whole world is jumping on you. Right now it is but it wasn't doing so at that time.

The cost we are paying right now is not because of Zia government, its because of the following 'democratic' governments.. read my next post to sombozo.. and yeah.. West does not like any country which is not 'white' so you also look for a disastrous situation in next decade.. India is being supported because of China, not be cause they love the 'biggest' (self-proclaimed) democracy..

 

[Desert Fox]

Why are you trying to play us fools?

The only fool here is the likes of you who believe the propaganda that USSR wanted to invade Pakistan, lolz. The USA was only spreading propaganda to cause mass hysteria that the USSR will soon invade Pakistan if Pakistan doesn't help the Afghans. Now tell me do you also believe that Saddam Hussain had WMD's?

Afghanistan government in large was pro-Soviet, the pro-Islam sections were being slaughtered.. If Amin thought of going towards west and American he had all the rights to do so, it was a matter of sovereign country.. Afghanistan has all the rights to chose its friends and alliances.. So are you trying to imply that Afghanistan was 'punished' because they tried to get free from USSR?

This implies that you know nothing about the Cold War. During the Cold War even the United States invaded Korea and Vietnam to prevent these countries from falling under the influence Communism, the West feared that Communism would spread from one country to another (also known as the domino theory) which is why the US and its allies intervened when it became inevitable that the pro-Western government of a country would fall to the Communist (as in the case of Vietnam and Korea). So therefore just like the US, the Soviets invaded Afghanistan to prevent it from becoming pro-western bloc.

If so, then there are more reasons to believe that USSR would had attacked Pakistan, One, because it was in American block, and Two, if was against and biggest threat of pro-USSR India..

Then why didn't Russia attack Pakistan genius? As i said earlier the Soviets had 5 times more troops than the NATO has today in Afghanistan, yet the Soviets didn't invade Pakistan. The Soviets were not afraid to attack Pakistan but they just saw no advantage in invading Pakistan. heck they even sent their Special Forces the Spetznaz into Tribal areas to take out Afghan resistance camps:

“They reached the Spina crest shortly before dawn. The company commanders and battalion commander were deciding
on how to seize and occupy the area when a loudspeaker broke the early calm. The loudspeaker was waking the faithful
and calling them to morning prayers. The 3rd Company immediately assaulted a Mufsidun firing position they discovered
during the ascent. The battalion moved across the Spina crest, seizing well-constructed, amply-supplied Mufsidun fighting
positions and digging in. By 0400 hours, the 154th Spetsnaz Battalion controlled the Spina crest and could fire down at
the Mufsidun trapped below them. They overran the Islamic bases and supply depot and captured a lot of ammunition
and many Mufsidun heavy machine guns and RPGs. The 1st Company moved onto the heights where it could dominate
all the approaches into the camp from Pakistan. The company began to dig in some 700 meters inside Pakistan. The
Spetsnaz controlled the area. Ahamadullah Wejdani’s group was still fighting a systematic retreat but was now out of
ammunition and could see the signal rockets of the Spetsnaz above them. He gathered his men and withdrew through a
side canyon and headed into Pakistan.”

Spetsnaz, Direct Action - Russian Special Purpose Forces

So if they wanted to invade Pakistan they could have, but they didn't because it would serve them no purpose.

Besides, it was a globally known fact that USSR was looking for access to warm waters..

Then how did the USSR become a "superpower" without Pakistan's warm water ports? Fact is the USSR had huge gas reserves in Central Asia, and that is excluding the natural resources of the rest of Russia. They didn't need Pakistan's warm water ports to survive.

There are people talking about the might of USSR if they wanted to invade Pakistan.. who is denying that? USSR was way ahead of US at that time in technology but if they had not been busy in Afghanistan for as long as they did, and their economy would had not stretched to the limit it was because of Afghan war, they would certainly had tried on Pakistan also..

The reasons you gave above are not acceptable. The Afghan resistance fighters were only fighting with AK's and RPG's which the Russians were soon able to counter with better armored vehicles and helicopter gunships, it was only after 1986 that the Afghan resistance received stingers and anti tank missiles and that too in limited numbers, and even that wasn't enough to bring down the Red Army. So my question is why didn't the Soviets invade Pakistan when they had over 500,000 soldiers?

That was the sole reason of Pakistan keeping USSR busy in Afghan for as long as it can.. war does play havoc with the economy of a country, and so, the USSR paid the price..

You have no proof/evidence/source that the Afghan war was the reason why the USSR disintegrated.

If we are speculating then so are you my dear friend.. do you have any proof to state that USSR would not had attacked Pakistan???

Do you have proof that the USSR would have attacked Pakistan?

So in short, we did what we thought best for OUR country at that time.. and that is the whole truth..

No, you did what the USA told you to do, and now today you are reaping the benefits of that war (TTP, suicide bombers, shattered economy, 60 billion dollars lost due to terrorism)

 

[citizenofland]

ok, a foolish question but why didnt they attack us, we clearly were supporting their enemies e.g talibans and america...why didnt they take revenge?

 

[AAtish]

The only fool here is the likes of you who believe the propaganda that USSR wanted to invade Pakistan, lolz. The USA was only spreading propaganda to cause mass hysteria that the USSR will soon invade Pakistan if Pakistan doesn't help the Afghans. Now tell me do you also believe that Saddam Hussain had WMD's?

Your post got personal, calling people like me fools.. hmmm.. interesting.. derogatory tactic of conversation.. making the others feel that they know nothing.. anyways, correct me if i am wrong.. you don't believe that 9/11, 7/7/, 26/11, WMDs, Al CIAdah, OBL etc. were real, right? i mean it should all also be the 'propaganda' depending upon your logic, isn't it? (which i highly believe it is, but thats not the question)

This implies that you know nothing about the Cold War. During the Cold War even the United States invaded Korea and Vietnam to prevent these countries from falling under the influence Communism, the West feared that Communism would spread from one country to another (also known as the domino theory) which is why the US and its allies intervened when it became inevitable that the pro-Western government of a country would fall to the Communist (as in the case of Vietnam and Korea). So therefore just like the US, the Soviets invaded Afghanistan to prevent it from becoming pro-western bloc.

Are you for real? or have 'people like you' left their thinking brain somewhere and forgot about it?.. The domino effect can be considered for USSR side also, so after Afghanistan, there was a strong possibility of it invading Pakistan also, and even if it didn't, and only 'influenced' Pakistan towards communism then what was the guarantee that west wouldn't had 'intervened' to stop Pakistan going in soviet block? and for your information, i am not a kid, i know about the cold war, lived through it..

Then why didn't Russia attack Pakistan genius? As i said earlier the Soviets had 5 times more troops than the NATO has today in Afghanistan, yet the Soviets didn't invade Pakistan. The Soviets were not afraid to attack Pakistan but they just saw no advantage in invading Pakistan. heck they even sent their Special Forces the Spetznaz into Tribal areas to take out Afghan resistance camps:
Spetsnaz, Direct Action - Russian Special Purpose Forces

So if they wanted to invade Pakistan they could have, but they didn't because it would serve them no purpose.

The reason for them NOT invading Pakistan has been given in my other posts, do read them 'genius' and if you have some logic, do use it.. It was not 'advantage' which stopped them, it was their economic instability..

Then how did the USSR become a "superpower" without Pakistan's warm water ports? Fact is the USSR had huge gas reserves in Central Asia, and that is excluding the natural resources of the rest of Russia. They didn't need Pakistan's warm water ports to survive.

All i can say it LOL to your logic here.. anyways, my suggestion to you would be to explore the reasons a bit more before making your 'learned' comments..

The reasons you gave above are not acceptable. The Afghan resistance fighters were only fighting with AK's and RPG's which the Russians were soon able to counter with better armored vehicles and helicopter gunships, it was only after 1986 that the Afghan resistance received stingers and anti tank missiles and that too in limited numbers, and even that wasn't enough to bring down the Red Army. So my question is why didn't the Soviets invade Pakistan when they had over 500,000 soldiers?

Fighting against Afghans who were not well trained and well equipped is different than fighting against a highly trained army of Pakistan, where the possibility of 'west' helping Pakistan to protect 'western' interests was extremely high.. According to your own 'theory' only introduction of 'stinger missile' dented USSR to some extent.. Pakistan would had gotten MORE THAN THAT.. again.. economic stability was a big question mark for them.. Genius!!..

You have no proof/evidence/source that the Afghan war was the reason why the USSR disintegrated.

Again.. Read the documentation, USSR had an already 'bloated' economy but they were keeping it intact (just like USA right now).. the length of Afghan war pushed them beyond the red line and they disintegrated.. again.. go do some research!

Do you have proof that the USSR would have attacked Pakistan?

Do you have any that they wouldn't had? either way, it was in Pakistan's best interest to protect its western borders, after all, Pakistan could not live peacefully between two volatile borders.. see the scenario today??

No, you did what the USA told you to do, and now today you are reaping the benefits of that war (TTP, suicide bombers, shattered economy, 60 billion dollars lost due to terrorism)

You are one of the 'broken records' we have on this forum which question the authenticity of each step taken by Pakistan's government.. and the counting you are doing in (brackets) is the prime example of why Pakistan fought the war against USSR.. Pakistan should play the same game with USA right now with the help of anti-American countries to protect itself.. again.. in the 'history' books you'll see some 'other' story in couple of decades..

So wake up and smell the beans.. read the first sentence of my sig.

Over and Out!!

 

[AAtish]

ok, a foolish question but why didnt they attack us, we clearly were supporting their enemies e.g talibans and america...why didnt they take revenge?

Read post # 100 in this same thread..

 

[Pride]

ok, a foolish question but why didnt they attack us, we clearly were supporting their enemies e.g talibans and america...why didnt they take revenge?

If they attack you then it would be a clear cut WW3 as Pak was an ally of US during cold war. Do you think any country can do that foolish step in current scenario. Fighting gurilla war on Vietnam or Afghanistan is Ok but direct fight means nuking each other.

 

[DarK-LorD]

Though The Soviets possessed a really massive army with 60000+ MBT's & 40000+ IFV's.Invading Pakistan would have resulted in a logistical nightmare.

Although this is off-topic but the reason behind USSR not attacking Pakistan was same as US not attacking India in 1971.

 

[Tshering22]

The cost we are paying right now is not because of Zia government, its because of the following 'democratic' governments.. read my next post to sombozo.. and yeah.. West does not like any country which is not 'white' so you also look for a disastrous situation in next decade.. India is being supported because of China, not be cause they love the 'biggest' (self-proclaimed) democracy..

Why do you and Chinese always keep thinking that we're working for USA when time and again we have proven to have independent policy than them? Perhaps self-fed conviction that whoever isn't anti-US is a US slave?

You really need to understand what is the meaning of being independent policy maker without getting anti-any country, something which is not defined well in Pakistani foreign policy since it always has sought someone as a backing ally and another as an enemy. Please clear these concepts. It just happens that our interests with West converge at the moment since your new master has some problem with us. That's all. There's a big difference in submitting totally to one "master" and being a partner, getting mutual benefits and try avoiding depending on one another a little too much.

We've been anti-West at one stage as well... so don't tell us the difference please.

Your democracy is as corrupt as ours agreed. But radicalization was done during Zia's period when your entire curriculum was transformed into a war study. That is what is causing so much problems. Most Pakistanis except a few Zia supporters say this and admit this.

 

[Respect4Respect01]

Uncle Mushi answered ur question here.


President Musharraf’s interview in Dosra Pehlu


start around 10-15 mins into the video.