USSR Collapse: A Crash Course | Documentary

[Black Tornado]

Afghanistan was deadly for them

 

[Paul2]

What CCP did in 1989 is yet to be unfold. What happened then sent Chinese people a clear signal: YOU HAVE TO USE VIOLENCE IF YOU EVER WANT TO REPLACE CCP. Most people, of course, would shun from using violence, which often serves as the last resort. Yet, that signal sticks and we have yet to see how it would unfold in the future. After all, everything has an end, including CCP. Even CCP's own doctrine recognizes that.

In 1991, USSR didn't fall from people's, or army's violence. There were few dozen people shot in sporadic violence only.

It was the CPSU's own last minute coup, and a subsequent countercoup which unseated CPSU from power.

If not for it, CPSU might've sat in the parliament to this day.

 

[nang2]

In 1991, USSR didn't fall from people's, or army's violence. There were few dozen people shot in sporadic violence only.

It was the CPSU's own last minute coup, and a subsequent countercoup which unseated CPSU from power.

If not for it, CPSU might've sat in the parliament to this day.

I wasn't talking about USSR.

 

[Paul2]

Afghanistan was deadly for them

That too. CPSU sent army to Moscow, but troops fresh from Afghanistan showed CPSU the middle finger, sat, and did nothing for entire August.

I wasn't talking about USSR.

I'm just just bringing the parallel.

The point is, use of violence may not always work out for the party in power as well.

China had no Afghanistan. We had Vietnam, but the number of troops is incomparable, and they were previously sated by Deng being ousted from power.

 

[HammerHead081]

The Soviets were going to collapse anyways, even if they didn't invade Afghanistan. I just wish we didn't helped USA infiltrate into Afghanistan, rather convinced them that Afghanistan isn't worth fighting for and instead it would have been better if USA helped with building up our army as well as securing our borders in the western side. If we convinced them that the Gwadar port is way more important strategically than Afghanistan itself and Soviet Union was going to self destruct anyways.

I guess in who would have known that the USA would just leave after beating Soviets and doing nothing about the mujahideens, our political and military leaders naivety was showcased.

 

[Paul2]

The Soviets were going to collapse anyways, even if they didn't invade Afghanistan. I just wish we didn't helped USA infiltrate into Afghanistan, rather convinced them that Afghanistan isn't worth fighting for and instead it would have been better if USA helped with building up our army as well as securing our borders in the western side. If we convinced them that the Gwadar port is way more important strategically than Afghanistan itself and Soviet Union was going to self destruct anyways.

I guess in who would have known that the USA would just leave after beating Soviets and doing nothing about the mujahideens, our political and military leaders naivety was showcased.

USSR invaded Afghanistan exactly because they felt they are going into crisis, and they needed one quick, and easy war to reinvigorate the system, and to show both the population, and the world that the party is still firmly in power.

What Zhongnanhai does these days is also because they want to be seen in control — "I can purge Jiang's head of police in Shanghai with a flick of a finger, think of what I can do with you."

I honestly have no idea for how long they can keep going from one excess, to another. So far, it seems, purges do work.

 

[HammerHead081]

USSR invaded Afghanistan exactly because they felt they are going into crisis, and they needed one quick, and easy war to reinvigorate the system, and to show both the population, and the world that the party is still firmly in power.

Yes it was a showcase of their power but their collapse was inevitable even if they succeeded in Afghanistan.

 

[nang2]

I'm just just bringing the parallel.

The point is, use of violence may not always work out for the party in power as well.

China had no Afghanistan. We had Vietnam, but the number of troops is incomparable, and they were previously sated by Deng being ousted from power.

Comparison between countries is very difficulty. Some seeming similarity could lead to vastly different results. Nonetheless, I appreciate your comment, which certainly has good points.

 

[dbc]

Most are offering their expert opinion without watching the documentary posted by OP.
The Soviet union failed because they were spending more than half their GDP on their military and funding for allies and satellite states. The other issue was immense wastage and poor productivity of their command economy.

 

[nang2]

Most are offering their expert opinion without watching the documentary posted by OP.
The Soviet union failed because they were spending more than half their GDP on their military and funding for allies and satellite states. The other issue was immense wastage and poor productivity of their command economy.

I am guilty as charged but lucky me, I wasn't commenting on USSR.

 

[Paul2]

Most are offering their expert opinion without watching the documentary posted by OP.
The Soviet union failed because they were spending more than half their GDP on their military and funding for allies and satellite states. The other issue was immense wastage and poor productivity of their command economy.

Norkos are eating grass, but WPK doesn't seem to be loosing power any time soon.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

USSR collapsed because people didn't have TV and so they hated their government. USSR was isolated from the rest of the world, not like China which has huge volume of trade and investment with other countries.

@dbc

 

[nang2]

Norkos are eating grass, but WPK doesn't seem to be loosing power any time soon.

Maybe size matters. You can grab something small very tightly but it is hard to hold a big one in that way.

 

[INS_Vikrant]

USSR was isolated from the rest of the world, not like China which has huge volume of trade and investment with other countries.

Different between communist and capitalist countries

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

Different between communist and capitalist countries

China is socialist capitalism. There are many large state owned companies in China but China also has world's most free market with least regulation.